# QAM mapping letter campaign (HD w/o cablecard)



## smbaker

Is there any interest in starting an informal letter-writing campaign to Tivo requesting QAM-mapping features? If they are to be convinced to implement this feature, then it may need some demonstation that there is a demand.

For those unfamiliar with the problem:

US cable service includes digital HD network programming as part of "basic cable" service by FCC mandate. The cable companies are required to pass this programming unencrypted, which means it does not require a cablecard to receive these network HD channels. The Tivo HD and S3 have the ability to discover and tune these channels without the need for a cablecard. The Tivo HD lacks the ability to associate guide data with these channels, thus rendering the Tivo functionality back down to the level of a 1980's VCR when attempting to use these HD channels. Tivo's policy is that you must have cablecards to associate guide data with digital channels. For many of us, acquiring cablecards requires us to pay a hefty additional upgrade to "digital cable", a hefty installation fee, and monthly rental fees on the cablecards themselves....

The Fix:

There are many possible solutions. The QAM channels include a PSIP header that usually has a channel number. In my case, the channels show up with the same channel number as my OTA HD stations, but the Tivo is still unable to associate guide data with them. Thus, in many cases a mapping function could be automatic. In other cases, a manual mapping function may be necessary.

For example, the user could go into the channel list, pick out a QAM HD channel, click some "associate guide data" link, and associate guide data with the channel. Alternatively some other have suggested mapping channel numbers rather than guide data. For example, the QAM HD channel could be manually mapped to the cableco's digital cable channel number for that channel.

IMO (and this is just my opinion), this is a simple feature to implement. Most of functionality is already there, it just needs a user interface. Tivo could do it if they thought the demand great enough.

Here is a suggested sample letter:

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

Dear Tivo,

I am a cable subscriber that is considering upgrading my standard Tivos to HD or S3 models. However, I only subscribe to basic cable and do not have a cablecard. My basic cable includes the four major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, and FOX) in digital HD by FCC mandate. I am able to tune these channels with my digital TV. Your Tivo HD and S3 models are also able to tune these channels, but with reduced functionality. The Tivo HD is unable to associate guide data with these channels, severely reducing the utility of the Tivo HD. In order to obtain cablecards, I would have to upgrade to a more costly package from my cable company that incurs additional installation and significant monthly fees and cablecard rental fees. As I primarily intend to use the Tivo HD to view the local networks (which are already included in digital HD as part of my basic cable service), I cannot justify the additional expense.

Please consider adding a feature to associate guide data with unencrypted QAM channels. This feature is commonly referred to as QAM-mapping by the community, and is available on some competing DVRs. If the Tivo HD or S3 supported this feature, then I would upgrade my remaining Tivos to HD models.

Thank You

------

Suggestions/edits are welcome to the letter. In fact each person's letter should be slightly different, so as not to be sending form letters. If you could include details such as how many Tivos you would buy and how much extra the cable company wants to charge you for cablecards, that would be good.

As far as where to send the letter, the best I can come up with is using the contactus page at http://www.tivo.com/abouttivo/contactus/index.html. There is a "feature ideas" link. If you are an shareholder, then you might want to try the investor relations email (after all you own the company!)


----------



## SugarBowl

Sure you get the networks in QAM from your cable company, but have you called your cable company and asked them for a list of the clear QAM channels that they provide? Is it posted on their website?


----------



## rainwater

SugarBowl said:


> Sure you get the networks in QAM from your cable company, but have you called your cable company and asked them for a list of the clear QAM channels that they provide? Is it posted on their website?


That would be the whole point of QAM mapping.


----------



## SugarBowl

rainwater said:


> That would be the whole point of QAM mapping.


But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


----------



## jfh3

SugarBowl said:


> But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


And, even if you had the assignments, you couldn't do anything with them, other than tune the stations manually.

The whole point of QAM mapping support is to be able to use all the Tivo scheduling features with QAM channels.

This is absolutely a Tivo problem.


----------



## rainwater

SugarBowl said:


> But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


No, the cable company has solved it with cablecards. That is not what the original poster is even talking about.


----------



## DUDE_NJX

I would definitely get another Tivo HD if it worked that way! :up:


----------



## smbaker

SugarBowl said:


> Sure you get the networks in QAM from your cable company, but have you called your cable company and asked them for a list of the clear QAM channels that they provide? Is it posted on their website?


I only want the networks. Sure, the others (Discovery, etc) might be nice. The cableco is not required to give me those extra digital networks, but they are required by the FCC to give me the four local networks.

As far as the cableco websites (comcast in particular), IMO they go to great lengths to obfuscate the channel lineups. I never knew I was entitled to receive the HD networks until I did a channel scan and further research in these forums. The only thing I found on comcast's website was a $5 "hd package" they wanted to sell me, and I think that was on top of the upgrade fees for 'digital' cable.


----------



## smbaker

SugarBowl said:


> But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


I'd say it's the cable company's *fault*, but it's Tivo's *problem*.

As a consumer, I would like the Tivo to work (with full functionality) on the channels that I pay for and am entitled to receive. Of course, Tivo can punt on the issue by requiring cablecards, but they are missing out on market share by doing so.


----------



## bkdtv

Some cable companies already use PSIP to remap their QAM channels to the correct cable channels. On those systems, you get guide data with the Tivo on all your unencrypted QAM channels.

If you want this problem fixed, convince your cable company to add PSIP information to remap QAM channels to the appropriate number in their digital lineup.


----------



## vstone

SugarBowl said:


> But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


Actually if he gets, say channel 7.1 over cable as 7.1, the cable company is actually passing it on per CFR (ie doing what they are supposed to be doing).


----------



## vstone

bkdtv said:


> Some cable companies already use PSIP to remap their QAM channels to the correct cable channels. On those systems, you get guide data with the Tivo on all your unencrypted QAM channels.
> 
> If you want this problem fixed, convince your cable company to add PSIP information to remap QAM channels to the appropriate number in their digital lineup.


Actually some did and apparently still are populating PSIP with the number corresponding to their published channel lineup. Unfortunately, the at not what the ATSC specs tell them to do.


----------



## 1003

*PSIP*
data is only required for the 'big 4' networks? This would explain how Comcast tends to play 'hide and seek' moving the other local broadcast/digital channels. TiVo should look at how Microsoft (can't believe I'm saying this) allows channels to be remapped in Media Center. You need this locally to remap WUPA to RF43 from the RF69 the guide data believes it to be. Microsoft also lets you assign the programming data to the channel you created. Simple and elegant solution I would have expected from TiVo, not Microsoft...


----------



## smbaker

bkdtv said:


> If you want this problem fixed, convince your cable company to add PSIP information to remap QAM channels to the appropriate number in their digital lineup.


What would be the cableco's incentive to do this when they can instead force their customers to upgrade to a 'digital' package, add a HD package, and rent cablecards instead? From the cableco perspective, incorrect channel numbers are not a problem, but a feature.

Furthermore, I think the specs say the cablecos have to pass the channel number that the broadcaster places in the PSIP, at least for the networks. In my case, this is one of those rare things that is working as expected -- for example NBC comes across as 16.1 which is the correct OTA channel number. The Tivo will NOT supply guide data for this channel.

Having the cablecos override the channel numbers the networks put in the PSIP is clearly not the right thing to do; it will only lead to more obfuscation of channel numbers by the cable companies. The cable companies do not want it to be convenient for you to get the big 4 networks in HD, as they would much rather charge for a digital cable package + HD package.


----------



## Saxion

smbaker said:


> I think the specs say the cablecos have to pass the channel number that the broadcaster places in the PSIP, at least for the networks.


That's certainly the _intent _ of the FCC regulations. However, the specific reg is poorly written and says only that the PSIP channel number data has to be _present_...it doesn't specifically say it couldn't be _modified _ by the cable company. It's one of those ridiculous loopholes that only a lawyer could love...

You are also correct that the cable company does not have any incentive to repopulate the PSIP channel data with their own channel assignments, and in fact has a financial incentive _not _ to do this. I think that's why it's extremely rare to find a cable market that does this (is Austin TX the only one?).

The vast majority of cable plants adhere to the spirit of the FCC regs and pass the PSIP data as received from the broadcaster. Given that...it is certainly TiVo's "fault" that TiVo owners can't make use of those channels.


----------



## Saxion

I'd encourage people to write letters to one or more of the following people (postal letters carry a lot more weight than email). Concise and respectful is the best method. 

Mr. Brian Lanier
Vice President for Software Development, Consumer Products Division

Mr. Todd Juenger
Vice President and General Manager, Audience Research and Measurement

Ms. Margret Schmidt
Vice President for User Experience Design & Research

Mr. Jim Denney
Vice President for Product Marketing

Each of the above at:

TiVo, Inc.
2160 Gold Street
P.O. Box 2160
Alviso, CA 95002


----------



## lessd

Saxion said:


> That's certainly the _intent _ of the FCC regulations. However, the specific reg is poorly written and says only that the PSIP channel number data has to be _present_...it doesn't specifically say it couldn't be _modified _ by the cable company. It's one of those ridiculous loopholes that only a lawyer could love...
> 
> You are also correct that the cable company does not have any incentive to repopulate the PSIP channel data with their own channel assignments, and in fact has a financial incentive _not _ to do this. I think that's why it's extremely rare to find a cable market that does this (is Austin TX the only one?).
> 
> The vast majority of cable plants adhere to the spirit of the FCC regs and pass the PSIP data as received from the broadcaster. Given that...it is certainly TiVo's "fault" that TiVo owners can't make use of those channels.


TiVo get their guide data from a 3rd party provider, the cable co do not have any published data on the clear QAM channels in their lineup, TiVo needs an automatic system to keep downloading this data so i do not see this as an easy problem for TiVo to solve as many of you think. If the cable co gave out the QAM data then the problem would be easy to address for TiVo. This is just my opinion.


----------



## rainwater

lessd said:


> TiVo get their guide data from a 3rd party provider, the cable co do not have any published data on the clear QAM channels in their lineup, TiVo needs an automatic system to keep downloading this data so i do not see this as an easy problem for TiVo to solve as many of you think. If the cable co gave out the QAM data then the problem would be easy to address for TiVo. This is just my opinion.


Didn't the Sony box solve this with a simple mapping feature?


----------



## bkdtv

rainwater said:


> Didn't the Sony box solve this with a simple mapping feature?


Yes, the Sony let you set a network affiliation for a particular QAM channel. Of course, whenever your cable provider changed their QAM channels -- some do it rarely and others do it more frequently -- recordings were from the wrong channel.


----------



## 1003

*If these channels*
are indeed 'echoes' of the broadcast channels as the FCC intended, TiVo already has the data. Allowing customers to manually connect the broadcast channel with the information already available to TiVo as OTA data.

Missing data for an obscure cable company weather channel won't bother me in the least. Just let me tune to it without data and record 30 minute blocks if I choose to record something.

The will to crawl out of the cable companies bed and do something for thier customers is something TiVo can do, if they choose to...


----------



## jfh3

lessd said:


> TiVo get their guide data from a 3rd party provider, the cable co do not have any published data on the clear QAM channels in their lineup, TiVo needs an automatic system to keep downloading this data so i do not see this as an easy problem for TiVo to solve as many of you think. If the cable co gave out the QAM data then the problem would be easy to address for TiVo. This is just my opinion.


Automatic QAM mapping that deals with MSO assignment changes is hard.

Basic manual mapping (like the Sony DHG series) is easy, if not trivial, all things considered.


----------



## Saxion

Saxion said:


> I'd encourage people to write letters to one or more of the following people


Another simple thing people can do is fill out this TiVo suggestion form. Both writing letters and filling out this web form are good ways to get TiVo's attention. Please consider voicing your opinion using one or both methods.


----------



## MickeS

I have written TiVo regarding this before. I'll write them again, just in case.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom

I would sign it!!


----------



## GoHokies!

smbaker said:


> I only want the networks. Sure, the others (Discovery, etc) might be nice. The cableco is not required to give me those extra digital networks, but they are required by the FCC to give me the four local networks.


Actually, the last time that this was discussed, I think that someone had a source that disproved this. Yes, they are required to feed you stations available OTA, but they are not required to provide them in HD.

JFH3 hit the nail on the head, though. These clear QAM channels move around in a lot of areas. Since your Tivo has no way of knowing when that happens, every time it does, you're going to be recording the wrong channel. Given that there is no way to easily support this type of mapping, I think that they should leave it alone and save themselves an avalanche of "My show didn't record properly" support calls caused by something that is completely out of their control.


----------



## jfh3

GoHokies! said:


> These clear QAM channels move around in a lot of areas. Since your Tivo has no way of knowing when that happens, every time it does, you're going to be recording the wrong channel. Given that there is no way to easily support this type of mapping, I think that they should leave it alone and save themselves an avalanche of "My show didn't record properly" support calls caused by something that is completely out of their control.


My vote would be to start by putting in a manual mapping function that those who understand the risks can use and then work toward a more robust/PSIP solution.


----------



## ericr74

I'm on board with this request big time. It seems like an easy way for TiVo to add a lot of value to their product. I'm unwilling to pay Comcast an additional $17/month just so I can watch the local HD stations, which it already provides free with my expanded basic package (already $49/month).

I'm ready to buy a TiVoHD as soon as TiVo adds a remapping feature (whether automatic or manual).


----------



## vstone

GoHokies! said:


> Actually, the last time that this was discussed, I think that someone had a source that disproved this. Yes, they are required to feed you stations available OTA, but they are not required to provide them in HD.
> ...


I don't think the CFR is specific about HD. As I read it, IF they carry the local broadcast stations, they must make them available. However I believe that the current must-carry regs apply only to analog. Broadcast TV, the cable industry, and the FCC are still wrangling with this one.


----------



## vstone

The TivoHD ads showing up on our Tivos still say that cablecard is required for digital cable reception. Of course they'd probably say that whether or not Tivo was working on it.


----------



## Slime

This is something thats stopping me purchasing a 2nd Tivo S3...

I get over 30 digital channels via QAM. I have a vizio TV that pulls them straight off the cable connection and integrates them into my normal channel line up, so I have channels such as 4, 4.1, 5, 5.1, 5.2 etc... I dont see why Tivo cant do the same.

I dont want to get Cable Cards for the 2nd Tivo, but I would like to record the main network stuff in HD for a 2nd room... it seems a huge oversight to not make this work correctly.


----------



## Koan

vstone said:


> I don't think the CFR is specific about HD. As I read it, IF they carry the local broadcast stations, they must make them available. However I believe that the current must-carry regs apply only to analog. Broadcast TV, the cable industry, and the FCC are still wrangling with this one.


Regardless of whether cable companies are required to carry local broadcast stations in HD, I would think it is to their advantage to do so. They need only to look at the number of limited basic subscribers in areas with strong OTA signals to get an idea of how much business they could lose as more households purchase high definition televisions.


----------



## Saxion

Slime said:


> This is something thats stopping me purchasing a 2nd Tivo S3...


I personally know 3 people that would buy a TiVoHD if it fully supported local digital channels over cable w/o CableCARDs: my mom, my dad, and my best friend's parents. All of them: 1) own HD sets, 2) subscribe to "expanded" (analog) cable, 3) watch the local HD channels over unencrypted QAM, 4) have no interest in putting up an antenna, and 5) have no interest in paying the cable company one red cent to be able to record what they already receive today.

How many sales is TiVo willing to loose here? Given their tenacious financial position, they don't have the luxury of leaving any sales on the table by neglecting this feature.


----------



## ericr74

Saxion said:


> I personally know 3 people that would buy a TiVoHD if it fully supported local digital channels over cable w/o CableCARDs: my mom, my dad, and my best friend's parents. All of them: 1) own HD sets, 2) subscribe to "expanded" (analog) cable, 3) watch the local HD channels over unencrypted QAM, 4) have no interest in putting up an antenna, and 5) have no interest in paying the cable company one red cent to be able to record what they already receive today.
> 
> How many sales is TiVo willing to loose here? Given their tenacious financial position, they don't have the luxury of leaving any sales on the table by neglecting this feature.


TiVoPony? Someone?  I'll write TiVo a love letter today if they promise to deliver this feature soon. The love letter will be in the form of a box fee and a three-year subscription for a TiVoHD.


----------



## vstone

About whose problem this is: TQM (Total Quality Mangement) was popular in the early to mid 1990's (and may still be popular). 

Part of TQM talks about finding the root cause of a problem, which is sometimes not so easily determined as people tend to stop at the first blocking point. In this case the problem is not being able to obtain program scheduling information about digital cable channels without a cable card. The cause is a system _apparently_ designed to receive digital cable systems only with a cablecard. The fact that it can tune clear QAM signals does not mean it was designed with this capability in mind. 

Alternatively, perhaps it was designed to allow the customer to map clear QAM channels to channel they should see. The CFR implies that for instance, my local channel OTA 7.1 should show up on a clear QAM tuner as 7.1. It is so in some systems, but not in either of the two systems I have experience with (one Comcast, one Time-Warner). Perhaps the feature is sitting there ready for when the cable companies start setting up their system correctly. Perhaps Tivo has enough cable company issues on their hands with cablecards and didn't want to complicate issues by talking about systems that didn't use cablecards.

Another part talks about "owning" a problem. Regardless of who caused the problem, if its a problem for you, then its your problem.

IF, repeat, IF, Tivo thinks that the lack of QAM tuning is a problem, then perhaps they are want to fix it. Maybe they are talking with cable companies. 

It may be low on their list of things to worry about. That doesn't mean it's not on the list.


----------



## vman41

I wonder how hard it would be to make a 'diagnositc' cable card that would provide fixed mappings for the clear QAM channels, programmable with a memory card?


----------



## jfh3

vman41 said:


> I wonder how hard it would be to make a 'diagnositc' cable card that would provide fixed mappings for the clear QAM channels, programmable with a memory card?


Pretty hard.  (Not realistic, even if possible)

FAR easier to do it in the Tivo code.


----------



## frantishak

I personally know few more who will cancel their TiVo subscription, unless QAM remapping suddenly shows up within next few months. Those people used to have decent OTA reception, moved, and now are stuck w/o guide data ...


----------



## vstone

For your evening entertainment:

Section 614.b(8) of Title 47 CFR states IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNALS CARRIED.--A cable operator shall identify, upon request by any person, the signals carried on its system in fulfillment of the requirements of this section.

You can read this to say that the cable companies have to provide clear QAM channels assignments, which, in turn, would make it easier for Tivo, Inc to automatically map your channels for you. Good Luck!


----------



## GoHokies!

vstone said:


> For your evening entertainment:
> 
> Section 614.b(8) of Title 47 CFR states IDENTIFICATION OF SIGNALS CARRIED.--A cable operator shall identify, upon request by any person, the signals carried on its system in fulfillment of the requirements of this section.
> 
> You can read this to say that the cable companies have to provide clear QAM channels assignments, which, in turn, would make it easier for Tivo, Inc to automatically map your channels for you. Good Luck!


You can, if "the requirements of this section" include a requirement to carry clear QAM HD versions of the local broadcast channels.


----------



## MickeS

frantishak said:


> I personally know few more who will cancel their TiVo subscription, unless QAM remapping suddenly shows up within next few months. Those people used to have decent OTA reception, moved, and now are stuck w/o guide data ...


I think that will be me in a few weeks.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

MickeS said:


> I think that will be me in a few weeks.


I also want this feature, but not badly enough to cancel over it.

If and when you do cancel, *please, please, please* make it clear to TiVo exactly why. Maybe it will help them understand that this is something that a lot of people want.

The absence of the feature has cost TiVo $500 in revenue from me alone. I would have bought an S3 a year ago but decided the box was too crippled to be worth $800. But now I bought a $300 TiVo HD because I was willing to live with the limitations for the lower price.


----------



## vstone

GoHokies! said:


> You can, if "the requirements of this section" include a requirement to carry clear QAM HD versions of the local broadcast channels.


As I read CFR, and I'm no lawyer, if the station is carried it must be on the basic tier. The requirement to be in the basic tier CAN BE READ (again) as "the requirements of this section."  With the FCC's lax enforcement, I'm not really sure that thsis makes a difference.


----------



## vstone

Koan said:


> Regardless of whether cable companies are required to carry local broadcast stations in HD, I would think it is to their advantage to do so. They need only to look at the number of limited basic subscribers in areas with strong OTA signals to get an idea of how much business they could lose as more households purchase high definition televisions.


In general I agree, but it really depends on HD TV set penetration of the cable market in question. When our system was Adelphia, we didn't get NBC via cable because the station wanted to be paid for their signal. When Comcast took over, NBC showed up. I don't know if NBC gave up or Comcast decided that paying NBC allowed them to raise rates AND their "reasonable return." Nationwide their have been several faceoffs over carriage of the HD signal.


----------



## Saturn

I hadn't really thought about it before this thread, but if there was QAM mapping, I could probably save a small bundle on cable fees (enough to sub another TiVo perhaps.) Most of the stuff we watch is on the networks and I could give up my digital package and cable cards if TiVo had QAM mapping.

I haven't tried OTA yet, but I suspect the reception isn't great around here.


----------



## jrm01

Saturn said:


> I haven't tried OTA yet, but I suspect the reception isn't great around here.


The rings would interfere with OTA.


----------



## smbaker

GoHokies! said:


> JFH3 hit the nail on the head, though. These clear QAM channels move around in a lot of areas. Since your Tivo has no way of knowing when that happens, every time it does, you're going to be recording the wrong channel. Given that there is no way to easily support this type of mapping, I think that they should leave it alone and save themselves an avalanche of "My show didn't record properly" support calls caused by something that is completely out of their control.


I can only speak from my own personal experience, but I purchased my HDTV back in December. I did a channel scan and it picked up the local HD networks and displayed them using the correct OTA channel numbers, because the PSIP is configured correctly for those channels. That's been almost 9 months, and nothing has changed, moved, or become unwatchable.

Yes, I realize other people have different experiences, but I think my experience here will become more of the norm, if what people are saying is true that the cablecos are required to pass through the PSIP that the network affiliates provide unaltered.

That's why I propose two mechanisms: 1) if something on cable shows up with a channel number in PSIP that matches an OTA network station, automatically assume the OTA guide data goes with that channel (perhaps with a confirmation by the user), and 2) add a manual mapping for those whose networks are not showing up with the correct PSIP data (with an appropriate disclaimer that the channel may move)


----------



## smbaker

jrm01 said:


> The rings would interfere with OTA.


Not to mention his OTA broadcasts will be showing up significantly later than the rest of us on Earth, so his Tivo won't record his programs on time. I'm sorry 'Saturn', but Tivo is not for you!!!!


----------



## smbaker

Saxion said:


> I personally know 3 people that would buy a TiVoHD if it fully supported local digital channels over cable w/o CableCARDs: my mom, my dad, and my best friend's parents. All of them: 1) own HD sets, 2) subscribe to "expanded" (analog) cable, 3) watch the local HD channels over unencrypted QAM, 4) have no interest in putting up an antenna, and 5) have no interest in paying the cable company one red cent to be able to record what they already receive today.


I'm convinced that there would be even more people in this situation were it not for the fact that a lot of people don't realize they receive the local networks in HD via their cable service, because the cablecos have gone to great lengths to make this knowledge non-obvious.

When I first bought my first HDTV back in December, I talked to the local reps at circuit city, best buy, and a rep for comcast. Not a one of them mentioned to me that I could simply plug the set in, do a channel scan, and receive HD channels. All of them told me to buy digital cable from the cable company. All of them (including the comcast rep) told me to avoid paying extra for an HDTV that had a cablecard slot because cablecards 'didn't work right'.

Finally, like you I have relatives that would upgrade to a THD if it would work with unencrypted QAM. My relatives (like me) feel that they already pay too much for cable and aren't going to pay any extra monthly fees. People are willing to give Tivo an extra $250-$300 to upgrade to a THD, but there's such psychological hatred of the cable companies that they aren't willing to voluntarily give a cableco a single cent more than they have to. [their hatred of cable cos is only second to their hatred of oil cos ]


----------



## 1003

*QAM mapping*
of some sort should be a TiVo feature. Locally Comcast provides PSIP mapping for the 'big four' networks. MyNetwork, CW, WTBS, and PBS seem to be drifting around based on the whims of Comcast. Drifting channels make it necessary to rescan every month or two. This bit of annoyance is possibly why so many don't/won't use the tuner they have to watch the channels they already get.

As pointed out the retailers/providers do not willingly provide information related to receiving clear digital channels. Meanwhile Comcast locally continues to convert more and more analogue basic channels to digital in an effort to rent more boxes...


----------



## sfhub

If there is PSIP channel mapping info for all your locals then the QAM mapping can be completely automated (for your locals) and there can be 2 scans, quick scan and full scan.

Full scan does what you expect and would pick up any new channels. It would be run manually or once every N weeks.

Quick scan can be run once (or twice) a day and what it does is tune each channel with PSIP channel mapping and verify the channel is still where it is expected. If not it should trigger full scan.


----------



## lickwid

Not sure if this is relevant at all, probably not. But I was in the same boat as most of you guys, but I got Comcast to add Cablecards to my account without having to upgrade to a digital package. They'll be adding $1.79 for the 2nd card to my high speed internet bill. Note I currently get expanded basic cable through my HOA, through Comcast, as well as high speed internet directly through Comcast.

So my situation is slightly different.

I WAS using QAM channels with my TivoHD unit for the past few weeks and have been frustrated that I also had to manually records HD shows. But for $1.79 a month, I can't complain.


----------



## Saxion

lickwid said:


> But for $1.79 a month, I can't complain.


That's a great (and unusual) deal. Did you have to pay for a truck roll?


----------



## 1283

Saxion said:


> That's a great (and unusual) deal. Did you have to pay for a truck roll?


It's not that unusual. Available in the San Francisco Bay Area and many other Comcast markets. ~$16 for the truck roll.

Even though I don't *need* more TiVos, I would buy two or more TiVoHDs if I don't need to get CableCards, simply because I don't want to pay the additional outlet charges to Comcast.


----------



## lickwid

Saxion said:


> That's a great (and unusual) deal. Did you have to pay for a truck roll?


By truck roll, I'm assuming you mean a service call charge. And yes, I believe it's $15.99 which is kind of ridiculous. Hopefully he'll come out with an M-Card, so I won't have to pay any monthly fee at all.

I'm also located in the SF Bay Area, Fremont specifically. Anyone know if M-Cards are rolling out here yet?

And not sure if it's allowed to be discussed here, but has anyone been fortunate enough to get the installer to keep the "Digital Classic" channels on. I'd like to get ESPN HD, TNT HD etc., without having to pay the additional $12 a month. According to the Comcast rep, if I wanted to add the "Digital Classic" package later, an installer would have to come out and remove the filters...


----------



## 1283

lickwid said:


> And not sure if it's allowed to be discussed here, but has anyone been fortunate enough to get the installer to keep the "Digital Classic" channels on. I'd like to get ESPN HD, TNT HD etc., without having to pay the additional $12 a month. According to the Comcast rep, if I wanted to add the "Digital Classic" package later, an installer would have to come out and remove the filters...


No way. There are no filters for digital channels. Unless the channels are not encrypted, you need to have subscription to receive those channels.


----------



## mattack

vstone said:


> Actually if he gets, say channel 7.1 over cable as 7.1, the cable company is actually passing it on per CFR (ie doing what they are supposed to be doing).


For me, most of my cable channels do show up this way.. e.g. KTVU 2 is 2.1, KPIX 5 is 5.1, KGO 7 is 7.1... but NBC is 33.1 instead of 3.1.

Is Comcast just screwing up the NBC one, or is there some other explanation how they can be 'mostly' right?


----------



## MickeS

mattack said:


> For me, most of my cable channels do show up this way.. e.g. KTVU 2 is 2.1, KPIX 5 is 5.1, KGO 7 is 7.1... but NBC is 33.1 instead of 3.1.
> 
> Is Comcast just screwing up the NBC one, or is there some other explanation how they can be 'mostly' right?


I think the post you replied to was talking about the OTA channel numbers vs cable channel numbers, not the analog vs digital channel numbers.


----------



## Saxion

c3 said:


> It's not that unusual. Available in the San Francisco Bay Area and many other Comcast markets. ~$16 for the truck roll.


I didn't mean the cost; I meant being able to lease CableCARDs without any digital cable subscription package. I and many others have tried getting CableCARDs in this situation, with no luck.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

c3 said:


> Even though I don't *need* more TiVos, I would buy two or more TiVoHDs if I don't need to get CableCards, simply because I don't want to pay the additional outlet charges to Comcast.


Yet another great argument. It's hard to understand why TiVo just couldn't have hired an intern for the summer to hack in a mapping screen. It would have been done by now.

Sometimes TiVo behaves with the *arrogance* of Steve Jobs. They know what's best for us and they're not about to give us a QAM setup screen or a free space indicator. The slight problem is the marketroids at TiVo *aren't* Jobs. Instead they have proven themselves over and over to be astonishingly inept.


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> I didn't mean the cost; I meant being able to lease CableCARDs without any digital cable subscription package. I and many others have tried getting CableCARDs in this situation, with no luck.


He didn't just mean cost. Bay Area offers CableCARDs at that price with just limited basic subscription. There are other parts of the country which don't do this, but I wouldn't call either situation rare. However we cannot get DVR from Comcast w/o adding expanded basic and digital classic, except in rare cases where someone sneaks it past the gatekeeper.


----------



## Jazhuis

c3 said:


> No way. There are no filters for digital channels. Unless the channels are not encrypted, you need to have subscription to receive those channels.


Not entirely true. While checking some things with my local cable service (at home and at work), a fair number of the basic cable channels are running over unencrypted QAM in a lower frequency block (I believe in the 72. to 73. range). This is within the analog range that the notch filters on the line will filter (and that they remove when you subscribe to something other than lifeline cable).

So it is possible for a physical filter on the line to block a digital channel that is sent in the clear, as long as the cable company takes the effort to map it to a frequency within the range that a line filter will block. This makes sense, as if you don't subscribe to at least basic cable, they can block you from tuning it digitally as well -- all well and good. I guess they figured there was no reason to encrypt channels that the bottom-tier digital package would get, although some of their choices for mapping are a bit bizarre (ESPN/Disney SD, CW SD? Not filtered. Nickelodeon/Univision SD, FOX HD? Filtered.)


----------



## sfhub

Jazhuis said:


> So it is possible for a physical filter on the line to block a digital channel that is sent in the clear, as long as the cable company takes the effort to map it to a frequency within the range that a line filter will block.


He didn't say it *couldn't* be done with a filter, just that it *isn't* done with a filter. Why should they go through all this trouble when they can just press a button and change your configuration on the customer service screen?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

Jazhuis said:


> Not entirely true. While checking some things with my local cable service (at home and at work), a fair number of the basic cable channels are running over unencrypted QAM in a lower frequency block (I believe in the 72. to 73. range). This is within the analog range that the notch filters on the line will filter (and that they remove when you subscribe to something other than lifeline cable).


Your cable company must have given you a crummy notch filter.

I have the same arrangement. $10/mo cable, therefore a notch filter which knocks out all frequencies between about 270 MHz and 500 MHz. But in my case, as viewed by TiVo HD:

channel 68: searching for signal
channel 69: visible picture, lots of snow
channel 70: good analog channel
channel 71: good analog channel
channel 72: first digital channel


----------



## Saxion

sfhub said:


> Bay Area offers CableCARDs at that price with just limited basic subscription. There are other parts of the country which don't do this, but I wouldn't call either situation rare.


Have to take exception with that, at least historically. Comcast in Bay Area is the first time I've ever heard of a market that provides CableCARDs without a digital programming package _as a rule_ (not some mistake by a clueless CSR). I do know of many other accounts where people in a variety of markets have resorted to all sorts of shenanigans to try to get CableCARDs w/o upgrading to digital cable: order digital and then cancel it and hope they don't demand the cards back, order a digital STB and take out the CableCARD and try to return the box, etc. Or more commonly, people are simply refused CableCARDs in this case (I was, repeatedly).

I think it would be great if more markets provided CableCARDs with no strings attached, and I'd love to hear more stories about this. Is this becoming more common? Anyone else done this?


----------



## Jazhuis

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Your cable company must have given you a crummy notch filter.


Oh, I won't deny that at all.

Then again, (and with reference to sfhub), they may be doing that on purpose anyway. This is Comcast...who really knows?


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> Have to take exception with that, at least historically. Comcast in Bay Area is the first time I've ever heard of a market that provides CableCARDs without a digital programming package _as a rule_ (not some mistake by a clueless CSR).


IIRC I have read Bellevue, WA and Denver, CO also allow CableCARDs with just limited basic. I don't dispute you are having problems getting this set up and I have no doubt you might get multiple CSRs trying to force a Digital package on you. I believe the reason you are seeing this is because of (mass) CSR misinterpretation of what is allowed. I also believe the reason you don't see more people posting it is possible is because few people know this can be done. Most people getting TiVo S3/HDs already have a digital package. Many people don't even realize they get HD locals with no digital package. Many of the ones that don't have a digital package are venting on the QAM mapping thread(s) and don't even want a CableCARD.

For Bay Area, I don't know if there is an explicit rule that says allow the customer CableCARDs even if they don't have Digital Cable in our market, however there is no rule in our market that says you must have Digital Cable to get CableCARDs.

The difference between what you said and what I said is an explicit rule is something you can point at and say give me that. For us, the issue usually never comes up. We just call in and schedule the CableCARD install, they tell us $15.99 truck roll + $1.79/mo for the second card (2 for TiVo S3).

If you are in a market where you can get Digital Cable, then downgrade to Limited Basic and keep the equipment, my interpretation of that is there is no billing system rule that forces you to get Digital Cable to get CableCARDs and your job is just to get past the gatekeeper. If you need to order digital then cancel as the path of least resistance, go for it.


----------



## vstone

MickeS said:


> I think the post you replied to was talking about the OTA channel numbers vs cable channel numbers, not the analog vs digital channel numbers.


Not quite. My local analog channel 7, broadcasts digitally on channel frequency 18, but their OTA PSIP data identifies their HD channel as 7.1. As I currently read the CFR (I changed my mind after being pointed to the correct section of the CFR), the Cable PSIP data should also identify the channel as 7.1. Of course cable boxes, cablecard equipped DVR's, and cablecard equipped TV sets identify that channel as 707. That (707) is where Tivo puts the program information preventing cablecard-less Tivos from identifying the program stream.

Many, maybe most, cable systems apparently properly populate the cable PSIP tables. The two with which I have experience do not. Perhaps if all of the PSIP data was correct, Tivo would be more active on this feature.

Tivo has to pick their fights carefully. If they supported mapped to the OTA channel ID (7.1 in this case), cable companies would be getting lots of calls about thsi issue (making them even more unhappy about Tivo) AND Tivo would have to explain the difference between OTA 7.1 and clear QAM cable 7.1. When you wanted to record, say CSI, on 7.1, you have to tell Tivo which to use. and Somebody on this forum would be crying for Tivo to add a feature instructing Tivo to go to the other 7.1 if they lost the signal on one while recording.


----------



## sfhub

vstone said:


> Tivo has to pick their fights carefully. If they supported mapped to the OTA channel ID (7.1 in this case), cable companies would be getting lots of calls about thsi issue (making them even more unhappy about Tivo) AND Tivo would have to explain the difference between OTA 7.1 and clear QAM cable 7.1. When you wanted to record, say CSI, on 7.1, you have to tell Tivo which to use. and Somebody on this forum would be crying for Tivo to add a feature instructing Tivo to go to the other 7.1 if they lost the signal on one while recording.


Well you can imagine different implementations where the issues are minimized. One implementation might be if you choose OTA guide data, it asks you an extra question whether you get OTA via antenna or via cable. Then when you choose cable and it scans for PSIP information. If it can't find any that match the guide it asks you to start over and if it does find the PSIP, it lets you continue, noting any missing channels. I think 99% of the people won't need the functionality of recording OTA HD locals and Cable HD locals, so you can just get rid of that option. I know some areas might not have the full stable of HD locals provided on Cable, but the ones people care about are mostly there and if this was a sacrifice we needed to make to keep the implementation simple enough to convince TiVo to do it, I think most people would be ok with it.


----------



## smbaker

vstone said:


> Tivo has to pick their fights carefully. If they supported mapped to the OTA channel ID (7.1 in this case), cable companies would be getting lots of calls about thsi issue (making them even more unhappy about Tivo) AND Tivo would have to explain the difference between OTA 7.1 and clear QAM cable 7.1. When you wanted to record, say CSI, on 7.1, you have to tell Tivo which to use. and Somebody on this forum would be crying for Tivo to add a feature instructing Tivo to go to the other 7.1 if they lost the signal on one while recording.


I don't care whether or not the cable company is "unhappy" about Tivo or not -- they need to put whatever data into the PSIP that the spec calls for. As I understand (from what others have posted), this is supposed to be what the originating network puts in there, which means that if everything is working correctly, it should be the OTA channel number. In my case, that's exactly what shows up (hooray for something working the *right* way for a change!)

As far as the channel conflict between QAM and OTA is concerned, this very same situation exists in analog. I can receive analog 9 OTA and analog 9 Cable. Tivo must have some way to disambiguate them. Moving to a digital world where you have 9.1 OTA and 9.1 QAM is the same problem. Use the existing solution, whatever it is.


----------



## Saxion

sfhub said:


> I believe the reason you are seeing this is because of (mass) CSR misinterpretation of what is allowed.


Thanks for the advice; you might be right there. I am going to try to fight this battle again, once the S3 gets upgraded to support multi-stream mode on M-Cards. I'll do what I can, but if I can't get around "the gatekeeper" CSR just by asking, I'll have to upgrade to a digital package to get the M-Card, then cancel, and let them try to pry the CableCARD out of my cold dead hands.

Of course, I really REALLY don't want to go through any of this, and wouldn't have to, *if TiVo would simply fix this problem!* I don't really care how they do it...automatic use of PSIP data if present, automatic nightly rescanning of QAM channels in case they move, pure manual channel mapping, an obscure backdoor, whatever. As it is, I have to fight a mighty battle with Cox, upgrade and downgrade my service, fight them to keep my M-Card, pay them monthly for the privilege, and deal with skyrocketing Cox CableCARD fees in perpetuity...and all this just to fix the damn TiVo guide! To anyone who thinks TiVo should not fix this: how is this elegant? How is this "a great customer experience"? No matter how TiVo could fix this...it would be better than all the above hassle.


----------



## moyekj

Saxion said:


> I'll do what I can, but if I can't get around "the gatekeeper" CSR just by asking, I'll have to upgrade to a digital package to get the M-Card, then cancel, and let them try to pry the CableCARD out of my cold dead hands.


 The only problem with that approach even if you succeed is if you subsequently have isues with the M-card then you will likely get little to no support from cable company (or they may then demand you either return the card or upgrade to digital service).


----------



## MickeS

vstone said:


> Tivo has to pick their fights carefully. If they supported mapped to the OTA channel ID (7.1 in this case), cable companies would be getting lots of calls about thsi issue (making them even more unhappy about Tivo) AND Tivo would have to explain the difference between OTA 7.1 and clear QAM cable 7.1. When you wanted to record, say CSI, on 7.1, you have to tell Tivo which to use. and Somebody on this forum would be crying for Tivo to add a feature instructing Tivo to go to the other 7.1 if they lost the signal on one while recording.


This is no different than what they already do for analog cable vs analog OTA. I have analog OTA channel 4 and analog cable channel 4. TiVo lets me choose if I want to show both in the guide, or just one of them. They could do the exact same thing with digital.

EDIT: oops, smbaker already pointed this out. Well, the more the merrier.


----------



## ciper

What if Tivo added QAM mapping but it could only be activated by a backdoor code. That would make everyone happy in my mind.

Remember the S1 didn't have folders but a backdoor code could enable alternate sorting methods on the NPL. I've used this feature for the last 4+ years.



MickeS said:


> This is no different than what they already do for analog cable vs analog OTA. I have analog OTA channel 4 and analog cable channel 4. TiVo lets me choose if I want to show both in the guide, or just one of them. They could do the exact same thing with digital.


In fact even the single tuner S1 units can do this when choosing a combination of analog tuner plus Satellite/Cable over video inputs.


----------



## vstone

MickeS said:


> This is no different than what they already do for analog cable vs analog OTA. I have analog OTA channel 4 and analog cable channel 4. TiVo lets me choose if I want to show both in the guide, or just one of them. They could do the exact same thing with digital.
> ...QUOTE]Very true, even assuming that OTA analog 4 and cable analog 4 have the same content. Most analog cable users do not have OTA antennas. The small number that do are probably advanced users. The same can probably be said for OTA digital 4.1 and cable digital 4.1 users.
> 
> And although smbaker doesn't care how much the cable company is pissed at Tivo, Tivo still has a vested interest in trying to be nice on the playground.
> 
> For the record, Tivo says they don't support clear QAM tuning. The hardware actually does. I persoanlly wish that the software did too, as I would be buying a second Tivo HD. But I think that Tivo's motivations are constrained for good reasons, some of which we may not be aware of and some of which we just disagree on priorities.
> 
> It's like the thread where the guy goes off the deep end because the Tivo HD can't take the SD output from his Starchoice satellite receivers (and also control them). Or the guy who wants an HD Tivo that will take component input, damn the cost. haven't seen him around here recently.


----------



## smbaker

vstone said:


> And although smbaker doesn't care how much the cable company is pissed at Tivo, Tivo still has a vested interest in trying to be nice on the playground.


Be nice, yes. Bend over backwards to accommodate cablecos that are not following the spec, no.

The cablecos are not going to like Tivo because they are a competitor. Both the cablecos and Tivo are now in the DVR business. The cablecos would much rather rent the DVRs themselves. Tivo must deal with this and work around cableco issues as much as practical. That's why we need the QAM mapping features.



vstone said:


> For the record, Tivo says they don't support clear QAM tuning. The hardware actually does. I persoanlly wish that the software did too, as I would be buying a second Tivo HD.


The hardware and software both support clear QAM tuning. It's guide data that is unsupported. Tivo has gone to all the work to build in a channel-scan feature. This already opens up the can of worms of channels moving or disappearing, and all the user interface and CSR issues associated with it.

90% of the clear QAM feature is done. What they failed to do is implement the remaining 10% that associates guide data with clear QAM channels.



vstone said:


> It's like the thread where the guy goes off the deep end because the Tivo HD can't take the SD output from his Starchoice satellite receivers (and also control them). Or the guy who wants an HD Tivo that will take component input, damn the cost. haven't seen him around here recently.


No, it's not. Those threads both call for significant hardware and software changes.

The ability to associate guide data with clear-QAM channels is a minor change to the Tivo. Of course, I'm speaking as a software developer who has not seen the actual code, but I can infer how the underlying implementation works. It's obvious that by implementing the channel scan and exposing the clear-QAM tuner that they recognize the problem and put forth effort to implement clear-QAM capability, but for unknown reasons failed to complete the feature.

I'm still think this is not due to valid technical concerns, but is either due to political reasons (back room deal with cable labs) or simple stubbornness on Tivo's part -- the same stubbornness that has us all using the "number of suggestions recorded" to know how much free space we have rather than a simple free space bar.


----------



## smbaker

ciper said:


> What if Tivo added QAM mapping but it could only be activated by a backdoor code. That would make everyone happy in my mind.


I'd think it better to be up-front about it and make it a published feature. It could have a disclaimer screen with the typical "three thumbs down" to confirm you are aware that channel numbers can change due to cableco reassignment and that you proceed at your own risk. It could further advise you that CSRs will not be able to assist with issues related to QAM-mapped channels.

A flag can be set when the feature is enabled and communicated during Tivo's nightly call. A CSR taking a support call would know that QAM-mapping is in use and respond appropriately if the user has problems with mapped channels. I know the CSR's have your Tivo details right there on the screen in front of them because when I deactivated my S1, they told me how big a hard drive I had put it.


----------



## vstone

smbaker said:


> ...
> The hardware and software both support clear QAM tuning. It's guide data that is unsupported. Tivo has gone to all the work to build in a channel-scan feature. This already opens up the can of worms of channels moving or disappearing, and all the user interface and CSR issues associated with it.
> 
> 90% of the clear QAM feature is done. What they failed to do is implement the remaining 10% that associates guide data with clear QAM channels.


 I guess I''l have to quibble here and say if the guide data isn't there, the software doesn't support it. Add the word 'fully' if it will make you feel better. The fact that the clear QAM scan feature is there may indicate that Tivo saw during the beta that PSIP tables were all screwed up and wanted to stay clear for now. The guide data resolution may be sitting in code ready to be activated. Or it may mean that they wanted to support this as an undocumented capability. Or ...

I wonder if Tivo, Inc regrets allowing the scan function out of beta?


> No, it's not. Those threads both call for significant hardware and software changes.


Well the Svideo would be neither a significant hardware ($10) nor software change, considering what previous models supported. You point is well taken with component inputs, but the real isue is with us consumers throwing bricks at Tivo's design and marketing decisions when we can only guess at the reasons behind them.



> The ability to associate guide data with clear-QAM channels is a minor change to the Tivo. Of course, I'm speaking as a software developer who has not seen the actual code, but I can infer how the underlying implementation works. It's obvious that by implementing the channel scan and exposing the clear-QAM tuner that they recognize the problem and put forth effort to implement clear-QAM capability, but for unknown reasons failed to complete the feature.


 or maybe did but declined to activate them.



> I'm still think this is not due to valid technical concerns, but is either due to political reasons (back room deal with cable labs) or simple stubbornness on Tivo's part -- the same stubbornness that has us all using the "number of suggestions recorded" to know how much free space we have rather than a simple free space bar.


I still wonder why they haven't put free space available on the system information screen, too. One day it occurred to me thar going all digital would resolve this (no quality to pick), then I realized that we would have 1080i bit streams, 720p bitstreams, 480i bitstreams, variations of these bitstreams depending on how cable and TV engineers setup their equipment, possible strange bitstreams like D*'s 1280x1080i (or whatever it is), Amazon unbox files, not to mention varying mpeg 2 bistreams, all without using that mpeg4 capability. I would like to think that something besides lack of stubbornness is behind this useful feature. But I digress.


----------



## smbaker

vstone said:


> I guess I''l have to quibble here and say if the guide data isn't there, the software doesn't support it. Add the word 'fully' if it will make you feel better. The fact that the clear QAM scan feature is there may indicate that Tivo saw during the beta that PSIP tables were all screwed up and wanted to stay clear for now.


If the PSIP tables were "all screwed up", then why leave the channel scan feature in there? None of it makes any sense to me. As I pointed out before, the all of the problems that would theoretically plague QAM mapping already plague the channel-scan feature.

For example, I can manually tell Tivo to record 16-1. Comcast can move, delete, or otherwise muck up the frequency and the Tivo will not be able to record the program. Whether or not it has guide data has no impact on these issues.



vstone said:


> Well the Svideo would be neither a significant hardware ($10) nor software change, considering what previous models supported.


I think on a $299 box, an extra $10 is a significant increase in price from a marketing standpoint. There are psychological factors at work here, and Tivo clearly wanted a < $300 price point.

Not to mention, if they spend an extra $10 for svideo, why not an extra $10 for a better remote, or an extra $10 for a better front panel display, or an extra $10 for more hard drive space. Sooner or later all those $10's add up to the cost of an S3.



vstone said:


> I still wonder why they haven't put free space available on the system information screen, too.


No matter what the technological or non-technological issues are, I fail to see how using the number of suggestions remaining is a better solution (which is what most people tell me to do when I gripe about it). If there are issues with variable recording size, then just give me a % of raw free space, and let me interpret it as I see fit.

I get the feeling there is someone with a philosophical point of view making the decisions -- someone who thinks those of us calling for free space indicators just don't understand their view of how Tivo should work. That same person probably also has a world-view where every cable device uses a cablecard and not clear-QAM. He probably curses the developer who snuck the channel-scan into the release...


----------



## Saxion

Back to OP: Did anyone write letters or otherwise contact TiVo regarding clear QAM support?


----------



## smbaker

Saxion said:


> Back to OP: Did anyone write letters or otherwise contact TiVo regarding clear QAM support?


I wrote something into the online suggestion thing at the website back when I started the thread. The advice that someone posted about mailing them a physical letter would probably yield greater results -- something I should really get around to doing. I think if someone could convince the powers that be to make this a *sticky* thread, then we may have more success...

However, as boneheaded as Tivo has been about the freespace indicator, I suspect they'll turn a deaf ear to QAM mapping. The only thing that will probably sway them is a large number of CSR calls from people who didn't know they needed a cablecard and/or a large number of product returns for the same reasons.

It's hard to say how many people are buying S3/HD without realizing they need the cablecards.... Although it's printed on the box and printed in the literature, I suspect there may be more than a few consumers who either don't pay attention or assume the cablecards will be provided free by their cable company.


----------



## Scopeman

In fact, the basic code to make this happen has been in teh S3 software since it shipped. The reason that I (and others) know this for a fact is that for almost a year those of us in Austin TX had this feature active - our original S3 systems were able to get schedule data via our HDTivo interface w/o cablecards. It was great - no OTA hookup, no CCard costs, and I was only paying $13/month for cable and got all my locals in QAM HD with Tivo recording features.

NOTE: This feature *started* after asked Tivo to tweak their lineup to recognize the 15xx series local channels as beings our local stations, and to map the Tivo data. Tivo complied.

A year ago this suddenly stopped, and calls to Tivo and TimeWarner produced the following:

TIVO: "We won't map data to QAM channels"
TWC: "We have not changed anything in our setup/PSIP/etc to cause this change"

Both of those were verified a number of ways (including checking out what changes (none) had occured to people using QAM to get guide data in non-Tivo appliances.

So from this we can assert the following:

#1. The solution (mapping OTA guide data to QAM) is a trivial act already, a capability already in Tivo software or in the Tivo headend datastream.

#2. It requires no act by the Cable Co to enable (although it may require the Cable Co to consent).

#3. It does not require Cable Cards to execute.

Based on that data, it clearly is a Tivo issue to solve - they need to outline what is required, explain the downsides (items may remap) and allow for users to opt-in with full disclosure. *IF* Cable Co consent is needed then they need to let us (the users) know, so that we can bring pressure to bear.


----------



## Scopeman

And one other thing - the original Austin mapping success was caused by the first few S3 owners putting in lineup requests (I owned 2nd S3 in Central TX).

If all owners in a particular area all submitted the same line-up fix requests on the same day/weekend then the mass similarity of the requests may get more notice than a random splattering.

Thoughts on this? Want to coordinate a city-by-city / weekend-by-weekend barage of lineup requests to see what happens?


----------



## vstone

Scopeman said:


> In fact, the basic code to make this happen has been in teh S3 software since it shipped. The reason that I (and others) know this for a fact is that for almost a year those of us in Austin TX had this feature active - our original S3 systems were able to get schedule data via our HDTivo interface w/o cablecards. It was great - no OTA hookup, no CCard costs, and I was only paying $13/month for cable and got all my locals in QAM HD with Tivo recording features.
> 
> NOTE: This feature *started* after asked Tivo to tweak their lineup to recognize the 15xx series local channels as beings our local stations, and to map the Tivo data. Tivo complied.


This is probably because the PSIP data mapped the clea QAM channels to the same channel as listed on the channel lineup. While this appears to make sense, it also appears to contradict federal laws which require them to map OTA virtual channel 7.1 to cable clear QAM virtual channel 7.1, not clear QAM cable virtual channel 1507 or whatever. If cable companies complied with federal law and Tivo supported a clear QAM lineup choice, all would probably be happy.



> ...
> TWC: "We have not changed anything in our setup/PSIP/etc to cause this change"
> ...


Between FEB 12 and FEB 14, 2007 the HD channels disppeared on most clear QAM receivers in the Myrtle Beach area, and presumably in all TWC system in SC. TWC swore that no changes were made locally or at the head end in Columbia, SC. they never admitted that they made any changes, but the channels finally reappeared. I'm not sure that many TWC tech folk have been trained enough to know what they're doing. Clear QAM channels seem to come and go with crows in our yard on the TWC system in Greensboro, NC.


----------



## smbaker

Scopeman said:


> #2. It requires no act by the Cable Co to enable (although it may require the Cable Co to consent).


I don't think it even requires them to consent. It does require the cablecos and the OTA broadcast stations to implement the PSIP correctly. As I understand, the cablecos are required to pass the PSIP channel number that the OTA station supplies. That requirement was likely put into the spec specifically to prevent the cablecos from playing games with channel numbers.

Strangely enough, someone in the FCC had enough foresight to predict that the cablecos would try every trick in the book to make government-mandated HD programming cost more than SD programming. It's odd for a government agency to think in advance like that....


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

smbaker said:


> Strangely enough, someone in the FCC had enough foresight to predict that the cablecos would try every trick in the book to make government-mandated HD programming cost more than SD programming. It's odd for a government agency to think in advance like that....


The powers that be in my local Comcast are quite accepting of their obligations. They're as confused by TiVo's incompetence as us owners. When I ordered Cablecards my Comcast guy called back to explain how I can already get clear QAM with the limited basic I was paying for. I still don't think he believes my explanation that I needed the cards because of TiVo's ineptitude.

My local Comcast supplies the 1st card for free, $1.79/mo for the 2nd card. Truck roll is $15. Comcast can't make money with rates like those (especially with a large number of callbacks for pixelation etc) so they would probably prefer TiVos to work w/o cablecards.


----------



## sfhub

Scopeman said:


> \So from this we can assert the following:
> 
> #1. The solution (mapping OTA guide data to QAM) is a trivial act already, a capability already in Tivo software or in the Tivo headend datastream.
> 
> #2. It requires no act by the Cable Co to enable (although it may require the Cable Co to consent).
> 
> #3. It does not require Cable Cards to execute.


#1 and #2 *only* work because the Cable company *does* put PSIP info that maps the QAM to a cable-style channel # the guide provider can recognized and produce data for.

Eliminate that PSIP then it doesn't work. Personally I think all cable companies should have the PSIP channels map to something the guide provider can produce data for and the guide provider should provide guide data for every PSIP channel # cable provides, however not all of us are lucky enough to be in that situation, which has given rise to calls for manual channel mapping. I think automatic mapping is perfectly doable if the parties cooperate and Austin proves that.

Yes the same thing can be done with OTA-style PSIP channel #s, but it seems TiVo assumes any channel # with subchannels automatically refers to the OTA antennae input and this prevents that from working, even if you could convince the guide provider to provide data for 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, etc.


----------



## smbaker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> My local Comcast supplies the 1st card for free, $1.79/mo for the 2nd card. Truck roll is $15. Comcast can't make money with rates like those (especially with a large number of callbacks for pixelation etc) so they would probably prefer TiVos to work w/o cablecards.


Perhaps. However, the cablecos are in the DVR rental business themselves, so there is a clear conflict of interest, and it is to their benefit that Tivo installation be non-trivial.

They also like to be able to charge extra for "digital" cable and "HD" programming, even though they are required by the FCC to provide network affiliates in digital HD with basic cable service.

So there are many reasons why they would view clear-QAM as not in their best interests.


----------



## restart88

JJ said:


> *PSIP*
> data is only required for the 'big 4' networks? This would explain how Comcast tends to play 'hide and seek' moving the other local broadcast/digital channels. TiVo should look at how Microsoft (can't believe I'm saying this) allows channels to be remapped in Media Center. You need this locally to remap WUPA to RF43 from the RF69 the guide data believes it to be. Microsoft also lets you assign the programming data to the channel you created. Simple and elegant solution I would have expected from TiVo, not Microsoft...


A little off topic here but are you saying Media Center has a functional channel guide capability? 

I ask because I have 2 Dell Dimensions with MCE, one of which now is used to stream my home security cams 24/ 7.

I bought an analog Powercolor Theater Pro card some time back and could never get it to work on either one and just gave up. Customer support was no help and I am about to donate the thing to charity in case someone else might have better luck.

Hey I'd try an HD tuner card to tide me over if it will automatically update the program guide and actually work right. It would be worth it to me just for the OTA feeds.


----------



## 1003

*YMMV*
In MCE2005 I choose Setup/TV/Settings/Guide/Add Missing Channels then choose Add Channel or Add DTV Channel as appropriate for you. I need this locally for WUPA-DT 43.1 as the mapping of RF43 to 69.1 seems ineffective. Matching the available WUPA listings to the created channel is easy as selecting from a list...

I have much love for the Avermedia A180 HDTV card, and hope that someday the QAM functionality available only in the AverTV software can work in MCE2005...


----------



## restart88

I'm glad you mentioned Aver Media. That's my security DVR card and I would have been inclined to get their card as their tech support was crucial in getting my card & software up and running well. Of course the documentation in the box was a joke but the online FAQs answered some of the questions.


----------



## 1003

*Don't expect*
the same level of support as the security cards. You are far more on your own. There is much help on the web and you are covering well travelled ground. Generally a look at the avsforum / home theater computers section for excellent advice and guidance.

Get a quality software DVD decoder and research your video card choices carefully. I still like my ATI X700 in AGP and PCI-E variants, but they are not a 'perfect' solution, but they have been able workhorses.

Thouroughbreds can run much faster and are prettier to watch, but my sytems run fine and look excellent on my R-PJ/Plasma/LCD displays...


----------



## Scopeman

vstone said:


> This is probably because the PSIP data mapped the clea QAM channels to the same channel as listed on the channel lineup. While this appears to make sense, it also appears to contradict federal laws which require them to map OTA virtual channel 7.1 to cable clear QAM virtual channel 7.1, not clear QAM cable virtual channel 1507 or whatever. If cable companies complied with federal law and Tivo supported a clear QAM lineup choice, all would probably be happy.
> 
> Between FEB 12 and FEB 14, 2007 the HD channels disppeared on most clear QAM receivers in the Myrtle Beach area, and presumably in all TWC system in SC. TWC swore that no changes were made locally or at the head end in Columbia, SC. they never admitted that they made any changes, but the channels finally reappeared. I'm not sure that many TWC tech folk have been trained enough to know what they're doing. Clear QAM channels seem to come and go with crows in our yard on the TWC system in Greensboro, NC.


But the contradictory point in the Austin area is that ONLY S3 Tivos were impacted - all other folks using QAM Tuners in other devices continued with no apparent impact to their setups.

Are you suggesting the the changes from Feb 2007 in Mrytle Beacj would only have impacted S3 devices and all other QAM users would be unaffected?

Also - I got my guide data when the local QAM via Cable was showing on 1501/1511/1521/1541/etc - *NOT* at 7-1/24-1/etc. So there is obviously a way to get the guide data without having the QAM channels correctly mapped away from the cable co. assigned channel #s like 1521.

Even more interesting - when I switched over to OTA the Season's Passes jumped from the "15xx" channels to the OTA version (XX-X channels) without my intervention, which clearly indicates the Season Passes had so level of awareness of the underlying true nature of the channel.

In addition, the Tivo staff at the resolution center confirmed for my the the changes in late 2006 that caused this issue on my S3s came from a Tivo change. They should revert to the original setup, and enable this mapping.


----------



## sfhub

Scopeman said:


> But the contradictory point in the Austin area is that ONLY S3 Tivos were impacted - all other folks using QAM Tuners in other devices continued with no apparent impact to their setups.


Unless they used TiVo as their guide provider, why would they be affected?



Scopeman said:


> Also - I got my guide data when the local QAM via Cable was showing on 1501/1511/1521/1541/etc - *NOT* at 7-1/24-1/etc. So there is obviously a way to get the guide data without having the QAM channels correctly mapped away from the cable co. assigned channel #s like 1521.


As mentioned earlier, Austin was lucky because they had 2 things:
1) cable company provided PSIP virtual channel #s that mapped to what they were using in their digital cable lineup
2) Austin TiVo users were able to convince TiVo to include those channel #s in the guide data

Austin lost #2, so that is why they no longer see the guide data in TiVo. TiVo can still tune those channels but has no guide data to record them. Austin is just like the rest of us poor S3 users now, except their channels are still PSIP mapped to 15xx instead of 2.1, 3.1, 4.1 like many others.



Scopeman said:


> Even more interesting - when I switched over to OTA the Season's Passes jumped from the "15xx" channels to the OTA version (XX-X channels) without my intervention, which clearly indicates the Season Passes had so level of awareness of the underlying true nature of the channel.


That doesn't indicate the TiVo module in question is aware of the underlying true nature of the channel. What it indicates is your Season Passes are created using the channel station identifiers and if the station identifier moves to a different #, TiVo will remap automatically. It would do this regardless of whether we are talking QAM or OTA/8VSB.



Scopeman said:


> In addition, the Tivo staff at the resolution center confirmed for my the the changes in late 2006 that caused this issue on my S3s came from a Tivo change. They should revert to the original setup, and enable this mapping.


Yes, as mentioned earlier, someone convinced TiVo to dump the guide data for 15xx channels, just like someone convinced them to add it earlier.


----------



## jvandecar

These are the channels I can get through Time Warner, direct Coax to Tivo HD. No set top box, no Cable Card. I have Basic and expanded Cable (no digital anything). I found them by doing a channel search.

83-1 KET HD
86-3 Bloomberg?
87-13 ShopNBC.COM
88-1 CBS WKYT
92-1 ESPN-HD
101-5 Jetix (Spanish)
101-6 History Channel (Spanish)
103-1, 103-2, 103-3, 103-4, 103-5, 103-6 ESPN Radio
104-1 Discovery HD
105-1 Cable Advertising PPV
105-9 Fox HD
106-5 Jetix
108-5 through 108-49 Digital Music Channels
109-00 TNT HD
114-1 ESPN2-HD

TiVo doesn't recognize the channels, and doesn't provide any programming information for them. Big pain in the arse. 

Is there anyway I can manually tell my TiVo what channel is which network, so that I can get lineup info and record using it, instead of telling it to record 101-6 (History Channel HD) at BLANK time on BLANK day? These channels have dumbed the Tivo down to a VCR.

All I'm really interested in ESPN HD, ESPN2 HD, TNT HD, History Channel HD and Discovery HD, since I get OTA HD from broadcast networks.


----------



## jfh3

jvandecar said:


> TiVo doesn't recognize the channels, and doesn't provide any programming information for them. Big pain in the arse.
> 
> Is there anyway I can manually tell my TiVo what channel is which network, so that I can get lineup info and record using it, instead of telling it to record 101-6 (History Channel HD) at BLANK time on BLANK day? These channels have dumbed the Tivo down to a VCR.


No, that is exactly the point of this thread - if you could do that, we would have QAM mapping!


----------



## moyekj

jvandecar said:


> All I'm really interested in ESPN HD, ESPN2 HD, TNT HD, History Channel HD and Discovery HD, since I get OTA HD from broadcast networks.


 Your cable company is really messing things up in the 1st place - I'd say it's pretty rare/unusual to find those channels unencrypted, especially ESPNs & Discovery. They will probably correct that at some point.


----------



## Dmon4u

My local Comcast had ESPN-HD up till two weeks ago. Now it's gone. I wonder why ?

Football Season ! Get your HD Programming from Comcast now (as heard on a local radio commercial) !


----------



## restart88

Just curious if you're in a Big Ten city? I hear they've been having contract disputes.


----------



## Dmon4u

If your talking about Comcast playing the same game as they did with the NFL Network, yes ! They want to put it in a Sports Package to help sell other worthless Sports channels or as an expensive stand alone to make mega-$$$ for Comcast, itself.

Though, in this case, the BTN is less than 7% football programming during each year, 83% junk sports that have no audience/Fans (and make no money) and 10% Basketball.

At least the NFL Network is 100% America's Sport, year around.


----------



## jrm01

Here is an example of the difficulty that could arise in providing the QAM mapping for guide data. My local Comcast (Pittsburgh) had been doing a great job of providing the in-the-clear local QAM channels, mapped exactly to the OTA channel numbers. Suddenly this week they all disappeared. I reran the Channel Scan and found them. Instead of mapping to OTA numbers they now are:

75.2201 NBC
75.2203 CBS
76.2301 FOX
76.2302 MYTV
85.2101 ABC
85.2103 PBS

In addition, I now get 40 music channels mapped to odd frequencies. I also continue to get the neighborhood VOD programming on various channels.

My Mitsubishi DLP did a proper job of mapping out the frequencies and finding all the channels. However, my Panasonic Plasma (brand new) only uses 3-digit sub-channels and it could not map half of the channels and I can't get them on that set.

Other than the cynical answer that Comcast does this to force customers to subscribe to their digital packages, what other reason would a cable company have to start using 4-digit sub-channel numbers?

Also, in checking the specs of a TV, is there a way to determine if it has 4-digit sub-channel capabilities with the QAM tuner?


----------



## MickeS

jrm01 said:


> Other than the cynical answer that Comcast does this to force customers to subscribe to their digital packages, what other reason would a cable company have to start using 4-digit sub-channel numbers?


I thought that was the only reason they did this.


----------



## SAH2

I just received the new Fall Update on my Series 3. I noticed that my QAM channels now have 4 "?"'s after the channel number, before the "no information available" I don't recall the "?"'s being there before the update. Is this a change or am I mistaken.?


----------



## sfhub

Quick, rifle through the setup menus to see if there is a QAM mapping facility.


----------



## 1003

*Costco*
visit pencilled in for Tuesday if QAM mapping is really available on TiVoHD...


----------



## frantishak

I would keep my hopes high. Before winter update my channels where marked with just a number (e.g. 4.1), after winter update they became number and 'cbl' (e.g. 4.1cbl). However, nothing in functionality changed.


----------



## SAH2

I checked all of the menus and nothing seems to be there for channel mapping. Still strange about the new ????. I was really hoping this got added with the new fall season. OTA is so spotty in our location.


----------



## Jazhuis

Sigh. I wouldn't count on it. 

I did finally come up with a decent business-case reasoning why manual QAM mapping would benefit TiVo, if they provided it to us. I just fear that at this point, it won't be worth the effort of bringing up.


----------



## 1283

Jazhuis said:


> I did finally come up with a decent business-case reasoning why manual QAM mapping would benefit TiVo, if they provided it to us. I just fear that at this point, it won't be worth the effort of bringing up.


I would immediately buy two more S3/HD units.


----------



## Jazhuis

Okay, fine. Someone point this out to TiVo, then:

(Personally) I have not opted-in to any of the data collection, because I haven't felt the need to use any of the services that request me to. However, even if I did, it would do TiVo little good, as a large chunk of their data from me would simply be associated with unknown recordings on physical QAM channels.

Give us QAM mapping, which in turn will give TiVo more valuable data (research and marketing) from those users that do not have a Cablecard but are using digital cable through open QAM.


----------



## moyekj

jrm01 said:


> Here is an example of the difficulty that could arise in providing the QAM mapping for guide data. My local Comcast (Pittsburgh) had been doing a great job of providing the in-the-clear local QAM channels, mapped exactly to the OTA channel numbers. Suddenly this week they all disappeared. I reran the Channel Scan and found them. Instead of mapping to OTA numbers they now are:
> 
> 75.2201 NBC
> 75.2203 CBS
> 76.2301 FOX
> 76.2302 MYTV
> 85.2101 ABC
> 85.2103 PBS
> 
> In addition, I now get 40 music channels mapped to odd frequencies. I also continue to get the neighborhood VOD programming on various channels.
> 
> My Mitsubishi DLP did a proper job of mapping out the frequencies and finding all the channels. However, my Panasonic Plasma (brand new) only uses 3-digit sub-channels and it could not map half of the channels and I can't get them on that set.
> 
> Other than the cynical answer that Comcast does this to force customers to subscribe to their digital packages, what other reason would a cable company have to start using 4-digit sub-channel numbers?
> 
> Also, in checking the specs of a TV, is there a way to determine if it has 4-digit sub-channel capabilities with the QAM tuner?


 Different QAM tuners assign different sub-channel numbers. Before I had CableCards my S3s assigned some 3 & 4 sub channel numbers such as you get above, however my PC Fusion HDTV tuner used "normal" single digit sub-channels for the same. i.e. The S3 used something like 99.1002 while my Fusion assigned 99.3. I think the S3 is kind of screwy in it's sub-channel # assignments. In my headend spreadsheet I used to try and capture sub-channel numbers but after discovering these different tuner discrepancies I now omit the sub-channel number in my spreadsheet.


----------



## jrm01

moyekj said:


> Different QAM tuners assign different sub-channel numbers. Before I had CableCards my S3s assigned some 3 & 4 sub channel numbers such as you get above, however my PC Fusion HDTV tuner used "normal" single digit sub-channels for the same. i.e. The S3 used something like 99.1002 while my Fusion assigned 99.3. I think the S3 is kind of screwy in it's sub-channel # assignments. In my headend spreadsheet I used to try and capture sub-channel numbers but after discovering these different tuner discrepancies I now omit the sub-channel number in my spreadsheet.


Are you saying that the cable company does not assign the sub-channel numbers? My problem is that the Panny doesn't get half the channels now and the ones that it does get are converted to a 3-digit number (just dropping the last digit). I was going to try it on the S3 today, but my Mits just died (I hope it just the bulb).


----------



## vstone

moyekj said:


> Different QAM tuners assign different sub-channel numbers. Before I had CableCards my S3s assigned some 3 & 4 sub channel numbers such as you get above, however my PC Fusion HDTV tuner used "normal" single digit sub-channels for the same. i.e. The S3 used something like 99.1002 while my Fusion assigned 99.3. I think the S3 is kind of screwy in it's sub-channel # assignments. In my headend spreadsheet I used to try and capture sub-channel numbers but after discovering these different tuner discrepancies I now omit the sub-channel number in my spreadsheet.


According to the display on my Westinghouse TV, it tunes to something like 110-9001 before dropping down to displaying 110-1. Doesn't make any sence to me.


----------



## billyjoebob99

It seems to me that there is a quick fix that TiVo could implement that would satisfy 60-90% of users. I say 60-90% based on an unscientific study of posts concerning QAM mapping.

It appears that the majority of users are in the same boat I am. I have all local HD stations mapped properly by TiVo to the same channel as the OTA stations. In my guide I have two channels labeled 7-1(local ABC). One channel from cable that tunes perfectly with no guide data and one from the antenna the tunes for crap with guide data

If TiVo were to simply put the guide data in QAM channels that have the same station ID as OTA channels my problems would be solved. I understand that it would not be a complete fix for everyone. I would still like the ability to manually map other QAM channels I receive like DiscoverHD. I know not all local QAM channels map correctly because of the data stream from the cable operators. But if TiVo implemented this fix they would satisfy a majority of users and put the burden on the cable operators for the rest.


----------



## frantishak

billyjoebob99, couldn't agree more !


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> Are you saying that the cable company does not assign the sub-channel numbers? My problem is that the Panny doesn't get half the channels now and the ones that it does get are converted to a 3-digit number (just dropping the last digit). I was going to try it on the S3 today, but my Mits just died (I hope it just the bulb).


They can assign the sub-channel #s if they choose to use cable PSIP virtual channel mapping. Absent of that mapping information, it is up to your device to count, and different devices appear to have attended different schools when they learned to count. The good news is the subchannel #s counting method is consistent within the specific device you are using so 201 won't change to 699 the next day (unless your cable company changes the stream ordering), but 201 on Sony might not be counted as 201 on Samsung or TiVo.


----------



## moyekj

sfhub said:


> They can assign the sub-channel #s if they choose to use cable PSIP virtual channel mapping. Absent of that mapping information, it is up to your device to count, and different devices appear to have attended different schools when they learned to count. The good news is the subchannel #s counting method is consistent within the specific device you are using so 201 won't change to 699 the next day (unless your cable company changes the stream ordering), but 201 on Sony might not be counted as 201 on Samsung or TiVo.


 Yes, for my cable company all except 2 unencrypted QAM channels have no PSIP information (even most of the HD locals). So when you tune those the sub-channel numbers are somewhat arbitrary depending on the tuner you use (but each tuner is consistent with itself as you state).


----------



## velo116

the sad news is I was about to go out and buy a THD tomorrow and was reading all these great things about it. But right before bed time I thought about this possible issue, and now that I know TiVo doesn't provide any support for this, I will probably not purchase tivo after all.


----------



## sfhub

Just to be sure you are worried about the right thing, are you only interested in recording HD locals like FOX-HD, CBS-HD, ABC-HD, NBC-HD? If that is the case, then you are correct, this would affect you. You could get a M-Card CableCARD from your cable company and this issue wouldn't be there. If you really want no additional charge from the cable company, then QAM mapping will be important to you. There are reports that a couple of areas like Austin actually can work without CableCARD because:
1) their cable provider uses PSIP to map the channels to the proper cable channel #s
2) the users convinced TiVo/TiVo's guide provider to populate the channel guide info for the digital channels even if digital cable was not selected

If you are in one of these areas, then you essentially already have automatic QAM/PSIP mapping.


----------



## velo116

I just want to record the locals and the cable company has arbitrarily assigned digital channels. I'm going to call today and find out, but right now I'm just paying for basic cable and i have a feeling in order to get the cable card they are going to make me upgrade to digital.

are there no software hacks or "homebrew" type stuff that might be able to remidy this issue?

update: yeah I would have to pay about $40 more per month to upgrade to basic digital in order to get a cable card.


----------



## Saxion

velo116 said:


> are there no software hacks or "homebrew" type stuff that might be able to remidy this issue?


Sadly, no. There was an attempt at this a few months ago...someone was investigating whether they could provide a service to modify individual user's S3 firmware images to map the QAM channels into the guide...but it never worked reliably and didn't go anywhere.


----------



## jlb

Saxion said:


> I personally know 3 people that would buy a TiVoHD if it fully supported local digital channels over cable w/o CableCARDs: my mom, my dad, and my best friend's parents. All of them: 1) own HD sets, 2) subscribe to "expanded" (analog) cable, 3) watch the local HD channels over unencrypted QAM, 4) have no interest in putting up an antenna, and 5) have no interest in paying the cable company one red cent to be able to record what they already receive today.
> 
> How many sales is TiVo willing to loose here? Given their tenacious financial position, they don't have the luxury of leaving any sales on the table by neglecting this feature.


Add me.

We pay $10/mo for the basic lineup. I am planning on an HDTV some time in the next year. I would likely buy something that can tune the QAM channels directly for live viewing (my wife will not want an antenna up anywhere, if we are even close enough anyway). And I'll use my S2DT for SD recording until it can no longer. But I would absolutely get an THD much sooner if it could record the QAM in the clear HDs, and keep my basic $10/mo package, rather than bump that up to $50ish.........


----------



## naiLS1

velo116 said:


> the sad news is I was about to go out and buy a THD tomorrow and was reading all these great things about it. But right before bed time I thought about this possible issue, and now that I know TiVo doesn't provide any support for this, I will probably not purchase tivo after all.


That's exactly my situation. I was literally just about to buy a Tivo HD and just happened to find this thread. Those QAM channels were the reason I was GOING to buy one. Not anymore---Tivo will have to fix this before I'll even consider it.


----------



## Saxion

If we make TiVo aware of all the sales they are losing because of this, I'm sure it would get fixed.

I'd wager they never lost a sale because of missing eSATA support, or lack of a disk space meter, or lack of HD content on Amazon, or slow TTG network performance, or any of the umpteen other minor issues people complain about. But they continue to lose many, many sales specifically because of this one glaring issue.

How can we communicate this effectively to TiVo? Did anyone actually follow through with the letter writing campaign?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

Saxion said:


> How can we communicate this effectively to TiVo?


I think it's a quixotic effort.

Smart businesses would be overjoyed to have access to sites like TiVo Community. Continuing feedback from their most tech savvy customers. Free beta testing. Free market research.

But instead, TiVo keeps running moronic marketing campaigns and keeps adding "features" that most people don't want.

They just don't get it!


----------



## sbourgeo

I think QAM mapping functionality has become the new free space indicator. Since searching the S3 forum for "mapping" makes it pretty clear that this is a feature that several TiVo customers would like to see implemented, I am sure that the folks at TiVo are aware of us that would like it.


----------



## TiVo Troll

bkdtv said:


> Yes, the Sony let you set a network affiliation for a particular QAM channel. Of course, whenever your cable provider changed their QAM channels -- some do it rarely and others do it more frequently -- recordings were from the wrong channel.


Sony's TVGOS allows a user to enter a digital channel number manually. It's a simple solution; easy to change if and when necessary, when a CableCARD is not used. But Sony's DVR can also use a CableCARD.

If as simple as it appears, TiVo might consider allowing non-CableCARD users to input digital channel numbers manually.


----------



## sfhub

sbourgeo said:


> I think QAM mapping functionality has become the new free space indicator.


From an implementation standpoint, I hope not


----------



## sbourgeo

sfhub said:


> From an implementation standpoint, I hope not


From an implementation standpoint, my bet is that TiVo will probably never implement either one.


----------



## bizzy

what percentage of tivo users do you think even know what QAM is?


----------



## crabbon

I'm game to participate in a letter to tivo campaign.


----------



## sbourgeo

bizzy said:


> what percentage of tivo users do you think even know what QAM is?


3.14159%


----------



## bizzy

I suspect you're over-estimating by an order of magnitude there.


----------



## fatespawn

bizzy said:


> what percentage of tivo users do you think even know what QAM is?


For purchasers of the Series 3 Tivo's, I'd say the % is pretty darn high. You don't throw down $250-600 without doing a little research. If someone didn't know the benefits and capabilities of a Tivo, they'd just opt for the STB from the cable company.


----------



## bizzy

Your theory makes sense, but given what I've seen reading the forums here, I'd have to disagree. Many people on here have trouble differentiating between the Tivo HD and Series 3, even though they've purchased one or the other.


----------



## Saxion

bizzy said:


> what percentage of tivo users do you think even know what QAM is?


Do you have to know what ATSC means in order to use an antenna?

You just know that you do a channel scan and you get your HD channels on X, Y, and Z. My Mom and Dad aren't the most technically savvy people around , but I got them set up to watch their local HD network channels on their basic cable. They don't know a QAM from a clam, but they know to punch in "6.1" (which happens to be the exact same channel as if they used an antenna) and they see Fox. They both like the idea of a TiVo but I told them they would get almost no support for their HD channels that they enjoy today unless they had CableCARDs installed and leased, and they said "No Way."


----------



## restart88

I'm still not sure I know the difference except that Tivo HD is for cable or OTA only, so if you want HD for DBS you have to pony up for a S3.

That and a smaller Hard Drive.


----------



## old64mb

fatespawn said:


> For purchasers of the Series 3 Tivo's, I'd say the % is pretty darn high. You don't throw down $250-600 without doing a little research. If someone didn't know the benefits and capabilities of a Tivo, they'd just opt for the STB from the cable company.


Maybe I'm stupid, but I didn't know QAM was available on the S3 until about 6 months after I'd bought it - despite the fact my TV has a QAM tuner as well.

Would I like the functionality? Absolutely, since I'd likely drop my cablecards and more expensive packages if I could just get the thing to work right with unencrypted HD and the unscrambled analog channels. Do I expect it? Not really.


----------



## sbourgeo

restart88 said:


> I'm still not sure I know the difference except that Tivo HD is for cable or OTA only, so if you want HD for DBS you have to pony up for a S3.


FWIW, the S3 and HD are both cable and/or OTA only.


----------



## fatespawn

I stand corrected.


----------



## sfhub

A lot of people who don't know about ClearQAM figure it out when they first install their new TV and it starts a standard scan. Then they are overjoyed to see they get HD NBC/CBS/ABC/FOX, especially if they install it on Sunday and see the football games. Then they get the TiVo and say why do I need to pay for CableCARDs and TiVo service when my TV gets it w/o extra equipment.


----------



## CrispyCritter

What I see in this thread and similar ones is people giving their local situation and saying "I want TiVo to give me guide data for my situation". In general, I see no recognition that folks are asking for different, sometimes contradictory, things (eg some want complete manual remapping freedom, others want mapping to OTA channel numbers, others want mapping to full digital service channel numbers), and no recognition of the cost to TIVo of particular things, including support. I think you folks will do much better if you can give a full model of what you want, including the benefits and costs to both you and TiVo, of a consensus QAM remapping proposal. 

I don't mean going down to the numbers level (TiVo can supply numbers), but I do mean a full list of costs and benefits, and a full description of the algorithm folks think solves the problem. It might include answers to questions like
What can get remapped and where? (guided setup or separate screen, what kind of channel id and how does user know it)?
How is guide data downloaded?
Who is responsible when change in channel id occurs?
How do folks find out about the feature?
How can folks find out pre-purchase whether it helps them?
Who is responsible when it stops working?
Who is responsible for what level of support (a BIG item, with several costs and benefits to each of user and TiVo. Eg if you start missing recordings, can you call TiVo before turning off the remapping?)?
Are there benefits other than increased sales?

So I challenge you to put together a full proposal! My opinion is I don't think you can put together a reasonable proposal including full support from TiVo, but you may be able to come up with a low cost proposal without full support that gives enough to be useful. But unless you can say exactly what you want, there's no reason to hope for TiVo to give it to you!


----------



## aindik

sfhub said:


> A lot of people who don't know about ClearQAM figure it out when they first install their new TV and it starts a standard scan. Then they are overjoyed to see they get HD NBC/CBS/ABC/FOX, especially if they install it on Sunday and see the football games. Then they get the TiVo and say why do I need to pay for CableCARDs and TiVo service when my TV gets it w/o extra equipment.


They don't even need a TV with a tuner. They just need to run a channel scan on the TiVoHD itself. That'll find all the QAM channels (even if they don't know what "QAM" is), and then the user would wonder why the TiVo doesn't know what any of those channels are.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

aindik said:


> They don't even need a TV with a tuner. They just need to run a channel scan on the TiVoHD itself. That'll find all the QAM channels (even if they don't know what "QAM" is), and then the user would wonder why the TiVo doesn't know what any of those channels are.


Very well said. This is the simplest explanation I've seen so far.

Of course the next questions from the user would be: WTF am I paying TiVo for? Is this the best they can do? I need to pay extra for something called "cablecards"?


----------



## andyf

What people want is a way to have full TiVo functionality so they can see and record all those digital in the clear channels without paying for them.

Given TiVo's reliance on CableLabs and the cable companies I don't see this happening.


----------



## aindik

andyf said:


> What people want is a way to have full TiVo functionality so they can see and record all those digital in the clear channels without paying for them.
> 
> Given TiVo's reliance on CableLabs and the cable companies I don't see this happening.


If the cable companies wanted to require cablecards or digital STBs to see those channels, they'd scramble them like they scramble the others. They either want to, or are required to, make the channels available to all QAM tuners. If they weren't required to and didn't want to, they wouldn't.

Sorta-related to TiVo's in the clear QAM implementation, does anyone know why the TiVoHD's scan can't tell the difference between a QAM channel with content available and a QAM channel that's scrambled?


----------



## Truncated

What would happen if you bought a cablecard off of eBay and inserted it yourself without activating it? Would it be able to download the right channel map and simply not decrypt encrypted channels?


----------



## andyf

Truncated said:


> What would happen if you bought a cablecard off of eBay and inserted it yourself without activating it? Would it be able to download the right channel map and simply not decrypt encrypted channels?


I think the card has to at least be registered in your cable companies system. I picked up two cards from my Comcast office. One of them gave me access to everything, the other gave me nothing. Comcast Houston cards don't need pairing with the host so the one card had obviously been used before, the other was most likely a new card. Once I called in and registered them on my account they both got the correct lineups.


----------



## Truncated

Buckeye Cable wants $100 for "installation," so I was wondering if there was some way around it, since I have basic service ($12.00 / month) and don't want the encrypted channels. Fortunately OTA gets me everything I need, but it would be nice to get the other digital qam stations mapped correctly.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> So I challenge you to put together a full proposal! My opinion is I don't think you can put together a reasonable proposal including full support from TiVo, but you may be able to come up with a low cost proposal without full support that gives enough to be useful. But unless you can say exactly what you want, there's no reason to hope for TiVo to give it to you!


It has already been discussed in great depth in the various qam mapping threads. I challenge you to find the information. Seriously unless you are the Product Manager at TiVo who will actually look at the proposal, your challenge is a waste of time just like it is for me to challenge you to find the information.


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> They don't even need a TV with a tuner. They just need to run a channel scan on the TiVoHD itself. That'll find all the QAM channels (even if they don't know what "QAM" is), and then the user would wonder why the TiVo doesn't know what any of those channels are.


That too, but my point is there are way more people getting new TVs with clearQAM than TiVos. The question was how many people are even aware of QAM and I was expanding the space to something larger than TiVo users.


----------



## sfhub

andyf said:


> What people want is a way to have full TiVo functionality so they can *see* and *record all those digital in the clear channels without paying for them.*
> 
> Given TiVo's reliance on CableLabs and the cable companies I don't see this happening.


You are confused. People are already paying for their HD locals. It is included in every cable plan. They can already "see" those channels so they aren't asking for that feature, just to record them with proper guide support.

CableLab's doesn't govern channel mapping. You are free to map channels without involving CableLABs at all. I don't know why you are bringing them into this particular discussion.


----------



## billyjoebob99

CrispyCritter said:


> So I challenge you to put together a full proposal! My opinion is I don't think you can put together a reasonable proposal including full support from TiVo, but you may be able to come up with a low cost proposal without full support that gives enough to be useful. But unless you can say exactly what you want, there's no reason to hope for TiVo to give it to you!


I've mentioned in another thread that all TiVo needs to do is map local QAM channels based on PSIP data. True, it won't help everyone but it would take the burden off TiVo at that point and put it on the cable companies. If the cable company transmits the PSIP data (as required by FCC regs) all is good. If they don't then it's their fault and problem not TiVo's.


----------



## sfhub

billyjoebob99 said:


> I've mentioned in another thread that all TiVo needs to do is map local QAM channels based on PSIP data. True, it won't help everyone but it would take the burden off TiVo at that point and put it on the cable companies.


BTW we have a rough idea how many people it would help based on this poll (which was created to figure that out)
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744

At the time of the poll about 45% of the TCF members responding said that their systems provided PSIP that mapped to useful channel #s.


----------



## andyf

sfhub said:


> You are confused. People are already paying for their HD locals. It is included in every cable plan. They can already "see" those channels so they aren't asking for that feature, just to record them with proper guide support.
> 
> CableLab's doesn't govern channel mapping. You are free to map channels without involving CableLABs at all. I don't know why you are bringing them into this particular discussion.


I admire *your* honesty. But "Truncated" on the previous page expresses the desire of most people when he said:

"Buckeye Cable wants $100 for "installation," so I was wondering if there was some way around it, since I have basic service ($12.00 / month) and don't want the encrypted channels. Fortunately OTA gets me everything I need, *but it would be nice to get the other digital qam stations mapped
correctly.*"

Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?


----------



## sbourgeo

andyf said:


> I admire *your* honesty. But "Truncated" on the previous page expresses the desire of most people when he said:
> 
> "Buckeye Cable wants $100 for "installation," so I was wondering if there was some way around it, since I have basic service ($12.00 / month) and don't want the encrypted channels. Fortunately OTA gets me everything I need, *but it would be nice to get the other digital qam stations mapped
> correctly.*"
> 
> Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?


The problem with that logic is that you're already paying for the digital local channels with or without a digital package.

I never understood why people here claim that implementing basic QAM mapping would somehow impact TiVo's relationship with cable companies or CableLabs. Wouldn't the cable companies be more bothered by the lost STB rental revenues due to TiVo offering a competing product?


----------



## bmgoodman

andyf said:


> Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?


Maybe cable companies could work using the honor system? All channels "in the clear", and you tell them which channels you watch and should then pay for? 
If my cable company chooses to send digital channels in the clear, they KNOW I may be getting channels I have not paid for. That's their business decision. (Though I believe they are not permitted to scramble local HD channels.) If my TV and my Tivo tunes a channel, I should be able to record it. I pay Tivo for guide data and I expect to get it. Ethics aside, I'd be happy JUST to get mapping for the HD locals. That's a half-dozen channels and I'd be satisfied.

Earlier this week, I got Comcast to install 2 CCs (m-cards is apparently what they use now) just so I could get my HD locals. On the plus side, Comcast has told me there's no extra charge for this! I'm awaiting my next bill to verify.

Bottom line, Tivo should have an "advanced" screen with channel mapping. You do not have to understand QAM at all to see a bunch of channels being tuned with NO guide data or channel information. It LOOKS like a Tivo problem to the uneducated consumer.


----------



## Jazhuis

andyf said:


> I admire *your* honesty. But "Truncated" on the previous page expresses the desire of most people when he said:
> 
> 
> 
> "Buckeye Cable wants $100 for "installation," so I was wondering if there was some way around it, since I have basic service ($12.00 / month) and don't want the encrypted channels. Fortunately OTA gets me everything I need, *but it would be nice to get the other digital qam stations mapped correctly.*"
> 
> 
> 
> Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?
Click to expand...

I see nothing in his post that indicates he's trying to get something he isn't supposed to. He already has mentioned that he has no interest in encrypted channels, which means he simply wants effective use of the channels which he has already paid for. Quite possibly, his "basic" cable tier includes several other non-broadcast channels (I believe mine, for instance, includes FX, some local access channels, and about 10 local religious stations) that are broadcast in clear QAM as well.

What he appears to be trying to get around is the onerous fee to have a technician come plug in a CableCard and call a number into a technician, which I think is a fairly reasonable thing to attempt.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

What's all this hinting that it is somehow unethical to wish for recording these clear QAM channels? The broadcast network signals being retransmitted are mandated to be in the clear, and are apparently a part of many companies' most basic service plans. In other words, if you're entitled to have the wire in the first place, you're typically entitled to the clear QAM broadcast stuff.

The other channels they can and should encrypt as desired, of course, and be accessed through the appropriate subscription.

In terms of guide data, the broadcast clear QAMs are generally equivalent to local OTA signals. It is completely reasonable to wish for the means to map a QAM channel to its OTA guide data equivalent when one might have problems using an antenna or receiving a usable signal with one. 

The guide data is already there for the OTA version. Map it!

I'll give them a pass on not mapping guide data to other weird clear QAM channels like religious channels, city council/local access stuff, C-SPAN, etc. There's generally not an OTA equivalent to those and as such I won't already have guide data.


----------



## 1003

*If*
there is wrong here it is not the TiVo user who simply wants to enjoy the full benefit of mandated channels they get in clear QAM.

The wrong here is the Evil Cable Company (ECC) that resort to sleight of hand by routinely changing the channel mapping. Unfortunately the government regulations designed to protect consumers do not specify how the clear channels are transmitted.

Comcast (my local ECC) regularally moves channels for no apparent reason and the game of hide and seek begins again...


----------



## Saxion

andyf said:


> Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?


Your posts ("I admire your honesty", "without paying for them", "get the digital channels for free") are insinuating. Regardless of how cable wants to market them, the local HD rebroadcasts (if present) are legally required to be included in all "limited basic" cable packages. As long as someone is paying for _any_ cable package, they are legally entitled to them. Please stop implying that people are doing something underhanded.


----------



## aindik

andyf said:


> Why would anyone pay for the digital package if they could get the digital channels for free?


Because they wouldn't get all the digital channels for free. Only the ones that the cable company chose (or is required) to send unencrypted. As far as HD goes, those are only the broadcast locals. If you want ESPN-HD, for example, you need to subscribe to a digital package (I think. It looks like, with Comcast, you can get expanded basic and pay $8.95 extra for the HD channels like ESPN-HD).


----------



## sbourgeo

aindik said:


> Because they wouldn't get all the digital channels for free. Only the ones that the cable company chose (or is required) to send unencrypted. As far as HD goes, those are only the broadcast locals. If you want ESPN-HD, for example, you need to subscribe to a digital package (I think. It looks like, with Comcast, you can get expanded basic and pay $8.95 extra for the HD channels like ESPN-HD).


True, but I don't think anyone has brought up mapping anything other than the broadcast locals available with lifeline cable.


----------



## aindik

sbourgeo said:


> True, but I don't think anyone has brought up mapping anything other than the broadcast locals available with lifeline cable.


Right. So the answer to "why would anyone pay for digital" is "because they want the other digital channels that aren't available unencrypted."


----------



## Saxion

_A long post, but I thought this would be a useful template for others._

Mr. Mark Roberts
Senior Vice President for Consumer Products
TiVo, Inc.
2160 Gold Street
P.O. Box 2160
Alviso, CA 95002

Dear Mr. Roberts:

As a TiVo Series 3 owner, I am writing to express both my excitement and appreciation over the promise of the TiVo S3/HD products, but also my deep frustration and aggravation over the current state of unencrypted digital cable support. Please consider this issue carefully and offer some sort of solution to the many similarly-frustrated TiVo owners who are supporting you with their hard-earned dollars.

The target audience for the S3/HD is split into 3 groups:

1) Those who want to record their digital content over-the-air.
2) Those who want to record OTA-equivalent digital content as delivered "in-the-clear" over cable.
3) Those who want to record encrypted digital content over cable.

The S3/HD provides support for the first group (in the form of ATSC tuners) and the last group (in the form of CableCARDs), but provides almost no support for the second group because the TiVo cannot map the digital channel numbers into the TiVo guide.

The number of people in the second group may be much larger than you think. It is difficult to measure because this group is comprised of "analog" tier cable customers, and thus there is little empirical data one can use to quantify it. But many of us cannot receive OTA signals because of poor reception, and (like the first group) are only interested in receiving and recording local network HD stations. We have no desire to upgrade to Digital Cable, pay for CableCARD installation truck rolls, rent CableCARDs, pay extra Digital Outlet fees, or deal with the incompatibilities, hassles, and DRM that CableCARDs introduce into our systems.

Worse still, the S3 does not support Multistream CableCARDs (M-Cards), so the people in the second group have to rent not one but two CableCARDs (at additional expense), with the specter of going through yet another expensive truck roll in the future to swap out the 2 CableCARDs for a single M-Card (to reduce the rental charges).

This is an enormous hassle and expense to force your users to go through just to provide ~6 channel numbers to the TiVo. CableCARDs are meant to provide decryption services. Using 2 of them, along with all the resulting costs and hassles, just to supply channel mapping data is an extremely inefficient and expensive exercise in overkill.

Consider also the future market for the S3/HD. As it moves down the price curve and tries to become a more mass-market product, it will likely encounter ever-increasing numbers of such cost-sensitive consumers. By not providing native support for these consumers, you are cutting yourselves off from a large group of otherwise potential buyers. Consider also that such a consumer has no other option for time-shifting their digital content, since they are not able to rent digital DVRs from their cable companies without upgrading to digital cable. TiVo could monopolize this market as a single source, if only it would provide native support for it.

A TiVo without guide data is very frustrating indeed. I am only able to record manually by channel, time and date. Trying to record a season of something like American Idol, where episodes often change start times and durations, means continually updating the manual recording every week. It quickly becomes burdensome and frustrating. This is not an acceptable customer experience, as I'm sure you will agree.

There are several ways TiVo could provide native support for this consumer group:

1) Provide OTA map data to digital cable channels that (via PSIP) are mapped to OTA channel numbers. This seems the simplest solution. It relies on the cable company to provide accurate PSIP data, which they are federally mandated to pass on when received from the broadcaster. If the cable company reassigns QAM frequencies, the user could simply initiate a new channel scan, or the TiVo could initiate a channel scan itself at an odd hour. It would thus require little to no user interaction. It would require no changes to Tribune-supplied programming data.

2) Allow users to manually modify the channel map, indicating the mapping between received channel number and cable-assigned channel number for the handful of local OTA rebroadcasted channels. This is the most flexible option. It requires some user interaction, but could fix the problem for everyone, regardless of the presence of accurate PSIP data. It should be noted that TiVo is not the first company to tackle this problem, and products like the Sony DHG-HDD250 HD-DVR and Windows Media Center allow users to manually map channel numbers like this.

3) Update Tribune-supplied programming data to include channels received in-the-clear over cable, whether they be QAM frequencies (if no PSIP) or PSIP-specified channel numbers (where PSIP is available). This solution would require no user interaction, but would require some work on Tribune's side.

Any of the above solutions would suffice. There are a great many current and prospective S3/HD owners who are anxiously awaiting some sort of resolution to this problem. CableCARDs are not the answer&#8230;they are simply too expensive and too problematic for the utterly simple task of providing ~6 channel numbers to the TiVo. Please consider implementing a solution as quickly as possible.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
xxx


----------



## sbourgeo

aindik said:


> Right. So the answer to "why would anyone pay for digital" is "because they want the other digital channels that aren't available unencrypted."


That comment was made by andyf while he was basically accusing people of stealing because they had the audacity to want to record in the clear QAM channels that they "weren't paying for", despite the fact that everyone has been discussing the broadcast local channels.

If I want ESPN-HD, then I'll pay for it. But it is not out of the question for me to want guide data for in the clear CBS-HD which I am paying for.


----------



## aindik

sbourgeo said:


> That comment was made by andyf while he was basically accusing people of stealing because they had the audacity to want to record in the clear QAM channels that they "weren't paying for", despite the fact that everyone has been discussing the broadcast local channels.
> 
> If I want ESPN-HD, then I'll pay for it. But it is not out of the question for me to want guide data for in the clear CBS-HD which I am paying for.


I agree with you fully.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

Saxion said:


> _A long post, but I thought this would be a useful template for others._


Your letter is too long. Too many words. 

Seriously, the only value of your letter is if 50 or even 50,000 people mailed it in. Otherwise, do you really expect a "tone deaf" company like TiVo to even read it?


----------



## Saxion

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Your letter is too long. Too many words.


Feel free to economize. 



Phantom Gremlin said:


> Seriously, the only value of your letter is if 50 or even 50,000 people mailed it in. Otherwise, do you really expect a "tone deaf" company like TiVo to even read it?


We've had 6,321 views of this thread. There is definitely interest. You'd think we could get at least 50; this is a _letter writing campaign _after all...


----------



## belfert

I have avoided getting both an HDTV and a Tivo HD because of the QAM mapping issue.

I pay for only the most basic cable service from Comcast which includes ABC, CBS, FOX, and NBC in both SD and HD along with a few other channels. Comcast will rent me a cable card, but I have reasons not to want one.

I still get the full package of analog channels even though I pay for the most basic service. If I got a cable card I would no longer get the extra channels. If the Tivo could map QAM channels I wouldn't need a cable card.

I guess I'll be viewing TV in SD with my ReplayTV for the foreseeable future. Of course, I would rather have a ReplayTV HD, but that will never happen so Tivo is the next best choice.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

belfert said:


> I still get the full package of analog channels even though I pay for the most basic service. If I got a cable card I would no longer get the extra channels. If the Tivo could map QAM channels I wouldn't need a cable card.


In my area Comcast does something called "analog digital simulcast".

I have cablecards, and I get every single one of the analog channels with my basic service. Comcast digitizes these analogs and sends them to me digitally. Their A/D conversion is (theoretically) much higher quality than in a consumer box like TiVo HD. These pre-digitized channels take far less disk space when recorded than if they were digitized locally by the TiVo.

Are you sure that Comcast in your area doesn't do the same thing?

Or are you saying that thru a quirk of your setup you get additional analog channels, such as CNBC, that wouldn't normally be available as part the basic service you're paying for? If so, then I agree, those additional channels might go away with cablecards.


----------



## belfert

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Or are you saying that thru a quirk of your setup you get additional analog channels, such as CNBC, that wouldn't normally be available as part the basic service you're paying for? If so, then I agree, those additional channels might go away with cablecards.


I pay for what Comcast calls 'Basic 1 Service' for about $15 a month. I am supposed to get 15 analog channels or so including all of the broadcast stations. I also get the broadcast stations in HD via QAM. In reality I get what Comcast calls 'Standard Cable' that includes some 40 or 50 channels.

Comcast delivers 'Standard Cable' to all cable subscribers. They used to install filters for 'Basic 1 Service' customers, but I found out they quit doing that some time ago. Anyone who has a cable ready TV can get all of the channels, but anyone with a cable box and presumably a cable card will get only what they pay for.

OTA SD TV is really bad in my area because I live too close to the tranmission towers. I get all kinds of ghosting and such. I only got cable for the broadcast stations, but I later discovered I was getting everything and have started watching some of the extra channels.

My parents do have a filter on their 'Basic 1 Service', but they have had serivce for a decade longer than I have. My brother used to remove the filter in the cable box outside until a service guy discovered it and padlocked the box.


----------



## mattack

Wait, you get ghosting on *digital* channels?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

belfert said:


> They used to install filters for 'Basic 1 Service' customers, but I found out they quit doing that some time ago.


Comcast here is slowly dropping analogs and having *only* digitals for many channels in "Standard Cable". Recently people here were irate when MSNBC, Hallmark, and a few others suffered this fate.

I predict that in a few years you will still have access to all the frequencies not being blocked by the filters. But unfortunately for you all the analog signals will be gone, replaced by encrypted digital versions.


----------



## belfert

mattack said:


> Wait, you get ghosting on *digital* channels?


No, on analog channels. I have yet to buy an HDTV because of lack of a good DVR that works with clear QAM HD channels.

I got basic cable service back when there were no HD channels on cable period and HD TVs were still very expensive with little or no content. I got cable because the analog OTA broadcast signal had so many ghosts.


----------



## belfert

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Comcast here is slowly dropping analogs and having *only* digitals for many channels in "Standard Cable". Recently people here were irate when MSNBC, Hallmark, and a few others suffered this fate.
> 
> I predict that in a few years you will still have access to all the frequencies not being blocked by the filters. But unfortunately for you all the analog signals will be gone, replaced by encrypted digital versions.


If/when that happens I'll have to decide if I give up watching cable only channels or simply bite the bullet and pay the extra $25 to $35 a month for full cable service.

I suspect the FCC will require cable companies to still offer a service that is broadcast stations only as they do now.


----------



## jrm01

belfert said:


> No, on analog channels. I have yet to buy an HDTV because of lack of a good DVR that works with clear QAM HD channels.
> 
> I got basic cable service back when there were no HD channels on cable period and HD TVs were still very expensive with little or no content. I got cable because the analog OTA broadcast signal had so many ghosts.


You may find that with the same antenna (or maybe one with amplfication) and an HD TV you can pick up the OTA HD very well. I have mediacre reception on analog OTA, but great HD reception on everything but ABC. I use QAM for ABC HD and manual recordings only for that.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

jrm01 said:


> You may find that with the same antenna (or maybe one with amplfication) and an HD TV you can pick up the OTA HD very well. I have mediacre reception on analog OTA, but great HD reception on everything but ABC. I use QAM for ABC HD and manual recordings only for that.


I bet there are a lot of people like you who get by pretty well with OTA but have that one pesky station where OTA is problematic and would love to utilize the QAM version, but alas, you're stuck with manual, guide data-less recordings.


----------



## Saxion

For anyone writing letter(s), here are 3 people that would be good to contact:

Mr. Jim Barton, Chief Technology Officer and Senior Vice President

Mr. Clent Richardson, Chief Marketing Officer

Mr. Mark Roberts, Senior Vice President for Consumer Products

All are at:
TiVo, Inc.
2160 Gold Street
P.O. Box 2160
Alviso, CA 95002


----------



## 1283

Might as well include the CEO while you're at it.


----------



## jlb

Ok. I confused myself from rereading this thread.

Cable cards allow for decrypting the encrypted channels, right?

Assuming that is right, a TiVoHD without cable cards would still be able to "see" the clear QAM channels, right?

If so, then wouldn't I be able to at least do trick play on those channels and manually record them?

And IIRC, the other reason for me to have the CCs would be to allow me to have a package that would have guide data associated with an HD channel for scheduling purposes.

I have an analog TV and a S2DT and the lifeline/basic package from Comcast for $10/month. I also have an unsubbed AT&T S2 that can do manual recording. We occasionally use that, but not often. My wife just gave me the accounting go ahead to purchase a new TV come holiday time. Likely looking at Vizio, but regardless of the brand, my initial plan was just to keep the S2DT for now for SD recording and be able to watch the clearQAM channels live.

If I had a TiVoHD without cable cards, would I be able to watch/manually record the clearQAM channels? If I had the TiVoHD with cable cards, but without a different cable package, does that add any other functions for _me_?


----------



## aindik

jlb said:


> Ok. I confused myself from rereading this thread.
> 
> Cable cards allow for decrypting the encrypted channels, right?
> 
> Assuming that is right, a TiVoHD without cable cards would still be able to "see" the clear QAM channels, right?
> 
> If so, then wouldn't I be able to at least do trick play on those channels and manually record them?


It can do that. It just has no idea what channel they are or what program is on when.



jlb said:


> If I had a TiVoHD without cable cards, would I be able to watch/manually record the clearQAM channels?


Yes. But, keep in mind that, sometimes, the cable company changes channel numbers without warning.



jlb said:


> If I had the TiVoHD with cable cards, but without a different cable package, does that add any other functions for _me_?


Assuming the cable company will let you do that, the answer is yes. It gives you guide data and consistent channel numbers for the local channels in HD.

It may also give you your current channels in digital (though, SD, of course), rather than analog form, which removes your from your TiVo the job of encoding them from analog to digital (i.e., removes the issue of recording quality from your TiVo's hands and gives you the channel in as good a quality as you can see it live, while using less disk space than "Best" quality would use). That depends on your individual cable company.

As an alternative to the cablecards, you could try plugging in an OTA antenna and seeing what kind of channels you get in HD from there.


----------



## Saxion

jlb said:


> Cable cards allow for decrypting the encrypted channels, right?
> 
> Assuming that is right, a TiVoHD without cable cards would still be able to "see" the clear QAM channels, right?
> 
> If so, then wouldn't I be able to at least do trick play on those channels and manually record them?


All correct: TiVoHD without CCs can tune to clear QAM channels, and you can do trick play on them & manually record them.


jlb said:


> And IIRC, the other reason for me to have the CCs would be to allow me to have a package that would have guide data associated with an HD channel for scheduling purposes.


Again correct: the CCs would allow the TiVo to associate TiVo guide data with those clear QAM channels, which enables Season Pass and Wishlist recordings. Also the CCs will hide any change your cable company makes to the frequency of the clear QAM channels, so the channel numbers will never change.


jlb said:


> If I had the TiVoHD with cable cards, but without a different cable package, does that add any other functions for _me_?


Yes, it adds Season Pass and Wishlist recording on clear QAM channels, and will fix the TiVo guide itself so it will tell you the titles of upcoming shows, episode descriptions, etc.


----------



## jlb

Thank you to *Saxion* and to *aindik* for clearing up my confusion.

The reason I ask is that I am getting an LCD TV come holiday time (finally got the "Accounting" go ahead). I know I am getting a Best Buy Gift Card from my in-laws for X-mas. But I didn't think Best Buy carries the Vizios. I would prefer buying a Vizio from Costco, given their warranty extension policy.

That being said, my wife said, well, you could get the TV at Costco and use the GC on something else at Best Buy. I could use it on cables I will need for the new TV (among other config changes I will have to make).

But I had put the bug in my wife's ear about the TiVoHD. Knowing that it could at least do trick play and manually record without CCs gives me some support for making that decision.

I guess what I need to do is find out from my local Comcast office if I can get cable cards from them without upgrading my basic, $10/month package. I could always say that I am upgrading to a new TV that has the slot available and would like to use cards in the slot. Who knows.

Depending on the cost of the cards from my local office, it might not make sense. But if I could get 2 cards (or 1 if they have an M card) for a total of $10 or less, then it might very well make sense for me. But I cannot see upping my package to get "all" of the HD channels.

So that brings me back to a matter of what makes sense right now. For the channels we receive, I don't know how much having the HD versions right now would make a difference for us (.....said from eyes not normally seeing HD). My HD viewing priorities right now would likely be mostly for football. Knowing that I could watch the Pats in the playoffs in HD would be great. Trick play ability so I can pause the game to go to the bathroom is even better, but being able to schedule a normal recording in HD may not be that big a deal.

If I were recording everything in HD, I would want a DVR Expander drive, but I don't know if I can budget that TOO at this point.

Ultimately, it comes down to WHEN I will get a TiVoHD. I will have one, but exactly when is the question. It's just that if I do purchase the TV at Costco, I have a gift card available to me for other stuff at Best Buy. It could be a TiVoHD. It could also be an iPod upgrade, slingbox, PS3, DVDs, etc.


----------



## aindik

jlb said:


> That being said, my wife said, well, you could get the TV at Costco and use the GC on something else at Best Buy. I could use it on cables I will need for the new TV (among other config changes I will have to make).


Do not buy cables at Best Buy. They will charge you $60 for cables you could get from Monoprice.com for less than $10. Best Buy is good for buying many things. AV cables are not on that list.



jlb said:


> I guess what I need to do is find out from my local Comcast office if I can get cable cards from them without upgrading my basic, $10/month package. I could always say that I am upgrading to a new TV that has the slot available and would like to use cards in the slot. Who knows.


Comcast won't deny you CableCards because you're using them in a TiVo. They may deny you CableCards because you don't have a digital cable package.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

aindik said:


> Do not buy cables at Best Buy. They will charge you $60 for cables you could get from Monoprice.com for less than $10. Best Buy is good for buying many things. AV cables are not on that list.


Man, that list is _short_! 

Personal :up: on Monoprice.


----------



## jlb

Agreed on cables. I was planning on Monoprice or something similar.

I just did a chat with Comcast and the following interesting information was discussed:



> Jeff_>
> I currently am on the lifeline/basic package at ~ $10/mo. I am considering purchase of a TV that has cable card slots in it. Granted, I am on that lifeline package and I may upgrade in the future, but for now, would it be possible for me to rent cable cards from you for the TV but maintain my current package?
> 
> Robert>
> Yes you may, the first cable card is no charge, each additional card is 2.50/mo.
> 
> .
> .
> .
> .
> .
> 
> Jeff_>
> Do you know what the fee is to roll a truck and do a simple CC install? Is it dependendt on each office?
> 
> Robert>
> It is 14.95 for each cable card installation.


Sooooooooooo, from this chat, it would only cost me $2.50/month more over my lifeline package to get cable cards. I tried the "why can't I install" the cards myself and call the info in, but $30 for the install of the 2 cards seems reasonable. Of course, I could go to the office, see if they have cards there and ask them directly.....

Given this information (and the transcript was saved), I think using the Gift Card on a TiVoHD would make sense. $2.50/mo to have the HD guide data associated works for me.

My last question......ok, so I would be using the CCs to tune/associate data/record the clear QAM channels. But on my basic lifeline package, how is it that the CCs will be able to do the association.

Ok, and now lastly, when I purchase the TV, I assume I would connect just the cable line direct to the TV first and let the TV do a channel scan (as we sometimes will be watching live TV (it happens)? When I get the TiVoHD home, do I do nothing until the installer arrives or can I run guided setup (and then re-run)?

I guess I need to check out the Comcast Cable Card Install Thread..........


----------



## jlb

Wow. I didn't realize just HOW good the prices were at monoprice. My DVD player is about a 15-18 foot cable run along the side wall away from the TV. I assumed that component cables for that long a run were so expensive that I would need to move the DVD player to get a short run for a direct component DVD to TV run (currently since I have an 27" analog TV, I just use a single composite run from the receiver).

But the 25 foot "premium" 3-plug component cable is only $23. I am going to end up getting that so I can leave the player where it is. Awesome!!!!!!

For all of you monoprice fans, do you recommend their "basic" cables or their "premium" cables, especially for a longer run?


----------



## aindik

jlb said:


> Sooooooooooo, from this chat, it would only cost me $2.50/month more over my lifeline package to get cable cards. I tried the "why can't I install" the cards myself and call the info in, but $30 for the install of the 2 cards seems reasonable. Of course, I could go to the office, see if they have cards there and ask them directly.....


They were vague, but $15 per cable card install seems like a per-trip charge, not a per card charge. They should only charge you $15, not $30, to install two cards at the same time. (And, if they have M-cards, it's only one card anyway).



jlb said:


> My last question......ok, so I would be using the CCs to tune/associate data/record the clear QAM channels. But on my basic lifeline package, how is it that the CCs will be able to do the association.


Your cable card would know what the channel number of every digital channel is, and also which of those channels you have rights to receive. In your case, it will know that you have rights to the channels you have now, plus the OTA local digital channels (the HD ones and the SD subchannels, if any). When I go to Comcast.com and look at the channel lineup, if I select "limited basic" when I'm given the opportunity to choose a lineup, it shows me the limited basic channels in the analog tier and also the digital locals.



jlb said:


> Ok, and now lastly, when I purchase the TV, I assume I would connect just the cable line direct to the TV first and let the TV do a channel scan (as we sometimes will be watching live TV (it happens)? When I get the TiVoHD home, do I do nothing until the installer arrives or can I run guided setup (and then re-run)?


You can run guided setup, which will pick up your analog channels. You can then run a channel scan, which will find the clear QAM channels. When the cablecard is installed, all the channel numbers change, so you'll need to run guided setup again after the installer leaves. I think TiVo recommends you do this, so that you can have the latest software installed before the CableCARD installer arrives.


----------



## jlb

Again, I sort of hijacked this thread to answer my questions, but now I am informed and can discuss with expert knowledge.

Thanks!!!!!!


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

jlb said:


> My last question......ok, so I would be using the CCs to tune/associate data/record the clear QAM channels. But on my basic lifeline package, how is it that the CCs will be able to do the association.
> 
> Ok, and now lastly, when I purchase the TV, I assume I would connect just the cable line direct to the TV first and let the TV do a channel scan (as we sometimes will be watching live TV (it happens)? When I get the TiVoHD home, do I do nothing until the installer arrives or can I run guided setup (and then re-run)?
> 
> I guess I need to check out the Comcast Cable Card Install Thread..........


I can't speak to your card installation question, as I haven't tried them yet, but I would say that your analog cable channels will continue to be known to the TiVo as they are now, based on the ZIP code and cable operator chosen during Guided Setup. If I'm not mistaken, the CCards would simply enable your TiVo to fully utilize (guide data, normal recording operations) _digital_ channels present on the cable, but would not enhance what it currently does with analog cable signals.



jlb said:


> Wow. I didn't realize just HOW good the prices were at monoprice. My DVD player is about a 15-18 foot cable run along the side wall away from the TV. I assumed that component cables for that long a run were so expensive that I would need to move the DVD player to get a short run for a direct component DVD to TV run (currently since I have an 27" analog TV, I just use a single composite run from the receiver).
> 
> But the 25 foot "premium" 3-plug component cable is only $23. I am going to end up getting that so I can leave the player where it is. Awesome!!!!!!
> 
> For all of you monoprice fans, do you recommend their "basic" cables or their "premium" cables, especially for a longer run?


I stocked up a while back on a few audio interconnects. I haven't really used those although I did have a couple premium and a couple regular. Both looked more than adequate. For a 25 ft. run, though, the premium would probably be a little thicker gauge.

Get cables a little longer than you would if paying BB prices. You'll have a lot more flexibility setting up your gear when you have enough slack to pull out a device. My TiVo is right beneath my TV, but the 8 ft. (or was it 10?) HDMI cable I'm using makes it easy to pull one of them out to access the rear panel. Same with my audio and cat5 cables back there.


----------



## aindik

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> I can't speak to your card installation question, as I haven't tried them yet, but I would say that your analog cable channels will continue to be known to the TiVo as they are now, based on the ZIP code and cable operator chosen during Guided Setup. If I'm not mistaken, the CCards would simply enable your TiVo to fully utilize (guide data, normal recording operations) _digital_ channels present on the cable, but would not enhance what it currently does with analog cable signals.


That's not necessarily the case. It may change two things regarding the analog channels.

1) Depending on the way the system is configured, channel numbers for analog channels without a box may be completely different than channel numbers for analog channels with a box. This is somewhat rare (I think this is more prevalent in systems where homes sit very close to OTA transmitters), but is the case in my system. After the CC was installed, every single channel number was wrong until I ran guided setup again. The CC will convert the system to the "with a box" numbering.

2) The CableCard may open the door to receiving the so-called "analog" channels in digital format. In many markets, Comcast offers the channels in the basic tier as analog (for cable-ready TVs and whatever analog boxes are still out there) and as 480i digital (mostly, to accommodate their own newer DVRs that don't have analog encoders, but also to accelerate the transition to an all digital system). There is an acronym for this that I keep forgetting. If you have this turned on on your account, then you'll receive all of your channels in digital, which will give you "perfect" recordings on your TiVo on all channels, not just the new HD ones.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

aindik said:


> That's not necessarily the case. It may change two things regarding the analog channels.
> 
> 1) Depending on the way the system is configured, channel numbers for analog channels without a box may be completely different than channel numbers for analog channels with a box. This is somewhat rare (I think this is more prevalent in systems where homes sit very close to OTA transmitters), but is the case in my system. After the CC was installed, every single channel number was wrong until I ran guided setup again. The CC will convert the system to the "with a box" numbering.
> 
> 2) The CableCard may open the door to receiving the so-called "analog" channels in digital format. In many markets, Comcast offers the channels in the basic tier as analog (for cable-ready TVs and whatever analog boxes are still out there) and as 480i digital (mostly, to accommodate their own newer DVRs that don't have analog encoders, but also to accelerate the transition to an all digital system). There is an acronym for this that I keep forgetting. If you have this turned on on your account, then you'll receive all of your channels in digital, which will give you "perfect" recordings on your TiVo on all channels, not just the new HD ones.


Interesting.

#1: I've heard of this renumbering scheme (I think my inlaws had that in their suburban Indianapolis home) but it never occurred to me that the numbering could change with a cable box.

#2: Yeah, what is that term? I've heard that described around TCF, too. Is it dual carriage? I guess that was off my radar because I sure doubt Mediacom is doing that here.  For HD, they can barely be bothered to carry much beyond the local broadcasters.


----------



## MickeS

jlb said:


> Ok, and now lastly, when I purchase the TV, I assume I would connect just the cable line direct to the TV first and let the TV do a channel scan (as we sometimes will be watching live TV (it happens)? When I get the TiVoHD home, do I do nothing until the installer arrives or can I run guided setup (and then re-run)?


If you want both the TV and the TiVoHD to tune channels, you will need to use a splitter on the cable.


----------



## Saxion

aindik said:


> 2) The CableCard may open the door to receiving the so-called "analog" channels in digital format. In many markets, Comcast offers the channels in the basic tier as analog (for cable-ready TVs and whatever analog boxes are still out there) and as 480i digital (mostly, to accommodate their own newer DVRs that don't have analog encoders, but also to accelerate the transition to an all digital system). There is an acronym for this that I keep forgetting.


Digital simulcasts. And it can be a very bad thing that CableCARDs can be configured to hide the analog channels and replace them with the digital simulcasts. For one, you no longer have any control over the encoding quality. For another, the digital simulcasts can be locked down with DRM (never the case for the analog versions) which can effectively break Tivo-To-Go.

Yet another reason it would be beneficial if TiVo allowed owners to manually modify the channel map...which would also solve the lack of guide data on clear QAM channels, by the way...which segues us back to the topic of this thread


----------



## atlynch

I am considering switching from Directv to Comcast. What I am reading here is that if I use basic cable, without cablecards, I get no guide data? Is that really true?

What If I do not use cable at all, just my rooftop antenna. Still no guide data?

With my soon to be obsolete HR10-250, I get guide data for my rooftop antenna. I can't imagine that the new TiVo HD would drop that.

Tell me it ain't so!

-Drew


----------



## Saxion

atlynch said:


> I am considering switching from Directv to Comcast. What I am reading here is that if I use basic cable, without cablecards, I get no guide data? Is that really true?
> 
> What If I do not use cable at all, just my rooftop antenna. Still no guide data?


With basic cable (and no CableCARDs) you will NOT get guide data on the digital channels. With rooftop antenna, you WILL get guide data. If you can receive all your desired digital stations with an antenna, by all means go that route. Unfortunately I get zero antenna reception...not one channel.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

atlynch said:


> I am considering switching from Directv to Comcast. What I am reading here is that if I use basic cable, without cablecards, I get no guide data? Is that really true?
> 
> What If I do not use cable at all, just my rooftop antenna. Still no guide data?
> 
> With my soon to be obsolete HR10-250, I get guide data for my rooftop antenna. I can't imagine that the new TiVo HD would drop that.
> 
> Tell me it ain't so!
> 
> -Drew


You'll have guide data for OTA in your area based on the ZIP code you provide during Guided Setup. Likewise for the channels on the cable that are truly analog, aindik's caveats notwithstanding.

If one subscribes to digital cable, CableCARDS are needed in order for the TiVo box to decrypt most of the channels, to properly "understand" where the actual channels are in the underlying cable signal, and tie it into the guide data.

What people are griping about here, and rightfully so, is that with even the most basic analog cable subscription there are usually a handful of digital channels available (generally the local broadcast network affiliates) on the wire that could be used by one's television QAM tuner or the TiVo in a basic, manual-recording way. This is annoying because it's not like TiVo doesn't have the guide data for these channels; it just can't "match things up" without the CableCARD. Hence the desire to "map" things yourself. It's not like being without cards magically creates channels that TiVo guide data has no knowledge of. It just can't link to it.


----------



## jlb

One last question. My run will be about 22 feet. I would probably get a 30 or 35 foot cable. Clearly, I am using a component for my DVD player. How different would video quality be for the TiVoHD using component versus HDMI. The TiVoHD will be about 2 feet from my receiver, so I don't need to carry audio up to the TV. Just video. Will there be a significant difference in HDMI versus component?


----------



## Saxion

jlb said:


> Will there be a significant difference in HDMI versus component?


Seriously, almost none. I did A/B testing and could not see any difference except that there was slightly more overshoot with component. I chose to use component because my TV syncs up faster to changes in resolution (480i vs 720p vs 1080i) over component than HDMI. With a long run, your situation may be different, since component might have degradation issues over a long run while HDMI will either work or not. Try both and return the cable you don't need.

I love helping people out and answering questions, but this thread has veered pretty far from the topic. Let's try to keep it focused. 

Has anyone else written letters to TiVo? I wrote 3. It only takes a few minutes and a couple of stamps!


----------



## Saxion

Saxion said:


> For anyone writing letter(s), here are 3 people that would be good to contact:
> 
> Mr. Jim Barton, Chief Technology Officer and Senior Vice President
> 
> Mr. Clent Richardson, Chief Marketing Officer
> 
> Mr. Mark Roberts, Senior Vice President for Consumer Products
> 
> All are at:
> TiVo, Inc.
> 2160 Gold Street
> P.O. Box 2160
> Alviso, CA 95002


For others who don't have the time or inclination to write real letters, I believe the above 3 people can be reached at the following email addresses:

[email protected] (Jim Barton, Chief Technology Officer and Senior Vice President)
[email protected] (Clent Richardson, Chief Marketing Officer)
[email protected] (Mark Roberts, Senior Vice President for Consumer Products)

I think real letters are more effective, but an email only takes a few minutes!


----------



## Saxion

Here's an example email which I sent (taking Phantom Gremlin's input into consideration, it's much shorter than my letter ):

Dear Mr. x,

I am writing to inquire about TiVo's plans to provide guide data for unencrypted (clear-QAM) digital cable channels received without CableCARDs.

As you know, there are many current and prospective TiVo customers who are waiting for TiVo to provide this support. CableCARDs remain vastly overpriced for many people who don't want to subscribe to Digital Cable. One cable company wants to charge a truck roll fee of $120 ($60 for each of 2 CableCARDs), monthly CableCARD rental charges, and an upgrade to a full Digital Cable package at a minimum cost of $9/month (they refuse to supply CableCARDs without a Digital Cable package).

Support for clear-QAM channels could take the form of allowing owners to manually map the clear-QAM channels to the correct guide channel numbers. Or, the TiVo could automatically associate OTA guide data when PSIP maps the clear-QAM channels to correct OTA channel numbers.

Can you please share your plans and let people know when to expect this critical feature?

Thanks so much,

-x
TiVo Series 3 Owner


----------



## dwynne

jlb said:


> Sooooooooooo, from this chat, it would only cost me $2.50/month more over my lifeline package to get cable cards. I tried the "why can't I install" the cards myself and call the info in, but $30 for the install of the 2 cards seems reasonable. Of course, I could go to the office, see if they have cards there and ask them directly.....
> 
> Given this information (and the transcript was saved), I think using the Gift Card on a TiVoHD would make sense. $2.50/mo to have the HD guide data associated works for me.
> 
> My last question......ok, so I would be using the CCs to tune/associate data/record the clear QAM channels. But on my basic lifeline package, how is it that the CCs will be able to do the association.


Do what I did (with an HD Tivo, not an S3) - get a single M-card from Comcast. Since the first card is free and the m-card will run both tuners, your net is $0 extra per month. I also just went to the main local Comcast office and picked up the card. Once I got the HD Tivo going and made sure all is well in analog and clear-QAM I stuck the card in, then called Comcast to hit it (about 5 minutes of hold and waiting) and it started working. $0 installation charges that way, but they did charge me a $1.99 "one time fee" for "change of service" on my last bill.

The cc maps the channels for you, so instead of local NBC being 86.4 or whatever it will appear on 236 or whatever the cable company picks for the local HD of that channel - but in any case you will get all the guide data and can do season passes, etc.

Some notes:

Any clear QAM channels that you are not supposed to have - like the on demand movies your neighbors are watching, NFL network in HD, etc will vanish with the cc installation - you only get what Comcast tells the cc to let you have. You can't even tune clear QAM unless you pull the cc.

Any analog channels you are not supposed to have will vanish as well. If you are on limited/lifeline basic and they never put the trap on your line, you could still get ESPN, Comedy Central, etc analog but once you install the cc those will go away - you can tune them but you get a grey screen and no signal.

Dennis


----------



## jlb

Dennis.....You hit on what I was going to try anyway. I will go to the local office in Newburyport and ask them for the card. And I have my fingers crossed that they have M cards.

I am wavering a little on what to do with the gift card. Part of me wants to dog proof the TV a little better and buy a mount. But, I think I will just get the TiVoHD and see how sturdy the TV is on our chest. I may need to buy some thin, hard rubber material, or something similar to make sure the table is totally level and sturdy for the stand (There are two pieces of wood on the top and they are ever so slightly off. My analog TV is heavy enough that it levels fine with a towel underneath).

And the more I read, not all the mounts work well with the Vizio, so, who knows..........


----------



## h00ligan

well, having just dealt with this issue, and knowing what cox communications charges for cable cards - I am returning both tivos i bought and cancelling service. I was planing on getting 3 yr/lifetime, but no way.

If Tivo can take all the time to add in the home media sharing, exports to ipod, yahoo weather and traffic, they should bloody well be able to figure out how to allow me to map on the machine. The fact that this BASIC functionality is missing is ridiculous.

Furthermore, the level of knowledge at the Tivo support desk is LAUGHABLE. the hd 'specialists' told me

Do an antenna and cable scan.

Great, now i see i have for example 12-1 on cable (no guide data) and 12-1 on antenna (woohoo guide data) yet I can't tell tivo to use that data.. ridiculous.

Second SUPERVISOR told me that without cable cards i couldn't get guide data, but that even with OTA antenna I wouldn't get guide data.. wtf?

The bottom line is, by the time one pays tivo monthly costs and cable card rentals, one may as well rent the bloody box from the cable company, and save the $300 out of pocket, as well as be able to order ppv.

Boo TIVO, you blew it.

@dwynne - if i could get something like that it wouldn't be a big deal, but i can't. They MUST install it, they DON'T have m cards so i would need FOUR, which will cost me about $30 a month. screw that. Yah i can blame the cable company for charging so much but it wouldn't be an issue if TIVO added what is essentially a very very basic feature. I bought tivos to stop paying the cable company as much, not spend more money with them.


----------



## jrm01

OK. I added my name to the list and sent this to Jim Barton:

Dear Mr. Barton:

I am the proud owner of a S2DT, S3 and TiVo HD. I would like to congratulate you on the many technical advances that TiVo has recently made and/or announced. In particular I appreciate the addition of TTG and MRV for the S3 platform, the external DVR expander for TiVo HD, and also the announced plans for the SDV Dongle solution and the dual-mode OCAP compliant solution for VOD.

However, there is one area that really has me confused (and impatient), and that is TiVo&#8217;s lack of response to the request for support of non-encrypted QAM channels without cable cards in the S3 and THD. I believe that I understand the difficulties in providing a solution (especially considering the cable companies penchant for moving and hiding these channels), but it does seem like a solution is possible by automatic mapping when PSIP data is available, and manual mapping when it is not.

I would appreciate any response you could provide me concerning TiVo&#8217;s plans in this area, and if there are none, I would appreciate an insight as to why it is not being addressed. I understand that these types of projects have to be prioritized according to resources available and benefits expected, but I personally believe that this should be considered a somewhat higher priority for TiVo.

I happen to work at Best Buy selling TVs (and TiVos). I have completed many sales by just explaining to the customer that they can get the local HD channels without subscribing to expanded digital services or adding a cable box from the cable company. I would think that there would be a larger market for TiVo if customers were able to record their local HD channels (with Guide Data) without increasing their cable bill with added services. Our local cable company (and most cable companies) will not provide cable cards unless you buy into one of their digital packages.

I would appreciate any insight you could provide.

Thank you,


----------



## Saxion

Great letter! Thanks for participating.


----------



## TiVo Troll

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> You'll have guide data for OTA in your area based on the ZIP code you provide during Guided Setup. Likewise for the channels on the cable that are truly analog, aindik's caveats notwithstanding.
> 
> If one subscribes to digital cable, CableCARDS are needed in order for the TiVo box to decrypt most of the channels, to properly "understand" where the actual channels are in the underlying cable signal, and tie it into the guide data.
> 
> What people are griping about here, and rightfully so, is that with even the most basic analog cable subscription there are usually a handful of digital channels available (generally the local broadcast network affiliates) on the wire that could be used by one's television QAM tuner or the TiVo in a basic, manual-recording way. This is annoying because it's not like TiVo doesn't have the guide data for these channels; it just can't "match things up" without the CableCARD. Hence the desire to "map" things yourself. It's not like being without cards magically creates channels that TiVo guide data has no knowledge of. It just can't link to it.


TiVo has a history of trying to 'get along' with other media businesses to foster potentially profitable symbiotic relationships with them. Think about the method TiVo uses to offer 30 sec. skip and don't even think about _Commercial Advance_!

TiVo intentionally may not want to offer channel mapping without CableCARDS. After all Comcast is TiVo's business buddy now and there are many other cable companies to pitch to.


----------



## jrm01

dwynne said:


> Any clear QAM channels that you are not supposed to have - like the on demand movies your neighbors are watching, NFL network in HD, etc will vanish with the cc installation - you only get what Comcast tells the cc to let you have. You can't even tune clear QAM unless you pull the cc.
> 
> Dennis


Do you mean that there are some systems that are providing NFL HD as an unecrypted QAM channel? It isn't even offerred here if I'm willing to pay for it.


----------



## ToddNeedsTiVo

It seems to me that if one can receive channels they aren't supposed to in clear QAM, it's just because the cableco has been too lazy to encrypt it based on the assumption that few people have a QAM tuner and the knowledge to poke around with a channel scan on the raw cable feed.


----------



## jrm01

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> It seems to me that if one can receive channels they aren't supposed to in clear QAM, it's just because the cableco has been too lazy to encrypt it based on the assumption that few people have a QAM tuner and the knowledge to poke around with a channel scan on the raw cable feed.


I agree with both suggestions, but will add a third. Locally Comcast provides 40 music channels in-the-clear, and they are scattered over various channels. I think they do it to hide the network HD channels (which they send with a four-digit sub-channel number) and make it harder to find them.


----------



## dwynne

jrm01 said:


> Do you mean that there are some systems that are providing NFL HD as an unecrypted QAM channel? It isn't even offerred here if I'm willing to pay for it.


I have no idea, but locally Comcast has a lot of SD digital signals in place that are clear QAM. There is also all the on-demand channels so you can watch what your neighbors are watching. And all the digital music channels. Those can all be tuned with a clear QAM tuner, but when you plug the cablecard(s) in the a HD or S3 Tivo to get the channel guide info you can no longer tune clear QAM. For those signals that have a "cable box channel' like the music channels, you can now tune to that channel on the Tivo. You will get the channel if you are supposed to and get a gray screen if you are not.

Locally we did have NFL and NFL in HD at one time in clear QAM. They used to take off INHD1 (now Mojo) and put on NFL HD whenever there was a live game on. Since that channel is always clear QAM we got it "free". They now have a channel dedicated to NFL HD, I am told, so I don't think they do that any more. I could have checked last night, but was busy watch the 'boys and the Pack in HD off of DirecTV .

So, here at least, adding the cablecard(s) can cost you channels - if you are on a limited or basic package, but can add premium channels if you are paying for those.

If your cable company does not offer NFL HD you could check with DTV. Get a minimum package plus the HD package and a free HD receiver (non-DVR) - the total would be $39.98 per month with free dish and install. So if you gotta have it and don't mind paying, that is an option. You also get a bunch of other SD and HD channels.

Dennis


----------



## vstone

jrm01 said:


> I agree with both suggestions, but will add a third. Locally Comcast provides 40 music channels in-the-clear, and they are scattered over various channels. I think they do it to hide the network HD channels (which they send with a four-digit sub-channel number) and make it harder to find them.


I think that the cable companies are too cheap to properly train their folk and too cheap to have somebody verify that their systems are working correctly. By mistake I recorded an episode of Iconoclasts twice off of UHD. One recording was copy protected and the other wasn't. In Feb 2007 changes were made to the Myrtle Beach, SC cable system that affected only some clear QAM tuner TV sets. Neither the local techs nor the state headend folks in Columbia knew about any changes that had been made to the system. They didn't figure it out until late May.

Various cable systems have, at one time or another, programmed their data streams to identify broadcast HD channels on QAM tuner system as a) per cable system lineup, b) per their OTA ID (eg 7-1) (which is probably as proscribed by federal law) , and c) some number that varies on equipment used (could be actual freq and subchannel or a programmed ID). The one discussed above did use system a; when it returned it was system c with (of course) no listing to help me find the broadcast channels.

Their customers are their QA and if it doesn't reflect their profit numbers they won't even respond much to that unless the franchide authority or the FCC gets excited.


----------



## jlb

Thinking about these last few posts........Makes we want to possibly reconsider how quickly I purchase a TiVoHD after getting our new HDTV at the end of the year. We just have the Comcast Basic anyways. So my initial thought was to just continue using my S2DT for now and be able to watch the in the clear QAM stuff "live", if desired.

I will at least "see what I can see" on the new TV before I make the TiVoHD purchase. Odds are I will get the TiVoHD sooner than later regardless, but the speed with which I get it, and the speed with which I put CCs in afterwards is the question.


----------



## dwynne

You have a Tivo, so you know that no way do you want to back to watching live TV any more. I get more watched in less time by skipping all the commercials and I watch when I want to.

HDTV will have the same effect on you - you will want to watch everything in HD and as little as possible in SD.

So to satisfy both desires you need an HD Tivo and a single (free) m-card from Comcast  .

When my father passed away I sold a friend the S1 lifetime box I purchased for him, he has been using it and loving it ever since. When he went to HD a while back the poor quality of SD Tivo'd stuff (and it really does look bad, worse than SD stuff on an HD Tivo) had him singing the blues. Ditto having to be at home to watch the ball game or his favorite shows to get them in HD. He took advantage of the $250 HD price and $199 lifetime transfer deals right after I did. One trip to Comcast for an m-card and all is well. All the season passes are HD and he is back to skipping commercials and Tivo-delaying the ball games.

The day I purchased my first HDTV I ordered the DirecTV HD Tivo - I KNEW I wanted as much HD programming as I could get, and I wanted it "Tivo'd" and not live.

You can TRY to get by like you are talking about, but you are not going to like it.

Now, if Tivo WOULD allow us to map our own channels (the purpose of this thread) then you could skip having to have the m-card and could also get a few more things clear QAM as well.

Dennis


----------



## dr_lha

Have to agree with Dywnne. I purchased an HDTV pretty much on a whim (got a good deal on a nice TV), and originally had no plans to buy a Tivo HD. 2 things changed my mind immidiately:

1. My Series 2 TiVo recordings looked terrible on the HDTV (although they improved a bit by ratcheting up my TiVo to "Highest Quality" which was never necessary on my SDTV).

2. My TV had a QAM decoder (to my surprise) and as soon as I experienced the locals in HD, I realised I couldn't go back to SDTV again. So I started doing as you thought, i.e. watching HDTV "live" and using TiVo for time shifting, but I soon good bored of this. 

Took me precisely 3 days of owning an HDTV before I ordered a TiVo HD. Suffice to say, my wife tossed her eyes and muttered something about "more money!"


----------



## brnscofrnld

Smeeking a bit here, but has anyone gotten a decent response from anyone with these letters?


----------



## Saxion

h00ligan said:


> well, having just dealt with this issue, and knowing what cox communications charges for cable cards - I am returning both tivos i bought and cancelling service. I was planing on getting 3 yr/lifetime, but no way.
> 
> If Tivo can take all the time to add in the home media sharing, exports to ipod, yahoo weather and traffic, they should bloody well be able to figure out how to allow me to map on the machine. The fact that this BASIC functionality is missing is ridiculous.
> 
> Furthermore, the level of knowledge at the Tivo support desk is LAUGHABLE. the hd 'specialists' told me
> 
> Do an antenna and cable scan.
> 
> Great, now i see i have for example 12-1 on cable (no guide data) and 12-1 on antenna (woohoo guide data) yet I can't tell tivo to use that data.. ridiculous.
> 
> Second SUPERVISOR told me that without cable cards i couldn't get guide data, but that even with OTA antenna I wouldn't get guide data.. wtf?
> 
> The bottom line is, by the time one pays tivo monthly costs and cable card rentals, one may as well rent the bloody box from the cable company, and save the $300 out of pocket, as well as be able to order ppv.
> 
> Boo TIVO, you blew it.


It's sad to see TiVo losing customers over this. Given their financial position, TiVo needs every subscriber they can get. Before you go, can you please write TiVo a letter or email and tell them your reasons?


----------



## MickeS

jlb said:


> Thinking about these last few posts........Makes we want to possibly reconsider how quickly I purchase a TiVoHD after getting our new HDTV at the end of the year. We just have the Comcast Basic anyways. So my initial thought was to just continue using my S2DT for now and be able to watch the in the clear QAM stuff "live", if desired.
> 
> I will at least "see what I can see" on the new TV before I make the TiVoHD purchase. Odds are I will get the TiVoHD sooner than later regardless, but the speed with which I get it, and the speed with which I put CCs in afterwards is the question.


Once you get your TV, you will either need to not get any HD programming at all, or face the fact that you'll want to be able to record it. 
Get the TiVo HD and an antenna (if you have decent reception where you are, and remember the analog reception is NOT an indicator of this), is my suggestion. That's all you need to watch the broadcast networks in HD.


----------



## TiVo Troll

ToddNeedsTiVo said:


> It seems to me that if one can receive channels they aren't supposed to in clear QAM, it's just because the cableco has been too lazy to encrypt it based on the assumption that few people have a QAM tuner and the knowledge to poke around with a channel scan on the raw cable feed.


Here there are two channels which Comcast doesn't offer at all on STB's or CableCARDS which are available in unencrypted QAM on their system. One is a downstate PBS channel, the other ARTS.


----------



## Roderigo

Saxion said:


> Given their financial position, TiVo needs every subscriber they can get.


This statement is not true... If it costs more to implement and support the feature than they're losing by not having the feature, they're making the right decision. Only tivo can answer that question.


----------



## 1003

*TiVo is hostage*
to thier 'deals' with the Evil Cable Companies. The future of TiVo is getting paid by cable companies not individual subscribers. Having the program data for HD OTA and not providing a method to align this data to the channel received (like Media Center does) seems so unlike TiVo...


----------



## dwynne

Roderigo said:


> This statement is not true... If it costs more to implement and support the feature than they're losing by not having the feature, they're making the right decision. Only tivo can answer that question.


My guess is that there are few folks that want/need the channel mapping - for sure now that Comcast has free cards. Most folks that spend the money for the box and the sub will want more HD material than they get clear QAM (in my case just the locals, Mojo, and little else) so will HAVE to get a cablecard so they can get HBO in HD or whatever.

While *I* would love for Tivo to let me get rid of my free cablecard, since it is free *I* can live with having to have it. So the small minority of folks that want this feature and would drop service if they can't get it may just not add up to the effort needed for Tivo to make the change.

Dennis


----------



## moyekj

dwynne said:


> My guess is that there are few folks that want/need the channel mapping - for sure now that Comcast has free cards. Most folks that spend the money for the box and the sub will want more HD material than they get clear QAM (in my case just the locals, Mojo, and little else) so will HAVE to get a cablecard so they can get HBO in HD or whatever.
> 
> While *I* would love for Tivo to let me get rid of my free cablecard, since it is free *I* can live with having to have it. So the small minority of folks that want this feature and would drop service if they can't get it may just not add up to the effort needed for Tivo to make the change.


 As has been stated Ad Nauseum, CableCards are effectively NOT free for many people. To be able to rent CableCards you are required to have subscription to digital cable which in turn requires subscription to extended basic service and in some cases people also get billed for additional digital outlets, etc. etc. The actual rental cost of the CableCards themselves in many cases is almost negligible compared to all those other fees. In my case for example the difference is something like $65/month extra on cable bill compared to limited basic which is all that would be necessary to receive the unencrypted HD locals via clear QAM if Tivo properly supported it.


----------



## dwynne

moyekj said:


> As has been stated Ad Nauseum, CableCards are effectively NOT free for many people. To be able to rent CableCards you are required to have subscription to digital cable which in turn requires subscription to extended basic service and in some cases people also get billed for additional digital outlets, etc. etc. The actual rental cost of the CableCards themselves in many cases is almost negligible compared to all those other fees. In my case for example the difference is something like $65/month extra on cable bill compared to limited basic which is all that would be necessary to receive the unencrypted HD locals via clear QAM if Tivo properly supported it.


My point is that the only folks who HAVE to have the mapping are folks that

a) are on a limited package

and

b) don't get free or cheap cablecards

I would assume that those folks represent some tiny fraction of HD Tivo customers and it may not make financial "sense" to Tivo to make changes to support such a small number.

If they did, I would pull out my m-card since I would no longer need it - but it would not make that much of a difference.

Dennis


----------



## jlb

Well, we decided we'll purchase the TiVoHD right around the same time as the TV. Maybe I'll give the TV a week or two just to get everything running smoothly and integrated with my system and Pronto remote. And I envision for my birthday in may to ask for a MyDVR Expander to allow for more space for HD recording.


----------



## dolphin

I have been trying to learn more about this topic. I think an "m card" means that there is multiple functionality on one Cablecard for one TiVO HD slot. So you don't need multiple physical cards. Is that right?

If so, is it possible that for 2-units, then you might pay $1.50 * 2 non-M-cards per TiVo * 2 TiVos = $6 per month? For me, that would be about a 15% monthly increase. 

Or $1.50 * 2 M-cards per TiVo = $3/month?

What "formula" has your cable company been using to calculate the monthly cost?


----------



## moyekj

dwynne said:


> I would assume that those folks represent some tiny fraction of HD Tivo customers and it may not make financial "sense" to Tivo to make changes to support such a small number.


 That is the key question. Prior polls and number of views of this thread as well as posts in this thread suggest that the interest is there. The simplest solution already discussed here would be to let those clear QAM channels with proper PSIP mapping to an OTA channel. i.e. 7-1 (ant) listings already exist. Let 7-1 (cbl) use the listings for 7-1 (ant). Doesn't sound like a heck of a lock of work on Tivo's part to implement while opening up the door for more subscriptions they would not obtain otherwise. ROI is something only Tivo can judge, but in this case the investment seems fairly low and with some decent chance for return.


----------



## CrispyCritter

moyekj said:


> That is the key question. Prior polls and number of views of this thread as well as posts in this thread suggest that the interest is there. The simplest solution already discussed here would be to let those clear QAM channels with proper PSIP mapping to an OTA channel. i.e. 7-1 (ant) listings already exist. Let 7-1 (cbl) use the listings for 7-1 (ant). Doesn't sound like a heck of a lock of work on Tivo's part to implement while opening up the door for more subscriptions they would not obtain otherwise. ROI is something only Tivo can judge, but in this case the investment seems fairly low and with some decent chance for return.


Can you point me to posts that go into the business case in detail and actually conclude it's worthwhile? I challenged this thread earlier to provide such a business case, and was assured it had been done in previous threads. I just spent 45 minutes looking for such a post and I couldn't find one. I would appreciate a link.

I frankly don't see how such a case can be made. The same people seem to be arguing that support costs will be low because this will be a "hidden" or unadvertised feature, but also arguing that there will be lots and lots of new sales because of it!


----------



## jcthorne

The simple fact that I am posting response #229 to this single thread devoted to the subject indicates there is significant intrest in the feature. This thread is in the top 1&#37; of traffic on the forum.

Anyone that thinks cable cards are available cheap or free from the cable company is already too far brainwashed in Comcastic advertising. There are a VERY few exceptions that have posted here, but not many. 

I do not want or need HBO at its rediculous rates for bygone movies. There simply is not $100 a month worth of pay programming on Comcast. For the last year I had Comcast CATV service, Tivo showed me that better than 95% of what I actually watched was on free national networks, most in HD. Why should we be asked to pay for programming we do not want or need just to get our TivoHD to present guide data for the channels we do pay for?


----------



## moyekj

CrispyCritter said:


> Can you point me to posts that go into the business case in detail and actually conclude it's worthwhile? I challenged this thread earlier to provide such a business case, and was assured it had been done in previous threads. I just spent 45 minutes looking for such a post and I couldn't find one. I would appreciate a link.
> 
> I frankly don't see how such a case can be made. The same people seem to be arguing that support costs will be low because this will be a "hidden" or unadvertised feature, but also arguing that there will be lots and lots of new sales because of it!


 Only Tivo can judge ROI as I mentioned - having one of us try to make a business case is pointless given that we don't know the cost of implementing any changes. The interest (and thus potential for return) at least among members of this forum is definitely there. Aside from this thread alone, just search for "unencrypted QAM" and see all the hits you get such as:
in-the-clear QAM survey
How can we Lobby Tivo to support information for QAM Tuners?
Possible to get HD channels w/ Comcast Limited Cable & CableCard?
QAM Tuner locals show up as 4-1, 5-1 etc but no program Guide, any Fix?
TIVO HD questions - sub transfer, QAM mapping
In the clear QAM and custom lineup


----------



## TiVo Troll

moyekj said:


> ...Prior polls and number of views of this thread as well as posts in this thread suggest that the interest is there. The simplest solution already discussed here would be to let those clear QAM channels with proper PSIP mapping to an OTA channel. i.e. 7-1 (ant) listings already exist. Let 7-1 (cbl) use the listings for 7-1 (ant). Doesn't sound like a heck of a lock of work on Tivo's part to implement while opening up the door for more subscriptions they would not obtain otherwise. ROI is something only Tivo can judge, but in this case the investment seems fairly low and with some decent chance for return.


Like the interest in a FSI expressed repeatedly on these Forums, which as soon as they learned about TiVo jumped to provide!

Channel mapping w/o a CC isn't a feature TiVo has an interest to provide. TiVo's interest is in fostering good business relationships with cable co's.!


----------



## moyekj

TiVo Troll said:


> Like the interest in a FSI expressed repeatedly on these Forums, which as soon as they learned about TiVo jumped to provide!


 One big difference is FSI wouldn't get them new subscriptions... But you're probably right, I think Tivo already got the message and passed on it, so no point harping on it anymore.


----------



## CrispyCritter

moyekj said:


> Only Tivo can judge ROI as I mentioned - having one of us try to make a business case is pointless given that we don't know the cost of implementing any changes. The interest (and thus potential for return) at least among members of this forum is definitely there. Aside from this thread alone, just search for "unencrypted QAM" and see all the hits you get such as:
> in-the-clear QAM survey
> How can we Lobby Tivo to support information for QAM Tuners?
> Possible to get HD channels w/ Comcast Limited Cable & CableCard?
> QAM Tuner locals show up as 4-1, 5-1 etc but no program Guide, any Fix?
> TIVO HD questions - sub transfer, QAM mapping
> In the clear QAM and custom lineup


I looked at most of those threads last night. I didn't find a single coherent proposal that lists costs and benefits to TiVo of providing QAM mapping (it may exist, but I didn't see it). As my earlier message said, numbers aren't needed at this stage, but acknowledgment of costs is.

Throughout the posts in the threads I looked at, there's a general dismissal of support costs. Most people are saying that it will be minimal because the only people who will ever use it will be experts, and it will be hidden. But if that's the case, then how can you expect it to sell enough extra HD TiVos to pay for the costs? I didn't see folks addressing this contradiction.

There is a definite demand for QAM mapping. These threads are good evidence of the demand. But at the moment, I see the demand pretty much limited to experts who already own an HD TiVo. That's a pretty small market.


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> Channel mapping w/o a CC isn't a feature TiVo has an interest to provide. TiVo's interest is in fostering good business relationships with cable co's.!


I don't understand why that point is brought up so often. How is offering a competing product to the cable company-provided STB fostering a good business relationship?


----------



## bmgoodman

CrispyCritter said:


> There is a definite demand for QAM mapping. These threads are good evidence of the demand. But at the moment, I see the demand pretty much limited to experts who already own an HD TiVo. That's a pretty small market.


How do you know the demand is limited? I'm really not sure either way. What I *AM* sure about is this: my HDTV's digital tuner pulled in lots of digital and HD channels on its own. My DVD recorder's digital tuner pulled in lots of digital and HD channels (downgraded quality of course). In both cases, I have to deal with knowing that 108-12 is NBC HD (for example). My Tivo's digital tuner also pulled in lots of digital and HD channels. Like the other two devices, I can watch those extra channels if I know what's on each channel. Where Tivo really fell down was that I had LOTS of channels that appear as "Channel 0". Perhaps 20 of them. I could flip through each "0" and see different digital content. But I couldn't manually record from ANY of them because they're all listed as "0"! To me, this then looks like my VCR-like DVD recorder is "smarter" than Tivo, because at least it differentiated among all the channels. This made me start to question my Tivo sub fee. Sure, I could pay for CableCards, but many people have found that the CC charges are NON-TRIVIAL between card fees, additional outlet fees, and sometimes package fees. WHY should people be asked to pay these additional fees when Tivo COULD help users manually map their channels??

There are a number of family members that I would purchase Tivo HDs for as Christmas gifts, and get them lifetime service. But knowing the difficulties that *I* had dealing with Comcast to get my CCs working, there's just NO WAY I'm going to subject them to that. I can't tell them in advance how much more my gift will COST THEM and I cannot be there in person each time a cable truck has to roll. These are LOST SALES. I cannot even recommend Tivo to most folks because of these same issues. When their cable company will simply bring them a DVR, hook it up, and have it working the same day?
I'd be more likely to recommend a Tivo HD if it could still control a cable box. At least I have some confidence in that approach, even if it does only record one thing at a time!

I sure hope the the Comcast Tivo strategy works, because their current HD strategy isn't inspiring confidence. And please don't tell me it's the cable companies making CableCards difficult. I do believe it is in their interest to make this process as difficult as possible. The fact remains that whether they're actively making things difficult or simply doing it accidentally, CableCards are making Tivo look bad to the average person.

Could QAM mapping be done simply enough to make things better? I guess I'm not sure, but it WOULD give me a better feeling about giving Tivo HD as a gift. As it stands now, I would consider giving DVD recorders as an alternative.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sbourgeo said:


> How is offering a competing product to the cable company-provided STB fostering a good business relationship?


Ask TiVo and Comcast, who together made the deal for Comcast to offer its DVR overlayed with TiVo's s/w. They appear to believe that hanging together beats hanging separately!


----------



## aindik

sbourgeo said:


> How is offering a competing product to the cable company-provided STB fostering a good business relationship?


When I was renting the Comcast DVR, I could leave for DirecTV at any time without losing money. Now that I've bought the TiVoHD, I've sunk $500 (box plus lifetime service transfer) in a box that I can't use with satellite TV until such time as satellite TV supports CableCARDs (i.e., never). Buying that TiVo solidified my relationship with Comcast for years to come. At least until FIOS rolls out here, which doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> Ask TiVo and Comcast, who together made the deal for Comcast to offer its DVR overlayed with TiVo's s/w. They appear to believe that hanging together beats hanging separately!


I don't see how that matters since the TiVo HD and TiVo S3 that would use the QAM mapping functionality compete with the Comcast hardware running TiVo software.

If you're saying that Comcast doesn't have their panties in a bunch by the STB sold by TiVo that can be used instead of the Comcast-povided one (and costing them box rental revenue), how would adding simple QAM mapping functionality to allow TiVo owners to have guide data for the digital channels they are already paying Comcast for hurt TiVo's relationship with Comcast?

And since it has been argued in this forum that cable cards are cheap or free, how would TiVo implementing QAM mapping functionality on my TiVo HD damage their relationship with Comcast? In that scenario, Comcast loses no revenue, they don't have to bother with the expense of a truck roll, and the customer isn't getting access to anything that they are not already paying for.


----------



## sbourgeo

aindik said:


> When I was renting the Comcast DVR, I could leave for DirecTV at any time without losing money. Now that I've bought the TiVoHD, I've sunk $500 (box plus lifetime service transfer) in a box that I can't use with satellite TV until such time as satellite TV supports CableCARDs (i.e., never). Buying that TiVo solidified my relationship with Comcast for years to come. At least until FIOS rolls out here, which doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.


It solidifies your relationship with anyone supporting Digital Cable Ready devices at least...


----------



## aindik

sbourgeo said:


> It solidifies your relationship with anyone supporting Digital Cable Ready devices at least...


As a practical matter, in nearly every city and town in America, there is only one company that supports Digital Cable Ready devices. The exceptions are when there is more than one cable company, or when there is a fiber optic solution from the phone company (i.e., Verizon FiOS). At this point in time, locations with either of those are not all that common. And I don't live in one.

If DirecTV would decide to support CableCARDs, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the same way.


----------



## sbourgeo

aindik said:


> As a practical matter, in nearly every city and town in America, there is only one company that supports Digital Cable Ready devices. The exceptions are when there is more than one cable company, or when there is a fiber optic solution from the phone company (i.e., Verizon FiOS). At this point in time, locations with either of those are not all that common. And I don't live in one.
> 
> If DirecTV would decide to support CableCARDs, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the same way.


True, the cable monopolies rule if FiOS/OTA don't work for you.

What we really need is an internet-based cable provider where you could plug a device onto your home network and run coax from it to your home video distribution system. Unfortunately, I'm sure that would keep a lot of lawyers busy for a while.


----------



## dolphin

Does anyone know of a location to get the QAM unencrypted channels? As Charter (Dallas) changes its lineup, it is adding more and more to digital and removing from analog. Example: we can't get G4, Bravo, Soap, and We channels on analog SD. I figured it out when I did a new channel search and these "new" QAM channels showed up.

PS: I agree that if they are there, then TiVo should handle the channel guide. And I would be buying two TiVo HDs for the Holidays if I didn't have to spend stupid time researching the whole mcard/scard/cablecard/digital/which cable plan/maybe switch to satellite/which satellite plan/truck roll/tivo or charter dvr/tivo or satellite dvr issue.


----------



## eziemann

This forum has a good deal of QAM mappings from around the country:

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21661


----------



## MickeS

This whole issue is really not complicated. It's basically not harder for the user to do than set the presets on their car radio, and I can't imagine that it's particularly difficult for TiVo to write the code necessary. It's just a matter of will and priorities.


----------



## Jazhuis

CrispyCritter said:


> Can you point me to posts that go into the business case in detail and actually conclude it's worthwhile? I challenged this thread earlier to provide such a business case, and was assured it had been done in previous threads. I just spent 45 minutes looking for such a post and I couldn't find one. I would appreciate a link.
> 
> I frankly don't see how such a case can be made. The same people seem to be arguing that support costs will be low because this will be a "hidden" or unadvertised feature, but also arguing that there will be lots and lots of new sales because of it!


Potential business case I posted in another QAM thread: viewership data. TiVo has no aggregate data they can pull from my S3 in this regard, as everything non-OTA is "Manual Recording". Adding a simple 1-1 QAM mapping ability (that, yes, does require me to do the work of the mapping myself) would allow them to use that viewing data in their marketing trend data.

It may not be the "keeping subscriptions" kind of business case, but hey, it does add value to their revenue stream.


----------



## mattack

aindik said:


> When I was renting the Comcast DVR, I could leave for DirecTV at any time without losing money. Now that I've bought the TiVoHD, I've sunk $500 (box plus lifetime service transfer) in a box that I can't use with satellite TV until such time as satellite TV supports CableCARDs (i.e., never). Buying that TiVo solidified my relationship with Comcast for years to come. At least until FIOS rolls out here, which doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.


Though presumably you'll be able to sell that TivoHD with lifetime for what you bought it for.


----------



## mattack

jcthorne said:


> I do not want or need HBO at its rediculous rates for bygone movies. There simply is not $100 a month worth of pay programming on Comcast. For the last year I had Comcast CATV service, Tivo showed me that better than 95% of what I actually watched was on free national networks, most in HD. Why should we be asked to pay for programming we do not want or need just to get our TivoHD to present guide data for the channels we do pay for?


Seems to me like you should go OTA then.

(I was the one who got cable in our house in the first place, though I've wondered if I could go totally OTA + netflix. There are some things like the Daily Show/Colbert (obviously not when the strike is on) that I'd miss a lot.. I can't forsee spending $2/episode or $16/month or whatever on each of them though..)


----------



## Saxion

mattack said:


> Seems to me like you should go OTA then.


As has been explained ad nauseum, this is *not *an option for many people, for a variety of reasons.


----------



## Saxion

TiVo Troll said:


> Channel mapping w/o a CC isn't a feature TiVo has an interest to provide. TiVo's interest is in fostering good business relationships with cable co's.!


And Microsoft's isn't? Why does Media Center support this?

For that matter, if implementation is so costly, and support costs so high, why does every competitor device (Media Center, Sony DVRs, Moxi/Digeo DVRs) support this _except TiVo_?


----------



## ciper

Saxion said:


> why does every competitor device (Media Center, Sony DVRs, Moxi/Digeo DVRs) support this _except TiVo_?


This is exactly what I have been wondering. As far as I know even MythTV can do this!

Personally this is the ONLY thing that stopped me from buying an S3 and more recently a Tivo HD. It's killing me that the current lifetime deal will expire in a month and I can't take advantage of it


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> And Microsoft's (interest) isn't? Why does Media Center support (manual channel mapping)?
> 
> For that matter, if implementation is so costly, and support costs so high, why does every competitor device (Media Center, Sony DVRs, Moxi/Digeo DVRs) support this _except TiVo_?


Do MS, Sony, or Moxi have contractual arrangements with cable co.'s?

(EDIT: Moxi does!)

I've got Sony's hi-def DVR, and while it does provide manual channel mapping through the most advanced version of TVGOS, the results are limited by TVGOS's list of program descriptions. IOW, for most channels there's only one line in the TVGOS program list so you can enter the digital hi-def channel number OR the regular analog channel number but not both. Sometimes there are different programs on a hi-def feed, but there's no way of breaking out that info.

Sony's DVR wasn't commercially succesful, and while it offers many neat configurable options, such as adjustable skip length and pic size, after actually dealing with channel mapping on the Sony my conclusion is that TiVo probably shouldn't offer such a half-fast feature. YMMV!


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> Do MS, Sony, or Moxi have contractual arrangements with cable co.'s?


You keep bringing that up, but never say why you believe that the TiVo/Comcast relationship will keep TiVo from implementing QAM mapping.

TiVo offers DVR's that can replace the Comcast STB's, which can cost Comcast box rental revenue. If that doesn't jeopardize the TiVo/Comcast relationship, how can TiVo-provided QAM mapping functionality for digital channels that Comcast customers are already paying for possibly impact it?

And again, if the first CableCard from Comcast is free as others have stated, then QAM mapping causes Comcast to lose no revenue, they don't have to bother with the expense of a truck roll, and the customer isn't getting access to anything that they are not already paying for.



> Sony's DVR wasn't commercially succesful, and while it offers many neat configurable options, such as adjustable skip length and pic size, after actually dealing with channel mapping on the Sony my conclusion is that TiVo probably shouldn't offer such a half-fast feature. YMMV!


That argument makes much more sense to me.


----------



## Revolutionary

TiVo Troll said:


> Do MS, Sony, or Moxi have contractual arrangements with cable co.'s?
> 
> (EDIT: Moxi does!)
> 
> I've got Sony's hi-def DVR, and while it does provide manual channel mapping through the most advanced version of TVGOS, the results are limited by TVGOS's list of program descriptions. IOW, for most channels there's only one line in the TVGOS program list so you can enter the digital hi-def channel number OR the regular analog channel number but not both. Sometimes there are different programs on a hi-def feed, but there's no way of breaking out that info.
> 
> Sony's DVR wasn't commercially succesful, and while it offers many neat configurable options, such as adjustable skip length and pic size, after actually dealing with channel mapping on the Sony my conclusion is that TiVo probably shouldn't offer such a half-fast feature. YMMV!


Contractual obligations with the cable companies are irrelevant (also, Tivo has contracts with the NCTA and CableLabs, not the individual cable companies, and arguably those bodies don't even have a dog in this fight -- the Comcast and Cox relationships have nothing to do with the S3). The Cable Cos can't restrict your ability access clear-QAM re-broadcast channels by contract with the hardware company. Access is mandated by the FCC.

Beyond that, the cable companies, on average, derive so little from the "upgrade path" on QAM that there is virtually no value to them in forcing customers away from it. The only upgrade path is cable card, and most cable providers charge a nominal fee to get those (*do not* feel compelled to post "My [podunk cable provider] charges $15 a month for cable cards," because this is an incredibly uncommon practice). It's not like they have so much riding on cable card that they need to force customers away from QAM tuning. Heck, they generally hate cable cards; from a customer service perspective, they probably prefer QAM tuning.

Bottom line: Tivo hasn't done this because Tivo doesn't want to, and not because of external pressures or obligations.

EDIT: This is a picayune trifle, but the phrase is "half-assed," not "half-fast."


----------



## TiVo Troll

sbourgeo said:


> You...never say why you believe that the TiVo/Comcast relationship will keep TiVo from implementing QAM mapping.
> 
> TiVo offers DVR's that can replace the Comcast STB's, which can cost Comcast box rental revenue. If that doesn't jeopardize the TiVo/Comcast relationship, how can TiVo-provided QAM mapping functionality for digital channels that Comcast customers are already paying for possibly impact it?
> 
> And again, if the first CableCard from Comcast is free as others have stated, then QAM mapping causes Comcast to lose no revenue, they don't have to bother with the expense of a truck roll, and the customer isn't getting access to anything that they are not already paying for.


Perhaps TiVo is the best place to ask such questions. I admit my take on TiVo's reluctance to provide non-CC channel mapping is mere conjecture.

If CC's were less flakey there would be no reason to consider manual channel mapping, no? Perhaps CC technology is what needs to be focused upon rather than manual channel mapping. As you state, HDTiVo only requires one (free) CC and is now TiVo's first line mass-market product.


----------



## TiVo Troll

Revolutionary said:


> Bottom line: Tivo hasn't done this because Tivo doesn't want to, and not because of external pressures or obligations.


OK. I buy that.



> EDIT: This is a picayune trifle, but the phrase is "half-assed," not "half-fast."


Are you perhaps a li'l slow regarding puns and satire?


----------



## Revolutionary

In the interest of comity I will ignore that.


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> Perhaps TiVo is the best place to ask such questions. I admit my take on TiVo's reluctance to provide non-CC channel mapping is mere conjecture.


TiVo isn't claiming that it hasn't implemented QAM mapping due to the Comcast relationship. You're putting it out there but won't state why you believe that.



> If CC's were less flakey there would be no reason to consider manual channel mapping, no? Perhaps CC technology is what needs to be focused upon rather than manual channel mapping. As you state, HDTiVo only requires one (free) CC and is now TiVo's first line mass-market product.


There is something to be said for not having to deal with the idiots at the cable company. I've had several billing errors, bad service, and blown off appointments over the years, but my favorite was when I had to basically install my cable modem myself because the clueless installer they sent over didn't know what to do.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sbourgeo said:


> TiVo isn't claiming that it hasn't implemented QAM mapping due to the Comcast relationship. You're putting it out there but won't state why you believe that.


Revolutionary posted the bottom line *here*! I buy it.



> There is something to be said for not having to deal with the idiots at the cable company. I've had several billing errors, bad service, and blown off appointments over the years, but my favorite was when I had to basically install my cable modem myself because the clueless installer they sent over didn't know what to do.


That's an issue between you and your cable company. Although I sometimes find mine (Comcast) inscrutable regarding pricing policies, on balance they've been credible with regards to billing, scheduling, program packages, and their field techs' competence.

I appreciate Comcast's current CC self-install policy (in my area), but wonder if, overall, CC self-installations don't sometimes create additional problems for cable co.'s.


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> Revolutionary posted the bottom line *here*! I buy it.


Huh?  Revolutionary's post supports my position that TiVo-implemented QAM mapping has no impact on the TiVo/Comcast relationship. I just wanted to know why you thought otherwise, which is why I keep asking.


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> And Microsoft's isn't? Why does Media Center support this?
> 
> For that matter, if implementation is so costly, and support costs so high, why does every competitor device (Media Center, Sony DVRs, Moxi/Digeo DVRs) support this _except TiVo_?


Because the naysayers' knee jerk reaction to any feature TiVo doesn't add is that the support or implementation costs are so high. It has been used for everything from Free Space Indicator (FSI) to better guide and playback navigation.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> If CC's were less flakey there would be no reason to consider manual channel mapping, no? Perhaps CC technology is what needs to be focused upon rather than manual channel mapping. As you state, HDTiVo only requires one (free) CC and is now TiVo's first line mass-market product.


As has been stated many times, CCs often trigger ancillary issues like additional outlet fees, forcing you to upgrade to digital cable, crappy uninformed CSR billing practice lies, HD equipment fees, etc. That is besides the pairing and install problems. There are a whole set of issues that simply go away when you don't need to deal with your cable company to get your TiVo working.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bmgoodman said:


> There are a number of family members that I would purchase Tivo HDs for as Christmas gifts, and get them lifetime service. But knowing the difficulties that *I* had dealing with Comcast to get my CCs working, there's just NO WAY I'm going to subject them to that. I can't tell them in advance how much more my gift will COST THEM and I cannot be there in person each time a cable truck has to roll. These are LOST SALES.


I just wanted to say "me too". There is one person to whom I'd like to give a TiVo HD. There is even a TiVo ad on my box telling me I can give a bundle of TiVo HD plus lifetime plus wireless adapter! TiVo has now made it easier to do this. I commend them.

But I can't do this. Because no clear QAM means cablecard hell. I could set up the Internet access myself, and that person already has basic cable. But no cablecards here without a truck roll. And OTA is not an option for most people around here. Too much multipath.

What kind of a "gift" is it when you subject the recipient to visit(s) from the local Comcast contractor?


----------



## Saxion

TiVo Troll said:


> Do MS, Sony, or Moxi have contractual arrangements with cable co.'s?


There are contractual dependencies between all of them and CableLabs (ex: OCUR, OpenCable).

The fact is that allowing customers to receive guide data for channels *they are paying for * and to which they are *entitled * by FCC regulations does not damage relationships with the cable industry.


----------



## Luke M

sfhub said:


> Because the naysayers' knee jerk reaction to any feature TiVo doesn't add is that the support or implementation costs are so high.


True. I remember when the "forum experts" were explaining why Tivo would never, ever make a dual tuner analog model. It was unthinkable, it was impossible...then they did it (easily).


----------



## MoxiGuy

fyi: one of the two retail Moxi DMRs planned for release early next year is designed for use with OTR and open QAM cable channels. I expect it will provide guide information for the unencrypted digital channels in the built-in guide. This morning, the Moxi site posted a sign up sheet looking for beta testers for the new HW.


----------



## MickeS

Luke M said:


> True. I remember when the "forum experts" were explaining why Tivo would never, ever make a dual tuner analog model. It was unthinkable, it was impossible...then they did it (easily).


Actually, they never did what most people said they'd never do: control two cable boxes at the same time. They ended up doing a compromise, where they have two built in analog tuners and can control one external cable box tuner.


----------



## Saxion

MoxiGuy said:


> fyi: one of the two retail Moxi DMRs planned for release early next year is designed for use with OTR and open QAM cable channels. I expect it will provide guide information for the unencrypted digital channels in the built-in guide.


I spoke with them at CES and was told they would support guide data for clear QAM channels. The box was supposed to be out in 2007 but looks like it will finally ship in 2008.

All companies have to spend money and innovate to keep up with their competition. No exception is made for TiVo. Of all the features that TiVo has been working on lately (MRV, TTG, Rhapsody, Swivel Search, eSATA, etc), lack of clear-QAM channel integration into the guide is the only thing that affects the basic, core functionality of the device, rendering it essentially useless for some part of their market. It's time for TiVo to step up and add this feature.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sbourgeo said:


> Huh?  Revolutionary's post supports my position that TiVo-implemented QAM mapping has no impact on the TiVo/Comcast relationship. I just wanted to know why you thought otherwise, which is why I keep asking.


QAM mapping is only necessary for hi-def TiVo users who sub to cable service. Why would TiVo want to engineer a workaround for CableCARD channel mapping? CC's are specifically designed to provide hi-def TiVo's QAM channel mapping.

It's unfortunate that S3 requires 2 CableCARDS instead of the 1 that HDTiVo requires. Wouldn't enabling 'M' card functionality for S3 be a better use of TiVo's resources than a workaround channel mapping project? Of course future S3's may use less costly HDTiVo style h/w which might solve that problem automatically.


----------



## TiVo Troll

*than letters to TiVo about QAM mapping?*



sfhub said:


> As has been stated many times, CCs often trigger ancillary issues like additional outlet fees, forcing you to upgrade to digital cable, crappy uninformed CSR billing practice lies, HD equipment fees, etc. That is besides the pairing and install problems. There are a whole set of issues that simply go away when you don't need to deal with your cable company to get your TiVo working.


TiVo is essentially a cable plus OTA tuner, and cable co. rules apply if TiVo is used as a cable STB. Use hi-def TiVo without cable if a cable co. is your problem; or perhaps an S2 and/or hi-def satellite DVR with satellite providers. But don't expect TiVo to provide workaround solutions for cable co. created problems.


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> There are contractual dependencies between all of them and CableLabs (ex: OCUR, OpenCable).
> 
> The fact is that allowing customers to receive guide data for channels *they are paying for * and to which they are *entitled * by FCC regulations does not damage relationships with the cable industry.


Paying for? Entitled? Nice words, but the devil is in the details.

There is no governmentally mandated 'entitlement' to EPG Data. That's a totally separate deal from either cable co.s or DVR providers.

Cable co.'s charge for additional outlets utilizing either STB's or CableCards. Mine doesn't charge for analog A/O's, BTW. YMMV.

At this time TiVo choses to use CableCARDS for QAM channel mapping. Write to TiVo about the potential business they may gain or lose but TiVo knows their revenue and cost balances better than anyone.


----------



## TiVo Troll

MoxiGuy said:


> fyi: one of the two retail Moxi DMRs planned for release early next year is designed for use with OTR and open QAM cable channels. I expect it will provide guide information for the unencrypted digital channels in the built-in guide. This morning, the Moxi site posted a sign up sheet looking for *beta testers* for the new HW.


Now yer talkin'! (I signed up!)

As long as it's not *vaporware*, which as of now Moxi DMR's apparently are, real competition will stir more innovation from TiVo than will a thousand Forum threads.

Of course squeezing profitability out of Media recorders is at best a tuff row. (Ho! Ho!) Ask TiVo.


----------



## Saxion

TiVo Troll said:


> Paying for? Entitled? Nice words, but the devil is in the details.
> 
> There is no governmentally mandated 'entitlement' to EPG Data.


I never said there was. Please don't put words in my mouth. I said that the *channels* are paid for and we are entitiled to receive them. I then said that providing guide data for such channels does not damage relationships with the cable industry.


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> I never said there was. Please don't put words in my mouth.


I never said you did. Those were my words.


----------



## sbourgeo

TiVo Troll said:


> QAM mapping is only necessary for hi-def TiVo users who sub to cable service. Why would TiVo want to engineer a workaround for CableCARD channel mapping? CC's are specifically designed to provide hi-def TiVo's QAM channel mapping.
> 
> It's unfortunate that S3 requires 2 CableCARDS instead of the 1 that HDTiVo requires. Wouldn't enabling 'M' card functionality for S3 be a better use of TiVo's resources than a workaround channel mapping project? Of course future S3's may use less costly HDTiVo style h/w which might solve that problem automatically.


Good grief, I give up...


----------



## fatespawn

TiVo Troll said:


> I never said you did. Those were my words.


Sorry Troll,

Your post alluded that Saxion's use of the word "entitlement" referred to "EPG Data".

His post was obviously referring to the entitlement of the channels that are being paid for by the consumer.

Looks pretty clear to me.

-fate


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> But don't expect TiVo to provide workaround solutions for cable co. created problems.


I don't see TiVo having any problems publishing they are working closely with cable companies on an SDV dongle. What's this we hear about a series4 with OCAP-mode. Those don't sound like cable co. created problems?

Reality is, there is a level of pain where TiVo knows they need to do something. With QAM mapping they haven't felt it or haven't been convinced of it. That could either be because it really isn't that big a deal (and I group the market being too small in that category), the people complaining aren't complaining loud enough, or the people listening aren't getting it.


----------



## aindik

The channels that are available in clear QAM are available in clear QAM not becasuse the cable company wants them that way, but because the law requires the cable company to transmit them that way. The cable company would prefer that as few people as possible know that they're transmitted that way, and prefer to make viewing them that way as difficult as possible without running afoul of the law. TiVo's interests are aligned with the cable company.


----------



## TiVo Troll

fatespawn said:


> Your post alluded that Saxion's use of the word "entitlement" referred to "EPG Data".


Alluded? Possibly. But such an interpretation is/was contrary to my intention at the time and contrary to the point I was/am attempting to make.



> His post was obviously referring to the entitlement of the channels that are being paid for by the consumer.


Yes, it obviously did.



> Looks pretty clear to me.


Yes; which is the point of contention! 
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The actual words which were exchanged:

Saxion:

_"The fact is that allowing customers to receive guide data for channels they are paying for and to which they are entitled by FCC regulations does not damage relationships with the cable industry."_

Me:

_"Paying for? Entitled? Nice words, but the devil is in the details.
There is no governmentally mandated 'entitlement' to EPG Data. That's a totally separate deal from either cable co.s or DVR providers."_

What do the words "paying for" and "entitled" refer to? To me they refer to "channels". "Allowing" is the word which refers to "guide data". However I do now realize that a reader could interpret the statement ambiguously.

Is there anything which remains as an area of confusion? How should the delination between what customers are entitled to vs. what cable and/or program guide providers freely offer be stated with a minimum of confusion?

As an aside, the issue here is to me a good example of the limits of the Forum or Message Board format. Ancillary concepts which could/would be expressed quickly and, if neccesary, corrected equally quickly when spoken beget a life of their own in this formal printed format and at times get blown out of proportion so that more critical underlying issues aren't dealt with.


----------



## TiVo Troll

aindik said:


> The channels that are available in clear QAM are available in clear QAM not becasuse the cable company wants them that way, but because the law requires the cable company to transmit them that way. The cable company would prefer that as few people as possible know that they're transmitted that way, and prefer to make viewing them that way as difficult as possible without running afoul of the law. TiVo's interests are aligned with the cable company.


I wonder what the law says regarding CableCARD availability? If a cable service offers just 1 OTA channel with a digital simulcast and cable co.'s are mandated to transmit digital versions of all OTA broadcasts they carry it would appear that any customer with 1 or more available digital channels should have the right to obtain a CableCARD.

What are the rules, if any, regarding CableCARD pricing? Comcast's charge for a second S3 CC appears illogical, even if not illegal. HDTiVo and S3 are functionally identical.

If CableCARD issues weren't a problem there'd be no need for alternate means of mapping QAM channels.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> I wonder what the law says regarding CableCARD availability? If a cable service offers just 1 OTA channel with a digital simulcast and cable co.'s are mandated to transmit digital versions of all OTA broadcasts they carry it would appear that any customer with 1 or more available digital channels should have the right to obtain a CableCARD.
> 
> What are the rules, if any, regarding CableCARD pricing? Comcast's charge for a second S3 CC appears illogical, even if not illegal. HDTiVo and S3 are functionally identical.
> 
> If CableCARD issues weren't a problem there'd be no need for alternate means of mapping QAM channels.


More and more companies are applying (and receiving) "effective competition" status, which means they aren't regulated by the local franchising authority (and FCC) anymore.

The reason they get effective competition status is because there is a formula used to determine this and DirecTV and Dish become the "effective competition"


----------



## sfhub

The concept is quite simple (as others have stated)

We pay the cable company for these channels. HD locals are part of our limited basic package (by FCC design)

We pay TiVo for our guide data as part of TiVo service.

We have the proper guide data in the guide for these channels.

We just have no way of matching up the two things we paid for.

We are not saying TiVo said their product would be able to do this matching.

We are saying TiVo *should* do this matching and many of us are willing to buy additional units for ourselves or friends if this feature was there.


----------



## Luke M

aindik said:


> The channels that are available in clear QAM are available in clear QAM not becasuse the cable company wants them that way, but because the law requires the cable company to transmit them that way. The cable company would prefer that as few people as possible know that they're transmitted that way, and prefer to make viewing them that way as difficult as possible without running afoul of the law. TiVo's interests are aligned with the cable company.


Stupid conspiracy theory logic.

How do you explain that many cable system choose to provide all "basic cable" channels (not just broadcast) as unencrypted analog and digital?

And how are these channels supposed to be "hidden" given that virtually every TV sold today receives them?


----------



## 1003

Luke M said:


> Stupid conspiracy theory logic.
> 
> How do you explain that many cable system choose to provide all "basic cable" channels (not just broadcast) as unencrypted analog and digital?
> 
> And how are these channels supposed to be "hidden" given that virtually every TV sold today receives them?


*Explain*
why my local Evil Cable Company routinely changes channels of local HD content. Lately Fox (5.1) changed to 5.806 and CW and MyNetwork seem to change every month or so. If the Evil Cable Company was being customer friendly why the game of hide and seek with the channels? Most big box sales drones are not aware or simply see the profitability of selling the cable or sattelite subscription...


----------



## segadc

I made a thread about this earlier today (and post it on the wrong forum!). Anyway, I did not know Tivo wouldn't recieve these HD channels that are hidden. I didn't even know about it until I connected my analog cable to my LCD I just got. Fios Tv comes next week but I decided to switch back to my LCD.


----------



## mattack

aindik said:


> The channels that are available in clear QAM are available in clear QAM not becasuse the cable company wants them that way, but because the law requires the cable company to transmit them that way.


To be technical, there are often other channels that are unencrypted too.. e.g. the digital music channels. At least for me they are, and I think others have said they're unencrypted for them too.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Me:
> 
> _"Paying for? Entitled? Nice words, but the devil is in the details.
> *There is no governmentally mandated 'entitlement' to EPG Data.* That's a totally separate deal from either cable co.s or DVR providers."_


Actually there is. Look at the passthrough PSIP requirements. PSIP includes EPG. The electronics industry and cable companies came up with the passthrough proposals and submitted to the FCC, which adopted them.

http://www.broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/ThalesDTVTranslator.pdf


----------



## sfhub

segadc said:


> Anyway, I did not know Tivo wouldn't recieve these HD channels that are hidden. I didn't even know about it until I connected my analog cable to my LCD I just got. Fios Tv comes next week but I decided to switch back to my LCD.


TiVo receives those HD channels and it has the guide data, it just can't figure out which guide data to associate with which channels because the "Display Channel" to "Physical Channel" table currently comes over the CableCARD.

You can still view the channels on TiVo, you just can't record them in the same way you do with your other channels. You can set up manual records, but you lose a lot of tivo intelligence by doing so.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> The concept is quite simple (as others have stated)
> We pay the cable company for these channels. HD locals are part of our limited basic package (by FCC design)
> We pay TiVo for our guide data as part of TiVo service.
> We have the proper guide data in the guide for these channels.
> We just have no way of matching up the two things we paid for.
> We are not saying TiVo said their product would be able to do this matching.
> We are saying TiVo *should* do this matching and many of us are willing to buy additional units for ourselves or friends if this feature was there.


Many? When compared with the number of hi-def TiVo subs who utilize CableCARDS and/or don't utilize cable at all?

Since CableCARDS provide precisely such matching, why should TiVo develop a parallel system? Instead CableCARDS are where attention needs to be directed to provide better service for the vast majority of TiVo's hi-def users.

BTW, originally I believed that Sony's TVGOS system of manual mapping provided a viable and simple solution for user mapping of QAM and advocated that TiVo adopt something similiar. But after getting involved in TVGOS manual mapping I now believe it's worse than no mapping at all. What a confusing mess!


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> Actually there is. Look at the passthrough PSIP requirements. PSIP includes EPG. The electronics industry and cable companies came up with the passthrough proposals and submitted to the FCC, which adopted them.
> 
> http://www.broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/ThalesDTVTranslator.pdf


Isn't *PSIP* data, which relates to OTA broacasting, a totally different animal from TiVo or cable STB EPG's?


----------



## TiVo Troll

TiVo Troll said:


> BTW, originally I believed that Sony's TVGOS system of manual mapping provided a viable and simple solution for user mapping of QAM and advocated that TiVo adopt something similiar. But after getting involved in TVGOS manual mapping I now believe it's worse than no mapping at all. What a confusing mess!


Between *here* and *here*!


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Isn't *PSIP* data, which relates to OTA broacasting, a totally different animal from TiVo or cable STB EPG's?


No it isn't, because cable is required to pass the PSIP info over for the HD locals (ie the channels we are discussing) Essentially what we are talking about with the HD locals is OTA channels delivered over cable lines since the FCC has required as much as practical for the PSIP and channel structure to be preserved when OTA channels are rebroadcast over cable as HD locals.

This does a couple of things:
1) establish that EPG info (provided by the broadcaster) actually is important enough to be a requirement and be directly addressed in FCC documents

2) establish that OTA channel numbers like 2.1, 3.1, 5.1, etc. must be passed through for the HD locals

3) TiVo already has the guide data for 2.1, 3.1, 5.1 because it supports OTA setups

4) so TiVo can choose to allow you to match up the PSIP info for the HD locals to the OTA guide data it has

You made the statement that there is no government mandated entitlement to EPG data. The link I provided shows that there is and further I have described how the virtual channel portion of PSIP can be used to map to TiVo's existing guide data.

If you feel your statement is still valid, please explain.


----------



## TiVo Troll

Of course TiVo could do what you want. The question is would doing so provide an advantage to TiVo worth the cost of developing and maintaining such a capability?

ATSC and PSIP rules don't appear to be as *black and white* as you state. Perhaps you're reaching? TiVo strictly aheres to gov't digital mandates (DT S2's lack of OTA capabilities, for example!)

Why is Sec. A/55 deleted from *this list* of ATSC standards? If government really mandates EPG data it sure seems that nobody is actually doing so. None of my outboard ATSC/QAM tuners have working EPG data even though they have such a capability.

S3's w/o CC's presently indicate many digital simulcasts (w/o guide data) in Comcast's line-up by displaying their OTA virtual channel number. (Sony's hi-def DVR doesn't.) In fact S3 only displays such channels through the OTA virtual channel number. When the actual frequency is tuned S3 indicates a good signal but no picture. (This change to virtual OTA channel numbers, in my area, has occured within the last month or so.)


----------



## vstone

Regarding QAM mapping, consider the following: By law cable companies have to give subscribers and franchise authorities 30 days notice before changing channel lineups. I get the feeling that this agreement is largely ignored, especially for channels being shifted from clear QAM to SDV.

Anyway, for those of us with at least one clear QAM tuner, even if the cable company doesn't give us a channel lineup (which possibly could be legally implied by the above requirement), they have to give us 30 days notice prior to changing the clear QAM lineup. If they just assigned to the OTA broadcasts virtual channel ID their OTA designation (e.g. 7-1) as some of us think they are required to do under federal law, they could play with the underlying frequency to their hearts desire. Then we could ask Tivo to allow us to map cable 7-1 to OTA 7-1.


----------



## jrm01

vstone said:


> Regarding QAM mapping, consider the following: By law cable companies have to give subscribers and franchise authorities 30 days notice before changing channel lineups. I get the feeling that this agreement is largely ignored, especially for channels being shifted from clear QAM to SDV.
> 
> Anyway, for those of us with at least one clear QAM tuner, even if the cable company doesn't give us a channel lineup (which possibly could be legally implied by the above requirement), they have to give us 30 days notice prior to changing the clear QAM lineup. If they just assigned to the OTA broadcasts virtual channel ID their OTA designation (e.g. 7-1) as some of us think they are required to do under federal law, they could play with the underlying frequency to their hearts desire. Then we could ask Tivo to allow us to map cable 7-1 to OTA 7-1.


My local Comcast office changed the clear-QAM channels from OTA equivalent number to a complex 4-digit subchannel number on higher channels (eg. 76.2302). I filed a complaint with the FCC and sent a copy to local Franchise Authority. They passed it on to Comcast, and lo and behold last weekend they were changed back to where they belong (or at least most of them).


----------



## TiVo Troll

vstone said:


> If (cable co.'s) just assigned to the OTA broadcasts virtual channel ID their OTA designation (e.g. 7-1)...we could ask Tivo to allow us to map cable 7-1 to OTA 7-1.


Very true. If every cable co. universally used digital OTA channel numbers as their virtual cable channel numbers it would indeed be very simple and cheap for TiVo to enable QAM mapping without CableCARDS.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> No it isn't, because cable is required to pass the PSIP info over for the HD locals (ie the channels we are discussing) Essentially what we are talking about with the HD locals is OTA channels delivered over cable lines since the FCC has required as much as practical for the PSIP and channel structure to be preserved when OTA channels are rebroadcast over cable as HD locals.
> 
> This does a couple of things:
> 1) establish that EPG info (provided by the broadcaster) actually is important enough to be a requirement and be directly addressed in FCC documents
> 
> 2) establish that OTA channel numbers like 2.1, 3.1, 5.1, etc. must be passed through for the HD locals
> 
> 3) TiVo already has the guide data for 2.1, 3.1, 5.1 because it supports OTA setups
> 
> 4) so TiVo can choose to allow you to match up the PSIP info for the HD locals to the OTA guide data it has
> 
> You made the statement that there is no government mandated entitlement to EPG data. The link I provided shows that there is and further I have described how the virtual channel portion of PSIP can be used to map to TiVo's existing guide data.
> 
> If you feel your statement is still valid, please explain.


And given you believe your points 1 and 2, just how do you explain polls saying that well less than half the respondents can receive their HD locals at the OTA channel numbers?

Reality does not match your claims here.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

Damn, it's unfortunate that this state of total silence from Tivo has gone on for over a year regarding this issue. It's especially frustrating knowing that they are reading all of this.

Can't someone, anyone, from Tivo just say "Can't do" or "Won't do" or "Stay tuned"? That's all many of us need to make appropriate purchase plans. All the debating with suppositions and assumptions just seems like a waste of energy when all we need is 2 seconds of acknowledgment from Tivo, who we know is listening anyway.


----------



## yunlin12

I really hope this mapping could happen, since I would like to add new Tivo HD to do MRV + watch basic local HD through cable, without having to add more cable cards and pay additional outlet fees. I just have some concerns on how they may implement this:

I understand that the possibility exists that Tivo could match the PSIP info that it sees on a clear QAM channel to that of the known station ID in its OTA guide data, therefore establishing this mapping between a channel and its QAM freq. However, Tivo needs to do a scan, and remembers what PISP it saw on which QAM freq, then it can do this mapping, right? What happens if Tivo scans when the OTA station is not braodcasting, like after midnight? Would Tivo still see any PSIP data to use for mapping?

If cable companies change the QAM freq assignment of one of these channels, how would Tivo know what new QAM freq to look for without a re-scan? If not, then I assume Tivo needs some automatic re-scan to keep the mapping up to date. I assume also to avoid interrupting user viewing, Tivo could schedule nightly re-scan to update this mapping during off hours (3am for example). What if the OTA broadcast is off during the re-scan?


----------



## Luke M

Here's an "outside the box" concept. Tivo could collect channel mapping info from their users who have CableCards, and distribute it to users who don't. In this way, accurate, up to date channel mapping could be provided (not limited to OTA).


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> And given you believe your points 1 and 2, just how do you explain polls saying that well less than half the respondents can receive their HD locals at the OTA channel numbers?
> 
> Reality does not match your claims here.


Explain why half do then, if there is no requirement? That is exactly the same argument you just put forth in the reverse direction.

On the other hand, I've pointed to the agreements that say so. If you'd like to dispute them, point to where the FCC did not adopt them as was described.

Pointing to cable companies who are not honoring the agreement says nothing about the agreement or whether it was adopted by FCC. As you can see by the post above, when complaining to the FCC, that cable company did restore the mappings. If they had no need to do so, why would they do that? Of course there are people who violate agreements all the time, but the existence of one allows you to point to it and say you aren't following it.

On the other hand if there is no agreement at all, the cable company really can do whatever they want regarding the mappings and PSIP.

Existence of rules is separate from adherence, except if there is not existence, there can be no adherence.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Of course TiVo could do what you want. The question is would doing so provide an advantage to TiVo worth the cost of developing and maintaining such a capability?
> 
> ATSC and PSIP rules don't appear to be as *black and white* as you state. Perhaps you're reaching? TiVo strictly aheres to gov't digital mandates (DT S2's lack of OTA capabilities, for example!)
> 
> Why is Sec. A/55 deleted from *this list* of ATSC standards? If government really mandates EPG data it sure seems that nobody is actually doing so. None of my outboard ATSC/QAM tuners have working EPG data even though they have such a capability.


You don't feel the group who cares about QAM mapping is significant. On the other hand I do. If you feel strongly, run a poll and see what the results are. Otherwise we'll just go back and forth with our opinions which are equally unsubstantiated (except we happen to be on a thread started by people who care about QAM mapping)

I would go straight to the FCC rather than messing with the ATSC docs you are bringing up. They are more black and white. The following backs up the white paper link I posted above (which is easier to read than the FCC CFR) I'll include the white paper link again in case you missed it:
http://www.broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/ThalesDTVTranslator.pdf

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/...s.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/pdf/47cfr76.640.pdf


> (1) Digital cable systems with an activated channel capacity of 750 MHz or greater shall comply with the following technical standards and requirements:
> ...
> (iv) For each digital transport stream that includes one or more services carried in-the-clear, such transport stream *shall include virtual channel data in-band in the form of ATSC A/65B:* ''ATSC Standard: Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision B)'' (incorporated by reference, see § 76.602), *when available from the content provider.* With respect to in-band transport:
> (A) The data shall, at minimum, describe services carried within the transport stream carrying the PSIP data itself;
> (B) *PSIP data describing a twelve-hour time period shall be carried* for each service in the transport stream. This twelve-hour period corresponds to delivery of the following event information tables: EIT-0, -1, -2 and -3;
> (C) The format of event information data format shall conform to ATSC A/65B: ''ATSC Standard: Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision B)'' (incorporated by reference, see § 76.602);
> (D) *Each channel shall be identified by a one- or two-part channel number and a textual channel name;* and


Regarding your A/55 question, it is old and likely got incorporated into a newer document in one form or another. The one's you should care about are A/65 (look for EPG and EIT) and A/69 (it deals with PSIP for OTA and cable):

Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision C) With Amendment No. 1
http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_65cr1_with_amend_1.pdf

Program and System Information Protocol Implementation Guidelines for Broadcasters
http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_69.pdf


----------



## yunlin12

Luke M said:


> Here's an "outside the box" concept. Tivo could collect channel mapping info from their users who have CableCards, and distribute it to users who don't. In this way, accurate, up to date channel mapping could be provided (not limited to OTA).


Very nice idea. This "box", wouldn't by any chance go by the name "cable labs" would it?


----------



## jrm01

My local provider changed the clear-QAM channel numbers two months ago to very obscure 4-digit sub-channel numbers (e.g. 76.2301). I filed a complaint with the FCC and sent a copy to our Franchise Authority. They sent it to Comcast asking for an explanation. Lo and behold last weekend the channel numbers reverted back to the OTA equivalent numbers.

At my request Franchise Authority met with Comcast yesterday (to discuss this, as well as ADS, SDV, head-end upgrades and cablecard support), but I don't know the outcome of the meeting yet.


----------



## jrm01

From what I hear, TiVo is now providing support for TiVo in Canada. It seems as though they have given them the capability of manually adding channels to their line-up if they are missing.

Anyone know more details? Is this a method that could be extended to clear-QAM support?


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> Explain why half do then, if there is no requirement? That is exactly the same argument you just put forth in the reverse direction.
> 
> On the other hand, I've pointed to the agreements that say so. If you'd like to dispute them, point to where the FCC did not adopt them as was described.
> 
> Pointing to cable companies who are not honoring the agreement says nothing about the agreement or whether it was adopted by FCC. As you can see by the post above, when complaining to the FCC, that cable company did restore the mappings. If they had no need to do so, why would they do that? Of course there are people who violate agreements all the time, but the existence of one allows you to point to it and say you aren't following it.
> 
> On the other hand if there is no agreement at all, the cable company really can do whatever they want regarding the mappings and PSIP.
> 
> Exhistence of rules is separate from adherence, except if there is not exhistence, there can be no adherence.


I'm not denying the regulations exist; I'm denying that their existence is sufficient for TiVo. Reality indicates it is not.

There's several loopholes in the rules - a major one being that cable companies sometimes get their signal direct from the station (not OTA) before the station adds the PSIP data. There's also confusion about which fields need to passed along; some companies are not passing along all fields, but do they need to according to the regulations?

I agree with TiVoTroll's point: if the vast majority of the cable companies were including full, correct PSIP info, then TiVo should be offering guides for the QAM mapping in some form. I think everybody agrees on that. But they don't.

This leads to the support morass that you so cavalierly dismiss. If TiVo offers QAM mapping, then TiVo's customers have every right to expect TiVo to deal with all of these different cable franchises and get them to pass along correct PSIP info. Just as TiVo has to get fixed incorrect channel numbers, and just as they have to deal with cable companies refusing to give out cablecards.

But as opposed to cablecards, PSIP info is 
1. an incredibly technical point that nobody in the front office (who TiVo has to deal with) will understand
2. Something very few customers will be able to talk to anybody at the cable company about.
3. Easy to claim compliance with, even if they are not usefully compliant.
4. Still as error-prone as anything else with the cable company (well, this applies to cable cards as well).
5. Not related to the cable company bottom line. If anything, implementing this hurts the bottom line for the cable company - people want it so they can avoid subscribing to a digital tier.

Existence of regulations is not sufficient. It wasn't deemed sufficient for cablecards. Why do you think the FCC requires the cable companies to actually use cablecards themselves? It wasn't because of efficiency - it was to make sure that cablecards actually got supported.

I don't see any way of TiVo avoiding spending thousands of hours of support time to offer QAM mapping. I don't see any way of TiVo not getting some customers seriously upset at them because they say they support QAM mapping, but it doesn't work for that customer. It will work for much less than half of the potential customers; that's an awful lot of customers to get upset at TiVo!


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> You don't feel the group who cares about QAM mapping is significant. On the other hand I do. If you feel strongly, run a poll and see what the results are. Otherwise we'll just go back and forth with our opinions which are equally unsubstantiated (except we happen to be on a thread started by people who care about QAM mapping)
> 
> I would go straight to the FCC rather than messing with the ATSC docs you are bringing up. They are more black and white. The following backs up the white paper link I posted above (which is easier to read than the FCC CFR) I'll include the white paper link again in case you missed it:
> http://www.broadcastpapers.com/whitepapers/ThalesDTVTranslator.pdf
> 
> http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/...s.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/pdf/47cfr76.640.pdf
> 
> Regarding your A/55 question, it is old and likely got incorporated into a newer document in one form or another. The one's you should care about are A/65 (look for EPG and EIT) and A/69 (it deals with PSIP for OTA and cable):
> 
> Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision C) With Amendment No. 1
> http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_65cr1_with_amend_1.pdf
> 
> Program and System Information Protocol Implementation Guidelines for Broadcasters
> http://www.atsc.org/standards/a_69.pdf


Even if you're 100% right and I'm 100% wrong, nothing is happening regarding TiVo's providing QAM channel mapping from sources other than CableCARDs. IMHO, TiVo is aware of the issue and its reps. have intentionally not posted in this thread.

If you're right and TiVo and almost everybody else is wrong, the ball is in your court. If you believe that a letter writing campaign to TiVo from posters at TiVo Community Forums is your best shot, go for it!

But if you're really right and almost everyone else is wrong perhaps you should be addressing the FCC instead of these Forums. Your links go to arcane documents which, to me, aren't clear as to what's required vs. what's recommended, and don't indicate what, if any, penalties apply if not followed. Perhaps you're overstating your case, or making it in the wrong place.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Even if you're 100% right and I'm 100% wrong, nothing is happening regarding TiVo's providing QAM channel mapping from sources other than CableCARDs. IMHO, TiVo is aware of the issue and its reps. have intentionally not posted in this thread.
> 
> If you're right and TiVo and almost everybody else is wrong, the ball is in your court. If you believe that a letter writing campaign to TiVo from posters at TiVo Community Forums is your best shot, go for it!
> 
> But if you're really right and almost everyone else is wrong perhaps you should be addressing the FCC instead of these Forums. Your links go to arcane documents which, to me, aren't clear as to what's required vs. what's recommended, and don't indicate what, if any, penalties apply if not followed. Perhaps you're overstating your case, or making it in the wrong place.


I have no disagreement that TiVo has said nothing and have done nothing about QAM mapping.

You have made various points that I have addressed. I have no illusions that everything will turn around overnight with TiVo.

By "everyone else is wrong" you are implying that "everyone else", in general, has your position or agrees with your points and thus I'm trying to point out they are all wrong, I think you need to go back and read some of the posts that have replied to you. I can point them out if you like.

If you want to point out TiVo isn't likely to do anything about QAM mapping, you aren't going to get any argument from me. If you use unsound arguments to justify your position, I will point that out.


----------



## sfhub

Luke M said:


> Here's an "outside the box" concept. Tivo could collect channel mapping info from their users who have CableCards, and distribute it to users who don't. In this way, accurate, up to date channel mapping could be provided (not limited to OTA).


That is a good idea. It is similar to what HDHomeRun does. It sends info from various clearQAM scans people have done and organizes the data based on zip code. You can see the results here:

http://www.silicondust.com/wiki/hdhomerun/channels


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> I agree with TiVoTroll's point: if the vast majority of the cable companies were including full, correct PSIP info, then TiVo should be offering guides for the QAM mapping in some form. I think everybody agrees on that. But they don't.


We have poll data that indicates about half the users who responded have cable systems that could benefit and half don't. If we had more specific TiVo sales data based on region then we could get a more accurate picture. For example if only the major metro markets passed PSIP properly but they accounted from 70% of TiVo sales, that is more important than 80% of the markets passing PSIP, but those markets only accounting for 20% of TiVo sales.

Support burdens really depend on implementation so it doesn't make sense to discuss them separately. For example one implementation that addresses much of your concern is simply for TiVo to detect major.minor OTA-style PSIP channel numbering and tell the user, we have detected OTA channel numbers and will include the OTA guide for your system. If they don't detect OTA-style PSIP, skip those options completely.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> That is a good idea. It is similar to what HDHomeRun does. It sends info from various clearQAM scans people have done and organizes the data based on zip code. You can see the results here:
> 
> http://www.silicondust.com/wiki/hdhomerun/channels


Great example. That site can't even get my OTA channels right and isn't even close on the clear-QAM channels.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> Great example. That site can't even get my OTA channels right and isn't even close on the clear-QAM channels.


SiliconDust has chosen to include channel #s which may not be accurate anymore because they want to serve as a rough guide for your area, not as the definitive source. The OTA channels look fine for my area.

The QAM channels understandably will not always match up as they are using raw channel #s (which change over time) so their users can find channels when they have no idea where they are, rather than PSIP-mapped channels which one would use (if available) for everyday usage. For example, in my area, if I'm looking in my area for CBS, there are 3 entries, and one of them is the right one for me. The other 2 were used at some point, but are no longer accurate, yet are included anyway so I can try them. I think they can improve there list by pushing the most frequently reported channel #s to the top and listing the rest as alternates.

The point would be if you use CableCARD-retrieved channel maps, it will be far more accurate because it comes straight from the source so there is no ambiguity.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> We have poll data that indicates about half the users who responded have cable systems that could benefit and half don't. If we had more specific TiVo sales data based on region then we could get a more accurate picture. For example if only the major metro markets passed PSIP properly but they accounted from 70% of TiVo sales, that is more important than 80% of the markets passing PSIP, but those markets only accounting for 20% of TiVo sales.
> 
> Support burdens really depend on implementation so it doesn't make sense to discuss them separately. For example one implementation that addresses much of your concern is simply for TiVo to detect major.minor OTA-style PSIP channel numbering and tell the user, we have detected OTA channel numbers and will include the OTA guide for your system. If they don't detect OTA-style PSIP, skip those options completely.


That's primarily an implementation algorithm (and a pretty un-useful one, as it is stated), not a support issue. The major support problem is not support for the people with solid cable company franchises correctly supplying PSIP data for all channels, it's with the people whose cable companies are not doing that (well over half, by the polls). People who say
1. My cable company is sending 0's for lots of channels. TiVo needs to fix that (example from this thread).
2. You advertised I could record HD QAM in my area, and I can't. You lied to me.
3. My TiVo missed a recording last night (in an area where QAM numbers shift). You have a terrible product.
4. I want to buy a TiVo, why can't you tell me what I can record in my area.
5. My cable company keeps on changing the channels they send. Please tell them to stop doing that.
6. My TiVo missed a recording last night. I don't know whether it was a QAM channel, why are you asking me these questions?

People get much more upset at a company when they think the company has promised something and not fulfilled the promise, than they do when they just want the company to promise something more. Dealing with that is a major support issue that you keep on dismissing.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> 1. My cable company is sending 0's for lots of channels. TiVo needs to fix that (example from this thread).
> 2. You advertised I could record HD QAM in my area, and I can't. You lied to me.
> 3. My TiVo missed a recording last night (in an area where QAM numbers shift). You have a terrible product.
> 4. I want to buy a TiVo, why can't you tell me what I can record in my area.
> 5. My cable company keeps on changing the channels they send. Please tell them to stop doing that.
> 6. My TiVo missed a recording last night. I don't know whether it was a QAM channel, why are you asking me these questions?


Very simple, no psip, no offer to use OTA guide. Nobody is lying to anybody.
With proper PSIP, underlying frequency changes are easily solved with nightly scans when unit is not busy.

You realize of course parts of what I'm suggesting are already in action for TW Austin customers. Instead of speculating what the support issues might be, ask those users who have used or are using the feature how it worked out for them. TW Austin sends PSIP that maps the HD locals to the digital cable channel #s. TW Austin's normal TiVo cable guide includes digital cable channel #s.

There are even more innovative solutions as mentioned above sending the actual channels maps downloaded via the CableCARD and sharing them. It doesn't even require certification because you aren't adding anything new on the cable line.

Then the users can spend their efforts getting their cable companies to properly passthrough the PSIP channel #s. Mine already does, as does 45% of the respondents' cable companies.

Instead of using "well over half" why don't we just use the real %.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744

5% have no HD locals in the clear
45% have useful PSIP (either OTA-style or digital cable #s matching guide)
50% do not have useful PSIP


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> Very simple, no psip, no offer to use OTA guide. Nobody is lying to anybody.
> With proper PSIP, underlying frequency changes are easily solved with nightly scans when unit is not busy.


What does "no psip" mean? I imagine most of these channels have psip info; it's just not useful psip info. Take my area: I'm told there's something like 7 (full) channels some TV's can get. The TiVo doesn't find any of them on a scan, and can only directly tune 3-4. I'm told that's because of faulty psip info. Of those 3-4, 2 occasionally get mapped to their OTA equivalents (5-1 and 50-1 as I recall) and the others (plus their subchannels) remain around the 103-x area. What does the TiVo offer me?

And what exactly is TiVo saying for all this? Does TiVo publicly commit to fully supporting QAM guide data? How does TiVo advertise this as a feature without getting some customers accusing them of lying?

What happens when a company supplies good data for a while, but then supplies bad data? Customers will get upset, and they will blame it on TiVo. Do you deny this?

With few exceptions, the cable company franchises have not committed to supplying proper PSIP. Without such a commitment, TiVo shouldn't promise anything to its customers. And in that case, how do you expect there will be enough customers willing to buy an HD TiVo (that were not willing to buy previously) to warrant TiVo adding this feature?



sfhub said:


> You realize of course parts of what I'm suggesting are already in action for TW Austin customers. Instead of speculating what the support issues might be, ask those users who have used or are using the feature how it worked out for them. TW Austin sends PSIP that maps the HD locals to the digital cable channel #s. TW Austin's normal TiVo cable guide includes digital cable channel #s.


Absolutely! I've used Austin myself in posts. IMO, that's an example of the proper way to go about this problem. Get the cable company to commit to supplying good PSIP. I haven't seen any other areas where there's a commitment expressed by the cable company to supply such info.



sfhub said:


> There are even more innovative solutions as mentioned above sending the actual channels maps downloaded via the CableCARD and sharing them. It doesn't even require certification because you aren't adding anything new on the cable line.


I don't follow this. Who has the cablecard to get the info in the first place?



sfhub said:


> Then the users can spend their efforts getting their cable companies to properly passthrough the PSIP channel #s. Mine already does, as does 45% of the respondents' cable companies.


Balony. Not that users shouldn't do this (they should), but far more customers will spend their time complaining to TiVo that TiVo should should get the cable companies to do things properly. Just look at this thread - it's filled with complaints about TiVo, and ways to complain to TiVo, but there's been very few people complaining to their cable company - who are the ones at the root of the problem.



sfhub said:


> Instead of using "well over half" why don't we just use the real %.
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744
> 
> 5% have no HD locals in the clear
> 45% have useful PSIP (either OTA-style or digital cable #s matching guide)
> 50% do not have useful PSIP


You're right - strike the "well over half" and just substitute "over half". I had remembered just the 35% figure, but the 10% people who have have mapping to cable numbers should be included. It makes no difference to my arguments.


----------



## vstone

CrispyCritter said:


> ...
> I don't see any way of TiVo avoiding spending thousands of hours of support time to offer QAM mapping. I don't see any way of TiVo not getting some customers seriously upset at them because they say they support QAM mapping, but it doesn't work for that customer. It will work for much less than half of the potential customers; that's an awful lot of customers to get upset at TiVo!


I agree. This is a no win situation for Tivo, especially if they are selling a lot of THD's to the less technically inclined (Not saying that any THD buyer is not technically inclined, just that the lower price will result ina wider buy-in).


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> I have no disagreement that TiVo has said nothing and have done nothing about QAM mapping.
> 
> You have made various points that I have addressed. I have no illusions that everything will turn around overnight with TiVo.


We agree.



> By "everyone else is wrong" you are implying that "everyone else", in general, has your position or agrees with your points and thus I'm trying to point out they are all wrong


I'm not 'implying' that everyone agrees with me (BTW, your quote left out 'almost'). I'm stating that, judging by industry practices, almost nobody acts as if the various documents you link to are mandates. Some, like the '*white paper link*' go to commercial sources pitching products. (BTW, where is the beginning to *this*?)



> I think you need to go back and read some of the posts that have replied to you. I can point them out if you like.


The post that I had the biggest problem with was *this*, posted right after I basically had just hollered 'uncle' by admitting that my opinion that TiVo's business relationship with Comcast was the cause of TiVo not providing non-CC QAM mapping was based on nothing but 'conjecture'.

(I don't know the actual reason, but now suspect it's because the lack of a uniform data base makes providing non-CC based QAM mapping a complicated project which would result in far greater developement and maintenance costs than sales. Because of all the special cases likely to have to be dealt with, non-CC QAM mapping would likely result in a lot of customer calls and bit**ing. Still 'conjecture'!)

You mentioned taking a 'poll' and even linked to *this one*. I'll leave the polls to you, but here's my admittedly non-scientific substitute:

Go right *here*. Look at the numbers showing how many times various threads have been viewed (the right hand column.) This thread has been viewed over 11,000 times (not bad!) but compare that to the many threads dealing with CableCARDS. (One is absolutely Comcastic!)

CableCARDS are the issue the great majority of TiVo's customer base is concerned about. That's where the money is! If CableCARD issues were cleared away there would be little interest in non-CC QAM mapping.



> If you want to point out TiVo isn't likely to do anything about QAM mapping, you aren't going to get any argument from me.


We agree.



> If you use unsound arguments to justify your position, I will point that out.


Good; so will I!


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> You realize of course parts of what I'm suggesting are already in action for TW Austin customers. Instead of speculating what the support issues might be, ask those users who have used or are using the feature how it worked out for them. TW Austin sends PSIP that maps the HD locals to the digital cable channel #s. TW Austin's normal TiVo cable guide includes digital cable channel #s.


If TW Austin customers get non-CC channel mapping on TiVo without TiVo having to do anything then cable co. customers wanting non-CC QAM mapping should be badgering their local cable co., not TiVo, right?


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Absolutely! I've used Austin myself in posts. IMO, that's an example of the proper way to go about this problem. Get the cable company to commit to supplying good PSIP. I haven't seen any other areas where there's a commitment expressed by the cable company to supply such info.


Can't do that because for 35% of the people responding, TiVo won't allow you to choose the OTA channel guide when you select service by cable. If TiVo did allow that, 35% of the people responding and their corresponding markets could benefit from this "proper" way. I'm actually a little surprised you would be so enthusiastic about this being the proper way when the only difference to what we have been bantering over the last couple of posts is to use the OTA guide to provide data for 2.1 instead of the cable guide to provide data for 702.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> If TW Austin customers get non-CC channel mapping on TiVo without TiVo having to do anything then cable co. customers wanting non-CC QAM mapping should be badgering their local cable co., not TiVo, right?


Nope, TiVo won't allow you to choose OTA guide when you choose cable service. That's 35% of the respondents. TW Austin maps HD locals to cable channel #s, that's 10% of the respondents.


----------



## TiVo Troll

OK.

For the past month or so one of my S3's, running w/o CC's, has been indicating Comcast's mirrored OTA digital channels by using their OTA channel numbers.

I had a *'bright idea'* regarding getting S3 to utilize that info (only one line away in the EPG), but it didn't work. The OTA equivalent channel numbers are virtual and aren't the frequencies which Comcast actually uses.

But it gets even *more* and *more* complicated!

Do some hi-def Limited Basic TiVo users basically (snicker!) want non-CC QAM mapping so as to retain analog Expanded Basic service that they get w/o paying due to cable co. oversight?

We get digital service so Expanded Basic is included but if we subbed only to Limited Basic, Comcast is supposed to put a trap in the coax to block all analog channels between 28 and 75. If the trap was left off or bypassed then an S3 w/CC's wouldn't receive Expanded Basic while an S3 w/o CC's would!


----------



## bmgoodman

TiVo Troll said:


> Do some hi-def Limited Basic TiVo users basically (snicker!) want non-CC QAM mapping so as to retain analog Expanded Basic service that they get w/o paying due to cable co. oversight?


Could you *please* stop trying to focus on those folks who want manual QAM mapping so they can continue to receive channels they aren't paying for? If you really believe that most users neither want nor need manual QAM mapping, that's fine, but I just don't see how you can take the posts from a few users who are trying to get something they aren't paying for and extrapolate that this is the case with most users who want manual QAM mapping. Isn't this the same type of logic that said most music downloaders were just trying to steal music?

Realistically, in just my circle of friends and family, a half-dozen Tivo users would be better of with a Tivo HD since they have converted to HDTV. BUT, because I know these folks are easily frustrated when these "entertainments" don't work correctly, I just cannot recommend the Tivo HD. Yes, in my mind, it is 99% the fault of the cable provider (who stands to benefit from CableCard woes), but that doesn't change things. For these folks, I cannot say how many truck rolls it will take (at least one, probably more), how many calls to tech support (for me, it was about 6 and an entire Saturday), how much they'll pay for each truck roll (mine was free), how much per CableCard per month (my two are free for now), and whether their bill will go up and by how much (mine went up $24/mo until I called to get things straight). Basically, I sank about 15 hours into getting my S3 set up with CableCards. And I don't have the time to help all these folks make it through the Comcast Cablecard hoops. My $0.02.

I would like to see the manual QAM mapping implemented through a Java-enabled web-based front end under "Manage" on Tivo's web site. This way, it can stay an "advanced" feature and I could probably log in FOR my friends and family and set up their mapping from my own home. In my mind, this seems like a good fit and it keeps the Tivo software from needing as much updating. I think the web interface could be simpler than setting up the UI in Tivo itself.


----------



## Budget_HT

bmgoodman said:


> Could you *please* stop trying to focus on those folks who want manual QAM mapping so they can continue to receive channels they aren't paying for? If you really believe that most users neither want nor need manual QAM mapping, that's fine, but I just don't see how you can take the posts from a few users who are trying to get something they aren't paying for and extrapolate that this is the case with most users who want manual QAM mapping. Isn't this the same type of logic that said most music downloaders were just trying to steal music?


I don't understand what your point is here.

I pay $16 per month to Comcast for Limited Basic cable service, which entitles me to a specified set of analog channels and all OTA-equivalent digital channels carried by Comcast in my area. So says the Comcast web site in their channel line-up area.

A relative living in a condo has Comcast Basic cable service, purchased at a group rate and paid for in bulk by the condo association (built into their dues to residents). Comcast told her that when her new TiVoHD arrives, she can go the Comcast office (down the street from her) and pick up an M card, at no cost to her. Apparently they want to set up an individual account for her to track the card.

So, who are you referring to that wants "channels they are not paying for?"


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> I had a *'bright idea'* regarding getting S3 to utilize that info (only one line away in the EPG), but it didn't work. The OTA equivalent channel numbers are virtual and aren't the frequencies which Comcast actually uses.
> ...
> Do some hi-def Limited Basic TiVo users basically (snicker!) want non-CC QAM mapping so as to retain analog Expanded Basic service that they get w/o paying due to cable co. oversight?


Your bright idea was flawed. The OTA input on the S3 uses 8VSB modulation. The cable input uses QAM modulation. Your cable service provides channels using QAM modulation so it is useless to connect it to the OTA input.

What you really want to happen is to have your original setup with the cable line connected to the cable input then have TiVo allow you to select OTA guide to merge with your existing cable guide. That is what was described just above your post. It is also my recollection that DirecTiVos allow such a configuration where you can merge the HD local guide with the DirecTV guide, so an example of this has already been in place in the past.

Your expanded basic references are a total red-herring to this QAM mapping (either automatic or manual) issue. If the cable company didn't put a trap on your line when it was supposed to be there, all cable-ready TVs, S1, S2 TiVo's etc. would get those channels. The issue is the trap is missing, not QAM mapping.


----------



## sfhub

Budget_HT said:


> I don't understand what your point is here.
> 
> I pay $16 per month to Comcast for Limited Basic cable service, which entitles me to a specified set of analog channels and all OTA-equivalent digital channels carried by Comcast in my area. So says the Comcast web site in their channel line-up area.
> 
> A relative living in a condo has Comcast Basic cable service, purchased at a group rate and paid for in bulk by the condo association (built into their dues to residents). Comcast told her that when her new TiVoHD arrives, she can go the Comcast office (down the street from her) and pick up an M card, at no cost to her. Apparently they want to set up an individual account for her to track the card.
> 
> So, who are you referring to that wants "channels they are not paying for?"


You need to read his post in the context of replying to Tivo Troll's post.

Tivo Troll is bringing unrelated red-herring issues and trying to use them to argue against QAM mapping.

When you get limited basic cable service, many cable companies install a frequency trap on your line to prevent you from getting the expanded basic analog channels. Sometimes for whatever reason, they forget or fail to install this trap. If that is the case, all your cable-ready TVs can get expanded basic analog channels. That includes the S3 when not using CableCARDs.

When you install CableCARDs on an S3, sometimes they change the channel map so instead of getting the analog < 99 channels, they switch you to digital (analog digital simulcast) versions of the < 99 channels. Since the expanded basic digital simulcast versions of < 99 channels are encrypted, after you install your CableCARD, you no longer get them.

However the reason this is a red-herring is you weren't supposed to get these channels in the first place and that is not what people on this thread are asking for (other than maybe 1 or 2 posts). We are asking for support for channels we are supposed to get because they are included in our cable package. The other issue Tivo Troll is talking about has everything to do with the trap being missing.


----------



## vstone

If Comcast wants to realign their channel lineups so that there is an analog gap above broadcast basic and below expanded (analog) basic and use a filter on the pole, they are free to do so. It will likely cost them more than it makes them.

Their failure to plan ahead for their conversion to digital cable is their problem, not ours. They owe us at least to comply with federal laws with regard to channel identification. If we end up with extra channels, that's their fault, not ours. Beyond unencrypted local broadcast channels with accurate PSIP data (when digital), they owe us nothing, plus or minus what your local city fathers have required by ordinance.

If we want channel mapping we need to get the FCC to "advise" the cable companies to comply with federal law. Then we will have a case to take to Tivo.


----------



## Saxion

CrispyCritter said:


> And what exactly is TiVo saying for all this? Does TiVo publicly commit to fully supporting QAM guide data? How does TiVo advertise this as a feature without getting some customers accusing them of lying? What happens when a company supplies good data for a while, but then supplies bad data? Customers will get upset, and they will blame it on TiVo. Do you deny this? With few exceptions, the cable company franchises have not committed to supplying proper PSIP. Without such a commitment, TiVo shouldn't promise anything to its customers.


You are forgetting something that is quite key. TiVo, today, fully advertises their support for *manual recording of clear-QAM channels*. They allow you to scan for them after running Guided Setup, they show them in the channel list, they show them in the Guide (with "To Be Announced" for the missing guide data), they allow you to select them for manual recordings, they even correctly parse the PSIP data and use it to assign the channel number. *These manual recordings are just as susceptible to QAM frequency changes & PSIP data changes as they would be if TiVo provided guide data for them!*

Does TiVo get a flood of service calls when "CableCo Inc" changes QAM frequency assignments and people's manual recordings break? Clearly, the specter of such increased support costs did not stop TiVo from delivering support for clear QAM channels in its current form.

Think of supplying guide data for clear QAM channels as an _enhancement _to the current support for them. If people are willing to live with the risk of their manual recordings breaking (due to QAM freq or PSIP changes), they clearly would be willing to live with the identical risk that their automatic, guide-based recordings could break in the same way.

As long as TiVo supports manual recording of clear-QAM channels, there is little additional support cost in allowing those same users to associate guide data for them.


----------



## sfhub

vstone said:


> If we want channel mapping we need to get the FCC to "advise" the cable companies to comply with federal law. Then we will have a case to take to Tivo.


It's good to get the FCC to remind them also, but 45% of respondents say their companies are already complying, providing useful PSIP channel maps. That seems like a good amount of people who can benefit from automatic QAM mapping (through the use of PSIP channel maps). Manual QAM mapping can be something looked at for the future.

I'm perfectly happy if TiVo just gave me the ability to merge OTA guide data when I choose to use the cable input.


----------



## Luke M

CrispyCritter said:


> I don't follow this. Who has the cablecard to get the info in the first place?


S3 users with CableCards. Tivo can gather accurate, up to date channel mapping for all cable systems that have at least one customer with an S3+CableCard.

To summarize the solutions:

1) Automatic mapping using PSIP. Tivo already uses the PSIP channel numbers, so this is a 'no-brainer'. It's just stupid that the Tivo doesn't know that cable 2-1 is the same channel as OTA 2-1. To keep the mapping up to date, the Tivo should re-scan the channels at least once a day.

2) Automatic mapping using Tivo-supplied map (see above). Not limited to channels with PSIP data.

3) Manual mapping. The entire burden is on the user and the mapping will break at unpredictable times.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Saxion said:


> You are forgetting something that is quite key. TiVo, today, fully advertises their support for *manual recording of clear-QAM channels*. They allow you to scan for them after running Guided Setup, they show them in the channel list, they show them in the Guide (with "To Be Announced" for the missing guide data), they allow you to select them for manual recordings, they even correctly parse the PSIP data and use it to assign the channel number. *These manual recordings are just as susceptible to QAM frequency changes & PSIP data changes as they would be if TiVo provided guide data for them!*
> 
> Does TiVo get a flood of service calls when "CableCo Inc" changes QAM frequency assignments and people's manual recordings break? Clearly, the specter of such increased support costs did not stop TiVo from delivering support for clear QAM channels in its current form.
> 
> Think of supplying guide data for clear QAM channels as an _enhancement _to the current support for them. If people are willing to live with the risk of their manual recordings breaking (due to QAM freq or PSIP changes), they clearly would be willing to live with the identical risk that their automatic, guide-based recordings could break in the same way.
> 
> As long as TiVo supports manual recording of clear-QAM channels, there is little additional support cost in allowing those same users to associate guide data for them.


Where does TiVo fully advertise that you can manually record clear QAM channels? And where do they say they support it? Everywhere I've checked, they specifically do not say they support it. Language like (TiVo HD FAQ)


> What signal sources does the TiVo HD DVR support?
> 
> The TiVo HD DVR supports digital cable, over-the-air digital antenna (ATSC), analog cable and analog antenna. You will need one (1) Multi-stream CableCARD or two (2) Single-stream CableCARDs to receive HD Digital channels. Without CableCARDs, you will still be able to receive standard definition analog channels, as well as analog and digital antenna channels.


The outside of my S3 box clearly states that you need either a cable card or a digital antenna to get HD. What does your TiVo HD box say?

There is a difference betweens "allows" and "supports". (Does TiVo "support" use of its units as doorstops? (Canonical use of unsubscribed TiVo))


----------



## Saxion

CrispyCritter said:


> Where does TiVo fully advertise that you can manually record clear QAM channels? And where do they say they support it?


OK, "advertise" is perhaps too strong of a word, but do you honestly expect people to believe that TiVo doesn't "support" manual recording of clear QAM channels?

Regardless, let me put it this way: if we could get a level of support for guide data _equal to the current level of support for manual recording_, we would all be ecstatic and could close this thread down. Better?


----------



## CrispyCritter

Luke M said:


> S3 users with CableCards. Tivo can gather accurate, up to date channel mapping for all cable systems that have at least one customer with an S3+CableCard.


I don't see how without changing their privacy policy. Their privacy policy is very strict. Eg, lots of complaints that TiVo online does NOT know the channels you receive.



Luke M said:


> 1) Automatic mapping using PSIP. Tivo already uses the PSIP channel numbers, so this is a 'no-brainer'. It's just stupid that the Tivo doesn't know that cable 2-1 is the same channel as OTA 2-1. To keep the mapping up to date, the Tivo should re-scan the channels at least once a day.


Quibble: TiVo has always considered the same channel from different sources to be a different channel. OTA 2-1 is a different channel than cable 2-1, and can have its own SPs and such. I would be surprised if they were always the same on every TiVo. But I agree it should be true for most. (And it is strongly not true that OTA 2 is the same as cable 2).



Luke M said:


> 2) Automatic mapping using Tivo-supplied map (see above). Not limited to channels with PSIP data.


There are potentially other problems here (besides acquiring the data), but I don't know enough about what's happening. I don't get the digital simulcast channels anywhere on my non-cablecard TiVoHD. Why not? How would TiVo be expected to handle the mapping between the cablecard mapping and the QAM channel? It's different than PSIP, but I don't know enough about it.



Luke M said:


> 3) Manual mapping. The entire burden is on the user and the mapping will break at unpredictable times.


The problem is that ALL of the above will break at unpredictable times for some people. My franchise has definitely been inconsistent about whether 105-3 (I don't remember the exact number) is mapped to 5-1. Sometimes it has been and sometimes it has not. The cable companies have no incentive to keep their info accurate. This is a cable company problem, but people will call TiVo and expect TiVo to fix it.

Again: your case 2, and the cable company changes its map. People miss recordings until their map is updated. Who will they complain to? How can TiVo even explain what happened to them (they won't know)? TiVo can't afford to develop a reputation for missing recordings. There's enough odd quirks that happen already, but those are at least explainable in most (but not all) cases. TiVo doesn't want to substantially expand this number.

The bottom line here is that TiVo cannot afford to have its reputation lie in the hands of the cable companies any more than it already is. The cable card battles have been damaging to TiVo, but are at least explainable. Lack of accurate PSIP data from the cable companies is much more technical and has little chance of being understood by the mass market.

As I've said, if you can get accurate PSIP data from the cable companies then I see no reason why TiVo wouldn't start supporting guide data for the clear QAM channels. But the PSIP data is currently both inaccurate and changing. The scheme above doesn't change that. Getting the cable companies to publicly commit to good PSIP data seems like the best course.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Saxion said:


> OK, "advertise" is perhaps too strong of a word, but do you honestly expect people to believe that TiVo doesn't "support" manual recording of clear QAM channels?
> 
> Regardless, let me put it this way: if we could get a level of support for guide data _equal to the current level of support for manual recording_, we would all be ecstatic and could close this thread down. Better?


Nope.

TiVo as a company does not "support" manual clear QAM recording. An individual machine may "support" it, but that's a different issue - and a slightly different meaning of support.

I can't manually record several of the QAM channels that my cable company sends out. The TiVo just doesn't tune them (errors in the PSIP data the cable company is sending, I've been told). Some other devices do tune the channels (and some others do not). I would not expect TiVo to help me with this problem. I see no indication that this is something they support, or that this is considered a bug.


----------



## Saxion

CrispyCritter said:


> TiVo as a company does not "support" manual clear QAM recording.


Well OK then...I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that one. Regardless, I said I'll accept your characterization of TiVo's level of "support" for manual recordings, and ask only for the same level of support for guide data. Call that level of support whatever you want...

The fact remains that all your points about PSIP problems and reliance on the cable company all apply to manual recordings. Since TiVo hasn't pulled support for that, they clearly disagree with your assessment of their impact.


CrispyCritter said:


> I can't manually record several of the QAM channels that my cable company sends out. The TiVo just doesn't tune them (errors in the PSIP data the cable company is sending, I've been told). I would not expect TiVo to help me with this problem.


Nor should you, but that has nothing to do with whether TiVo supports manual recording. Garbage in, garbage out: it is not TiVo's responsibility to ensure you receive a signal of sufficient quality from your cable company. Whether it's low signal level or corrupt PSIP data, that's between you and your cable company. And yes, you have FCC regulations to help you, as they did me when I petitioned Cox San Diego to start including correct PSIP data (they did). But saying TiVo won't help you fix the PSIP garbage your cable company is providing you is a red herring, and has nothing to do with TiVo's level of support for clear QAM channels.


----------



## Luke M

CrispyCritter said:


> I don't see how without changing their privacy policy. Their privacy policy is very strict. Eg, lots of complaints that TiVo online does NOT know the channels you receive.


It's not a privacy issue (and I wouldn't describe Tivo's privacy policy as "strict"...it's quite lax, IMHO). So CBS maps to RF channel 84-1 on a particular cable system. How is that a privacy issue?



CrispyCritter said:


> Quibble: TiVo has always considered the same channel from different sources to be a different channel. OTA 2-1 is a different channel than cable 2-1, and can have its own SPs and such. I would be surprised if they were always the same on every TiVo. But I agree it should be true for most. (And it is strongly not true that OTA 2 is the same as cable 2).


Hmm. I can't say I've ever seen a case where the cable version of an OTA channel is carrying different programming (except maybe for late night infomercials in the case where the OTA channel is turned off to save power).

Of course even if the programming is the same, they should be treated as different channels. Just as the same analog channel can be available OTA and on cable (but normally the user would delete the OTA version from the channel list to prevent confusion).



CrispyCritter said:


> As I've said, if you can get accurate PSIP data from the cable companies then I see no reason why TiVo wouldn't start supporting guide data for the clear QAM channels. But the PSIP data is currently both inaccurate and changing. The scheme above doesn't change that. Getting the cable companies to publicly commit to good PSIP data seems like the best course.


As far as I know, they have committed, and more importantly, the FCC is also behind it. The problem isn't lack of formal commitment, but simply laziness about implementing it in some cases. It's really the broadcasters who ought to be doing the complaining, but for some reason they don't seem to care. Maybe they will care more after the analog cutoff.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Where does TiVo fully advertise that you can manually record clear QAM channels? And where do they say they support it? Everywhere I've checked, they specifically do not say they support it. Language like (TiVo HD FAQ)
> The outside of my S3 box clearly states that you need either a cable card or a digital antenna to get HD. What does your TiVo HD box say?
> 
> There is a difference betweens "allows" and "supports". (Does TiVo "support" use of its units as doorstops? (Canonical use of unsubscribed TiVo))


Great, then you have just provided the solution to the "support" issues you feel will come about.

Don't put the feature on the box and add an entry to the TiVo HD FAQ that says you don't support this feature.

Then add the menu entry to enable it and bury it somewhere deep or make it SPS-enabled.

So "allow" QAM mapping, but don't "support" it, according to your terminology.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> But the PSIP data is currently both inaccurate and changing. The scheme above doesn't change that. Getting the cable companies to publicly commit to good PSIP data seems like the best course.


They may be for your market, but not in mine. My HD locals have PSIP channel mappings which correspond to the OTA channel #s and it has been very consistent since they fixed it over a year ago.

I don't see why this is very hard to explain. If you turn on your TV everyday and you have 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 7.1, 11.1, etc. then one day 2.1 disappears, that clearly is the cable companies fault, same as if you had 2 3 4 5 7 11 and one day 2 disappeared.

If you had a clearQAM TV that tuned 2.1 3.1 4.1 5.1 7.1 11.1 and 2.1 disappeared, would you blame the TV?

Just the other day, analog 2, 3, and 4 were almost unwatchable. I didn't blame TiVo, I called the cable company and they told me after 3 people complain in an area they consider it an outage and they came out and fixed it that night.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> There are potentially other problems here (besides acquiring the data), but I don't know enough about what's happening. I don't get the digital simulcast channels anywhere on my non-cablecard TiVoHD. Why not? How would TiVo be expected to handle the mapping between the cablecard mapping and the QAM channel? It's different than PSIP, but I don't know enough about it.


When the CableCARD starts up it downloads a mapping table that essentially says 702=78.1, 705=78.2, 707=118.1, etc.

The CableCARD channel maps goes from the CableCARD to TiVo, where TiVo imports into their own data structures. When you select 702, TiVo looks at its table and finds the underlying RF channel.

That information could be sent to TiVo servers by units which use CableCARD and downloaded by units which don't use CableCARD.

The CableCARD channel map uploads to TiVo server to be downloaded by non-CableCARD users is actually simpler than the PSIP channel maps because PSIP maps are inline data, so you see the changes when you tune the channel, thus the rescans. The CableCARD channel map is downloaded as a complete table of the mappings.

On your other topic of channels moving around (which isn't an issue for the above solution, because the maps will automtically be updated)

These QAM channels do change assignments over time, but it isn't like they are changing every hour. That is SDV-world.

My QAM channels have stayed on the same frequency for months, sometimes years. If they do change, 90% of the time it isn't to a brand new major #, rather the minor # changes. In that case, my TV has always been able to transparently find the new minor # w/o need for any new rescan, so I imagine TiVo can too.

It is only when the major # changes to something completely different that a new scan is needed. That happens far less often.


----------



## Saxion

sfhub said:


> Then add the menu entry to enable it and bury it somewhere deep or make it SPS-enabled.


Which is a great solution! I've always maintained that TiVo could bury this in a deep menu or create a backdoor ala 30-sec-skip. The vast majority of those savvy enough to figure out their local QAM mapping would be comfortable with such a solution, and it wouldn't lead to enormous support costs or expectations.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> It is only when the major # changes to something completely different that a new scan is needed. That happens far less often.


Actually my QAM channels underwent a major change recently and my TV found the new ones without a scan and displayed a message briefly stating "Channel 76.2303 changed to 2.1". I assume there was some sort of redirect provided.


----------



## vstone

Saxion said:


> ...
> *These manual recordings are just as susceptible to QAM frequency changes & PSIP data changes as they would be if TiVo provided guide data for them!*.
> ..


If you're worried about changing the QAM frequency, telll your cable company to tell you 30 days in advance of any changes to the channel lineup, as required by federal law.


----------



## TiVo Troll

*I asked the question just once, being careful to use the word "some"!*


bmgoodman said:


> Could you *please* stop trying to focus on those folks who want manual QAM mapping so they can continue to receive channels they aren't paying for? If you really believe that most users neither want nor need manual QAM mapping, that's fine, but I just don't see how you can take the posts from a few users who are trying to get something they aren't paying for and extrapolate that this is the case with most users who want manual QAM mapping. Isn't this the same type of logic that said most music downloaders were just trying to steal music?


Must have hit a nerve!



> Realistically, in just my circle of friends and family, a half-dozen Tivo users would be better of with a Tivo HD since they have converted to HDTV. BUT, because I know these folks are easily frustrated when these "entertainments" don't work correctly, I just cannot recommend the Tivo HD. Yes, in my mind, it is 99% the fault of the cable provider (who stands to benefit from CableCard woes), but that doesn't change things. For these folks, I cannot say how many truck rolls it will take (at least one, probably more), how many calls to tech support (for me, it was about 6 and an entire Saturday), how much they'll pay for each truck roll (mine was free), how much per CableCard per month (my two are free for now), and whether their bill will go up and by how much (mine went up $24/mo until I called to get things straight). Basically, I sank about 15 hours into getting my S3 set up with CableCards. And I don't have the time to help all these folks make it through the Comcast Cablecard hoops. My $0.02.


What is it about installing one 'M' card in HDTiVo that makes such a big deal that you don't believe your friends and relatives can handle it?



> I would like to see the manual QAM mapping implemented through a Java-enabled web-based front end under "Manage" on Tivo's web site. This way, it can stay an "advanced" feature and I could probably log in FOR my friends and family and set up their mapping from my own home. In my mind, this seems like a good fit and it keeps the Tivo software from needing as much updating. I think the web interface could be simpler than setting up the UI in Tivo itself.


So you want TiVo to develop something that most TiVo users couldn't manage or (like me) just wouldn't want to deal with.


----------



## jrm01

vstone said:


> If you're worried about changing the QAM frequency, telll your cable company to tell you 30 days in advance of any changes to the channel lineup, as required by federal law.


Actually most interpretations of the FCC Requirement (not Law) indicate that this does not apply to clear-QAM. And the notice that they provide for regular cable channels is usually posted in a Legal Announcement in the Newspaper that no one ever sees.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> Your bright idea was flawed.


That's why I called it a 'bright idea'!



> The OTA input on the S3 uses 8VSB modulation. The cable input uses QAM modulation. Your cable service provides channels using QAM modulation so it is useless to connect it to the OTA input.


Sounds like a plausible explanation. Do you therefore believe that the OTA channel number is an actual frequency used by Comcast and not a virtual number? Why does S3 indicate good signals but no programs on the actual frequencies that I know Comcast uses for those channels?



> What you really want to happen is to have your original setup with the cable line connected to the cable input then have TiVo allow you to select OTA guide to merge with your existing cable guide. That is what was described just above your post. It is also my recollection that DirecTiVos allow such a configuration where you can merge the HD local guide with the DirecTV guide, so an example of this has already been in place in the past.


Yup!

An excellent concept if TiVo could do it for all users in a simple and cheap manner.



> Your expanded basic references are a total red-herring to this QAM mapping (either automatic or manual) issue. If the cable company didn't put a trap on your line when it was supposed to be there, all cable-ready TVs, S1, S2 TiVo's etc. would get those channels. The issue is the trap is missing, not QAM mapping.


OT, true; just a related observation not directly a part of the QAM mapping issue.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

heh. I am another TiVo HD user without cable cards right now and really have little interest in the more programming of upper digital tiers. I would use QAM mapping happily to get more shows I do not have to pay for. 

Of course I can think of 5 to 10 things in the interface I would rather see improved first along with extending the HME interface to get at DVR functions like starting MRV or scheduling shows so 3rd parties can make Galleon into a very cool clearing house to do things on any TiVo in the house from any TiVo in the house.


that said, I will go to cable cards after the new year in order to get digital clarity on the extended basic channels I do mainly record from. I have waited on cable card install mainly because TWC botched it up so bad the first time round and did not have Mcards available. my hope is that after the new year i can get an Mcard and 2 TWC employees knowledgeable enough to install cable cards and pair them correctly.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> Tivo Troll is bringing unrelated red-herring issues and trying to use them to argue against QAM mapping.


Why are you and bmgoodman so sensitive about an OT comment I made in one post? Not "issues"; just one OT post!

I'm not opposed to QAM mapping if it could be done by TiVo for all its hi-def users in a cheap and simple manner.

But, since CC's intrinsically provide channel mapping I don't believe TiVo needs to put a parallel system in place until or unless CC issues are resolved first. CC's provide the method that the great majority of hi-def TiVo users use to map cable lineups and resolving CC issues would spur hi-def TiVo sales far more than resources used to develop a parallel system of mapping just unencrypted QAM channels.


----------



## TiVo Troll

vstone said:


> If Comcast wants to realign their channel lineups so that there is an analog gap above broadcast basic and below expanded (analog) basic and use a filter on the pole, they are free to do so. It will likely cost them more than it makes them.
> 
> Their failure to plan ahead for their conversion to digital cable is their problem, not ours. They owe us at least to comply with federal laws with regard to channel identification. If we end up with extra channels, that's their fault, not ours. Beyond unencrypted local broadcast channels with accurate PSIP data (when digital), they owe us nothing, plus or minus what your local city fathers have required by ordinance.
> 
> If we want channel mapping we need to get the FCC to "advise" the cable companies to comply with federal law. Then we will have a case to take to Tivo.


Limited Basic Service isn't profitable. Cable co.'s are required by law to provide Limited Basic Service of at least the broadcast stations they carry. A block only affects analog channels in Expanded Basic.


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> You are forgetting something that is quite key. TiVo, today, fully advertises their support for *manual recording of clear-QAM channels*. They allow you to scan for them after running Guided Setup, they show them in the channel list, they show them in the Guide (with "To Be Announced" for the missing guide data), they allow you to select them for manual recordings, they even correctly parse the PSIP data and use it to assign the channel number. *These manual recordings are just as susceptible to QAM frequency changes & PSIP data changes as they would be if TiVo provided guide data for them!*
> 
> Does TiVo get a flood of service calls when "CableCo Inc" changes QAM frequency assignments and people's manual recordings break? Clearly, the specter of such increased support costs did not stop TiVo from delivering support for clear QAM channels in its current form.
> 
> Think of supplying guide data for clear QAM channels as an _enhancement _to the current support for them. If people are willing to live with the risk of their manual recordings breaking (due to QAM freq or PSIP changes), they clearly would be willing to live with the identical risk that their automatic, guide-based recordings could break in the same way.
> 
> As long as TiVo supports manual recording of clear-QAM channels, there is little additional support cost in allowing those same users to associate guide data for them.


You make some good points which sound reasonable. But, until or unless verified, they're opinions, not facts.

TiVo has a history of doing things its way and not always what fans push for.


----------



## bmgoodman

TiVo Troll said:


> Why are you and bmgoodman so sensitive about an OT comment I made in one post? Not "issues"; just one OT post!
> 
> I'm not opposed to QAM mapping if it could be done by TiVo for all its hi-def users in a cheap and simple manner.
> 
> But, since CC's intrinsically provide channel mapping I don't believe TiVo needs to put a parallel system in place until or unless CC issues are resolved first. CC's provide the method that the great majority of hi-def TiVo users use to map cable lineups and resolving CC issues would spur hi-def TiVo sales far more than resources used to develop a parallel system of mapping just unencrypted QAM channels.


Sorry that I came off as sensitive, but we clearly disagree philosophically on QAM mapping. You say Tivo does not need to put a parallel system in place "until or unless CC issues are resolved first." To me, the parallel system is NEEDED "until or unless CC issues are resolved". Once they are resolved, the parallel system serves less purpose or perhaps no purpose. I think Tivo has more ability to control a parallel system than to control the behavior of every cable operator in the country. Sure, CableCards are supposed to be the answer, but you can see from thousands of posts here that it IS NOT WORKING FOR SOME PEOPLE. So when I am asked what is so difficult about getting and installing an m-card into a Tivo, my answer was already there. I sank untold hours dealing with Comcast to get my 2 cards working and it frustrated me greatly that every time there was a problem, they wanted to roll a truck. Another 4-hour window out of my life. Because they're NOT VERY GOOD at supporting CC as they are required to do. Sure, as we eventually see new cable boxes that require CCs to operate, I'll bet they get better. But they aren't very good now. That's why I said I felt I could support friends and family if there were a web-based QAM mapping table under "Manage My Account" at tivo.com. I feel confident I could better handle that than dealing with their various cable companies. Not to mention that I still can't get close to telling them how much more they're going to have to pay for cablecard(s). The prices are all over the board. I'm therefore looking to Tivo to help me get more out of their product. Otherwise, I'm recommending these folks get a DVD recorder with digital tuner and go back to recording shows manually by time/channel. Huge step backwards, at least it will work. [In fact, I just used my Panasonic DVD recorder to record a 2 hour movie for a relative. I recorded from its digital tuner from an HD channel and let it fill the DVD with the 2 hour movie. When she watched it, she remarked on how great a picture it was. (Yes, I know it did not record as HD).]


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> OK, "advertise" is perhaps too strong of a word, but do you honestly expect people to believe that TiVo doesn't "support" manual recording of clear QAM channels?


Not really. Crispy made a *valid point*! TiVo very specifically states what is supported and what isn't. I'm sure (yup, conjecture!) its attorneys were consulted about precisely this issue.



> Regardless, let me put it this way: if we could get a level of support for guide data _equal to the current level of support for manual recording_, we would all be ecstatic and could close this thread down. Better?


Only if it costs TiVo the same as it currently costs, including customer satisfaction; i.e. absense of calls b*t*hing to CS.


----------



## TiVo Troll

bmgoodman said:


> Sorry that I came off as sensitive, but we clearly disagree philosophically on QAM mapping. You say Tivo does not need to put a parallel system in place "until or unless CC issues are resolved first." To me, the parallel system is NEEDED "until or unless CC issues are resolved". Once they are resolved, the parallel system serves less purpose or perhaps no purpose. I think Tivo has more ability to control a parallel system than to control the behavior of every cable operator in the country. Sure, CableCards are supposed to be the answer, but you can see from thousands of posts here that it IS NOT WORKING FOR SOME PEOPLE. So when I am asked what is so difficult about getting and installing an m-card into a Tivo, my answer was already there. I sank untold hours dealing with Comcast to get my 2 cards working and it frustrated me greatly that every time there was a problem, they wanted to roll a truck. Another 4-hour window out of my life. Because they're NOT VERY GOOD at supporting CC as they are required to do. Sure, as we eventually see new cable boxes that require CCs to operate, I'll bet they get better. But they aren't very good now. That's why I said I felt I could support friends and family if there were a web-based QAM mapping table under "Manage My Account" at tivo.com. I feel confident I could better handle that than dealing with their various cable companies. Not to mention that I still can't get close to telling them how much more they're going to have to pay for cablecard(s). The prices are all over the board. I'm therefore looking to Tivo to help me get more out of their product.


Damn! In my area Comcast allows self-installs.

My self-install of an 'M' card, and then self-reinstall of 2 'I' cards after a problem developed, and then "fooling around" - pulling the second 'I' card to see if S3 w/digital service would work w/o it (not reliably, but w/only Limited Basic it would have worked fine!) and putting it back, all went so easily!



> Otherwise, I'm recommending these folks get a DVD recorder with digital tuner and go back to recording shows manually by time/channel. Huge step backwards, at least it will work. [In fact, I just used my Panasonic DVD recorder to record a 2 hour movie for a relative. I recorded from its digital tuner from an HD channel and let it fill the DVD with the 2 hour movie. When she watched it, she remarked on how great a picture it was. (Yes, I know it did not record as HD.)


I'm a fan of DVD recording too. Full 480i anamorphic resolution is surprisingly good and really cheap!

I don't have a digital tuner DVD-recorder but in lieu use component output from HDTiVo. I just won a Toshiba TiVo DVD recorder on eBay and will soon be able to check how well it compares, using poor old S-Video.

OT: I've got 2 DVD-recorders w/extensive editing capabilities and 2 w/o editing. Editing is great but is so time consuming to get perfect that for all but the most critical recordings just archiving is fine. I wish a simplified recorder with just the capability to divide a program, with no other editing capabilities, existed.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Saxion said:


> Well OK then...I guess we'll just agree to disagree on that one. Regardless, I said I'll accept your characterization of TiVo's level of "support" for manual recordings, and ask only for the same level of support for guide data. Call that level of support whatever you want...
> 
> The fact remains that all your points about PSIP problems and reliance on the cable company all apply to manual recordings. Since TiVo hasn't pulled support for that, they clearly disagree with your assessment of their impact.
> Nor should you, but that has nothing to do with whether TiVo supports manual recording. Garbage in, garbage out: it is not TiVo's responsibility to ensure you receive a signal of sufficient quality from your cable company. Whether it's low signal level or corrupt PSIP data, that's between you and your cable company. And yes, you have FCC regulations to help you, as they did me when I petitioned Cox San Diego to start including correct PSIP data (they did). But saying TiVo won't help you fix the PSIP garbage your cable company is providing you is a red herring, and has nothing to do with TiVo's level of support for clear QAM channels.


I strongly disagree. Do you really believe that if TiVo started to fully advertise recording clear QAM stations, that they would not get a lot of complaints about people who can't record them?

I wouldn't complain to them, and you wouldn't, but if somebody was getting most of their QAM stations coming in as channel 0, don't you think they would complain to TiVo? Especially if some other devices get non-zero channel numbers for those stations? (Hint, read earlier in this thread).

If TiVo promises something, and that something doesn't get fulfilled, TiVo will legitimately get complaints, even if it's the cable company's fault. That's what support means.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Saxion said:


> Which is a great solution! I've always maintained that TiVo could bury this in a deep menu or create a backdoor ala 30-sec-skip. The vast majority of those savvy enough to figure out their local QAM mapping would be comfortable with such a solution, and it wouldn't lead to enormous support costs or expectations.


Other proponents of QAM mapping: is that the agreed upon proposal for TiVo to do?

I agree that minimizes support costs. There are still substantial costs. For instance, all the support people have to be trained to recognize the procedure and what problems may pop up because of it. And there will always be a larger portion of insufficiently savvy folks who try it (and need support) than savvy folks. But I agree, the support costs will be much less.

However, how do you possibly sell enough TiVos then (TiVos that were bought specifically because of this ability) to recoup the development, testing, and support costs? How does anybody find out about this capability? The QAM threads here haven't established nearly enough of a demand in themselves; there needs to be a much wider audience.


----------



## CrispyCritter

bmgoodman said:


> Sorry that I came off as sensitive, but we clearly disagree philosophically on QAM mapping. You say Tivo does not need to put a parallel system in place "until or unless CC issues are resolved first." To me, the parallel system is NEEDED "until or unless CC issues are resolved". Once they are resolved, the parallel system serves less purpose or perhaps no purpose. I think Tivo has more ability to control a parallel system than to control the behavior of every cable operator in the country.


Again, is this an opinion shared by other proponents of QAM mapping? Is QAM mapping to be regarded as only a temporary hack until cablecard bugs are worked out?

My view is that TiVo has to resolve the CC issues in order to survive. They've been working hard on it and have made progress, both theoretically and on the ground. The major cable companies have agreed to have much more TiVo specific training (the installers will be TiVo-aware), and we (the customers here) have trained any number of cable installers ourselves. TiVo has to focus on that.

QAM mapping will be a noticeable distraction, and having to deal with cable companies to get them to fix their PSIP data will be a major task. I think TiVo needs to focus on the core CC issues; PSIP is not a mission critical battle (especially if it's a temporary hack, but even otherwise.)


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> Actually my QAM channels underwent a major change recently and my TV found the new ones without a scan and displayed a message briefly stating "Channel 76.2303 changed to 2.1". I assume there was some sort of redirect provided.


What you described may or may not be a major # change because the 76.2303 looks like a physical RF channel # (ie PSIP info was not present) and the 2.1 looks like a virtual channel map. What I'm saying is the channel could still physically be at major channel # 76, they might just have added the PSIP channel map info and when your TV tuned in, it noticed the PSIP channel map info and told you the new channel location (which is now a virtual channel #)


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Sounds like a plausible explanation. Do you therefore believe that the OTA channel number is an actual frequency used by Comcast and not a virtual number? Why does S3 indicate good signals but no programs on the actual frequencies that I know Comcast uses for those channels?


What I'm saying is the S3 OTA input understands "french" and the S3 cable input understands "english". Either one can use physical or virtual channel #s, but they are meaningless to each other.


----------



## bmgoodman

OK, I'm starting to think that Tivo will never see the benefit of manual channel mapping. That now makes me wonder whether the Tivo Underground could do something? Surely there's a way to expose the channel information stored in a Tivo? I'd like something in a nice java app that would run on my PC and then transfer the channel map to the Tivo, please.


----------



## Saxion

TiVo Troll said:


> You make some good points which sound reasonable. But, until or unless verified, they're opinions, not facts.


Thanks, but I'm not sure what you're asking or what you think is an opinion. Is it the "support for manual recording of clear QAM"? This is hardly opinion; I first learned of it in Megazone's early S3 review  (he had the ear of the TiVo apps guys when he wrote it):



> *Does the S3 support unencrypted digital cable channels, aka QAM in-the-clear, without a CableCARD?*
> Partially. Clear QAM channels can be tuned directly by entering the correct channel number. Recordings can be scheduled by time and channel. There is no guide data for digital cable channels without CableCARD, and hence no Season Passes or Wish Lists are possible. There is currently no way to manually map channels. _TiVo is looking into the possibility to provide mapping in the future._


This is common knowledge. Lots of people are using this feature today (myself included). TiVo acknowledged at the time that they were considering expanding clear QAM support to include mapping to guide data. This is not a new concept here...


----------



## Saxion

CrispyCritter said:


> Again, is this an opinion shared by other proponents of QAM mapping? Is QAM mapping to be regarded as only a temporary hack until cablecard bugs are worked out?


I would strongly disagree with that. Providing guide data to Clear-QAM stations expands TiVo's market. It's as simple as that. The fact is that CableCARDs remain expensive for many people, and they can break some key TiVo functionality (they can force the use of digital simulcasts, which can break TiVo-To-Go and eliminate compression options). I personally know 3 people who watch all their HD through Clear-QAM reception using the built-in tuner on their TVs; they have no desire to pay their cable company one dime to record exactly what they receive today, but would buy a TiVo if it fully supported their stations.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Why are you and bmgoodman so sensitive about an OT comment I made in one post? Not "issues"; just one OT post!
> 
> I'm not opposed to QAM mapping if it could be done by TiVo for all its hi-def users in a cheap and simple manner.
> 
> But, since CC's intrinsically provide channel mapping I don't believe TiVo needs to put a parallel system in place until or unless CC issues are resolved first. CC's provide the method that the great majority of hi-def TiVo users use to map cable lineups and resolving CC issues would spur hi-def TiVo sales far more than resources used to develop a parallel system of mapping just unencrypted QAM channels.


The way the OT comment was integrated into your post spurred on additional confusion because it made others think you were saying QAM mapping is equated to getting service you aren't paying for. You could have been talking about Pam Anderson and if it started to generate OT subthreads, the response would have been the same.

I feel CC issues under TiVo's control should have priority over QAM mapping (either automatic or manual). However, I don't see why CC issues outside of TiVo's direct influence, like poorly trained customer service people, sales people convincing you to go with cable DVR instead of TiVo, provisioning problems because the back-end people don't know how to pair properly, etc. should delay QAM mapping if TiVo were to decide they wanted to address it.

The automatic QAM mapping proposal isn't actually a completely parallel system built from scratch. The system is already in place for OTA mapping and the cable side is already capable of reading the PSIP and understanding the virtual maps, same as the OTA side.. For the automatic QAM mapping proposal we are mostly talking about the final step of merging guide data. There is a proof of concept already in place for TW Austin.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Damn! In my area Comcast allows self-installs.
> 
> My self-install of an 'M' card, and then self-reinstall of 2 'I' cards after a problem developed, and then "fooling around" - pulling the second 'I' card to see if S3 w/digital service would work w/o it (not reliably, but w/only Limited Basic it would have worked fine!) and putting it back, all went so easily!


I'm happy for you that you've had a more reasonable experience with Comcast.

My area only allows tech installs, but everything went fine the first time and has worked ever since.

The problem I had was with billing and that took months to sort out because they issue credits, then the next month the same problem shows up again. Everytime I make a service or CC equipment change, the old billing problems start showing back up and I have to spend time to get it resolved.

If I get a new TiVo, it can see all my HD locals using 2.1 5.1 7.1 etc. I know these channels work fine and channel movement that can't be accounted for automatically hasn't happened in over a year (I watch these channels on my ClearQAM TV)

If I can just merge the OTA guide even when I choose cable delivery of channels, then I can use the new TiVo without needing to deal with billing issues again. Since TiVo has MRV working, my new TiVo would be dedicated to recording HD locals and my existing CableCARD TiVo could be used to record encrypted programming, which was basically the purpose of CableCARDs to start with.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Other proponents of QAM mapping: is that the agreed upon proposal for TiVo to do?


Burying in menus, SPS enabled, or asking me to agree ten times not to call TiVo about this feature is fine.

Personally I just want some way to merge the OTA guide when I select cable input.

I wonder how many people called TiVo support and complained kickstart 62 wasn't working? I mention it because it is a similar advanced feature where the arguments of support costs, user experience, etc. could all be applied as well.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Again, is this an opinion shared by other proponents of QAM mapping? Is QAM mapping to be regarded as only a temporary hack until cablecard bugs are worked out?


Absolutely not. I don't agree it is a temporary hack. PSIP channel maps are not going away, neither should automatic QAM mapping based on PSIP virtual channel maps.

The feature would potentially be useful to anyone who is in a cable market that provides useful PSIP channel maps. That is 45% of respondents in the poll at the time the poll was taken. If people complain to the FCC or "corporate" for large cable companies adjust their policy across their footprint, those numbers could increase.

The feature could be useful to anyone who records HD locals.

If the user must have the ability to record encrypted channels on all their TiVos, then this feature is useless. If the user must record expanded basic digital simulcast channels on every TiVo then this feature is useless because expanded basic digital simulcast channels are almost always encrypted, except in rare cases.

If on the other hand, the user has no need to record encrypted channels and only cares about HD locals, then this feature could be useful. I would say this feature is most useful for people who either only care about HD locals or segment their recording so they have dedicated units only recording HD locals. The user who only had limited basic cable service would be the most obvious beneficiary however...

Even in a household where the user has some units using CableCARD, this feature could be useful. Because of MRV, that user may choose to offload recording of programming from HD locals to dedicated unit(s) which do not require CableCARD because they are only recording unencrypted HD locals. Using MRV, these recordings would be available to any TiVo S3/HD in the home. This would be similar to the situation where the user only has 1 or 2 cable boxes which can get digital cable, but they still use cable-ready TVs in the rest of the house to get the under 99 channels, except with MRV, it is even more useful because the programming recorded is available anywhere in the home.


----------



## sfhub

w/r/t various posts that say fixing CableCARDs is the answer, I don't agree.

I would agree that CableCARD users are currently a very high percentage of the TiVo S3/HD users so any CableCARD problem under TiVo control should get priority.

However, saying CableCARD is the answer, I can't agree with because CableCARD just comes with too much baggage. CableCARDs should be the answer if you must record encrypted channels, because they are the only answer.

If you don't need to record encrypted channels, CableCARDs can be an answer, but a just as useful, if not more useful answer is to not use them. The only reason we are forced to use CableCARDs if we only care about recording unencrypted HD locals is the channel maps happen to be tacked on to CableCARD functionality.

We are proposing alternate ways to provide the channel map, w/o the need for CableCARDs and the baggage they carry. We just want the "cable-ready" Plug and Play VCR model w/r/t HD locals that are not encrypted and for which useful PSIP channel maps have been provided.


----------



## TiVo Troll

TT said:


> Sounds like a plausible explanation. Do you therefore believe that the OTA channel number is an actual frequency used by Comcast and not a virtual number? Why does S3 indicate good signals but no programs on the actual frequencies that I know Comcast uses for those channels?





sfhub said:


> What I'm saying is the S3 OTA input understands "french" and the S3 cable input understands "english". Either one can use physical or virtual channel #s, but they are meaningless to each other.


Yes; I agree. But I'm still curious about the two questions I asked. Does anybody have a clue?


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> Thanks, but I'm not sure what you're asking or what you think is an opinion. Is it the "support for manual recording of clear QAM"? This is hardly opinion; I first learned of it in Megazone's early S3 review (he had the ear of the TiVo apps guys when he wrote it):


While it's allowed, TiVo does not '*support*' manual recording from clear QAM channels. 'Support' is a legal term.

Your last statement in *Post 326* is of now an unproven opinion: 
_"As long as TiVo supports manual recording of clear-QAM channels, there is little additional support cost in allowing those same users to associate guide data for them."_



> From *Megazone's FAQ*: *Does the S3 support unencrypted digital cable channels, aka QAM in-the-clear, without a CableCARD?*
> Partially. Clear QAM channels can be tuned directly by entering the correct channel number. Recordings can be scheduled by time and channel. There is no guide data for digital cable channels without CableCARD, and hence no Season Passes or Wish Lists are possible. There is currently no way to manually map channels. TiVo is looking into the possibility to provide mapping in the future.





Saxion said:


> This is common knowledge. Lots of people are using this feature today (myself included). TiVo acknowledged at the time that they were considering expanding clear QAM support to include mapping to guide data. This is not a new concept here...


The second quote is from S3/HDTiVo FAQ at Megazone's site, about 1/3 down the page. It ain't mine.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> The way the OT comment was integrated into your post spurred on additional confusion because it made others think you were saying QAM mapping is equated to getting service you aren't paying for.


As I stated earlier, it appears I hit a sensitive nerve! BTW, I just asked a question in *post 320*: 
_"Do some hi-def Limited Basic TiVo users basically (snicker!) want non-CC QAM mapping so as to retain analog Expanded Basic service that they get w/o paying due to cable co. oversight?"_



> I feel CC issues under TiVo's control should have priority over QAM mapping (either automatic or manual). However, I don't see why CC issues outside of TiVo's direct influence, like poorly trained customer service people, sales people convincing you to go with cable DVR instead of TiVo, provisioning problems because the back-end people don't know how to pair properly, etc. should delay QAM mapping *if TiVo were to decide they wanted to address it.*


Ah, those darned 10 last words!



> The automatic QAM mapping proposal isn't actually a completely parallel system built from scratch. The system is already in place for OTA mapping and the cable side is already capable of reading the PSIP and understanding the virtual maps, same as the OTA side.. For the automatic QAM mapping proposal we are mostly talking about the final step of merging guide data. There is a proof of concept already in place for TW Austin.


But in *post 319* you stated that TW Austin did the mapping, not TiVo.


----------



## BobCamp1

After reading all of this, I think Tivo has this as a low prioirty on their "things to do" list. A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.

Someone who just wants to record HD locals will just rent the el cheapo cable DVR at $10/month.

With the launch of the HD, the DVR price went down to $250, so now there is more of a business case for this feature. But $250 is still a lot of money -- Tivo could make the same arguement that it expects all of its HD customers to use CableCards.

Also, this PSIP/EPG data is currently available in less than half of the markets. So a low priority item just got even lower. I don't think it's a dumb idea anymore, but it's going to be a long time before you see it (maybe s/w release 11.x).


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> Absolutely not. I don't agree it is a temporary hack. PSIP channel maps are not going away, neither should automatic QAM mapping based on PSIP virtual channel maps.


I'm fine with your answer; I just hadn't encountered proponents stating it was a "temporary hack" before and I just wanted to check. I view QAM mapping as a legitimate need. But it's a medium-term important need for only a small number of folks, IMO. (And as bmgoodman points out, in the short term it would be useful for more folks).

I do question whether it will be useful long-term (4+ years) as the cable companies get rid of analog cable and require a box or cablecard for all viewing. But I don't think anybody knows what will be done then, and I don't think it affects the current discussion much at all.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> Burying in menus, SPS enabled, or asking me to agree ten times not to call TiVo about this feature is fine.
> 
> Personally I just want some way to merge the OTA guide when I select cable input.


I agree it's fine for you. You've never been the problem!

The problem is all of the other folks out there who do not live in a rock-solid PSIP world, and do not know anything at all about PSIP. Those are the ones who will be causing the support problems, not you.

Again, I ask you: if this is a buried unadvertised feature, how do you possibly expect TiVo to sell enough new units/subs (that would not have been sold if this buried feature had not been there) to make it worth their while to offer it?


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> When the CableCARD starts up it downloads a mapping table that essentially says 702=78.1, 705=78.2, 707=118.1, etc.
> 
> The CableCARD channel maps goes from the CableCARD to TiVo, where TiVo imports into their own data structures. When you select 702, TiVo looks at its table and finds the underlying RF channel.
> 
> That information could be sent to TiVo servers by units which use CableCARD and downloaded by units which don't use CableCARD.
> 
> The CableCARD channel map uploads to TiVo server to be downloaded by non-CableCARD users is actually simpler than the PSIP channel maps because PSIP maps are inline data, so you see the changes when you tune the channel, thus the rescans. The CableCARD channel map is downloaded as a complete table of the mappings.
> 
> On your other topic of channels moving around (which isn't an issue for the above solution, because the maps will automtically be updated)
> 
> These QAM channels do change assignments over time, but it isn't like they are changing every hour. That is SDV-world.
> 
> My QAM channels have stayed on the same frequency for months, sometimes years. If they do change, 90% of the time it isn't to a brand new major #, rather the minor # changes. In that case, my TV has always been able to transparently find the new minor # w/o need for any new rescan, so I imagine TiVo can too.
> 
> It is only when the major # changes to something completely different that a new scan is needed. That happens far less often.


All this is fine for you, but we've established that your situation is not typical. What happens when you apply these algorithms to places who can't even tune the channels in question? I'm not sure I see things are automatic here; I think the user still has to say what channels they want information for. This only helps track changes, which can be automatically done.

I'm not sure why you claim that changing assignments is not a problem. Yes, it will eventually be picked up, but recordings will be missed before then.

I'm also not sure how wide-spread the cable mappings are. Are they guaranteed to be system wide, especially in a system that is gradually upgrading as many systems are? I would think at best you can count on them being the same on the same head-end. Too many franchises are formed from joining two or more other franchises and have different hardware on different front ends (eg, see discussions on the Comcast TiVo delays). I don't see any way for TiVo to track head-ends.

And the privacy policy is a definite obstacle (more in another message).


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Again, I ask you: if this is a buried unadvertised feature, how do you possibly expect TiVo to sell enough new units/subs (that would not have been sold if this buried feature had not been there) to make it worth their while to offer it?


How many people buy tivo because of 30-second skip? How many people bought S3's when kickstart 62 was revealed? How many people buy lower model units when it is revealed they can upgrade the drive themselves? How many people call TiVo support about these undocumented areas?


----------



## CrispyCritter

Luke M said:


> It's not a privacy issue (and I wouldn't describe Tivo's privacy policy as "strict"...it's quite lax, IMHO). So CBS maps to RF channel 84-1 on a particular cable system. How is that a privacy issue?


TiVo is extremely specific about what information goes from your TiVo to them. Everything is itemized and categorized (check their privacy policy - there's a link to it on the TiVo main page (bottom left corner). There isn't anything there that says they can download the channel maps, so they can't do it without changing the policy.

I don't know if there are any issues about the channel maps. I do know there are issues about downloading cablecard info in general. That would never be allowed (without permission). But can the channel maps be downloaded without ever containing enough info to identify the source? I'm not sure - it certainly is enough info to identify some individual apartment buildings, which is a far more precise identification than the zip code that TiVo currently uses for anonymous info.

Why do you say it the privacy policy is lax? TiVo has spent a lot more time on their privacy issues than almost any other company. It really is a pain at times (on-line scheduling is terrible because of it for example), but it's necessary.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> All this is fine for you, but we've established that your situation is not typical. What happens when you apply these algorithms to places who can't even tune the channels in question? I'm not sure I see things are automatic here;
> ...
> I'm not sure why you claim that changing assignments is not a problem. Yes, it will eventually be picked up, but recordings will be missed before then.


Umm, I think we have established that 45% of the respondents are in cable markets that are similar to mine and provide useful PSIP channel maps.

You asked the general question to other people on this thread whether we agreed with the post you quoted and I responded with how I personally feel. I don't presume to speak for others, but you seem to use that to isolate my opinions as only applicable for my own personal situation when there are others in the same situation.

On the other hand, it seems you are using your opinion to apply to many more people than yourself.

The reason channel movements can be dealt with automatically when you have useful PSIP channel maps are:
1) if the minor number changes, but not the major, TiVo can figure that out automatically when the channel is tuned. My and other TVs do this automatically.
2) to account for major number changes tivo just needs to perform a scan when the unit is not busy anywhere between 6am and primetime. Cable companies do their channel changes in the early morning when very few people are watching because they don't want any troubles with the CableCARDs not getting the channel map changes downloaded to them.

In my area, channel movement of type #2 is very rare and hasn't happened for HD locals in over a year, so while it can happen, I think it is overblown how frequent it happens. Movement of type #1 I think are more frequent but TiVo can handle those at record time because it is inline to the same major channel it is tuning thus no searching on other channels is required.

BTW TiVo misses shows for various reasons. That is the bulk of the content in the Season Pass alert forum. There are ways TiVo can improve the Season Pass mechanism to minimize the missing shows even more but I don't see them spending the time to do so. That must mean missing shows occasionally does not rise to the level of burden on support to make them need to address it.

Also I've never personally ever though to call TiVo if a show wasn't recorded. I just look at the recording history to see why it didn't. Where are you getting your data that this is such an issue for support. Given the mechanisms mentioned above I would expect missing shows is a very rare occurrence.

TiVo doesn't record purely based on channel #. It actually does correlation based on channel identifier names. That is whey when you switch from OTA to cable, many of your season passes continue to work even though the channel # changes. Similar if the cable company decides to reorder the channels. Season Passes continue to work unless they change the name of the channel. For areas with useful PSIP, they often include both the virtual channel map as well as the textual channel identifier. This gives even more ways for TiVo to match things up.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> TiVo is extremely specific about what information goes from your TiVo to them.


Just a clarification, this is a separate discussion on the new idea of using channel maps from folks who have CableCARDs in your area, to populate channel maps of people who don't have CableCARDs in the same area.

Go to zap2it.com, type a zip code, get the list of channels, attach a QAM frequency to each channel.

Could you explain the privacy issues? I'm not getting it. They don't need to attach this to your name. On the other hand knowing which commercials I skip, which shows I record, which ones I watch, that could be considered private information.

If there are multiple channel maps (uploaded from CableCARD channel maps) for your zip code available, compare the textual channel identifiers available in the PSIP (assuming 45% respondent's useful PSIP channel map info) to see which channel map makes sense and automatically use that one.


----------



## bmgoodman

BobCamp1 said:


> A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.
> 
> Someone who just wants to record HD locals will just rent the el cheapo cable DVR at $10/month.


FWIW, I am the customer who doesn't exist in your world. I spent $600 on a Series 3 and I'm perfectly happy recording from the 6 or 7 HD channels I get free with my "limited basic" package. At present, I am not interested in spending another $18/mo. If I recorded everything in HD, I'd also need more disk space.


----------



## Luke M

CrispyCritter said:


> Why do you say it the privacy policy is lax? TiVo has spent a lot more time on their privacy issues than almost any other company. It really is a pain at times (on-line scheduling is terrible because of it for example), but it's necessary.


Last time I checked Tivo was recording every user action. That is the absolute lowest level of privacy possible. As for what Tivo is currently promising to do or not do with the information they collect - I consider that irrelevant. A "privacy policy" is what you have when you don't have privacy.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Yes; I agree. But I'm still curious about the two questions I asked. Does anybody have a clue?


I can tell you exactly whether a particular channel is a virtual channel or a real channel. The problem with answering your question is whether we know the answer, it is that you have phrased the question where it cannot be answered without asking further questions. It isn't an all or nothing answer, it depends on the particular channel you are using as an example.

For the OTA #s, some could be physical channels, some could be virtual channels. Same with the Cable #s. For example in OTA 2.1 is almost definitely a virtual channel. 69.1 could be virtual or physical. I would tend to say physical channel #, but there are more questions we could ask to determine that particular case.

So when you see an OTA channel 2.1 that is a virtual channel for your ease of use. The physical channel might be something like UHF 35 using 8VSB modulation.

Now when you are using cable, it may also have a 2.1 channel available. That is almost definitely a virtual channel map as well. The physical channel might be cable channel 113 using QAM modulation.

So to answer your question 2.1, the virtual channel map, may look the same under OTA and under cable, but the physical channels they map to are almost definitely different frequencies and using different modulation.

For the purposes of guide data, you can find the proper guide data by using the 2.1 virtual channel #. For the purposes of tuning, you need to actual physical RF channel.

If you'd like to detail the specific case of what you encountered, we can figure out what was happening.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> But in *post 319* you stated that TW Austin did the mapping, not TiVo.


Of course TW Austin did the PSIP channel maps.

What made the whole thing work is somebody convinced TiVo side via tribune to include the guide data for digital cable even if you didn't have CableCARDs installed.

That is all people who want the automatic QAM mapping are asking. For 35% of the people, make the OTA guide data available to be merged into the guide for people who choose cable. For 10% of the people, just make the digital cable channels guide data available even if you don't have CableCARDs.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.
> 
> Someone who just wants to record HD locals will just rent the el cheapo cable DVR at $10/month.


Why not? If I can get a TiVo S3/HD and connect without CableCARDs, I can offload all the recordings I want from HD locals (NBC, CBS, FOX, ABC, CW) onto the CableCARD-less unit and free up my CableCARD unit to record just the encrypted shows. I don't need to deal with CableCARD install, billing, etc. issues and I can watch the shows using MRV.

If I get the cheapo cable DVR it can actually cost significantly more than $10/mo. First, the base charge is $14/mo in my area. Second you are forced into getting digital cable package, which often forces you to get expanded basic. So your $10/mo DVR is now more like $40-$50/mo.

2nd problem with the el cheapo DVR is you can't use it with MRV to your existing TiVo S3/HD. Whereas every TiVo S3/HD you add makes all the recorded programming available to any TiVo S3/HD in the house, you don't get that with the el cheapo cable DVR. Thus there is more value in a CableCARD-less TiVo S3/HD because of MRV connects it to all your existing TiVos and the CabelCARD-less TiVo can playback recordings recorded on your CableCARD TiVo S3/HDs.


----------



## Luke M

BobCamp1 said:


> With the launch of the HD, the DVR price went down to $250, so now there is more of a business case for this feature. But $250 is still a lot of money -- Tivo could make the same arguement that it expects all of its HD customers to use CableCards.


There was a thread recently about using S3s with antenna only - I was surprised by the number of people who responded. Even though the TivoHD is kind of pricey, it doesn't mean that everyone is subscribed to a deluxe cable package.

When many TV makers included a CableCard feature, very few consumers used it. (Hence later models mostly dropped the feature). Why wasn't it used? Part of the answer, I think, is that most of the good HD content was (is) available unencrypted.


----------



## sfhub

Luke M said:


> When many TV makers included a CableCard feature, very few consumers used it. (Hence later models mostly dropped the feature). Why wasn't it used? Part of the answer, I think, is that most of the good HD content was (is) available unencrypted.


Another part of the answer is people didn't want to pay more money just to watch live HD content which they can already get using the STB included with their cable package. People also don't feel like paying money to record HD content, but the value of recording is enough that they can justify paying for the CabelCARDs since that is pretty much the only way TiVo can record reasonably well for digital cable.


----------



## jaguaraja

couldn't tivo just copy the guide data from the respective SD channel?

In other words, could tivo just copy the guide data from SD channel 2 for HD channel 2.1?

4 for 4.1...etc?


----------



## mattack

BobCamp1 said:


> After reading all of this, I think Tivo has this as a low prioirty on their "things to do" list. A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.


I agree that it's a low (if not zero) priority. But I am another one of the users you talk about. I have a S3 and a Tivo HD, both of which I bought because of 'lifetime transfer' offers.. and currently I'm using them only for analog cable.. Largely because I don't want to pay for cable cards. I hope to try a better antenna at some point (I've tried rabbit ears but wasn't able to get things, we no longer have an antenna on the roof.)

I very rarely do a manual recording from a QAM channel.. But with QAM remapping, I'd probably record from the HD stations a lot more, and then expand my hard drives because the recordings take up so much space. So Tivo is holding back the trickle down of my money to the hard drive vendors because of the lack of QAM remapping.. heh heh..


----------



## mattack

I possibly suggested this way way earlier in the thread...

Has anyone actually tried to hack the 'lineup' data in their Tivos to accomplish this?

For example, standalone Tivos do not support "cable and cable box". There is/was a hack a long time ago where someone wrote scripts to essentially duplicate the setup information on the Tivo, so the user could have both analog and digital setups... and the Tivo would only use the box for the channels that required the box.

Seems to me that a very similar hack could be done to add the 'remapping' into the Tivo's notion of the current lineup. I realize that's a lot of handwaving, but I was hoping someone here had actually looked at some of the Tivo setup internals.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> I possibly suggested this way way earlier in the thread...
> 
> Has anyone actually tried to hack the 'lineup' data in their Tivos to accomplish this?
> 
> For example, standalone Tivos do not support "cable and cable box". There is/was a hack a long time ago where someone wrote scripts to essentially duplicate the setup information on the Tivo, so the user could have both analog and digital setups... and the Tivo would only use the box for the channels that required the box.
> 
> Seems to me that a very similar hack could be done to add the 'remapping' into the Tivo's notion of the current lineup. I realize that's a lot of handwaving, but I was hoping someone here had actually looked at some of the Tivo setup internals.


Someone did try but it wasn't clear what the technique or outcome was as there were no further updates in that thread. He had asked people to send images that he would test his changes on. Basically it doesn't rule out or rule in what you are suggesting, just that someone did try something similar with unclear results.


----------



## Saxion

TiVo Troll said:


> While it's allowed, TiVo does not '*support*' manual recording from clear QAM channels.


That's _your opinion_, and an unproven one that I completely disagree with. TiVo had marketing, engineering and test teams all expend resources to add the following features: 1) Run a channel scan to pick up all Clear-QAM channels, 2) Decode the PSIP data to provide channel numbering, 3) Show those channels in the Guide, 4) Allow those channels to be selected in the Manual Recording screen, and 5) Automatically tune to those channels and record them when specified. And they did all of this in up-front menus; no secret codes or anything hidden. Personally, I think it is patently ridiculous to claim TiVo doesn't support this easily verifiable, completely unhidden, widely-used feature set. Oh, and when there was a problem with these Manual Recordings in a recent firmware release, the TiVo support center took my call, assigned a case number, and fixed it the next release. _That_ is support.


TiVo Troll said:


> The second quote is from S3/HDTiVo FAQ at Megazone's site, about 1/3 down the page. It ain't mine.


Sorry, I did not mean to imply otherwise; that's what the colon was for that preceded the quote. I've updated my post to make this more clear.


----------



## Saxion

CrispyCritter said:


> I do question whether it will be useful long-term (4+ years) as the cable companies get rid of analog cable and require a box or cablecard for all viewing.


Legally, that can never happen. Clear QAM channels will always be available. Pesky FCC regulations, you know.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Saxion said:


> Legally, that can never happen. Clear QAM channels will always be available. Pesky FCC regulations, you know.


The regulations are not nearly as straightforward as you imply. For example, I would claim you can't prove to me that a cable company must currently offer all OTA broadcasts in an area in HD. If they offer it, it has to be unencrypted, that's clear, but they don't have to offer it. The rules are ambiguous. In addition, a local station can forbid them from offering it unless the cable company pays them money. The must carry rules are also affected by competition (I've forgotten the buzz word). Lots of loopholes.

The cable world and regulations are rapidly changing. In 4 years, the requirements that cable companies support analog TVs will go away. I'm not sure what will replace them, but unless the FCC insists, I'm sure the cable companies will be trying to exert much more control over additional outlets than they do now.


----------



## dallasdoug

BobCamp1 said:


> After reading all of this, I think Tivo has this as a low prioirty on their "things to do" list. A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.
> 
> Someone who just wants to record HD locals will just rent the el cheapo cable DVR at $10/month.
> 
> With the launch of the HD, the DVR price went down to $250, so now there is more of a business case for this feature. But $250 is still a lot of money -- Tivo could make the same arguement that it expects all of its HD customers to use CableCards.
> 
> Also, this PSIP/EPG data is currently available in less than half of the markets. So a low priority item just got even lower. I don't think it's a dumb idea anymore, but it's going to be a long time before you see it (maybe s/w release 11.x).


Just wanted to chime in, and say I am one of the people you think does not exist.

Well, the truth is I only spent $300 on a HD Tivo, but I currently only have basic cable and cable modem service through Time Warner.

I don't watch a whole lot of TV, but my wife watches more than I do. The thing is, all the stuff she likes to watch is on, at most, expanded basic cable. She doesn't care about HD, and I don't care about anything but whats on the locals in HD.

So why should I pay Time Warner some ridiculous fee just to have the ability to tune all of the channels I pay for? I am able to receive and manually record HD channels at the moment. But it would be nice if I could simply associated the guide data of the SD channels with that of the HD.

This is a very simply programming job, the problem is, Tivo would have to release it as a perpetual beta feature if they wanted it to be that simple, because QAM channels change all the time, as I have found. Heck, different TV's tune them on different channels in my house. The thing is, I don't think Tivo wants to go down that road. It's not difficulty of implementing a simple feature like that, it's the implications for their standard of quality.

But anyway, I currently pay under $70 a month for regular cable, and internet. To get a cable card, I will be required to increase that cost by at least $30 a month, and thats just to get the same exact thing I have now in essence. And if I want all the HD's to make the cable card worth it in any way shape or form, thats another $10, not to mention the cable card charge and now more tax.

So now I go from a reasonable bill to a ridiculous bill north of $100 all just so I can get guide information for a few channels.

I have done that before with comcast, where my bill was something like $140 a month, never again. I have the money to pay for it, I just don't want to.

Even at $70 a month I feel ripped off. My service goes down frequently, the customer service people have the intellect of a rock, and their service technicians are terrible.

Above all else, the though of needing to allow one of their "technicians" in my house gives me the willies. Last time I let one in, he was about to start drilling a hole through my brick to bring a cable into the other room. Time warner never told me that their "outlet install" did not mean wiring properly in the attic/walls, but just drilling a hole in my freaking house. I promptly told him NO! And ran the cable myself properly.

It really irks me, that something like cable card requires one of those fools to come out. Not only do I have a much better idea on what is going on, but I could have the thing installed in 1/10th the time they could. Give me the damn card, ill call you and have you activate it, and maybe then I might be inclined to give you $30 a month.

But no, you give me terrible service, send out morons that haven't the foggiest clue what is going on, try to destroy my house, force me to wait around my house during a 5 hour window of time for a technician, and expect me to pay you more money and like it? I don't think so.


----------



## rainwater

jaguaraja said:


> couldn't tivo just copy the guide data from the respective SD channel?
> 
> In other words, could tivo just copy the guide data from SD channel 2 for HD channel 2.1?
> 
> 4 for 4.1...etc?


No. For one, none of the HD shows would have the correct HD tag so searches and wishlists wouldn't work correctly. And you can't assume both channels will have the exact same programming all the time either.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Luke M said:


> Last time I checked Tivo was recording every user action. That is the absolute lowest level of privacy possible. As for what Tivo is currently promising to do or not do with the information they collect - I consider that irrelevant. A "privacy policy" is what you have when you don't have privacy.


I see. I think this establishes that you have a very unique view of privacy in the modern world. But this is not the thread to debate it.

I stand by my statement: TiVo needs to change their privacy policy in order to collect channel maps from every TiVo with cable cards.


----------



## dallasdoug

rainwater said:


> No. For one, none of the HD shows would have the correct HD tag so searches and wishlists wouldn't work correctly. And you can't assume both channels will have the exact same programming all the time either.


Here is where I see the problem. This would work most of the time, but because it isn't going to work 100% of the time, tivo wont do it. Surely people like us could deal with the issues just to have the feature, but that is not how it's going to go down.


----------



## rainwater

dallasdoug said:


> Here is where I see the problem. This would work most of the time, but because it isn't going to work 100% of the time, tivo wont do it. Surely people like us could deal with the issues just to have the feature, but that is not how it's going to go down.


Uh, if TiVo is going to use guide data, they would just use the guide data for the digital channel not the SD channel.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> CrispyCritter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I ask you: if this is a buried unadvertised feature, how do you possibly expect TiVo to sell enough new units/subs (that would not have been sold if this buried feature had not been there) to make it worth their while to offer it?
> 
> 
> 
> How many people buy tivo because of 30-second skip? How many people bought S3's when kickstart 62 was revealed? How many people buy lower model units when it is revealed they can upgrade the drive themselves? How many people call TiVo support about these undocumented areas?
Click to expand...

None of this answers my question. I'll rephrase it yet again:
Do you, sfhub, believe that TiVo will sell enough extra units/subs, that they would not have sold otherwise, to recoup the costs of development, testing, and support, assuming that this is an unadvertised, unsupported feature?

None of your examples are at all equivalent to what you've been proposing for QAM mapping/guide data. Even fully supported e-sata is much less of a burden than your proposals, as an example of a feature that does sell TiVos. Just maintaining a database from every TiVo of cablemaps, that is updated and downloadable in real time is a very major undertaking!


----------



## jcthorne

BobCamp1 said:


> After reading all of this, I think Tivo has this as a low prioirty on their "things to do" list. A customer wouldn't spend $600 on a DVR and $10/month for Tivo service just to record three or four channels in HD. They'd fork over the other $8/month for CableCards plus $10/month for HD content so they could receive and record ALL the HD channels.
> 
> Someone who just wants to record HD locals will just rent the el cheapo cable DVR at $10/month.
> 
> With the launch of the HD, the DVR price went down to $250, so now there is more of a business case for this feature. But $250 is still a lot of money -- Tivo could make the same arguement that it expects all of its HD customers to use CableCards.
> 
> Also, this PSIP/EPG data is currently available in less than half of the markets. So a low priority item just got even lower. I don't think it's a dumb idea anymore, but it's going to be a long time before you see it (maybe s/w release 11.x).


You have missed the point. In many markets, Cable Cards are NOT free or just a couple bucks a month. In Houston, a pair of cable cards added to my account is WELL over $50 a month. My basic cable subscription already includes 95% of all the HDTV I ever watched when I had a premium digital cable subscription. It just is not worth that $50 a month for the one or two minor shows I miss (which are available from the internet and can be downloaded to the Tivo anyway).

BUT, in order to use the CATV channels I am paying for, Tivo needs to allow some way of associating guide data with them.

The same is true for the Comcast DVR. Its not $10 a month. It is well over $50 a month upcharge from basic cable as much of its real cost is burried in the premium cable packages. Perhaps someday when the FCC enforces alacarte pricing for CATV, this will clear up and the consumer will actually understand what they are paying for.

Tivo allowed me to see the value I was getting for my programming dollar (or lack thereof) and I refuse to go back to paying for programming I do not want or watch just to get guide data that I AM paying for.


----------



## TiVo Troll

sfhub said:


> I can tell you exactly whether a particular channel is a virtual channel or a real channel. The problem with answering your question is whether we know the answer, it is that you have phrased the question where it cannot be answered without asking further questions. It isn't an all or nothing answer, it depends on the particular channel you are using as an example.
> 
> For the OTA #s, some could be physical channels, some could be virtual channels. Same with the Cable #s. For example in OTA 2.1 is almost definitely a virtual channel. 69.1 could be virtual or physical. I would tend to say physical channel #, but there are more questions we could ask to determine that particular case.
> 
> So when you see an OTA channel 2.1 that is a virtual channel for your ease of use. The physical channel might be something like UHF 35 using 8VSB modulation.
> 
> Now when you are using cable, it may also have a 2.1 channel available. That is almost definitely a virtual channel map as well. The physical channel might be cable channel 113 using QAM modulation.
> 
> So to answer your question 2.1, the virtual channel map, may look the same under OTA and under cable, but the physical channels they map to are almost definitely different frequencies and using different modulation.
> 
> For the purposes of guide data, you can find the proper guide data by using the 2.1 virtual channel #. For the purposes of tuning, you need to actual physical RF channel.
> 
> If you'd like to detail the specific case of what you encountered, we can figure out what was happening.


Thanks for at least replying. It's truly a complex issue.

OT: TiVo users are fortunate in many ways!

I've got another hi-def DVR (not Sony's) which has gotta' be the worst DVR ever made. Its almost fatal quirk is that in order to access the EPG, TVGOS, its clock has to be very close to right on, and the only way to set its clock is (you guessed it!) through TVGOS. If it wasn't for hacker fans discovering the factory reset code, all would be lost. But its not that simple; the factory reset code defaults to OTA so in order to get TVGOS to reset the clock the cable coax must first be switched to the antenna input. Then there's a hard reboot involved. (The damned DVR has fans because its the only hi-def DVR with 2 standard-def line inputs. It only receives clear QAM channels but TVGOS permits manual mapping.)

I've finally got it almost tamed (still gotta' wrassle with angles after power outages) but only use it as a hi-def tuner, not DVR, sending signals downrezzed to anamorphic 480i to a DVD recorder. I bring it up in this post because PBS's Seattle channel KCTS offers 4 digital programs, 3 standard-def and 1 hi-def (IMHO the neatest hi-def channel available!!!!) Now, precisely on the hour, but not every hour, this strangely twilight-zoned DVR changes the program being received on KCTS's clear QAM ch. 82-5 from KCTS-HD to KCTS new Spanish language channel V-Me which actually is on clear QAM 82-2. The channel doesn't change, just the program. In order to get KCTS-HD back I've gotta' tune away from and then back to 82-5. Needless to say this screws up any DVD recording scheduled!


----------



## TiVo Troll

Saxion said:


> (Your definition of support is) _your opinion_, and an unproven one that I completely disagree with. TiVo had marketing, engineering and test teams all expend resources to add the following features: 1) Run a channel scan to pick up all Clear-QAM channels, 2) Decode the PSIP data to provide channel numbering, 3) Show those channels in the Guide, 4) Allow those channels to be selected in the Manual Recording screen, and 5) Automatically tune to those channels and record them when specified. And they did all of this in up-front menus; no secret codes or anything hidden. Personally, I think it is patently ridiculous to claim TiVo doesn't support this easily verifiable, completely unhidden, widely-used feature set. Oh, and when there was a problem with these Manual Recordings in a recent firmware release, the TiVo support center took my call, assigned a case number, and fixed it the next release. _That_ is support.


Posters to this thread, on both sides, have repeatedly stated their positions, opinions, and thoughts. Posts have been getting longer and longer, often covering the same ground over and over and frankly getting boring.

For me, the issue has parallels to the *FSI* situation, about which, AFAIK, a TiVo rep. never posted in these Forums. (???)

Perhaps one will here; we'll see!

In the meantime I'll read but (hopefully) (at least try to) refrain from routine posting in this thread unless something new happens.


----------



## BobCamp1

Luke M said:


> There was a thread recently about using S3s with antenna only - I was surprised by the number of people who responded. Even though the TivoHD is kind of pricey, it doesn't mean that everyone is subscribed to a deluxe cable package.
> 
> When many TV makers included a CableCard feature, very few consumers used it. (Hence later models mostly dropped the feature). Why wasn't it used? Part of the answer, I think, is that most of the good HD content was (is) available unencrypted.


Or, CableCards were difficult to use and everyone already had a cable box anyway.

In the beginning, the only HD content available was network TV and HBO. That's changed. Your cable company is gearing up to have over 100 HD channels. You bought a $1500 HDTV. Maybe you also bought a sound system to go with it. You bought a pricey DVR. You pay at least $10/month just for guide data for the DVR. And now you're too cheap to pay $6/month for CableCards and maybe $10/month for the other 95 HD channels? To each his own, I guess. It's like buying a $200,000 sports car and using it to commute to work, but never driving it over 30 mph.

Finally, my cable system has SDV. It looks like some of the locals are on SDV. They are unencrypted and QAM (i.e. FCC is happy), but the actual channels they are on change every hour or so. Maybe the new SDV box will make life easier. Hey, does the new SDV box require CableCards? If not, then there's your solution assuming the cable company puts all of the locals on SDV.

I still think this is a very small consumer base that will continue to shrink as time passes by. I think Tivo is just waiting for the problem to go away. If it hasn't gone away in a year or two, then maybe it will do something.


----------



## BobCamp1

jcthorne said:


> You have missed the point. In many markets, Cable Cards are NOT free or just a couple bucks a month. In Houston, a pair of cable cards added to my account is WELL over $50 a month. My basic cable subscription already includes 95% of all the HDTV I ever watched when I had a premium digital cable subscription. It just is not worth that $50 a month for the one or two minor shows I miss (which are available from the internet and can be downloaded to the Tivo anyway).


I assume this is the new math. Basically, to get CableCards, you have to first subscribe to the HD digital tier, which is the bulk of this price increase. Mainly because most people who want CableCards are using them to plug into their HD equipment. They have HD equipment because they want to watch HD content. So your cable co. doesn't bother creating something in billing separating the two. Not great, but understandable. And not Tivo's problem.

Why don't you download ALL your HD shows from the Internet? Then you don't need an HD DVR at all. You could use an S2 (-$20) or a DVD recorder to record the SD content. Or ditch your $45/month high-speed Internet connection to save some money.

I'm just saying that people who buy Tivos are generally making quite a bit of money. Sure, there are a few people who save money by buying an expsensive DVR to record 4 HD channels. The customer is always right. But this market is small. Which is why QAM mapping is low on the priority list.

When I was involved with cell phones, we got a call 8 months after the phone was released (that's 4 years in "regular" product years). Someone complained that they couldn't use a pre-paid SIM card in their $1000 phone. We added it to the list, but it was way down on the list. As the program was wrapping up, we did fix the problem because we knew that today's $1000 phone would be $300 next year, so it would enter the market where pre-paid SIM cards might be used. But we didn't get right on it, and the market for it was obviously small since it was the only complaint we got.

I used to think this was a dumb idea, but there are a few people who would really like this feature, so I changed my mind. But Tivo has its hands full with the SDV box and all the other issues. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> None of this answers my question. I'll rephrase it yet again:
> Do you, sfhub, believe that TiVo will sell enough extra units/subs, that they would not have sold otherwise, to recoup the costs of development, testing, and support, assuming that this is an unadvertised, unsupported feature?
> 
> None of your examples are at all equivalent to what you've been proposing for QAM mapping/guide data. Even fully supported e-sata is much less of a burden than your proposals, as an example of a feature that does sell TiVos. Just maintaining a database from every TiVo of cablemaps, that is updated and downloadable in real time is a very major undertaking!


Actually it directly answers your question. It seems you didn't phrase your question correctly to get the answer you wanted. You asked


> if this is a buried unadvertised feature, how do you possibly expect TiVo to sell enough new units/subs (that would not have been sold if this buried feature had not been there) to make it worth their while to offer it?


Basically how can a buried unadvertised feature sell enough units to be worthwhile. I simply pointed out buried unadvertised features which do result in sales. The act of hiding it will not, in and of itself, prevent the feature from selling units.

You seem to now be asking whether a particular feature can result in additional sales, which is a different question. You've tacked on the unadvertised portion making it look like the same question, but it isn't.

Further you have confused the issue by shifting it towards the costs associated with an "out-of-the-box" idea presented by Luke M, trying to emphasize this is a whole lot of new work.

While that suggestion may be, I'm suggesting making the OTA guide available to cable users, which is a much simpler suggestion.

So to answer that question, yes, I do feel allowing users to merge the OTA guide into a cable setup will result in additional sales that justify doing it, whether it is hidden or not. In the case of TW Austin it was even simpler, just have Tribune add the data to the existing non-digital cable guide.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> Finally, my cable system has SDV. It looks like some of the locals are on SDV. They are unencrypted and QAM (i.e. FCC is happy), but the actual channels they are on change every hour or so. Maybe the new SDV box will make life easier.


You mean the digital simulcast channels are in SDV?

or the HD locals?

The reason I ask is I haven't yet seen HD locals on SDV and would be interested in hearing which cable system started doing this.

digital simulcast on the other hand I've heard many areas putting on SDV.

HD locals were the premise for solutions like merging guide data.

Digital Simulcast is a whole different ballgame because they almost always don't include PSIP and could be on SDV.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> I stand by my statement: TiVo needs to change their privacy policy in order to collect channel maps from every TiVo with cable cards.


I'm still not getting it. There is no private informatin about the customer in the channel map. Everyone on the same head-end gets the same channel map regardless of which package they sign up for.


----------



## sfhub

dallasdoug said:


> Here is where I see the problem. This would work most of the time, but because it isn't going to work 100% of the time, tivo wont do it. Surely people like us could deal with the issues just to have the feature, but that is not how it's going to go down.


MRV doesn't work 100% of the time but they released it. A few folks with digital simulcast have noticed that they can't MRV those channels (on their systems) because of copy protection flags, while they could MRV the analog equivalents.

I don't believe every feature TiVo puts out needs to meet this 100% foolproof standard. It is one of many considerations, but isn't a showstopper requirement.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Sorry, sfhub, but you're just playing semantic games. And despite all your attempts at distractions, you still haven't answered the question,


sfhub said:


> Actually it directly answers your question. It seems you didn't phrase your question correctly to get the answer you wanted. You asked
> 
> Basically how can a buried unadvertised feature sell enough units to be worthwhile. I simply pointed out buried unadvertised features which do result in sales. The act of hiding it will not, in and of itself, prevent the feature from selling units.


Your restatement is wrong. I asked about one specific feature and how *YOU* expect that particular feature to sell *ENOUGH* units to make up the costs if it's unadvertised. I never denied that unadvertised features result in sales, and it's gross misrepresentation if you claim I did.

I ask you version 2 again, since you seem to like it better:
Do you, sfhub, believe that TiVo will sell enough extra units/subs, that they would not have sold otherwise, to recoup the costs of development, testing, and support, assuming that this is an unadvertised, unsupported feature?


----------



## jtown

The problem I personally have with the lack of QAM mapping is the fact that it _could_ be done. There is no technical or legal basis for the lack of remapping.

Right now, my cable bill gets split 4 ways so the fact that it's $170/month is not a huge issue. We've got the highest speed internet service available, every premium channel, and all the HD they offer. To me, that's easily worth $40something/month. However, if I was paying the entire bill, I'd really have to give some thought to what the service is really worth. The extra cost of the digital tier has a much bigger impact when you're paying 100% of the bill. I'd probably opt for slower internet access, basic cable, and a netflix account.

Basic cable is _supposed_ to include unencrypted network feeds. Which it does. In fact, they even get mapped to 2-1, 4-1, 7-1, 11-1, etc. on my S3 without cablecards. (They're in the 700s with cablecards.) One's even labeled NBC Studio Feed or something close to that. All lined up nice and neat. But there's no program data. I have program data for the OTA versions (also at 2-1, 4-1, 7-1, and 11-1). So how is it my S3 can determine where to put the cable versions in my lineup but not associate program guide data with those channels? And why the hell won't they let me make the link myself?

I suspect Tivo's being pressured by the cable companies to omit this feature for the very reason so many Tivo users want it. You basically get no HD (except OTA) unless you install cablecards. Which often means adding digital service. Which means a total price bump in the $30-50/month range. Then comes the "We can add HBO, Cinemax, and Showtime for just $10/month for the first three months." If Tivo let us link the program data to the HD network feeds provided by the cable company, quite a few people would probably be satisfied with that. No bump to digital service, no CC rental fee, no room to upsell premium channels.

I'm sure this has all been covered before in this thread but the situation hasn't changed so it's still relevant.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> I'm still not getting it. There is no private informatin about the customer in the channel map. Everyone on the same head-end gets the same channel map regardless of which package they sign up for.


I didn't claim it was "private information" (I said I didn't know if in some circumstances it could be considered private). TiVo enumerates the information it collects from the boxes in its privacy policy, and cablecard information is not listed there. That information includes things that are considered private and things that are not. If TiVo starts collecting more information (ie cablecard maps), then it has to at least list it and say what category it falls under. Cablecard maps do not fall under any of the current categories as TiVo defines them.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> So to answer that question, yes, I do feel allowing users to merge the OTA guide into a cable setup will result in additional sales that justify doing it, whether it is hidden or not. In the case of TW Austin it was even simpler, just have Tribune add the data to the existing non-digital cable guide.


Thank you for answering (my previous message was started before you edited and added your answer).

It probably will cost TiVo about 1000 subs worth of effort to implement and test this (more expensive to test than most features since it relies on understanding what most of the hundreds of cable franchises across the country are actually doing). It will cost about 1000 sub worths of effort for each person year of support (which includes training the service reps, and developing the training and managing the training and ...). So even at the low service end of an unadvertised feature, we're still talking about 1000's of additional TiVos that need to get sold. (You're welcome to quibble about my figures; I'll go into more details if you want). That's a lot of additional TiVos; I haven't seen that kind of demand here. And without advertising and support, it's not clear how word will get around to give you that kind of numbers.

All of this is ignoring all of the problems of having a service that doesn't work for half the people. If TiVo isn't advertising it, then folks certainly have no reliable way of finding out whether it works. (I would claim even if they are advertising it, and have some means of trying to target areas of reliability, it's not going to be perfect, and there are going to be upset people).

All of this is much more opinion than fact; I'm not expecting particularly for one or the other side to convince the other that their opinion is right. But at least now there are established opinions to debate over!


----------



## dallasdoug

I just did some manual recordings on the high def. Especially when it's a weekly thing, it really doesn't matter much, set it and forget it. I get TV guide so I just use that for prime time high def. Or else I just look at the SD section, and I know the mapping for all the HD equivalents, it takes me maybe 30 seconds more to setup a show. Well worth it to save $40 a month.

Here is my question though, if the OTA stuff does get guide support, wouldn't it work if you plugged your cable into the antenna side and let it search? If the mappings are the same, shouldn't it work just fine? So you just set it up with a splitter.


----------



## BobCamp1

sfhub said:


> You mean the digital simulcast channels are in SDV?
> 
> or the HD locals?


OK, played with my neighbor's system.

It looks like some of the subchannels are on SDV. I can't find one of NBC's subchannels (weather) and one of the ABC subchannels (news).

Also, there is no rhyme or reason to the assignments. I hope I got this right:

The NBC HD station is on 106.2. The ABC HD station is 106.3. 106.5 carries a subchannel of the NBC station that isn't broadcast OTA.

PBS is 107.1 - 107.4, and CBS is 107.5. CW is not broadcast in HD here, it's broadcast as a subchannel to NBC. But it looks like it's in HD on either 100.2 or 100.3.

I did find a couple of channels in 101 that should have been encrypted. SDV is on channels 88-91 for sure -- there are over 100 subchannels on 91 alone. One of those channels disappeared while I was watching it.

I'm not sure an average person can manually map this. I'm not sure **I** can manually map this.


----------



## TiVo Troll

*because it feels so good when I stop!")*



BobCamp1 said:


> Basically, to get CableCards, you have to first subscribe to the HD digital tier...


Why? (At least scream and yell about it!)

Comcast's S3 *FAQ*....*more!* (Limited Basic service includes simulcasts of OTA digital channels by law. And if Limited Basic is what's being subscribed to...)

And *more*! (BTW, there's a *trick* which permits both of S3's tuners to function when using one CC with Limited Basic Service.)


----------



## TiVo Troll

dallasdoug said:


> Here is my question though, if the OTA stuff does get guide support, wouldn't it work if you plugged your cable into the antenna side and let it search? If the mappings are the same, shouldn't it work just fine? So you just set it up with a splitter.


*Sorry*, but that isn't the way it works.

A *further explanation*.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> OK, played with my neighbor's system.
> 
> It looks like some of the subchannels are on SDV. I can't find one of NBC's subchannels (weather) and one of the ABC subchannels (news).
> 
> Also, there is no rhyme or reason to the assignments. I hope I got this right:
> 
> The NBC HD station is on 106.2. The ABC HD station is 106.3. 106.5 carries a subchannel of the NBC station that isn't broadcast OTA.
> 
> PBS is 107.1 - 107.4, and CBS is 107.5. CW is not broadcast in HD here, it's broadcast as a subchannel to NBC. But it looks like it's in HD on either 100.2 or 100.3.
> 
> I did find a couple of channels in 101 that should have been encrypted. SDV is on channels 88-91 for sure -- there are over 100 subchannels on 91 alone. One of those channels disappeared while I was watching it.
> 
> I'm not sure an average person can manually map this. I'm not sure **I** can manually map this.


Understood, the above example is the 50% respondent case when usable PSIP is not available. I'm pretty sure all the channels you listed actually have no PSIP channel map information and the numbers you are encountering are the actual RF channels.

The 45% respondent case where an automatic QAM mapping solution could be made available would have NBC virtually mapped to 4.1, CBS to 5.1, etc. (adjust to whatever they are locally for you) thus even if the underlying major # did move, it would show back up at 4.1 upon a rescan.

The channels that disappeared when you were watching them I suspect are onDemand (VOD) or SDV.


----------



## sfhub

TiVo Troll said:


> Comcast's S3 *FAQ*....*more!* (Limited Basic service includes simulcasts of OTA digital channels by law. And if Limited Basic is what's being subscribed to...)
> 
> And *more*! (BTW, there's a *trick* which permits both of S3's tuners to function when using one CC with Limited Basic Service.)


My area doesn't suffer from this problem but I believe what Bobcamp was pointing out is some areas don't allow you to get CableCARDs unless you are a digital subscriber. I think this is wrong and contradicts what Comcast corporate says, but nevertheless there are reports of this happening, and from my experience if you really want to hit a brick wall try to argue how Comcast corporate rules contradict what the CSR is telling you are the rules for your particular case.

I read the links you posted and nothing Comcast listed in those FAQs precluded them from forcing digital tier before they allow you to get CableCARDs, but I'm sure there is some other guideline or rule somewhere which says every subscriber should be able to get CableCARDs.


----------



## jcthorne

BobCamp1 said:


> I assume this is the new math. Basically, to get CableCards, you have to first subscribe to the HD digital tier, which is the bulk of this price increase. Mainly because most people who want CableCards are using them to plug into their HD equipment. They have HD equipment because they want to watch HD content. So your cable co. doesn't bother creating something in billing separating the two. Not great, but understandable. And not Tivo's problem.
> 
> Why don't you download ALL your HD shows from the Internet? Then you don't need an HD DVR at all. You could use an S2 (-$20) or a DVD recorder to record the SD content. Or ditch your $45/month high-speed Internet connection to save some money.
> 
> I'm just saying that people who buy Tivos are generally making quite a bit of money. Sure, there are a few people who save money by buying an expsensive DVR to record 4 HD channels. The customer is always right. But this market is small. Which is why QAM mapping is low on the priority list.
> 
> The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.


You still don't get it. HD IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE BASIC CABLE PACKAGE. There is very little original HD programming in the premium digital package not already included in the basic package except ESPN and I am not a sports fan on TV. There are many folks for which it makes no financial sence to pay for programming they do not watch. The problem with the packaging of the channel lineups they way they are is that few realize what they are overpaying for. I did not for years until I had Tivo show me in the Now Playing list. (about the time Comcast jumped the rates here in Houston for the third time in the same year.) There is far more than 4 HD channels on the basic package and further, better than 75% of all original HD content is on the national networks. Eliminate live sports and the ratio is even higher. For me it was better than 95%.

I will agree with your last statement. Unfortunatly, I do not think most consumers of TV programming actually know what they pay for vs what they actually use. Sat and Cable operators want it that way.


----------



## sfhub

Why CableCARDs aren't really $2/month for some people

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=377786


djfiggy said:


> Hi all,
> 
> Let me tell you, it's been a battle with Charter Cable getting my Tivo HD up and running (that's a whole seperate story), and now they are coming up with special fees to throw at me because I don't have one of their receivers! I am curious if any of you have a Series 3 or HD and are using it with Charter Cable and if so, if you are getting charged this fee as well.
> 
> The fee is called a "HD Supplement Receiver" fee and it's $5.00. Basically, I am already paying them $2 per cable card to get my cable service, in addition to another $8 a month for the "HD Tier" which is fine. But now they are charging me this $5 on top of everything. At first, by the description, I thought they were saying that I was using one of their receivers in my home, which is false as I gave the receiver back to them when I bought my Tivo. Upon going to my local office, they confirmed that I DON'T have one of their receivers, but said they HAVE to charge me this fee so that my Tivo can get the HD Channels...?
> 
> Umm...doesn't the CABLE CARD tell the tivo which channels to receive? Hmm.
> So basically, since I have the Tivo and want their HD channels, I have to pay $13 a month for it? Has anyone else heard of this mysterious fee? Sounds to me like a penalty fee for using Tivo and not paying them $15 a month to use their crappy box!


----------



## Luke M

BobCamp1 said:


> Or, CableCards were difficult to use and everyone already had a cable box anyway.


Not everyone, but people who subscribed to premium channels, yes. And people who didn't subscribe to premium channels didn't need a CableCard.



BobCamp1 said:


> I still think this is a very small consumer base that will continue to shrink as time passes by. I think Tivo is just waiting for the problem to go away. If it hasn't gone away in a year or two, then maybe it will do something.


I would expect the TivoHD to be the entry-level Tivo by then, which means a greater percentage of "low end" users who don't subscribe to encrypted channels. So the demand for better support of unencrypted QAM can only increase.


----------



## dallasdoug

Luke M said:


> I would expect the TivoHD to be the entry-level Tivo by then, which means a greater percentage of "low end" users who don't subscribe to encrypted channels. So the demand for better support of unencrypted QAM can only increase.


The problem is, most low end users don't know the difference between QAM and SPAM.


----------



## vstone

jrm01 said:


> Actually most interpretations of the FCC Requirement (not Law) indicate that this does not apply to clear-QAM. And the notice that they provide for regular cable channels is usually posted in a Legal Announcement in the Newspaper that no one ever sees.


For a clear QAM tuner (ie the user of the CFR mandated basic (Broadcast) tier) I cannot see how it wouldn't apply. However, I'd be happy to read other interpretations. The more about this stuff I learn, the more I lknow I don't know and, more to the point, how spotty my knowledge is.

The requirements are in Sections § 76.1602 and .1603 of 47 CFR Ch. I, with the qualifier that the franchising authority must have notified the cable comp. and the FCC of its intent to enforce these section.

I have seen some of the "Legal Announcements," although I couldn't swear that they were always in the classified section. Those getting their news from TV, and thereby enriching the cable companies, are not likely to puruse the printed classified very often.

More to the point, in this day and age, the franchising authority could list this info on their web site, as could the cable company. In those cases where they have our email address, they could email us with the details.


----------



## BobCamp1

Luke M said:


> I would expect the TivoHD to be the entry-level Tivo by then, which means a greater percentage of "low end" users who don't subscribe to encrypted channels. So the demand for better support of unencrypted QAM can only increase.


It can decrease if all those HD channels suddenly stop being unencrypted. Then when cable does provide over 100 HD channels, and they're all encrypted except for network programming, most people are going to want a CableCard.

Does the magical SDV box work without CableCards? If not, as SDV is deployed, people will need CableCards.

The point is, different markets have totally different systems. In some areas, you need CableCards despite what any FCC mandate says. In some areas, you currently get a lot of unencrypted HD channels but that could change at any time. The market isn't well defined, so the payback isn't well-defined, so why does Tivo want to devote a lot of resources to this?


----------



## vstone

TiVo Troll said:


> Limited Basic Service isn't profitable. Cable co.'s are required by law to provide Limited Basic Service of at least the broadcast stations they carry. A block only affects analog channels in Expanded Basic.


You can say its not profitable. I can say they don't lose any money on it. We now have less cable equipment here and less employess, yet the rate goes up 5% and our rate is 50% that that of the same company 50 miles to the north.

I would agree that a block doesn't make much sense on a digital system with encryption. Those remaining blocks are remnants of analog basic service customers. But a block can affect digital channels if the cable company wants to go that route.

The technical digital equivalent of an anlog cable ready TV set is the digital TV with a clear QAM tuner. However, the logical equivalent is the Digital Cable Ready TV sets, ie cablecard TV set. Good luck in finding one less than 40" (except for a holdover Sharp 27 incher from several years back).

edit: Not sure that the last para added much to this discussion , but it seemed a good idea at the time.


----------



## BobCamp1

jcthorne said:


> You still don't get it. HD IS ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE BASIC CABLE PACKAGE.


I get it -- I get that you still don't get it. HD is not included in the basic cable package everywhere in the country. This makes the overall market for this feature even smaller, and Tivo's incentive to add it even less. It's possible the only reason unencrypted QAM channels currently exist is because the cable co. hasn't figured out how to encrypt them and add a tier for them. Or maybe they are just lazy. Or maybe they are waiting for a sufficient number of HD subscribers before they throw the switch.

Tivo needs to have a sense of not only where the market is today, but what it will look like in a few years. There's no point developing a feature that few people will use today and even fewer people will use next year.


----------



## vstone

jcthorne said:


> You have missed the point. In many markets, Cable Cards are NOT free or just a couple bucks a month. In Houston, a pair of cable cards added to my account is WELL over $50 a month. My basic cable subscription already includes 95% of all the HDTV I ever watched when I had a premium digital cable subscription. It just is not worth that $50 a month for the one or two minor shows I miss (which are available from the internet and can be downloaded to the Tivo anyway).
> 
> BUT, in order to use the CATV channels I am paying for, Tivo needs to allow some way of associating guide data with them.
> 
> The same is true for the Comcast DVR. Its not $10 a month. It is well over $50 a month upcharge from basic cable as much of its real cost is burried in the premium cable packages. Perhaps someday when the FCC enforces alacarte pricing for CATV, this will clear up and the consumer will actually understand what they are paying for.
> 
> Tivo allowed me to see the value I was getting for my programming dollar (or lack thereof) and I refuse to go back to paying for programming I do not want or watch just to get guide data that I AM paying for.


If cable carsd are costing you more than the simplest cable box with a cablecard in it, I recommend that you inform the FCC. This clearly does not fall under the "reasonable rate of return" that federal law allows for equipment.


----------



## BobCamp1

sfhub said:


> Understood, the above example is the 50% respondent case when usable PSIP is not available. I'm pretty sure all the channels you listed actually have no PSIP channel map information and the numbers you are encountering are the actual RF channels.


Yep. And the redirected channels numbers show up when you use OTA for NBC and CBS, but not for ABC or FOX. So for NBC and CBS, TWC isn't broadcasting the PSIP data correctly (or I don't know how to use my neighbor's HDTV.) The other stations don't transmit PSIP. What a mess. Some of the channels automatically remap, and some don't. I can see why Tivo wants to avoid this problem for now.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> I get it -- I get that you still don't get it. HD is not included in the basic cable package everywhere in the country.


95% of respondents said HD locals are included in the basic cable package for their systems.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744

45% of respondents say they have useful PSIP, which is a limitation for automatic QAM mapping.


BobCamp1 said:


> It's possible the only reason unencrypted QAM channels currently exist is because the cable co. hasn't figured out how to encrypt them and add a tier for them.


For HD locals they are unencrypted due to FCC, not because the cable co. hasn't figured out how to encrypt them. I seriously doubt the cable company hasn't figured out how to encrypt any channel.


BobCamp1 said:


> Or maybe they are just lazy. Or maybe they are waiting for a sufficient number of HD subscribers before they throw the switch.


That might be for channels like ESPN, Discovery, etc. that some folks get, but not for HD locals.


----------



## Saxion

BobCamp1 said:


> HD is not included in the basic cable package everywhere in the country. This makes the overall market for this feature even smaller. [...] There's no point developing a feature that few people will use today and even fewer people will use next year.


Bob, market forces have made HD locals almost universally available. The very few cable markets that don't have them _will _have them eventually (again, simple market forces). And the FCC requires that they are always unencrypted and available on the most basic tier of service. Given that, I just don't see how you can make these sorts of statements.

Indeed, as TiVo's HD products drop to ever-decreasing price points, and encounter ever-increasing numbers of price-sensitive consumers, the market for this feature is certain to _increase_, not decrease.


----------



## Saxion

BobCamp1 said:


> What a mess. Some of the channels automatically remap, and some don't. I can see why Tivo wants to avoid this problem for now.


How have they avoided the problem? Manual Recordings of such channels function today, and are just as susceptible to all of the above (more so: forcing people to deal with odd-numbered channels constantly is a lot more messy than allowing them to make a one-time mapping between the odd-numbered channels to more rational, real-world channel numbers). Providing something like manual channel ID remapping would _clean up_ the system that exists today.


----------



## Saxion

BobCamp1 said:


> In some areas, you need CableCards despite what any FCC mandate says.


Please name one such area.


----------



## CrispyCritter

sfhub said:


> 95% of respondents said HD locals are included in the basic cable package for their systems.
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=367744


Not true. 95% of respondents said they could receive HD locals over analog. That's different (no intent of the cable companies is implied). Many, and I would actually guess most, franchises do NOT list the HD locals as part of their basic cable package. I know mine doesn't. I would be surprised if any of the "wandering channel" franchises list the HD locals.

If you can get the cable company to acknowledge that HD locals should be included in the basic cable package, you're most of the way to convincing them to send good PSIP data!


----------



## jrm01

CrispyCritter said:


> If you can get the cable company to acknowledge that HD locals should be included in the basic cable package, you're most of the way to convincing them to send good PSIP data!


In my area Comcast has 12-14 digital channels available clear-QAM. When I put in my zip code on their site and select Basic Cable four of them are listed (2 digital, 2 HD) but the channel number given is the cable channel number (2xx or 7xx) rather than the actual clear-QAM channel.


----------



## Luke M

CrispyCritter said:


> Not true. 95% of respondents said they could receive HD locals over analog. That's different (no intent of the cable companies is implied).


That statement doesn't parse. What do you mean? And how is it possible to unintentionally carry channels?



CrispyCritter said:


> Many, and I would actually guess most, franchises do NOT list the HD locals as part of their basic cable package.


In my Comcast channel guide, the HD locals are grouped with HD cable channels. But the fine print states that HD locals are available in the lowest service tier (limited basic).

What is your point?


----------



## BobCamp1

Saxion said:


> How have they avoided the problem? .... Providing something like manual channel ID remapping would _clean up_ the system that exists today.


That's the problem I was talking about. Isn't that the discussion in this thread? Have Tivo provide some manual and/or automatic channel remapping? For my cable system, automatic remapping doesn't look like it will work and manual remapping isn't as straightforward as I thought it would be. We're talking about getting regular people to find and map those channels, the same people whose VCR is still blinking "12:00" and are still looking for the "any" key on their computer. I don't think they'll be able to get it right the first time. Or the fifth time. I'm still not sure I got it 100% right, and it's only 12 channels. Who will they call if they can't get it right? Tivo. And this isn't a simple question. It'll take someone at the call center a while to explain what to do. That in itself costs Tivo money.

I suppose they could make this feature unofficial or hidden, but why add a feature that less than half of only their advanced customers will use? It's not a high priority for sure.


----------



## sfhub

CrispyCritter said:


> Not true. 95% of respondents said they could receive HD locals over analog. That's different (no intent of the cable companies is implied). Many, and I would actually guess most, franchises do NOT list the HD locals as part of their basic cable package. I know mine doesn't. I would be surprised if any of the "wandering channel" franchises list the HD locals.
> 
> If you can get the cable company to acknowledge that HD locals should be included in the basic cable package, you're most of the way to convincing them to send good PSIP data!


Not sure what the "analog" was referring to.

So you are of the opinion that if you get HD locals in the clear, there are 2 categories, those that get it as part of limited basic, and those where it isn't specified, but you get it in the clear because the cable company either doesn't know how to encrypt, too lazy to encrypt, is dragging you in before they switch? I just don't believe that at all. I firmly believe if you get them in the clear today, it is because of FCC regulations, whether they list it in your package or not.

For example in my Comcast area there is a special section called limited basic high definition. My area seems to follow the corporate policy on CableCARD pricing, PSIP, high-definition, etc., so I would expect other Comcast areas to have the Limited Basic High Definition section also. I know there are some Comcast areas (probably more recent acquisitions) which seem to make up their own rules and they might not.

Also for my area, they acknowledged HD locals were in Limited Basic long before they fixed the PSIP. I agree that getting your HD locals to be in the clear is a prerequisite for getting useful PSIP, but getting useful PSIP follows its own track regarding implementation, depending on the cause of the PSIP issue, could be broadcaster side, could be feed, could be cable company PSIP translator, could be they are lazy, etc.

I am open to the possiblity that if the broadcaster NBC, CBS, etc. itself chooses a different business model, there is a possibility for that to change.


----------



## BobCamp1

Saxion said:


> Bob, market forces have made HD locals almost universally available. The very few cable markets that don't have them _will _have them eventually (again, simple market forces). And the FCC requires that they are always unencrypted and available on the most basic tier of service. Given that, I just don't see how you can make these sorts of statements.
> 
> Indeed, as TiVo's HD products drop to ever-decreasing price points, and encounter ever-increasing numbers of price-sensitive consumers, the market for this feature is certain to _increase_, not decrease.


Sorry, I had "non-network " in front of "HD" in my previous post, but took it out because I thought we all knew the HD locals would be carried in the clear. Of course, you have to read the tiny fine print to realize that -- most people just assume that they need a CableCard or box to get any HD channel, and the cable company isn't likely to correct them.

But my point is that in some areas, like mine, I will only ever get those 12 free HD channels. The other 300 (all new HD and most of the SD) will cost me and require a CableCard and the SDV box. Cable markets are gravitating towards the type that I'm in, not the "everything is free" market some of you are in. And if all I wanted were those 12 free channels, I'd just put a good OTA antenna in and cancel cable. No remapping feature needed. (I know of a few people who have done this -- but none of them own a DVR because that defeats the main purpose of saving money).

I just don't think this market is very big, and there is a good chance it will shrink. I agree it's a nice feature for a few of you, but most people won't use it at all.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> But my point is that in some areas, like mine, I will only ever get those 12 free HD channels. The other 300 (all new HD and most of the SD) will cost me and require a CableCard and the SDV box. Cable markets are gravitating towards the type that I'm in, not the "everything is free" market some of you are in. And if all I wanted were those 12 free channels, I'd just put a good OTA antenna in and cancel cable. No remapping feature needed. (I know of a few people who have done this -- but none of them own a DVR because that defeats the main purpose of saving money).


Maybe there has been some confusion in what we have been discussing. For the purposes of automatic QAM mapping, I was only expecting to record Limited Basic High Definition (ie the unencrypted HD locals)

I agree the minute you want to record encrypted channels, CableCARD is a must. However even in a household where I record encrypted channels, I have about 80% of my recordings from HD locals. I'm perfectly happy offloading 80% of my recordings to dual-tuner TiVo S3/HDs that didn't need CableCARDs, and watching those shows over MRV. Then I would just need to deal with the 1 CableCARD (or 1+1 in the case of S3) that is included in every Comcast subscription. Also because of MRV, the shows recorded on my 1 dual-tuner CableCARD TiVo S3/HD are available for viewing on my CableCARD-less TiVo S3/HD.


----------



## Joe Jensen

I'm new to this thread, just tried to get my parents Series 3 set up. Their Sony TV gets the Channel info for the channel banner, but the Tivo can't get this info. I think it's odd that the Sony TV can figure this out but the Tivo can't. I didn't have to do any mapping to get the Sony TV to work.

My parents live in a very small town in Iowa. They have a city owned cable company, "HiTec Communications". 

Am I missing something?


----------



## Saxion

Joe Jensen said:


> I think it's odd


Hi Joe, and welcome (to you and your parents) to the TiVo family!

Yes it is odd. TiVo is not competitive with a variety of devices (TVs, DVRs) that can tune and fully support clear QAM channels. Please write to TiVo to express your puzzlement. Only by showing TiVo the high level of interest in this feature, can we get them to fix it.

Most likely, your Sony is parsing and displaying data contained in the PSIP table that is sent along with your clear QAM channel, which can include things like the OTA channel number, a textual channel name, and the current program title and synopsis.


----------



## Joe Jensen

Saxion said:


> Hi Joe, and welcome (to you and your parents) to the TiVo family!
> 
> Yes it is odd. TiVo is not competitive with a variety of devices (TVs, DVRs) that can tune and fully support clear QAM channels. Please write to TiVo to express your puzzlement. Only by showing TiVo the high level of interest in this feature, can we get them to fix it.
> 
> Most likely, your Sony is parsing and displaying data contained in the PSIP table that is sent along with your clear QAM channel, which can include things like the OTA channel number, a textual channel name, and the current program title and synopsis.


I will do that. I did some more experiments today. I found that if I tell the TIVO that I have antenna and cable during setup, the guide data for all digital channels in the area show up.

I am a little surprised that I can't tune any HD channels with the cable connected to the antenna input. I know the TIVO isn't remapping. But, for example on digital 11.1 channel is actually broadcast on 45 analog. (The Tivo even told me that). I don't know why I can't tune in channel 45 with the Tivo (on analong input) an see the HD channel?


----------



## Ereth

That's because the frequencies for OTA and cable are not the same. Everything above channel 6 (if I remember correctly) is on a different frequency on the cable than it is on broadcast over-the-air.

It's interesting that you can get the Guide Data, though. My S3 will let me tune 111 (which was the cablecard mapped channel until I unplugged the cablecard) but then it immediately changes to the OTA mapping (12-07, if I remember right). Makes me wonder if you could leave the cable connected to the cable feed and record off 12-07. I'll have to re-run Guided Setup tonight!


As to the question of whether you get HD channels with any cable service? Yes, you do. I thought everyone knew this. Heck, you even get them if all you have is a cablemodem and NO TV service at all!


----------



## Joe Jensen

Ereth said:


> That's because the frequencies for OTA and cable are not the same. Everything above channel 6 (if I remember correctly) is on a different frequency on the cable than it is on broadcast over-the-air.
> 
> It's interesting that you can get the Guide Data, though. My S3 will let me tune 111 (which was the cablecard mapped channel until I unplugged the cablecard) but then it immediately changes to the OTA mapping (12-07, if I remember right). Makes me wonder if you could leave the cable connected to the cable feed and record off 12-07. I'll have to re-run Guided Setup tonight!
> 
> As to the question of whether you get HD channels with any cable service? Yes, you do. I thought everyone knew this. Heck, you even get them if all you have is a cablemodem and NO TV service at all!


I've tried a ton of setup combinations. In one attempt, the HD channels showed up in the "Channel List" menu section as selectable, but there station IDs were shown as ****, and there was no guide data. Also, even though the Tivo had them in the list, you could not tune them in. In another attempe, I tried plugging the cable into the antenna input. I then ran setup telling the Tivo that I only had antenna. This time after the channel scan it showed all digital channels as 11.1, 13.1, etc in the "channel list" menu, but the Tivo could not tun them in. When I was in the "channel list" menu, each HD channel listed as .1, but it also said when analog channel they were on. For example, the Tivo said 11.1 was on channel 45. I then tried to tune in channel 45, but the Tivo couldn't tune anything.

Does anyone know if the FCC still has waivers for very small cable systems? My parents like in a town of 2500 people and the cable company is owned by the town.


----------



## Luke M

Joe Jensen said:


> I've tried a ton of setup combinations. In one attempt, the HD channels showed up in the "Channel List" menu section as selectable, but there station IDs were shown as ****, and there was no guide data.


That's normal. You can't get guide data for digital channels on cable without a CableCard. Unfortunately.



Joe Jensen said:


> Also, even though the Tivo had them in the list, you could not tune them in.


That's not normal. You should be able to watch and manually record the channels. Don't use the physical channel numbers; that won't work. Use the virtual channel numbers (e.g. 11.1).



Joe Jensen said:


> Does anyone know if the FCC still has waivers for very small cable systems? My parents like in a town of 2500 people and the cable company is owned by the town.


Waivers for what?


----------



## Saxion

Ereth said:


> That's because the frequencies for OTA and cable are not the same. Everything above channel 6 (if I remember correctly) is on a different frequency on the cable than it is on broadcast over-the-air.


It's more than just frequency: cable and antenna use completely different modulation schemes. Think AM vs FM. They are completely incompatible and you can't swap the cable and antenna inputs on the TiVo.



Joe Jensen said:


> I found that if I tell the TIVO that I have antenna and cable during setup, the guide data for all digital channels in the area show up.


In this case, you'll get guide data for the OTA channels, but not for the digital cable channels (even if they share the same channel numbers). That's what this thread is about!



Joe Jensen said:


> Does anyone know if the FCC still has waivers for very small cable systems?


Not sure what you think is wrong with your cable system. Sounds like when you have cable connected to the correct input, you are not able to get channel IDs or guide data. This is expected; that's what this thread is seeking to change.

The FCC's PSIP passthru requirements only apply to cable plants that are 750MHz or greater, so it could be that your parent's cable system isn't delivering any PSIP data, in which case the clear QAM cable channels would show up at frequency numbers like 75.3 rather than OTA channel numbers like 6.1. But in either case, the TiVo will not have guide data for them (without a CableCARD or two). Again, contact TiVo if you want them to change this.


----------



## Luke M

Saxion said:


> It's more than just frequency: cable and antenna use completely different modulation schemes. Think AM vs FM. They are completely incompatible and you can't swap the cable and antenna inputs on the TiVo.


That's correct, unless the cable company is carrying the broadcast channels as 8VSB, rather than the normal (for cable) QAM. This is very unlikely, however.


----------



## Joe Jensen

Luke M said:


> That's normal. You can't get guide data for digital channels on cable without a CableCard. Unfortunately.
> 
> That's not normal. You should be able to watch and manually record the channels. Don't use the physical channel numbers; that won't work. Use the virtual channel numbers (e.g. 11.1).
> 
> Waivers for what?


Waiver to let the cable company delay implementing cable cards. I spoke to the guy (yes, the one guy in this town) who does the tech stuff. He said they are upgrading the head end security and implementing new STBs and will have cable cards by end of Jan 2008. He said these new cards were supposed to enable the following;
1) Consumers buy any STB or DVR they want
2) Consumers can buy their own cable card so they don't have to rent
3) these cards enable the guide from cable, and PPV

Sounds like these cards my not work in the Tivo and current gen STBs as he said they would be 2 way cards...joe


----------



## B. Target

Saxion said:


> ...Providing something like manual channel ID remapping would _clean up_ the system that exists today.


I couldn't agree more, but I understand that Tivo may not want the support calls when the cable supplier changes frequencies. That's why it make complete sense to provide this functionality as a "back door" without official support.
To those that say it is not a priority, I believe to those that are unable to receive a reliable OTA signal and are paying for basic cable it is a high priority. My old Sony DVR allowed for this and I never had any problems with this feature. (So I don't get flamed, I like the Tivo feature set better-That's why this is frustrating)
I guess my question to Tivo is: What's the downside of offering this to those customers who could benefit from it?


----------



## bicker

A few come to mind quickly: Development time and effort; test time and effort; and support costs.


----------



## B. Target

bicker said:


> A few come to mind quickly: Development time and effort; test time and effort; and support costs.


So what your saying is that the customers needs aren't worth Tivo's "time and effort"? I'm not sure that's a compelling argument.
Tivo has always seemed to be a company that went the extra mile for its customers.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

B. Target said:


> Tivo has always seemed to be a company that went the extra mile for its customers.


No. Not for a long time. Not for a long, long, long time. (In internet years, anyway).

Some quick examples come to mind:

1) TiVo is willing to continue to take money from Series 1 owners but is unwilling to fix their DST problems until shamed into it by a hacker.

2) TiVo comes up with the ridiculous "Fall 2006" pricing changes, starts the FAQ, then disappears from the thread they started once everybody points out how f***ed up the scheme is. The lunacy continues for an entire year until the "Fall 2007" pricing change slightly simplifies things.

3) Bugs, bugs, bugs. Some are of the nuisance variety, but others have completely *broken* functionality that people have come to enjoy (and must continue to pay for)!

The above is just a smattering of how diligently TiVo goes the "extra mile" for its customers. The details are all available on various threads at this site. It's not pretty.  The only consolation is that the "free" cable company supplied DVRs are usually much worse!


----------



## bicker

B. Target said:


> So what your saying is that the customers needs aren't worth Tivo's "time and effort"?


No, what I'm saying is that *your* needs, specifically, aren't worth TiVo's time and effort.   

I'm saying that companies have to *prioritize *their time and effort.



B. Target said:


> I'm not sure that's a compelling argument.


Just because they don't match with your personal preferences doesn't mean a company's priorities are anything other than what they're supposed to be.



B. Target said:


> Tivo has always seemed to be a company that went the extra mile for its customers.


So what you're saying is that they seemed that way until they made a decision that you personally didn't like?

See? I can distort what *you* say, too!


----------



## jjmmss00

Hi All,

I have just got my new TIVO HD running, and have been much informed by the above discussions. It would be very desirable for me to get this mapping feature as I have analog cable and don't get good reception for all the OTA HD channels. As a software engineer, I believe that it would be simple for TIVO to add some simple manual user solution or a solution that depended on the encoded information in the channel stream.

I have Bright House and the TIVO matches all the logical HD channels numbers exactly to their OTA counterparts. However before I could get the TIVO to tune into the channels, I had to manually tune into to the physical channel. The TIVO would then detect them and add them to the channel list. The TIVO would also switch the channel number to the logical channel numbers in the channel list. Upon selecting a channel as receivable in the setup menue it would be added to the guide with of course no program information. This is of course very frustrating as it should be possible to tell TIVO that channel 2-1 (NBC) antenna is the same as 2-1 cable.

In order to accomplish the above, I needed to know actuall where the physical channels were. Fortunately I have a myHD HD tuner that does clear QAM decoding to scan the channels and get this important information. My Samsung HDTV was useless for this purpose. While it can scan and find the HD channels it only reads out the logical channel numbers and not the necessary physical channels.

I don't see a lot of hope that TIVO will add this capability as a documented feature because from reading the above, too many people have different cable situations and the support headache would be enormeous. I find hope that they would add some undocumented "backdoor" feature that we more adventurous people could try.

Does anyone know of any Hacker attempts to achieve this functionality?

thanks --- jjmmaaoo


----------



## bicker

jjmmss00 said:


> As a software engineer, I believe that it would be simple for TIVO to add some simple manual user solution or a solution that depended on the encoded information in the channel stream.


Simple as compared to what? And you've determined this _based_ on what?

(Note, a lot of us, here, are software engineers. One thing many of us have learned is to laugh when our project managers start a sentence with, "It would be simple to..." )


----------



## bizzy

bicker said:


> (Note, a lot of us, here, are software engineers. One thing many of us have learned is to laugh when our project managers start a sentence with, "It would be simple to..." )


You must be new at it. The appropriate response is to hide under your desk.


----------



## jjmmss00

Reasonable question. I believe that the guide would probably be implemented as a collection of information records for each station. Then each channel would have a pointer into the guide for its appropriate listings. If that assumption were true, one would only need to insert the correct pointer into the station table to the already existing information in the guide. 

Since TIVO must be able to take channel mappings from the cable card, it seems reasonable to me anyway that the mapping mechanism would be some sort of pointer table that could get its inputs from a source other than the cable card.

However I agree that that I really don't know how this is accomplished, and maybe it could be a challenging problem. Only giving my thoughts here.

--- jjmmss00


----------



## B. Target

bicker said:


> No, what I'm saying is that *your* needs, specifically, aren't worth TiVo's time and effort.
> 
> ...Just because they don't match with your personal preferences doesn't mean a company's priorities are anything other than what they're supposed to be.
> 
> See? I can distort what *you* say, too!


Agreed, that's what I thought the purpose of this discussion was: To elevate the priority level of this issue as seen by Tivo to the benefit of a subset of customers. If this isn't an issue for you, I'm glad. But for those of us who *are* affected, a method to map these channels would be appreciated.


----------



## bicker

bizzy said:


> You must be new at it. The appropriate response is to hide under your desk.


Real software engineers don't hide from anything! <flex>


----------



## bicker

jjmmss00 said:


> Reasonable question. I believe that the guide would probably be implemented as a collection of information records for each station. Then each channel would have a pointer into the guide for its appropriate listings. If that assumption were true, one would only need to insert the correct pointer into the station table to the already existing information in the guide.


This exhibits one of the most common errors my project manager makes -- assuming that a feature is _just _business logic. This feature would require a sufficient amount of time and effort devoted to implement, test and then support the user-interface to _modify _the channel mapping.

Regardless, neither business logic nor user-interface is necessarily "simple". If we don't know the existing code, then we cannot determine whether any change is simple or complex.


----------



## bicker

B. Target said:


> Agreed, that's what I thought the purpose of this discussion was: To elevate the priority level of this issue as seen by Tivo to the benefit of a subset of customers.


This isn't a TiVo-sponsored forum. Some TiVo employees do read these forums, but to elevate this issue to TiVo you need to contact TiVo.

Regardless, my interest is in keeping things real.


----------



## jjmmss00

Bicker,

Guess you have a silly boss in assuming things. Note from my messages that I havn't assumed anything, just mentioned how I think things are probably laid out.

Still think that the implementations would be simple having written many menu driven user interfaces. I note that you don't agree.


----------



## sender_name

believe me, I would love to tell my damn series 3 that 102-1 is FoxHD and 102-2 is NBCHD...etc...It would be so simple...and perfect


----------



## bicker

jjmmss00 said:


> Guess you have a silly boss in assuming things.


I wouldn't say the project managers are "silly" -- they simply don't know the code. It's not their job.


----------



## h0mi

Hi... kinda new to this but isn't there guide information in the QAM signal? My TV (37" vizio LCD) detects guide data for QAM channels... why couldnt the (my) Tivo HD pick up this same guide data when it's sent from my cable provider? I really dont want to have to resubscribe to digital cable & deal with cablecards.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> This isn't a TiVo-sponsored forum. Some TiVo employees do read these forums, but to elevate this issue to TiVo you need to contact TiVo.


Very true, and thus the title of this thread. The best thing we can do collectively is to contact TiVo via email or letters, and tell them about the level of interest in this missing feature and the business they are loosing because of it. *Please, take a few minutes of your time to do this.*


----------



## sfhub

bicker said:


> This exhibits one of the most common errors my project manager makes -- assuming that a feature is _just _business logic. This feature would require a sufficient amount of time and effort devoted to implement, test and then *support the user-interface to modify the channel mapping*.
> 
> Regardless, neither business logic nor user-interface is necessarily "simple". If we don't know the existing code, then we cannot determine whether any change is simple or complex.


That portion of your comment applies to the manual QAM mapping feature.

The feature jjmmss00 needs is the automatic QAM mapping, which we know already works because TW Austin cable users are able to use it. Since jjmmss00's system has useful PSIP, what he needs is for TiVo to allow OTA guide data to map to the cable/QAM tuner. Currently OTA guide data is restricted to the OTA tuner.


> I have Bright House and the TIVO matches all the logical HD channels numbers exactly to their OTA counterparts.


BTW jjmmss00, you don't need to get the physical channels from your MyHD. You can ask TiVo to scan all channels and it will pick up all the PSIP (if present) and map to the logical channels. If PSIP isn't usable or present, the channel shows up as the physical channel.


----------



## bicker

h0mi said:


> Hi... kinda new to this but isn't there guide information in the QAM signal?


You're probably referring to PSIP. That's not guide data, but rather just channel mapping data. Not all cable systems provide accurate PSIP, and the TiVo is not designed to use it.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> BTW jjmmss00, you don't need to get the physical channels from your MyHD. You can ask TiVo to scan all channels and it will pick up all the PSIP (if present) and map to the logical channels. If PSIP isn't usable or present, the channel shows up as the physical channel.


What determines the physical channel?

On my Comcast system they changed the clear-QAM channels several months ago to odd channel numbers (76.2302, etc.). I filed a complaint with FCC and sent copies to Franchise Authority and Comcast. After a meeting with the Franchise Authority they promised to correct it and changed 3 of the 8 channels back to OTA equivalent, but the others are still the odd numbers. I have exchanged e-mails with Comcast Director of Government Affairs and he has expressed that the other changes are more difficult, but they are working on it.

Is the physical channel just derived from the frequency being used or is it something else? The real problem here is that the sub-channel number is 4 digits and many TVs only allow for 2 or 3 digit sub-channel numbers.


----------



## bicker

Uh.... I think we're going to have to start from scratch with definitions, because to me, "physical" channel _means _the frequency being used, as opposed to the "mapped" channel, which is the channel number that you tell your equipment you want to tune in. Given that: (1) The "mapped" channel is simply assigned, and therefore is not based on the "physical" channel; and (2) There is no requirement that the cable physical channel match the OTA physical channel. What probably happened in your case is that the cable company simply fixed their PSIP. That made it so your equipment was able to map the "physical" channel used by the cable company to broadcast the channel you were concerned about to the channel number you were expecting that channel to be mapped to.


----------



## Luke M

bicker said:


> You're probably referring to PSIP. That's not guide data, but rather just channel mapping data.


It's also guide data, though not particularly useful guide data.



bicker said:


> Not all cable systems provide accurate PSIP, and the TiVo is not designed to use it.


Tivo does use PSIP for channel mapping, both OTA and cable. It doesn't use the PSIP guide data.


----------



## ohendo

Wow. Ordered my Tivo HD a few days ago, anxiously awaiting its arrival. Stumbled upon this thread and it floored me. No guide data for my HD channels?!?! Just super.

Thanks to all for the hard work you've put into this so far, and I will be contacting Tivo immediately with my feature request.


----------



## h0mi

I'll be contacting the cable co to determine if I'm going to resubscribe to digital cable or not... otherwise I'll have to get OTA working & I'll just cancel my cable (tv) service until this gets resolved.


----------



## jlb

ohendo said:


> Wow. Ordered my Tivo HD a few days ago, anxiously awaiting its arrival. Stumbled upon this thread and it floored me. No guide data for my HD channels?!?! Just super.
> 
> Thanks to all for the hard work you've put into this so far, and I will be contacting Tivo immediately with my feature request.


That's no guide data without cable cards. For me, that's ok, as the first card is free and the second is only $2.50 per month. But others have reported outrageous fees for CCs.


----------



## vstone

I believe that the OTA PSIP guide data (apparently included with h0mi's cable data stream) is only for the next 12 hours and therefore of marginal usefullness to a Tivo even if the Tivo scanned the program listings every half hour, which it probably doesn't. It probably doesn't include descriptive information ("John investigates...") and probably doesn't even include episode # info. I'm too lazy to go look it up again in the ATSC specs, but h0mi can tell us what guide data his Vizio gets,

edit: It's interesting that h0mi's cable co (apparently) includes the OTA PSIP guide data, but doesn't include the PSIP data that would map it to its OTA designation (e.g. 7-1).

I don't know the mechanism that cable co. DVRs use for scheduling, but it is probably not via cable PSIP data and apparently divorced from program descriptions, as the latter is a function provided by interacting with the cable system. With the Tivo it's all provided together.

We really need a mechanism to map a clear QAM channel to Tivo guide data.


----------



## dwynne

B. Target said:


> So what your saying is that the customers needs aren't worth Tivo's "time and effort"? I'm not sure that's a compelling argument.


Percentage-wise, what would you think would be the percentage of HD Tivo owners who would need clear QAM mapping? Probably a lot less than 1%, I would guess. That would be the reason they will probably never implement the needed code - just not enough folks that have to have this to justify the cost. That and they can tell you how to fix your problem with three words: "get a cablecard"  .

I wish they would fix it, but I am not at all surprised that they have not.

Dennis


----------



## bicker

Luke M said:


> Tivo does use PSIP for channel mapping, both OTA and cable. It doesn't use the PSIP guide data.


I think you need to clarify that, because there is no question that with PSIP but without CableCards the TiVo will still not match up cable's broadcast of local channels with the program guide data it provides via Tribune.


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> I believe that the OTA PSIP guide data


Are you folks talking about EPG? I don't typically associate EPG with PSIP, even though EPG is carried within the PSIP. Sorry if that caused some confusion.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> Not all cable systems provide accurate PSIP, and the TiVo is not designed to use it.





bicker said:


> I think you need to clarify that, because there is no question that with PSIP but without CableCards the TiVo will still not match up cable's broadcast of local channels with the program guide data it provides via Tribune.


TiVo correctly parses the PSIP data stream, extracts the virtual channel number contained therein, and uses that virtual channel number for all future references to that channel: in the channel lineup, in the Guide, in the Manual Recording channel selection box, in the Season Pass manager, and in the ToDo List. And if PSIP happens to supply a virtual channel number that matches the cable-company-assigned channel number that is otherwise supplied via CableCARD, then the TiVo can associate full guide data for that channel. So to say "the TiVo is not designed to use [PSIP]" is simply not correct. TiVo uses PSIP just fine. What TiVo does not do is allow for the association of guide data to a channel that, via PSIP or not, is mapped to anything other than the cable-company designated virtual channel number.


----------



## bicker

Saxion said:


> And if PSIP happens to supply a virtual channel number that matches the cable-company-assigned channel number that is otherwise supplied via CableCARD, then the TiVo *can *associate full guide data for that channel.


"Can" or "does"?

And doesn't the cable company map the channel to the broadcast virtual channel number (4-1) rather than the cable-company-assigned channel number (804)?


----------



## CrispyCritter

bicker said:


> And doesn't the cable company map the channel to the broadcast virtual channel number (4-1) rather than the cable-company-assigned channel number (804)?


The cable company does whatever the cable company wants to do - including mapping some channels and not others. Some franchises map to broadcast numbers and some to cable company numbers and the majority don't map to either.


----------



## bicker

But there is a regulation, I'm sure, that requires PSIP -- whether it is complied-with or not, I bet it specifies which way (and I bet that it specifies the broadcast virtual channel number -- just an instinct). 

Regardless, I think the answer to my question to Saxion ("Can or does?") will be important.


----------



## BobCamp1

These past few posts have me confused. I think the issue is simpler than I orignally thought.

So you guys basically want all of the cable companies to install these and configure them properly:
http://www.wegener.com/WHITE_PAPERS/pdf/WP_PSIP_july04_lr.pdf

How is this Tivo's problem? Isn't this an FCC issue?


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> "Can" or "does"?


"Does"! Move to Austin, TX and see for yourself.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> But there is a regulation, I'm sure


Not really. The regulations state that if PSIP is included by the provider (i.e. the local broadcaster) then it must also be included in the cable feed. But the regulation doesn't state specifically that it must be _unmodified_. The intent clearly was to have the broadcaster insert PSIP data identifying an OTA virtual channel number (say, 6.1) and would thus have the same channel number whether received OTA or over clear QAM cable. But some MSOs have taken the liberty of themselves changing or inserting new PSIP data rather than just passing on what was received from the broadcaster. In Austin TX, the MSO added or replaced PSIP data and mapped all the locals _to the cable company designated virtual channel numbers_. TiVo subscribers in that area are able to get full TiVo guide data, with no CableCARDs in sight!

Again, the clear intent of the system is to have OTA channel numbers in PSIP, not cable channel numbers. So this is an aberration...but an interesting one.

_Edit: here is a link to the relevant regulations, if you need a sleeping aid.  The pertinent parts:

"For each digital transport stream that includes one or more services carried in-the-clear, such transport stream shall include virtual channel data in-band in the form of ATSC A/65B: ``ATSC Standard: Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision B)'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 76.602), when available from the content provider."

And:

"Each channel shall be identified by a one- or two-part channel number and a textual channel name"_


----------



## Saxion

BobCamp1 said:


> So you guys basically want all of the cable companies to install these and configure them properly:


Well, in a perfect world, you are right! If all cable companies generated their own PSIP data containing their own channel mapping scheme, it would work! But talk about herding cats...they are under no obligation to do this and it goes against the spirit and intent of the PSIP "passthrough" requirement. You'd never convince all of them to do this. I believe that the FCC or the courts should rule on whether the PSIP data must be passed though unmolested; I think it should as it would create uniformity.


----------



## bicker

Saxion said:


> "Does"! Move to Austin, TX and see for yourself.


That's good to hear... so with just basic cable and no CableCards, with proper PSIP from the cable company, you get program guide data mapping, Season Pass capability, etc. Excellent.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> Excellent.


Yes indeedy. Really, the TiVo is closer to supporting guide data on clear QAM channels than it might seem at first. In Austin they have a fully working system. It is susceptible to frequency reassignments by the MSO, but no more so than the current method of manual recording. If we could just replicate the Austin experience, but using OTA channel numbers instead of cable company channel numbers, we'd be a good deal of the way there to making a lot of people happy (and selling more boxes!).


----------



## sfhub

bicker said:


> But there is a regulation, I'm sure, that requires PSIP -- whether it is complied-with or not, I bet it specifies which way (and I bet that it specifies the broadcast virtual channel number -- just an instinct).
> 
> Regardless, I think the answer to my question to Saxion ("Can or does?") will be important.


There is no regulation that requires PSIP to be created by the cable company. There is regulation that requires PSIP in OTA to be carried over (adjusting appropriate values like modulation 8VSB->QAM, frequency, etc.) to cable if it is present in the original OTA source.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> These past few posts have me confused. I think the issue is simpler than I orignally thought.
> 
> So you guys basically want all of the cable companies to install these and configure them properly:
> http://www.wegener.com/WHITE_PAPERS/pdf/WP_PSIP_july04_lr.pdf
> 
> How is this Tivo's problem? Isn't this an FCC issue?


If a cable company uses PSIP to map to their 3-digit style channel #, TiVo has already been shown to work correctly (even if you are not using CableCARD) once you convince TiVo's Tribune feed to include the digital cable channel information.

However this automatic mapping can also be done with the OTA style major minor #s *if* TiVo allowed OTA guide data to refer to cable PSIP-mapped channels. Currently if you choose to configure the OTA guide, when you select the channels, TiVo software forces the use of the OTA antenna input. If the guide data was disassociated from the antenna input, then it could work just like TW Austin for folks with cable PSIP that uses OTA-style major.minor numbering.


----------



## JYoung

While Time-Warner Austin may be doing great stuff with their unencrypted QAM channels, I see no evidence that Time-Warner of Los Angeles is doing anything period.

In setting up my Sony TV, I found no Guide information nor any PSIP information on the QAM spectrum.


----------



## Saxion

sfhub said:


> If the guide data was disassociated from the antenna input, then it could work just like TW Austin for folks with cable PSIP that uses OTA-style major.minor numbering.


+1!


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> I believe that the FCC or the courts should rule on whether the PSIP data must be passed though unmolested; I think it should as it would create uniformity.


To be clear, some parts of the PSIP must be changed to be carried on cable. The modulation type changes from 8VSB to QAM and the frequency changes. However that is all underneath the hood and what users will care most about is the channel numbering and possibly the textual name. My area a couple of years back had a misconfigured PSIP editor that didn't change the modulation from 8VSB to QAM and many clear QAM TVs had trouble tuning the channel.

If TiVo wanted to be more advanced, it has 2 ways to automatically do the mapping (assuming useful PSIP of course). It can use the PSIP virtual channel # or it can use the textual name for the station. TiVo guide data includes both. The textual name could also be used like a "checksum" to make sure automatic mapping is doing the right thing.


----------



## Saxion

JYoung said:


> I found no Guide information nor any PSIP information on the QAM spectrum.


What channel numbers did they show up as? Are you sure those channel numbers weren't derived from PSIP data?

If they really aren't passing any PSIP data, at least you have the FCC to back you up. You can contact the regulatory compliance legal dept at TWC, your local franchise authority, and/or the FCC and file a complaint.


----------



## JYoung

Saxion said:


> What channel numbers did they show up as? Are you sure those channel numbers weren't derived from PSIP data?


Since these are the digital QAM numbers (79.01 to 122.405) with no tags, I'm assuming that I'm not getting any PSIP data.
The Bravia is supposed to be able to take advantage of Digital Guides if the cable company supplies one.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> What determines the physical channel?
> 
> On my Comcast system they changed the clear-QAM channels several months ago to odd channel numbers (76.2302, etc.). I filed a complaint with FCC and sent copies to Franchise Authority and Comcast. After a meeting with the Franchise Authority they promised to correct it and changed 3 of the 8 channels back to OTA equivalent, but the others are still the odd numbers. I have exchanged e-mails with Comcast Director of Government Affairs and he has expressed that the other changes are more difficult, but they are working on it.
> 
> Is the physical channel just derived from the frequency being used or is it something else? The real problem here is that the sub-channel number is 4 digits and many TVs only allow for 2 or 3 digit sub-channel numbers.


First off let's assume PSIP virtual channel mapping is completely out of the picture and you just discussing channels with no PSIP channel map info. Once you introduce PSIP, from a technical standpoint, things can be mapped all over the place.

With the major.minor style numbering you see on your clear-QAM tuner, the major # is directly derived from the frequency that the channel is broadcasting under. That part is normally clear cut.

The issue generally becomes how is the sub-channel derived. The answer is it depends on who's counting. I've seen 2 clear-QAM devices take the same set of streams and generate different subchannel #s. My experience is with Sharp and Sony TVs, but there are other examples. There is no set algorithm used to derive subchannel #s.

The good thing is once you introduce PSIP channel mapping, whichever algorithm your device uses to generate sub-channel #s is hidden behind a virtual channel map #, so the user is not exposed to those inconsistencies.


----------



## sfhub

JYoung said:


> Since these are the digital QAM numbers (79.01 to 122.405) with no tags, I'm assuming that I'm not getting any PSIP data.
> The Bravia is supposed to be able to take advantage of Digital Guides if the cable company supplies one.


Those look like channels with no (useful) PSIP info to me.

If you can capture the streams using MyHD, HDHomeRun or some other PC-based clear QAM tuner, you can run TSReader to analyze/parse the streams and it will tell you if any PSIP info is present.


----------



## Saxion

JYoung said:


> 79.01 to 122.405


That subchannel number 405 seems awfully big (usually, HD channels take up so much bandwidth that you won't see very many subchannels on a freq that carries at least one HD). We're just talking about the 6 local network channels (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, WB, & PBS) right? What channel numbers are those 6 showing up on?


----------



## jrm01

Saxion said:


> That subchannel number 405 seems awfully big (usually, HD channels take up so much bandwidth that you won't see very many subchannels on a freq that carries at least one HD). We're just talking about the 6 local network channels (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, WB, & PBS) right? What channel numbers are those 6 showing up on?


What do you mean by "big"? Several of my HD sub-channels are 2301, 1105, etc. Of course this wreaks havoc on my Panny Plasma that only uses 3-digit sub-channel numbers.


----------



## Luke M

sfhub said:


> If TiVo wanted to be more advanced, it has 2 ways to automatically do the mapping (assuming useful PSIP of course). It can use the PSIP virtual channel # or it can use the textual name for the station. TiVo guide data includes both. The textual name could also be used like a "checksum" to make sure automatic mapping is doing the right thing.


That's not advanced. Advanced would be recognizing the channel bugs. No PSIP required!


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> What do you mean by "big"? Several of my HD sub-channels are 2301, 1105, etc. Of course this wreaks havoc on my Panny Plasma that only uses 3-digit sub-channel numbers.


For people with sequentially numbered subchannels, seeing someone post .405 could make them think there really are 405 subchannels. My impression has always been folks with large numbered subchannels just had non-sequential subchannels, but the number of streams/6MHz was comparable to other systems.

You don't actually have 2301 subchannels, right?


----------



## BobCamp1

sfhub said:


> If TiVo wanted to be more advanced, it has 2 ways to automatically do the mapping (assuming useful PSIP of course). It can use the PSIP virtual channel # or it can use the textual name for the station. TiVo guide data includes both. The textual name could also be used like a "checksum" to make sure automatic mapping is doing the right thing.


Well, some PSIP data doesn't have a textual name (or the data doesn't exist) and some have a slightly different textual name between PSIP and Tribune. You'd get into WABC vs. WABC-HD vs. WABC HD vs. WABC*HD vs. WABCHD, etc.


----------



## BobCamp1

Saxion said:


> Yes indeedy. Really, the TiVo is closer to supporting guide data on clear QAM channels than it might seem at first. In Austin they have a fully working system. It is susceptible to frequency reassignments by the MSO, but no more so than the current method of manual recording.


So Tivo only looks at the PSIP data once, like during guided setup? If the PSIP data then changes Tivo doesn't update itself? So how would Tivo know when to rescan the channels if the PSIP data were updated?


----------



## sfhub

PSIP channel mapping info is transmitted inline. When the channel is tuned, the PSIP channel mapping info can be examined. If only the subchannel changes, when a device tunes the base channel, it will often enumerate the subchannels and find the change automatically. My Sharp TV finds subchannel changes without any intervention on my part.

For changes where the base channel changes, the obvious thing to do would be to scan the channels at least once a day when a tuner is free.

As a data point, in my particular area, the broadcast HD channels are very stable and almost never move base channel #s. Sub-channel #s almost never change either for the broadcast HD channels.

The ones that do change sub-channel #s are the ADS digital simulcast channels. Personally I would never expect an automatic solution to cover these channels as they don't have PSIP.

The encrypted channels change more often as well, but we never expect to get those w/o CableCARD so they are not an issue.


----------



## Saxion

BobCamp1 said:


> So Tivo only looks at the PSIP data once, like during guided setup? If the PSIP data then changes Tivo doesn't update itself? So how would Tivo know when to rescan the channels if the PSIP data were updated?


As sfhub points out, PSIP is "looked at" whenever the channel is tuned. However, the PSIP data itself is the thing that should _not_ change very often...the intent of the system is to have the OTA broadcasters insert their OTA channel numbers (which almost never change) into the PSIP data that they feed to the cable operator, who then passes it on unchanged. Now, the _frequency & subchannel_ that the cable company chooses to transmit the channel over is subject to change...but the current Manual Recording scheme is just as susceptible to this (moreso: the user has to manually rescan, then go and delete all their manual recordings and create new ones!). So, there are various levels of support TiVo could implement: map only OTA-matching channel numbers to the OTA guide OR allow full custom mapping by the user; automatically trigger a new channel scan whenever a clear QAM channel is missing due to freq change OR force the user to manually rescan when freq changes; etc. Of course, a fully automated "Cadillac" solution would be great, but a more limited/manual/backdoor "Hyundai" solution would also satisfy a great many people!


----------



## vstone

sfhub said:


> ...
> I've seen 2 clear-QAM devices take the same set of streams and generate different subchannel #s.
> ...


I have a Westinghouse that will find a channel like 192.9002 and then call it 192.2 and, as reported by someone else, the Westy will accept 4 subschannel digits.


----------



## vstone

Saxion said:


> What channel numbers did they show up as? Are you sure those channel numbers weren't derived from PSIP data?
> 
> If they really aren't passing any PSIP data, at least you have the FCC to back you up. You can contact the regulatory compliance legal dept at TWC, your local franchise authority, and/or the FCC and file a complaint.


The FCC issued a report (Third Periodic Review of the Commissions Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion To Digital Television) Monday that, among other things, hinted that a forthcoming DTV Must Carry proceeding wil address PSIP short comings at the cable plant level.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> For people with sequentially numbered subchannels, seeing someone post .405 could make them think there really are 405 subchannels. My impression has always been folks with large numbered subchannels just had non-sequential subchannels, but the number of streams/6MHz was comparable to other systems.
> 
> You don't actually have 2301 subchannels, right?


Nope. For that channel there are 3 sub-channels: 2301, 2302 and 2303.


----------



## jjmmss00

Sounds like if one lives in Austin this problem is solved per SAXON.

_"In Austin TX, the MSO added or replaced PSIP data and mapped all the locals to the cable company designated virtual channel numbers. TiVo subscribers in that area are able to get full TiVo guide data, with no CableCARDs in sight."_

Perhapse a possible fix for this problem (at least for many of us) would be for TIVO to add a few "phantom" stations to the cable guide data at the logical channel numbers for the OTA networks.


----------



## sfhub

vstone said:


> I have a Westinghouse that will find a channel like 192.9002 and then call it 192.2 and, as reported by someone else, the Westy will accept 4 subschannel digits.


So I went back and captured the transport streams on my system to figure out what method devices are using to assign subchannel #s (in the absence of PSIP channel map info).

For background, each stream has PMT/PID info. This includes the PID and a Program #.

Some devices appear to use the "Program #" data. In the case of .405 and .2301, I'm guessing that is what is being displayed.

Other devices, like my Sharp TV, sort all the streams based on the PID then assign user friendly #s starting from 1. Your Westy sounds like it is numbering subchannels the same way as my Sharp.

This is all irrelevant when PSIP channel map info is present because that will override any implementation dependent counting methods.

Method #1 - use Program # as subchannel


Code:


PAT Version Number: 2
Transport Stream ID: 10242 (0x2802)

[u][1][/u] - PMT PID 54 (0x0036) - Program [u]1[/u]
[u][2][/u] - PMT PID 55 (0x0037) - Program [u]2[/u]
[u][3][/u] - PMT PID 48 (0x0030) - Program [u]3[/u]
[u][7][/u] - PMT PID 53 (0x0035) - Program [u]7[/u]
[u][8][/u] - PMT PID 52 (0x0034) - Program [u]8[/u]

Method #2 - sort by PID, assign user friendly subchannel # starting from 1


Code:


PAT Version Number: 2
Transport Stream ID: 10242 (0x2802)

[u][1][/u] - PMT PID 48 (0x0030) - Program 3
[u][2][/u] - PMT PID 52 (0x0034) - Program 8
[u][3][/u] - PMT PID 53 (0x0035) - Program 7
[u][4][/u] - PMT PID 54 (0x0036) - Program 1
[u][5][/u] - PMT PID 55 (0x0037) - Program 2


----------



## Saxion

jjmmss00 said:


> Perhapse a possible fix for this problem (at least for many of us) would be for TIVO to add a few "phantom" stations to the cable guide data at the logical channel numbers for the OTA networks.


That's an excellent idea.


----------



## Saxion

vstone said:


> The FCC issued a report (Third Periodic Review of the Commissions Rules and Policies Affecting the Conversion To Digital Television) Monday that, among other things, hinted that a forthcoming DTV Must Carry proceeding wil address PSIP short comings at the cable plant level.


I'd love to read that report; do you have a link?


----------



## sfhub

For testing this theory, what if TiVo and Tribune had test channel guides in a few markets marked (experimental) which included the HD locals (2.1, 4.1, 5.1, 7.1, etc.) in the standard cable guide.

So when you enter your zip code, you are given the standard analog guide to select from, plus one that is marked experimental. If you are in one of these areas, you can choose the (experimental) guide and force a manual channel scan which will pick up various channels and map them according to the PSIP channel maps. These channel #s would correspond to the experimental guide.

This is essentially what TW Austin folks had done, except their channel #s are 3-digit style instead of major.minor.

I'm configured for digital cable right now and TiVo is perfectly happy letting me enter 2-1, so there doesn't appear to be anything in the UI that limits major.minor channel numbering to only work with OTA setups.

The beauty of this experiment is it doesn't require reworking the TiVo software, just providing a new guide set. Selecting and using the guide is already in place.


----------



## snow918

I'm new to HDTV. I have had an old Tivo for standard cable service with my non-HD TV. Recently bought a Samsung HDTV, which is able to receives OTA HD channels amazingly clear (NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS and Fox). Realizing that I barely watch my cable stanadard channels anymore (most shows I watch are available OTA in HD), I just canceled my cable sevice. Now I have all my wanted channels free and crispy clear with OTA. 

However, I miss Tivo/DVR service (my old Tivo no longer works). I googled OTA HDTV DVR. It appears that there were a couple of OTA HDTV DVR (by SONY and LG) a few years back but all discontinued for whatever reason. I'm thinking to get a Tivo HD (probably Series 3 Tivo) as my OTA HDTV DVR. Any suggestion? I wonder if Tivo HD has problem to get my local (Houston) channel guide data (Those HD channels are numbered as 2.1, 8.1, 11.1, 13.1, 26.1, while the coressponding cable channels are 2, 8, 11, 13, 26). This thread on "QAM mapping issue" which confuses me a little. My understanding is that QAM mapping is related to using cablecard to get OTA channel data. Right? Or am I missing something? 

Thanks for your inputs.


----------



## andyf

No problem getting Houston OTA channels. All the networks are in the same antenna farm so you can get them all with a simple antenna.


----------



## mattack

snow918 said:


> However, I miss Tivo/DVR service (my old Tivo no longer works). I googled OTA HDTV DVR. It appears that there were a couple of OTA HDTV DVR (by SONY and LG) a few years back but all discontinued for whatever reason. I'm thinking to get a Tivo HD (probably Series 3 Tivo) as my OTA HDTV DVR. Any suggestion? I wonder if Tivo HD has problem to get my local (Houston) channel guide data (Those HD channels are numbered as 2.1, 8.1, 11.1, 13.1, 26.1, while the coressponding cable channels are 2, 8, 11, 13, 26). This thread on "QAM mapping issue" which confuses me a little. My understanding is that QAM mapping is related to using cablecard to get OTA channel data. Right? Or am I missing something?


Since you're just wanting to use OTA -- then nothing to see here, move along. QAM is only relating to digital channels over cable systems.

Tivo HD and Series 3 are two different specific models of Tivo. Series 3 is much more expensive (though less so lately), and has some more features you may or may not think are worth the money. There are many other threads covering the differences.


----------



## jrm01

Maybe this isn't a surprise to others, but it was to me. I have Comcast service and have one THD with cable-only and antenna. therefore I am able to get the in-the-clear-QAM channels. I was flipping around and found a movie on one of the "neighbor's VOD" channel, and just for the fun of it decided to record it (manually off course). It recorded just fine, and I was able to MRV it to my S3 downstairs. Really thought it would have been copy-protected (since Comcast protects all premium here), but it wasn't.


----------



## swegs

god i wish tivo would give us QAM mapping auto or manual i dont care just give it to me!!!!


----------



## jrm01

I have had an on-going communication with Comcast ever since I filed a complaint with my Franchise Authority concerning the lack of PSIP data on clear-QAM channels. It was always available and complete until 3 months ago. Since I started my campaign they have included partial PSIP for 4 of 7 local HD channels. It is sufficient to map them back to where they belong, but does not have guide data (only call letter identifier).

I got a call today from Comcast supervisor who said that this weekend they would be modifying these channels to include all PSIP data and that they would call me back on Sunday to see if it is working.

Interestingly he said that the problem was caused by changes made by the station operators when they began to make changes required to support 2009 digital mandate. He said that Comcast has to install some new hardware to accomodate these changes and that it will be done this weekend.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> Interestingly he said that the problem was caused by changes made by the station operators when they began to make changes required to support 2009 digital mandate. He said that Comcast has to install some new hardware to accomodate these changes and that it will be done this weekend.


I would think it is more likely that some PSIP changes did not play well with your local Comcast's translating equipment and they needed an update. I don't know if they meant to assign blame or deflect criticism, but the problem seems to be on Comcast's side. If the source side was the problem sending some non-standard PSIP, they would be the ones that need to fix it because adding workarounds for non-standard PSIP just encourages more non-standard implementations. Also it is not like the PSIP generators at the source are 60 years old, and the companies that implemented it are long gone, so fixing the source is quite reasonable.

It is good though to see confirmation from your data point that PSIP passthrough regulations can be enforced. This means they do exist as we understand them and if sufficient people complain, we should be seeing more and more useful PSIP.


----------



## mattack

jrm01 said:


> I have had an on-going communication with Comcast ever since I filed a complaint with my Franchise Authority concerning the lack of PSIP data on clear-QAM channels. It was always available and complete until 3 months ago. Since I started my campaign they have included partial PSIP for 4 of 7 local HD channels. It is sufficient to map them back to where they belong, but does not have guide data (only call letter identifier).


This doesn't solve the problem of this thread for you, right? You won't actually get guide data without cablecards, right?

For me, most of the OTA channels are mapped (e.g. KTVU is 2-1, KPIX is 5-1, etc.), but the NBC affiliate is 33-1 instead of 3-1 (the analog version is 3). Is this the same problem -- lack of PSIP data?

I believe some of the sub-channels of KQED, our main PBS affiliate, are in the wrong place (I think in the 90s), though there are 9-1 and 9-2 channels too. (I have never been able to find a digital version of KQED that plays the same as the analog KQED, which is annoying for the few times I'd want to do a manual recording.)


----------



## jrm01

I just heard from a fellow avs-forum friend who also filed a complaint with the FCC and Franchise Authority over the same issue. I had provided him the info to file the complaint. He is also in Pittsburgh, but a different head-end office and a different Franchise. Comcast called him today concerning the complaint and they are investigating for his service area and say they will call him back.


----------



## jrm01

mattack said:


> This doesn't solve the problem of this thread for you, right? You won't actually get guide data without cablecards, right?


It doesn't solve the problem of this thread, however, if Tivo ever does solve the problem I believe it will first occur for those systems that provide proper PSIP information. I'm just trying to get our system into that camp.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> This doesn't solve the problem of this thread for you, right? You won't actually get guide data without cablecards, right?
> ...
> I believe some of the sub-channels of KQED, our main PBS affiliate, are in the wrong place (I think in the 90s), though there are 9-1 and 9-2 channels too. (I have never been able to find a digital version of KQED that plays the same as the analog KQED, which is annoying for the few times I'd want to do a manual recording.)


Getting useful PSIP is a pre-requisite for automatic QAM mapping. Whether TiVo does something with it or not is another question, but it is in general a better situation to have lots of areas providing useful PSIP because other manufacturers will also be able to use the PSIP to do mapping.

Your problem with KQED is different. Comcast gets KQED from 2 different feeds. The HD feed uses a direct line to pump 24/7 HD. The rest are from the standard feed. I believe KQED is only sending the PSIP on the direct line. Prior to complaints, only the SD subchannels that came on the standard feed had PSIP, but after complaints they seemed to have switched it around so the HD feed gets useful PSIP.


----------



## Wetsprocket625

I would really like to see this happen too. With me if I could just tell the programming guide to copy the programming to a qam channel from the analog equivalent is all I would need. It would seem easy enough to do.


----------



## vstone

I think the concensus is that this is theoretically easy to too, and _probably_ technically easy to do. I still think the issue is that Tivo doesn't want their support staff having to call half the cable plants in the country to explain what the law is. Its fairly obvious that the mangement of the major cable companies, each of which is really half holding company, don't care about the technical niceties and therefore their version of benign neglect (a form of management) is the order of the day.


----------



## Dancar

I really don't understand what the problem is. If tivo connects to an online database that tells it that CNN is on 44 and Comedy is on 60, then why can't the same database know that KOMO HD is on 4.1 and KING HD is 5.1?

This is upsetting. There's nothing in the tivo marketing that says you need an upgraded cable pakage to use tivo features with channels that are included in the basic package.


----------



## sfhub

Dancar said:


> I really don't understand what the problem is. If tivo connects to an online database that tells it that CNN is on 44 and Comedy is on 60, then why can't the same database know that KOMO HD is on 4.1 and KING HD is 5.1?


CNN on 44 and Comedy on 60 are
1) relatively fixed
2) published by the cable companies

KOMO HD on 4.1 and KING HD on 5.1, IMO should be automatically mappable to the OTA equivalents, either by a guide data change, or by software changes on the TiVo.

KOMO HD on 112.1 and KING HD on 98.1, while also doable IMO, is more subject to counterarguments that it would increase support costs and channel #s change more frequently. The difficult part with these channels, which don't have useful PSIP, is the cable company can change the channel #s at any point in time and they don't publish their changes or give warning.


----------



## sfhub

So why doesn't TiVo allow the S3s to use a single CableCARD to record 2 channels if the channels are not encrypted? Clearly it is capable of doing so because people have done it (until they run guided setup). In terms of baby steps, this would put S3s on the same footing as TiVo HD, assuming all you wanted to record was HD locals (which is a good portion of this thread). In this scenario, the CableCARD would purely be used to download the channel map, which is guaranteed to be the same for both tuners because they are on the same system. If the decryption features of the CableCARD are not needed for the particular 2 channels being recorded, using a single CableCARD should not restrict the user to single-tuner operation.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> In this scenario, the CableCARD would purely be used to download the channel map, which is guaranteed to be the same for both tuners because they are on the same system. If the decryption features of the CableCARD are not needed for the particular 2 channels being recorded, using a single CableCARD should not restrict the user to single-tuner operation.


I have no idea why, but I would bet that this would run into Cablelabs certification issues.


----------



## Joe Jensen

vstone said:


> I think the concensus is that this is theoretically easy to too, and _probably_ technically easy to do. I still think the issue is that Tivo doesn't want their support staff having to call half the cable plants in the country to explain what the law is. Its fairly obvious that the mangement of the major cable companies, each of which is really half holding company, don't care about the technical niceties and therefore their version of benign neglect (a form of management) is the order of the day.


Here is my theory.
1) Cable companies don't want or like Tivo
2) Cable companies fund Cable labs. Cable labs owns the decision on what hardware is certified to run on cable systems. No certification, not going on the cable system. (encryption stuff)
3) The cable companies were forced by the FCC to adopt cable cards.
4) I suspect that Cable labs made a deal with Tivo. "We'll approve the Tivo box if you don't enable HD in the clear." Cable labs knew that all cable operators would be forced to do put HD in the clear. 
5) I assume remapping the channels is trivial as all HD TVs with ATSC tuners do this. The only reason I can see for Tivo not, is they cut a deal with the Devil.

Thoughts?


----------



## bicker

Joe Jensen said:


> Thoughts?


My thoughts are that folks are looking for a demon when there isn't one. Not everything that happens has a "fault". Sometimes things just are, and stay that way, for no reason other than that's the way it is. In cases where something isn't the way we want it, but it doesn't contradict explicit promises, until there is proof of nefarious intent in any specific situation, then the honorable approach is to assume nothing, blame no one, and work to find the best way to live with the situation, while asking courteously for it to change.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Dancar said:


> I really don't understand what the problem is. If tivo connects to an online database that tells it that CNN is on 44 and Comedy is on 60, then why can't the same database know that KOMO HD is on 4.1 and KING HD is 5.1?
> 
> This is upsetting. There's nothing in the tivo marketing that says you need an upgraded cable pakage to use tivo features with channels that are included in the basic package.


It's all over the place in TiVo marketing. It's in several places on their website; it's prominently on the box. They overstate it a bit by saying cablecards or OTA antenna required to receive HD, but they very clearly state that they do not support cable HD without cablecards.

To answer your first part, reiterating what sfhub said, the cable companies do not report the channel numbers to the database, and there is no way for the Tribune database to get those numbers without such reporting. It's even worse than sfhub said: even if some channels have PSIP data mapping to , say, 5-1, the cable companies still feel free to change that and turn mapping off and on. (My franchise is an example - previous time I checked, I was able to tune 50-1; I can't now). The cable companies do not advertise these numbers anywhere for most franchises.

If the cable companies change the channel or the way they do things, who are the TiVo customers going to turn to clear up the cable company's mistakes? TiVo. Just as they now turn to TiVo to clear up the cable company's mistakes in reporting the normal lineup. The customers get quite upset at TiVo for not getting perfect data; even though it's the cable company at fault. And that's for a function (accurate guide data) that the cable companies have supported for a long time. How much worse is it going to be for a function that the cable companies don't even acknowledge as being part of their responsibility? Support for this will be a nightmare.


----------



## Joe Jensen

bicker said:


> My thoughts are that folks are looking for a demon when there isn't one. Not everything that happens has a "fault". Sometimes things just are, and stay that way, for no reason other than that's the way it is. In cases where something isn't the way we want it, but it doesn't contradict explicit promises, until there is proof of nefarious intent in any specific situation, then the honorable approach is to assume nothing, blame no one, and work to find the best way to live with the situation, while asking courteously for it to change.


I normally agree, but then in this case I've worked with cable labs so it's not really a clean slate for me. I hope you are right, because I've also worked with Tivo and if they can legally fix this I am sure they will. I'm just betting they can't...joe


----------



## Joe Jensen

CrispyCritter said:


> It's all over the place in TiVo marketing. It's in several places on their website; it's prominently on the box. They overstate it a bit by saying cablecards or OTA antenna required to receive HD, but they very clearly state that they do not support cable HD without cablecards.
> 
> To answer your first part, reiterating what sfhub said, the cable companies do not report the channel numbers to the database, and there is no way for the Tribune database to get those numbers without such reporting. It's even worse than sfhub said: even if some channels have PSIP data mapping to , say, 5-1, the cable companies still feel free to change that and turn mapping off and on. (My franchise is an example - previous time I checked, I was able to tune 50-1; I can't now). The cable companies do not advertise these numbers anywhere for most franchises.
> 
> If the cable companies change the channel or the way they do things, who are the TiVo customers going to turn to clear up the cable company's mistakes? TiVo. Just as they now turn to TiVo to clear up the cable company's mistakes in reporting the normal lineup. The customers get quite upset at TiVo for not getting perfect data; even though it's the cable company at fault. And that's for a function (accurate guide data) that the cable companies have supported for a long time. How much worse is it going to be for a function that the cable companies don't even acknowledge as being part of their responsibility? Support for this will be a nightmare.


How then can the Sony TV map the cable channels into the right convention? For example, in my parents town, digital 11.1 is broadcast on 64.1 according to the cable engineer I spoke with. When we manually tune the Tivo to 64.1, we get the channel, but obviously no guide data. However, when the cable is hooked to the Sony TV, it has no problem remapping 64.1 to 11.1 automatically.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Joe Jensen said:


> How then can the Sony TV map the cable channels into the right convention? For example, in my parents town, digital 11.1 is broadcast on 64.1 according to the cable engineer I spoke with. When we manually tune the Tivo to 64.1, we get the channel, but obviously no guide data. However, when the cable is hooked to the Sony TV, it has no problem remapping 64.1 to 11.1 automatically.


I'm not sure I understand your point. Your example is a strong argument for my case. The majority of cable franchises across the country do not send out good PSIP info. Some don't send it out at all, and others (like mine and your parents) send out malformed data. TiVo can handle good data. Some TVs can handle some of the malformed data and others TVs and TiVos cannot. If TiVo was offering QAM mapping, it sounds like you would expect TiVo support to get things fixed up.

As I said, a support nightmare.


----------



## Joe Jensen

CrispyCritter said:


> I'm not sure I understand your point. Your example is a strong argument for my case. The majority of cable franchises across the country do not send out good PSIP info. Some don't send it out at all, and others (like mine and your parents) send out malformed data. TiVo can handle good data. Some TVs can handle some of the malformed data and others TVs and TiVos cannot. If TiVo was offering QAM mapping, it sounds like you would expect TiVo support to get things fixed up.
> 
> As I said, a support nightmare.


Maybe I've been lucky, but ALL HD TVs that I've owned, or helped folks install, have had no issues remapping the HD channels. My Sony, my parents Sony, 4 friends of my parents, and may 10 friends where I live. I didn't realize that all TVs can't do this automatically.

As I think about this, how does the Tivo handle this channel mapping when using cable cards?


----------



## CrispyCritter

Joe Jensen said:


> Maybe I've been lucky, but ALL HD TVs that I've owned, or helped folks install, have had no issues remapping the HD channels. My Sony, my parents Sony, 4 friends of my parents, and may 10 friends where I live. I didn't realize that all TVs can't do this automatically.


I think most (HD TVs) can, if the PSIP info is correct. The TiVo certainly can (as witness the complaints here from people in "good" cable franchises where the TiVo is working perfectly except for guide info, but who don't appreciate the problems facing TiVo in other locations).

But it depends on your area. If the cable company in some area sends out malformed info, then it depends on the particular TV. Some ignore errors better than others. In my particular area, lots of TVs (and my TiVos) won't see any of the HD locals on a channel scan, but can directly tune at least some of them. My TiVo only directly tunes 3 or 4 out of 7, while there are TVs that can't tune any of them, and others that can tune all of them.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> I have no idea why, but I would bet that this would run into Cablelabs certification issues.


Why? I don't recall seeing anything the in the certification checklist that said a channel map could only be used for a single tuner. When I have time I'll dig up the checklist and see if I missed something.

In fact, TiVo HD uses a single channel map for both tuners and the certified TiVo S3 also does this as long as you don't rerun guided setup.


----------



## Luke M

Joe Jensen said:


> 5) I assume remapping the channels is trivial as all HD TVs with ATSC tuners do this. The only reason I can see for Tivo not, is they cut a deal with the Devil.


Tivo does do this. Works fine. But channels like 2-1 are not in the cable channel maps.

Next conspiracy theory?


----------



## quattro100

Will the addition of cable cards without any change in basic cable service work or will the hd channels ( abc, nbc, cbs, fox ) no longer work without upgrading the service?

If I cant get the hd channels guide on my hd tivo without the added expense, then I will return my hd box ( seems to have a lot of bugs in the short time I have used it, slow to respond and freezes at times ) and get a series 2 to record just the basic definition.


----------



## dwynne

sfhub said:


> So why doesn't TiVo allow the S3s to use a single CableCARD to record 2 channels if the channels are not encrypted?


When the CC is inserted then the Tivo "defers" to it for the channel mappings and for which channels are allowed, no matter if the channels are in the clear, SD, HD, analog, whatever.

For example, let us say you don't pay for ESPN but it is on your analog cable. With no CC in place you tune the analog channel and there it is. You pop in the CC and have the cable company hit it, when you tune to that channel (which is in the clear and analog) you will get a gray screen - because even though the signal is there the CC says "you don't get this channel". So the CC is not just used to map the channels on unscramble channels, it is used to set what you can watch no matter what the source is. If you try to punch in a clear QAM channel with the CC in place, that will not work either. Once you installed the CC you lost the ability to freely tune the Tivo. The music channels here are in clear QAM and can be tuned w/o a CC in place. Put it in and get it working, and now the channels are mapped (115-2 becomes 435 or whatever). You can't tuner 115-2, but you can 435 - but if you don't subscribe to a tier that includes the music channels you get a gray screen - but the Tivo channel info tells you what channel you are on. Pop out the CC and tune the QAM channel again and you have the channel for free.

So you have to have an M-card or two single stream cards for 2 tuners to work - no matter what you are trying to record or watch on 1 or 2 tuners.

I think Tivo could have easily designed it no be this way, but they figured that not many folks would buy an expensive HD Tivo and pay the monthly fee to Tivo and pay a monthly cable bill and not subscribe to something - which would require the cablecard(s) to be obtained. I am sure they also considered that they needed to "play nice" with the cable companies and once a CC is installed they limit what you can watch to what the CC says. Yes you and I can see exceptions and reasons why some would want it otherwise, but I would not think that either occurred to the Tivo designers or they figured the numbers would be so small as to make any efforts to appease them a waste of resources.

Dennis


----------



## sfhub

I think you are missing my point. It isn't to override the CableCARD mappings to get "in the clear" channels that you don't subscribe to. My point is to use the CableCARD mappings from a single CableCARD for HD locals (you do subscribe to) to tune the 2nd tuner.

HD locals, in general
1) are not encrypted for most people
2) are part of the basic package for most people

So if you installed a single CableCARD, 1) the HD locals would be in the downloaded channel map, 2) that channel map could be used to tune the 2nd tuner as long as those channels are not encrypted, which is the case for HD locals on most peoples' systems.

You can see that TiVo can even use the channel map from a previous CableCARD install that was later removed. Both tuners work fine until you re-run guided setup (or the cable company changes the underlying RF)
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=5863337#post5863337

Seeing as it is unlikely S3 users will ever see an M-mode update to use a single M-card, I think TiVo should just formalize the functionality they already have and allow you to use both tuners using the channel map from a single card. Then the folks asking for QAM mapping (at least the S3 ones) who currently would need 2 cards could use just 1 card.

BTW not every region works the way yours does. My region gives me the full channel map no matter which package I have. Whether I can receive the channel or not is determined by the encryption. I can tune to many channels I don't receive, and the RF frequency TiVo is tuned to is the same as on a box that does subscribe to those channels. I don't get a grey screen, I just get a not subscribed screen. This is how they implement the HBO free previews. My channel map stays the same, they just turn off encryption and magically HBO shows up.


----------



## dwynne

I understand your point, but what I saying is that the cablecard determines what you get to see. Yes, they also use it for channel mapping, but even if the channel is known or is a simple analog channel if the CC says you don't get it then even if the signal is in the clear the Tivo can't get it.

Again, they didn't design it to work with one cablecard - they designed it to work with OTA signals or a pair of cablecards. The number of folks who would try to use a Tivo with cable and without any cablecards they figure to be a very, very small minority if they even considered it at all. To imagine that someone would try to make it work with a single cablecard and dual tuners for sure never crossed their minds.

I knew from the launch that the S3 was not for me, since I did not want to have to rent two cable cards - so I did not purchase one. If Tivo had allowed channel mapping then maybe I would have. Patience paid off when they released the much cheaper HD Tivo that would accept m-cards and my cable company dropped their prices - in fact my m-card is free. So I did not purchase until it made sense to do so. 

Did someone ever tell folks they did not need a cablecard for their Tivo to work on cable? Or tell them dual tuners would work with a single card? I would hop not and would hope the buyers would research this prior to paying the money.

Maybe at some point they will allow manual channel mapping of clear qam or maybe pick up the date from the cable company without a card, but I would think the odds of them making a patch to allow a single non-m-card to control dual tuners is just not very likely. I would get rid of the S3 and get an HD or just get a 2nd card.

Dennis


----------



## sfhub

dwynne said:


> I understand your point, but what I saying is that the cablecard determines what you get to see. Yes, they also use it for channel mapping, but even if the channel is known or is a simple analog channel if the CC says you don't get it then even if the signal is in the clear the Tivo can't get it.


So what is the point of bringing up analog channels? HD locals are in your CableCARD channel map (assuming your provider bundles HD locals into the most basic package), so what you describe is not relevant to what I'm suggesting. I'm talkigng about channels you *do* get, not channels you don't get.

We are on a QAM mapping thread, not a "how can I keep my expanded basic I don't subscribe to after I get CableCARDs thread" People who want QAM mapping predominantly want it for recording HD locals w/o need for CableCARDs (except for a few stragglers who want it for other reasons). I'm only suggesting a way to minimize the pain for S3 users. I was always surprised to see that you could plug in 2 CableCARDs into the S3, run through guided setup, then pull the 2 CableCARDs and the S3 would work perfectly fine, recording HD locals on 2 tuners with full guide support and 0 CableCARDs installed. The end result is the functionality folks on this thread want, except the method for "entering a QAM map" is plugging in CableCARDs and going through guided setup, then pulling the cards, as opposed to mapping through PSIP, or mapping through some UI.


----------



## Joe Jensen

Luke M said:


> Tivo does do this. Works fine. But channels like 2-1 are not in the cable channel maps.
> 
> Next conspiracy theory?


Luke, I didn't understand your point. Here is the latest example I faced. My parents have a Sony HDTV. They plug thte cable in, and the Sony finds all the local HD channels as the local cable company rebroadcasts them in the clear (no encryption). The local cable company has to move the frequencies for some channels because they already have channels in those slots. When the cable is plugged into the Tivo, it cant remap the channels that the Sony could. The engineer from the local cable company (2000 person town with 900 subscribers) called Tivo to find out why the Tivo couldn't find the HDs in the clear on his cable system he was told the Tivo was not able to remap the channels. I assumed that since my Sony, my Sharp, my parents sony, my friends Pioneer Elite, my friends Panasonic, my friends Mitsubishi, etc etc, can all remap these channels, it must be fairly well understood.

I also have professional experience with cable labs. I was working professionally with many STB manufacturers when Tivo was approved by cable labs and all the customers I was working with were shocked that Tivo was approved so quickly. Previous cable labs behavior was to fail trial at least 2-3 times, and only allow trials like every 3 months. Maybe I'm just a conspiracy nut, but a deal with cable labs, approval in exchange for not enabling in the clear without a cable card, seems pretty plausable.


----------



## 1283

dwynne said:


> I understand your point, but what I saying is that the cablecard determines what you get to see. Yes, they also use it for channel mapping, but even if the channel is known or is a simple analog channel if the CC says you don't get it then even if the signal is in the clear the Tivo can't get it.


No, it doesn't work that way. I have limited basic, so the analog expanded basic channels (including CNN) are physically blocked out by a notch filter. However, the CNN ADS version is not encrypted, so with the CableCard, I receive CNN, mapped to its published channel, even though it's not part of my subscription.


----------



## Luke M

Joe Jensen said:


> My parents have a Sony HDTV. They plug thte cable in, and the Sony finds all the local HD channels as the local cable company rebroadcasts them in the clear (no encryption). The local cable company has to move the frequencies for some channels because they already have channels in those slots. When the cable is plugged into the Tivo, it cant remap the channels that the Sony could. The engineer from the local cable company (2000 person town with 900 subscribers) called Tivo to find out why the Tivo couldn't find the HDs in the clear on his cable system he was told the Tivo was not able to remap the channels. I assumed that since my Sony, my Sharp, my parents sony, my friends Pioneer Elite, my friends Panasonic, my friends Mitsubishi, etc etc, can all remap these channels, it must be fairly well understood.


I don't know what the problem was in this case. But the Tivo S3/HD does find unencrypted QAM channels and does use PSIP if available. The subject of this thread involves connecting the channels to guide data, that's all.



Joe Jensen said:


> I also have professional experience with cable labs. I was working professionally with many STB manufacturers when Tivo was approved by cable labs and all the customers I was working with were shocked that Tivo was approved so quickly. Previous cable labs behavior was to fail trial at least 2-3 times, and only allow trials like every 3 months. Maybe I'm just a conspiracy nut, but a deal with cable labs, approval in exchange for not enabling in the clear without a cable card, seems pretty plausable.


Fair enough, but it's all based on a faulty premise.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Joe Jensen said:


> Luke, I didn't understand your point. Here is the latest example I faced. My parents have a Sony HDTV. They plug thte cable in, and the Sony finds all the local HD channels as the local cable company rebroadcasts them in the clear (no encryption). The local cable company has to move the frequencies for some channels because they already have channels in those slots. When the cable is plugged into the Tivo, it cant remap the channels that the Sony could. The engineer from the local cable company (2000 person town with 900 subscribers) called Tivo to find out why the Tivo couldn't find the HDs in the clear on his cable system he was told the Tivo was not able to remap the channels. I assumed that since my Sony, my Sharp, my parents sony, my friends Pioneer Elite, my friends Panasonic, my friends Mitsubishi, etc etc, can all remap these channels, it must be fairly well understood.


Again, there are lots and lots of existence proofs that TiVo can remap the channels fine, if the PSIP data is good. How do you explain all the people for whom it works?


----------



## Joe Jensen

CrispyCritter said:


> Again, there are lots and lots of existence proofs that TiVo can remap the channels fine, if the PSIP data is good. How do you explain all the people for whom it works?


I was not aware of anyone for whom it works. In reading this thread, I only saw one post where the user had been getting guide data and then it went away with no explanation from Tivo.

Are there really a ton of people? I stopped at the Tivo booth at CES and spoke with someone I've worked with at Tivo in the past. When I explained the problem they told me that unless the HD channels in the clear from the cable company were in the same slots as over the air, they could not remap to the guide data. When I suggested that maybe there was a deal with cable labs in order to get quicker certification, they just smiled.


----------



## fallingwater

Now that E* has announced an OTA only hi-def DVR not requiring a service fee maybe TiVo should re-consider providing EPG data for unscrambled QAM w/o CC's, just to compete.

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/primenewswire/134162.htm

I've got 2 high-def DVR's other than TiVo. W/o CC's both tune all unscrambled QAM on actual cable frequencies (from 79-1 through 121-XX). TiVo used to but now places OTA simulcast QAM channels on OTA equivalent numbers within the EPG lineup. So OTA Ch. 5-1 has guide info (but no picture) while on the line above cable 5-1 has no guide data but a great picture!

TiVo, w/o CC's, no longer recognizes unscrambled cable channels on their actual QAM frequencies when they're tunable from the EPG on OTA equivalent channel numbers. So (apparently) PSIP is doing all the work (the actual source must still be the actual QAM frequency) and all that needs be done is an EPG upgrade to 'put it together'. Sounds both doable and cheap! 

At this point such a solution won't cover everyone, everywhere, but it's a start!


----------



## sfhub

Joe Jensen said:


> I was not aware of anyone for whom it works. In reading this thread, I only saw one post where the user had been getting guide data and then it went away with no explanation from Tivo.


About 45% of people responded to a poll on the S3 forum about whether their cable company provided useful PSIP channel maps. I'd assume many of these people had tested with their TiVo before a CableCARD was installed.

On my system, PSIP channel maps work fine and if I don't use CableCARDs, I have the HD locals mapped to their OTA equivalent major.minor channel #s. TiVo, as currently implemented, just has no way to associate its guide data with those channels so only manual record is available. It is kind of frustrating because if I configure the OTA antenna, I'll see all the guide data for 2.1 and 5.1 and I'll have a second guide entry for 2.1 and 5.1 (via cable/QAM tuner) with no guide data.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Now that E* has announced an OTA only hi-def DVR not requiring a service fee and coupon eligible converter boxes aren't designed for TiVo, maybe TiVo should re-consider providing EPG data for unscrambled QAM w/o CC's, just to compete.


That might actually be a rationale, so maybe we'll see it in the fall service update.


----------



## CrispyCritter

Joe Jensen said:


> I was not aware of anyone for whom it works. In reading this thread, I only saw one post where the user had been getting guide data and then it went away with no explanation from Tivo.
> 
> Are there really a ton of people? I stopped at the Tivo booth at CES and spoke with someone I've worked with at Tivo in the past. When I explained the problem they told me that unless the HD channels in the clear from the cable company were in the same slots as over the air, they could not remap to the guide data. When I suggested that maybe there was a deal with cable labs in order to get quicker certification, they just smiled.


You're talking about two different things here. In the last poll, there were about 45% users for whom the TiVo correctly used PSIP info to remap the channels. It did not remap to useful channels for the other 55%. Very few (only in Austin as far as I know) have the TiVo guide data associated with these remapped channels. That's a completely different issue, not connected with what the TiVo itself does with PSIP info.


----------



## velo116

bicker said:


> That might actually be a rationale, so maybe we'll see it in the fall service update.


So historically does Tivo ever release updates for issues other than in the fall? Does that mean that we have to wait until next November before even the possibility of any kind of resolution to this issue?

My problem is that its not just the local channels anymore. I have basic cable, and Charter has deleted game show network, g4, and cspan. Although the only one I'm interested in is G4, the only way to get it is through the QAM portion. I really don't want to keep paying more and more money to Charter because it seems like its never going to stop. The last thing I want to do is get out of my expanded basic package and get raped by price increases and introductary offers.


----------



## sfhub

velo116 said:


> My problem is that its not just the local channels anymore. I have basic cable, and Charter has deleted game show network, g4, and cspan. Although the only one I'm interested in is G4, the only way to get it is through the QAM portion. I really don't want to keep paying more and more money to Charter because it seems like its never going to stop. The last thing I want to do is get out of my expanded basic package and get raped by price increases and introductary offers.


Is G4 in the clear or encrypted? In my area, if they remove a channel that was in expanded basic analog, it ends up being encrypted when it changes to digital. If it is encrypted, your only option with TiVo is CableCARD, irrespective of QAM mapping.


----------



## bicker

velo116 said:


> So historically does Tivo ever release updates for issues other than in the fall?


I think there are two major updates per year. Clearly it is too late for new features to get into the Spring update.


----------



## velo116

sfhub said:


> Is G4 in the clear or encrypted? In my area, if they remove a channel that was in expanded basic analog, it ends up being encrypted when it changes to digital. If it is encrypted, your only option with TiVo is CableCARD, irrespective of QAM mapping.


All the channels that were regular analog are now "in the clear". CSPAN, Gameshow, G4, and WE are now un-encrypted digital. IIRC, on the handout they gave me the channels are just listed as "digital" not even "digital basic" as some of the other channels are listed.


----------



## jrm01

bicker said:


> I think there are two major updates per year. Clearly it is too late for new features to get into the Spring update.


Unless, of course, they had already planned on this feature for the Spring.


----------



## sfhub

velo116 said:


> All the channels that were regular analog are now "in the clear". CSPAN, Gameshow, G4, and WE are now un-encrypted digital. IIRC, on the handout they gave me the channels are just listed as "digital" not even "digital basic" as some of the other channels are listed.


My area has something called Limited Basic Digital channels. If it is in that grouping, I can depend on the channel being unencrypted. In my area if the channels are in one of the "digital" tiers, then I cannot depend on those channels being permanently unencrypted. Some day someone will make some changes and the channel will no longer be viewable. It has happened many times this way.

CSPAN should be a limited basic digital channel though. Gameshow and G4 just depend on your area. In any event what I'm saying is for the latter 2 channels manual QAM mapping might help in the short run but I wouldn't depend on those channels being unencrypted for the long run.


----------



## velo116

jrm01 said:


> Unless, of course, they had already planned on this feature for the Spring.


Generally, when does what's getting put into the update get released?


----------



## sfhub

velo116 said:


> Generally, when does what's getting put into the update get released?


Usually we don't even know what is in the update *after* it is released. You see threads where folks scramble to figure out what changed. Sometimes there are major features that get announced a few days earlier. There is an ongoing debate just about release notes, let alone knowing before-hand what is coming in an update.


----------



## jrm01

I had mentioned earlier that I've been having on-going conversations with my local Comcast management to get proper PSIP info for our 7 clear-QAM HD channels. They have corrected four of them and say the other three will be corrected "shortly".

According to the engineer the problems began when the stations made changes to their feed in preparation for the 2009 Digital Conversition, and now Comcast has to make engineering changes to accomodate these changes.

Does this make any sense?


----------



## bizzy

Do you have a contact that we could share with our local Comcast engineers?


----------



## jrm01

bizzy said:


> Do you have a contact that we could share with our local Comcast engineers?


I have actually been working thru a comcast director of government relations who then communicates with the engineer. He said that once the problem is resolved the engineer will call me to discuss the results. If I get a name I'll let you know.


----------



## fallingwater

jrm01 said:


> I had mentioned earlier that I've been having on-going conversations with my local Comcast management to get proper PSIP info for our 7 clear-QAM HD channels. They have corrected four of them and say the other three will be corrected "shortly".
> 
> According to the engineer the problems began when the stations made changes to their feed in preparation for the 2009 Digital Conversition, and now Comcast has to make engineering changes to accomodate these changes.
> 
> Does this make any sense?


I wonder if what you've been told from Comcast is related to my LG LST-3410A's changing the program (not channel) to V-Me whenever tuned to any Ch. 82-X subchannel? LG's 3410 claim to fame (after being the worst) is that AFAIK it's the only digitally tuned DVR with analog line inputs!

Comcast's rep. said it wasn't their doing, and PBS actually called back to say that PSIP mapping took care of any tuning problems. For S3 TiVo w/o CC's, which used to suffer from Ch. 82 program changing, it did indeed.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=12696406#post12696406


----------



## ciper

This thread has not been replied to in quite a while. Any news?


----------



## moyekj

ciper said:


> This thread has not been replied to in quite a while. Any news?


 I think people have given up hope on this happening (I did anyway long ago)... hopefully at least Tivo is dedicating their development efforts to SDV tuning resolver solution. SDV is obviously becoming pretty widespread judging by recent posts and is a threat to Tivo's bottom line unlike this issue.

Actually, thinking about this some more, I wonder if the tuning resolver could be used in units without cablecard? It may offer channel mapping capabilities of it's own such that unencrypted channels would be properly mapped to the proper cable company channel #s. Maybe they can kill 2 birds with 1 stone here...


----------



## 1003

*TiVo, Inc.*
has a choice in this. The difficult choice here is supporting owners of the products or Evil Cable Companies. TiVo has revenue streams from both but appears to favour the Evil Cable Companies as the more lucrative ongoing revenue stream...


----------



## DUDE_NJX

ciper said:


> This thread has not been replied to in quite a while. Any news?


There's never been any news in this thread. Only pointless speculation. :down:


----------



## gamo62

bicker said:


> That might actually be a rationale, so maybe we'll see it in the fall service update.


Fall update? What about the spring and summer update? Why wait so long?


----------



## bicker

I prefer to traffic in *rational* speculation.


----------



## jjmmss00

I haven't read the thread for a while and have taken some time to digest the issues, and have decided that TIVO needs to take responsibility for this problem. We should stop being nice about it.

My cable channels get remapped tom the OTA equivalents. I will call TIVO tomorrow and complain that they are not providing me with the programming data that I am paying for. All they need to do is add program information records that replicate the information from the OTA channel numbers in the cable programming records. 

Since they are unlikely to do this, as they seem anxious to please the cable companies (or maybe there is even a deal or conspiracy in place), I will try a complaint to the FCC or whoever else may have any power over this issue. Bottom line is they are not giving us what we are paying for, and we need to escalate the issue to have any possibility for success.


----------



## bicker

jjmmss00 said:


> I haven't read the thread for a while and have taken some time to digest the issues, and have decided that TIVO needs to take responsibility for this problem. We should stop being nice about it.


Based on what explicit guarantee do you base your indignation?

Since you have never been promised a QAM mapping feature, I suggest you put your ego back in your pocket and remain "nice" to TiVo with regard to this issue. The quickest way to have your request ignored is to come across as a raving lune.


----------



## jjmmss00

bicker said:


> Based on what explicit guarantee do you base your indignation?
> 
> Since you have never been promised a QAM mapping feature ...
> 
> 
> 
> Per my message if you would read it again please before resorting to name calling. I am asking for the programming guide data that I am paying for (not remapping).
> 
> I believe that you are the "raving lune" if you still think that TIVO will do something about this. The only way is to escalate the issue to some other regulatory authority if that is possible!
Click to expand...


----------



## bicker

What name-calling are you referring to?  I think you're reading more into my message than is there.

Programming guide data is provided to subscribers as per the explicit promises made.

I never said that TiVo would or wouldn't do anything about this. Indeed, if you read my earlier messages, I expressed doubt that they ever would. The reference I made was to your promise to "stop being nice". That's what I was suggesting to you would be a bad idea.

Finally, no regulatory authority has any jurisdiction nor should any. This feature that has no regulatory impact. We already have too much government. We shouldn't create more just because a private company offers a product without a feature you want them to offer.


----------



## mattack

bicker said:


> Finally, no regulatory authority has any jurisdiction nor should any.


They do have authority over the PSIP information, correct? In other words, people have quoted the rules saying that a cable company can't alter existing PSIP data..

So if we get PSIP data, then the remapping-without-cablecards should be even easier?

In my case, I would then at least get Fox, CBS, ABC, and the main KQED HD channel with no 'manual' remapping, if the PSIP data were paid attention to.


----------



## bicker

So you're therefore focusing your attention on, and complaining about your cable company. THAT makes sense, then. However, if your cable company does what it is supposed to do (pass through PSIP data instead of remapping to cable channels), your TiVo still won't work without CableCards. So you'll have accomplished absolutely nothing.


----------



## jrm01

bicker said:


> So you're therefore focusing your attention on, and complaining about your cable company. THAT makes sense, then. However, if your cable company does what it is supposed to do (pass through PSIP data instead of remapping to cable channels), your TiVo still won't work without CableCards. So you'll have accomplished absolutely nothing.


Nothing will have been accomplished yet. However, for those of us who still hold out hope that Tivo will provide guide data someday for properly mapped channels (to OTA equivalent, or to cable channel) it is a step forward. Comcast just completed the effort in my area to get these channels back to the OTA channel number. As I mentioned earlier, by working thru the local franchise authority they agreed to do this and they have lived up to their promise. Took six months, but it's done.

Now I just have to wait for Tivo.


----------



## bicker

That much is true. Hopefully, TiVo will eventually get to this request, and decide to satisfy it.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> However, if your cable company does what it is supposed to do (pass through PSIP data instead of remapping to cable channels), your TiVo still won't work without CableCards. So you'll have accomplished absolutely nothing.


He accomplished one step on the path to eventual HD without cable cards. I'm not very confident Tivo will make the relatively simple change to support this but I can still dream.

I can't imagine the amount of work needed for Unbox. Wouldn't the consumer benefit more if the effort had been spent to implement manual QAM mapping that nearly everyone could use VS downloads that many of us have no interest in?


----------



## aindik

ciper said:


> I can't imagine the amount of work needed for Unbox. Wouldn't the consumer benefit more if the effort had been spent to implement manual QAM mapping that nearly everyone could use VS downloads that many of us have no interest in?


Everyone "could" use the manual QAM mapping, but the only people actually interested in it are the people who don't want to get CableCARDs for one reason or another.


----------



## ciper

I believe it to be the majority rather than the exception. Many are renting cable cards just to get a handfull of HD channels. Not everyone can justify cable bills exceeding 50$ a month (extended plus cable cards plus additional packages).


----------



## aindik

ciper said:


> I believe it to be the majority rather than the exception. Many are renting cable cards just to get a handfull of HD channels. Not everyone can justify cable bills exceeding 50$ a month (extended plus cable cards plus additional packages).


I haven't kept up on CableCARD regulations and practices as much as I should. Is it currently impossible to get a CableCARD with a lifeline cable subscription? If it is possible, how much does it cost?

Comcast has a listing in their price list for "HDTV for customers with Basic, Standard or Digital Starter." This item is $9.95 a month. "Basic" is their lifeline offering, which costs $24.20 a month. So, for $34.15 you can get lifeline cable plus the locals in HD with a rented HD box. I think you should be able to get a CableCARD instead of the box with that package, for the same price (if not less). Is there any reason you can't?


----------



## ciper

aindik said:


> I haven't kept up on CableCARD regulations and practices as much as I should. Is it currently impossible to get a CableCARD with a lifeline cable subscription? If it is possible, how much does it cost?


Physically it is possible. Ordering it is another story. There have been postings where people couldn't even get basic or extended cable with a cable card unless they ordered a digital package.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> I believe it to be the majority rather than the exception.


Based on what? Every indication is that there are only a few folks looking for that feature. Rest assured that if it were a major driver of folks buying TiVos, then TiVo would have added the feature.


----------



## sbourgeo

bicker said:


> Based on what? Every indication is that there are only a few folks looking for that feature. Rest assured that if it were a major driver of folks buying TiVos, then TiVo would have added the feature.


There certainly are a lot of views on this thread for a feature that only a few folks are looking for...


----------



## ZeoTiVo

You know - this feature would be a LOT easier to implement in the series 4/tru2way box that TiVo is working on now. It would actually now be a waste of resources to try and kludge it onto the series 3 line.


----------



## bmgoodman

ZeoTiVo said:


> You know - this feature would be a LOT easier to implement in the series 4/tru2way box that TiVo is working on now. It would actually now be a waste of resources to try and kludge it onto the series 3 line.


Great, let's again split the code base and abandon the "old" models.


----------



## 1003

sbourgeo said:


> There certainly are a lot of views on this thread for a feature that only a few folks are looking for...


*Keeps*
costing TiVo everyday I continue with my Series1 instead of buying a TiVoHD. That is, if the experts around here are right about the cost of support for each model.

This is absolutely the one 'tipping point' feature that is left influencing my buying decision. Or I can leave TiVo behind completely and buy something that does not place limitations on guide data because they have to keep ECC (evil cable companies) business partners happy. It used to be about users happiness but that has changed lately...


----------



## aindik

sbourgeo said:


> There certainly are a lot of views on this thread for a feature that only a few folks are looking for...


If I view the thread 100 times, that's 100 views, not 1 view.


----------



## sbourgeo

aindik said:


> If I view the thread 100 times, that's 100 views, not 1 view.


Maybe only one person has been viewing this thead 22k times.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> Rest assured that if it were a major driver of folks buying TiVos, then TiVo would have added the feature.


Companies make mistakes about feature priorities all the time. They misread the market, get poor market research data, focus on pet projects because of time already invested, etc. They are only human. That's what this thread is for...to convey to TiVo the amount of interest in this feature, and that they are absolutely losing sales because of it.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> Based on what? Every indication is that there are only a few folks looking for that feature. Rest assured that if it were a major driver of folks buying TiVos, then TiVo would have added the feature.


I laughed when I read this and looked like a weirdo since I am in a public place. Here is a random piece of useless data - *every* single person I've told about the Tivo HD has said something to the effect of "Why do I need to rent a cable card to get those channels if my xxxxx(generic) TV from Costco gets them just fine and on the right channels?" It's damn near impossible to make any referrals because of this! I guess it doesnt matter now since the rewards program is ending...

Right now I have to pay an extra 43$ a month to record the local channels in HD with guide data (luckily I have an M-card). Thats extra 30 to get "digital expanded basic" plus "HDTV" plus "cable card rental"


----------



## aindik

ciper said:


> I laughed when I read this and looked like a weirdo since I am in a public place. Here is a random piece of useless data - *every* single person I've told about the Tivo HD has said "Why do I need to rent a cable card to get those channels if my xxxxx(generic) TV from Costco gets them just fine and on the right channels?"
> 
> Right now I have to pay an extra 43$ a month to record the local channels in HD with guide data (luckily I have an M-card). Thats extra 30 to get "digital expanded basic" plus "HDTV" plus "cable card rental"


If you call to cancel Digital Expanded Basic and go down to Basic (knocking $30 of the $43 off your bill), what happens?


----------



## ciper

aindik said:


> If you call to cancel Digital Expanded Basic and go down to Basic (knocking $30 of the $43 off your bill), what happens?


I have to return the cable card and then I get unmapped QAM channels,,, which is why I'm posting here in the first place.

Channel mappings are rarely configured properly to match the "packages" that are sold and sales drones rarely know what the hell they are saying. Instead they learn to give an answer automatically if its not an officially supported configuration.


----------



## aindik

ciper said:


> I have to return the cable card and then I get unmapped QAM channels,,, which is why I'm posting here in the first place.
> 
> Channel mappings are rarely configured properly to match the "packages" that are sold and sales drones rarely know what the hell they are saying. Instead they learn to give an answer automatically if its not an officially supported configuration.


They actually make you return the CableCARD, huh? That's ridiculous. What if you said you wanted Basic with an HD box. You could get that if you wanted to, right?

You should be able to get a CableCARD on any package for which an HD box is available for rent. If you can't get one, it at least sounds like Comcast isn't living up to the spirit of the CableCARD regulations (if not the letter of those regulations), which were designed to allow people to get the digital channels available from the cable company without renting the cable company's box. If they have a package that's available with a box but not with a CableCARD, I'm not sure that's allowed.

Put another way: If you go to your local channel lineup and tell it to give you the channels included in Limited Basic, you'll see your HD locals listed right there. The text at the bottom says:


> *HDTV broadcast signals are included with Basic Service. To receive HDTV signals provided by the Company, an HDTV capable television set (not provided by the Company) and an HDTV capable digital converter are required


Are they allowed to require that the "HDTV capable digital converter" be the one they rent? I thought the point of CableCARD was that they couldn't require that.


----------



## ciper

Right now I am with Astound but I had the same rigamarole with Comcast (my city has two cable providers to choose from!). The basic answer is that to get a cable card you must have digital cable and digital cable means the expanded package (which it shouldn't) then once you have digital cable you can add HDTV to it. On top of that even if I got basic plus cable card I would need to order the HDTV package which includes encrypted channels even though the locals are not encrypted. Its just one big cluster**** after another 

The huge building I live in used to have wiring for the large roof antenna but the wiring is 30+ years old and there is no plan to repair any cuts.



bicker said:


> Based on what? Every indication is that there are only a few folks looking for that feature.


Hehe thought I would reply to this a second time. I invite you to view the "TiVo Series3 HDTV DVRs " forum then sort by either number of replies or number of views. The QAM thread is the HIGHEST feature request based thread when sorting by replies (before SDV dongle!) and the SECOND HIGHEST thread for a feature request based on views (right behind SDV dongle). "Every indication" indeed


----------



## bicker

sbourgeo said:


> There certainly are a lot of views on this thread for a feature that only a few folks are looking for...


And the number of members of TCF is only a small percentage of the entire TiVo customer base, and the entire TiVo customer base is a small percentage of the target market for selling more TiVos.


----------



## bicker

Saxion said:


> Companies make mistakes about feature priorities all the time.


And posters, without the benefit of marketing research and without a vested interest in making the right business decisions for the company, make "mistakes" about feature priorities much more often.

In the immortal words of Randy Jackson, "Just keeping it real, dawg."


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> And the number of members of TCF is only a small percentage of the entire TiVo customer base, and the entire TiVo customer base is a small percentage of the target market for selling more TiVos.


True. Most of the target audience doesnt understand the intricacies involved. They will say "why do I need to rent a cable card if all my other TVs get the channels without one." I have paypal and I'm willing to bet on it if the scenario was setup properly.

I am willing to listen to your explanation on how QAM mapping would cause Tivo to lose revenue. I contend it will have the opposite effect.

Stop double posting!







is your friend.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> True. Most of the target audience doesnt understand the intricacies involved.


Nor care as much as you'd like us to believe.



ciper said:


> I am willing to listen to your explanation on how QAM mapping would cause Tivo to lose revenue.


Who said anything about revenue (except you). Why did you decide to play with that Straw Man?

Please restrict your objections to what I wrote to what I _actually_ wrote, rather than what is easier to argue against.



ciper said:


> Stop double posting!


Double posting is permitted in this forum. I don't reply to two different messages in the same reply, as a rule. Different people have different posting styles. If you want to derail this thread in yet-another manner, go ahead and quibble about this further.


----------



## 1003

*TiVo*
never even gets close to that 'target customer' because ECC (Evil Cable Company) takes the call and tells them what they 'need'. Evil Cable Companies will also gladly inform customers how superior thier rental box is and the extra charges related to TiVo ownership/service and unnecessacary tier upgrades they will require.

When TiVo realizes that the cable companies have pulled the wool over thier eyes it will be too late. ECC paid them to develop software for the Motorola boxes, diverting financial/human resources from any development of true standalone or sattelite boxes.

TiVo unfortunately took that bait from Evil Cable Companies, but also took thier eye off the loyal customers who were the basis of thier success...


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> *Every indication *is that there are only a few folks looking for that feature.





bicker said:


> And posters, without the benefit of marketing research and without a vested interest in making the right business decisions for the company, *make "mistakes" about feature priorities much more often*.


So true, so true.


----------



## JYoung

ciper said:


> Here is a random piece of useless data - *every* single person I've told about the Tivo HD has said something to the effect of "Why do I need to rent a cable card to get those channels if my xxxxx(generic) TV from Costco gets them just fine and on the right channels?"


What TVs do they use that gets the correct *HD* channels?
Because since Time-Warner doesn't give the proper PSIP data here, my Bravia can only pick up the clear QAM channels on the digital side, just like my TiVos.


----------



## bicker

Saxion: Let's cut to the core issue: Why do so many people in these threads try to project their personal preferences as moral imperatives for companies to kowtow to? It's maddeningly inane, and the manner in which they do so foster unfounded expectations in casual readers. That was really the point I was making.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> Nor care as much as you'd like us to believe.


Exactly right. They don't care. They just want it to work like every other piece of hardware



bicker said:


> Who said anything about revenue (except you). Why did you decide to play with that Straw Man?


No straw man at all. I asked you a question and you got defensive. I want to know how QAM mapping will cause Tivo to lose revenue.



bicker said:


> Please restrict your objections to what I wrote to what I _actually_ wrote, rather than what is easier to argue against.


Seriously? 
*Attention All - Bicker has decided we can only respond to his comments and cannot introduce new questions to the interaction.*



bicker said:


> Double posting is permitted in this forum. I don't reply to two different messages in the same reply, as a rule. Different people have different posting styles. If you want to derail this thread in yet-another manner, go ahead and quibble about this further.


Its no derailment. I feel it shows a lack of respect to us other forum members.



bicker said:


> Saxion: Let's cut to the core issue: Why do so many people in these threads try to project their personal preferences as moral imperatives for companies to kowtow to? It's maddeningly inane, and the manner in which they do so foster unfounded expectations in casual readers. That was really the point I was making.


My answer to your first question is - We project personal preferences in these threads so that Tivo will see them and make changes that will make more customers happy. I still want to know the negative side to supporting QAM mapping.

If that is your core issue and you aren't against QAM mapping then why reply to this thread? Take it to a forum feedback section.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

This has been mentioned numerous times.

The cable companies are *required* to sell you premium channels (such as HBO) without requiring you to purchase any other tier of service (except most basic).

HBO from a cable company is usually in the $16/mo range. It (most likely) requires a cable card. That cable card (most likely) will also properly map the HD locals.

It's worth trying to get just HBO and seeing how well the cable cards work. Much cheaper than ther $30/mo or $40/mo I see mentioned for "digital cable".


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> No straw man at all. I asked you a question and you got defensive. I want to know how QAM mapping will cause Tivo to lose revenue.


You perhaps don't know what a Straw Man is. The issue here is that I never said anything about revenue. It is a bit like me asking me if you have stopped beating your wife. It has nothing to do with what you were discussing, so isn't appropriate for me to ask that.



ciper said:


> Attention All - Bicker has decided we can only respond to his comments and cannot introduce new questions to the interaction.


No. I have decided to call you out whenever you try to make it sound like I'm advocating something other than I actually am saying, or to draw me into an argument that I have no interest in pursuing.



ciper said:


> Its no derailment. I feel it shows a lack of respect to us other forum members.


That's your prerogative, but I could say the same about some of the things you've posted about me in the last few hours. The reality is that I respect the topic, and so should you, and personalities shouldn't enter into it.



ciper said:


> I still want to know the negative side to supporting QAM mapping.


Development, maintenance and support costs.



ciper said:


> If that is your core issue and you aren't against QAM mapping then why reply to this thread?


I'm against the fostering of unfounded expectations.


----------



## BobCamp1

ciper said:


> Physically it is possible. Ordering it is another story. There have been postings where people couldn't even get basic or extended cable with a cable card unless they ordered a digital package.


That's the REAL problem here...and it's not Tivo's. It's yours. This thread wouldn't exist if these cable companies would let you rent just the CableCard with no strings attached.

And as I have said before, this feature is useless in my cable system. Not only do you need Tivo to support it, you need the cable company to support it as well. And judging by how badly they are supporting CableCards, which earn them more money than this feature would, you expect them to support this feature as well or better?

I think this thread has a lot of views just because it's a complex issue and people are just trying to figure out what the problem is. FYI, the "Tivo HD - Video Vanishes" and "SDV" threads have more views. I think Tivo should focus on those first -- they sound rather important.


----------



## dwynne

ciper said:


> Here is a random piece of useless data - *every* single person I've told about the Tivo HD has said something to the effect of "Why do I need to rent a cable card to get those channels if my xxxxx(generic) TV from Costco gets them just fine and on the right channels?"


But how many folks are willing to spend $250-300 for an HD Tivo plus $129 for a 1 year sub and use it ONLY to record the locals in HD?

Random piece of useless data: The only folks I know with limited basic are folks that took it because it makes a cable modem cheaper or are cheapskates or are living on limited budgets. Everyone else I know has at least the normal cable package with a lot more channels than just the locals and CSPAN and they would never buy a Tivo and pay for service if they could not also record those channels and possibly some premium content as well.

Since Tivo missed putting this in place to start with and given what I think are the small number of folks this effects, then I would doubt they will ever expend the development effort to fix it. I wish they would, but since I get my cablecard for free I can get by if they don't .

Dennis


----------



## sfhub

JYoung said:


> What TVs do they use that gets the correct *HD* channels?
> Because since Time-Warner doesn't give the proper PSIP data here, my Bravia can only pick up the clear QAM channels on the digital side, just like my TiVos.


What does your cable market have to do with Ciper's? Unless you are on the same head-end neither of your experiences have anything to do with the other. You might ask which market he is in, but asking which TV he is using, implying he has some special TV that does more than others, doesn't make any sense.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> That's the REAL problem here...and it's not Tivo's. It's yours. This thread wouldn't exist if these cable companies would let you rent just the CableCard with no strings attached.


If TiVo S3/HD's main usage cannot work without CableCARDs and cable franchises, for whatever reasons, make CableCARDs hard to utilize, then it is TiVo's problem as well because it is impeding sales to cable users, a substantial market for TiVo. Of course it is also problem for the end-user who purchased TiVo, but that can normally be resolved with a return.

This thread wouldn't exist if all CableCARDs were given out for free and they were provisioned correctly a high percentage of the time (similar to cable STBs). Neither of those cases will be likely. I think it would be interesting if the SDV dongle becomes a way to get guide data for HD locals w/o requiring a CableCARD.


BobCamp1 said:


> And as I have said before, this feature is useless in my cable system. Not only do you need Tivo to support it, you need the cable company to support it as well. And judging by how badly they are supporting CableCards, which earn them more money than this feature would, you expect them to support this feature as well or better?


You know this has already been discussed. The cable company is already required to support it (PSIP for HD locals). They need to support this not for TiVos in particular, but for general DTV transition. In slightly less than half the markets they already do and users can benefit. The other markets require enforcement of existing rules.


----------



## sfhub

dwynne said:


> But how many folks are willing to spend $250-300 for an HD Tivo plus $129 for a 1 year sub and use it ONLY to record the locals in HD?
> 
> Random piece of useless data: The only folks I know with limited basic are folks that took it because it makes a cable modem cheaper or are cheapskates or are living on limited budgets. Everyone else I know has at least the normal cable package with a lot more channels than just the locals and CSPAN and they would never buy a Tivo and pay for service if they could not also record those channels and possibly some premium content as well.


I think it is a poor assumption that this feature is only useful for people who subscribe to just limited basic. This feature is potentially useful for any person who records HD locals even if they have the super premium rainbow gold deluxe package. How many people hook up analog cable-ready TVs throughout the house directly to the wall and only have 1 or 2 cable boxes for the main rooms to watch encrypted channels? Just because you have a premium package doesn't mean you need every TV to have access to them and doesn't mean that everything you record is encrypted.

Personally I would buy another TiVo to offload recording HD locals from my CableCARD equipped TiVo. HD locals comprise 85% of my recordings. If I can offload them onto CableCARD-less TiVo's that will free up my CableCARD equipped TiVo to watch LiveTV and record just the encrypted channels (which truly need a CableCARD). I can still have access to all the HD locals because I can watch using MRV.

A portion of TiVo's market buys TiVo HD for OTA. Some of this market segment cannot get good signals, so they become cable customers, but most of their recordings are locals (in this case upgrading to HD).

I see many people who don't really watch that much TV, but are drawn to buy new HD-capable panels because they are so impressed with the HD PQ they can get just from the locals w/o subscribing to a premium cable package. They are excited they can just go home and plug the TV in and get amazing PQ without doing anything extra.

They buy the TV just to watch HD locals because it just looks so much better. These people aren't poor or living on a lifeline. They do wonder though why if their TV can give them access to this amazing PQ, why an advanced TiVo HD can't do the same. Specifically why they should pay more to get a TiVo when all the advanced features of TiVo are neutered (for HD locals on cable) unless they get a CableCARD, which they didn't need to do with their TV.


----------



## aindik

sfhub said:


> I think it is a poor assumption that this feature is only useful for people who subscribe to just limited basic. This feature is potentially useful for any person who records HD locals even if they have the super premium rainbow gold deluxe package. How many people hook up analog cable-ready TVs throughout the house directly to the wall and only have 1 or 2 cable boxes for the main rooms to watch encrypted channels? Just because you have a premium package doesn't mean you need every TV to have access to them and doesn't mean that everything you record is encrypted.
> 
> Personally I would buy another TiVo to offload recording HD locals from my CableCARD equipped TiVo. HD locals comprise 85% of my recordings. If I can offload them onto CableCARD-less TiVo's that will free up my CableCARD equipped TiVo to watch LiveTV and record just the encrypted channels (which truly need a CableCARD). I can still have access to all the HD locals because I can watch using MRV.


The cost of, instead of doing that, just getting another CableCARD for your second TiVoHD is, what, $10 a month? So long as we're clear on what we're talking about.



sfhub said:


> A portion of TiVo's market buys TiVo HD for OTA. Some of this market segment cannot get good signals, so they become cable customers, but most of their recordings are locals (in this case upgrading to HD).
> 
> I see many people who don't really watch that much TV, but are drawn to buy new HD-capable panels because they are so impressed with the HD PQ they can get just from the locals w/o subscribing to a premium cable package. They are excited they can just go home and plug the TV in and get amazing PQ without doing anything extra.
> 
> They buy the TV just to watch HD locals because it just looks so much better. These people aren't poor or living on a lifeline. They do wonder though why if their TV can give them access to this amazing PQ, why an advanced TiVo HD can't do the same. Specifically why they should pay more to get a TiVo when all the advanced features of TiVo are neutered (for HD locals on cable) unless they get a CableCARD, which they didn't need to do with their TV.


The TiVoHD can give them that amazing PQ on the QAM locals just like their TV can. But, just like their TV, the TiVoHD doesn't know what shows are on the channels when.


----------



## dwynne

sfhub said:


> They do wonder though why if their TV can give them access to this amazing PQ, why an advanced TiVo HD can't do the same. Specifically why they should pay more to get a TiVo when all the advanced features of TiVo are neutered (for HD locals on cable) unless they get a CableCARD, which they didn't need to do with their TV.


They can get the amazing PQ all they want, but no PG info. An informed consumer should not buy an HD Tivo if they do not want to or can't get a cablecard - it was designed for cablecard and is required. Now someone who did not know better needs to exercise their 30 day return privileges and return the Tivo for a refund if they can't/won't get a cablecard.

Keep in mind, the S3 was sold for $800 when it was launched and I am sure they never imagined anyone would pay $800 plus Tivo service fees and be too cheap to pay for a cablecard - or to spend all that money and only watch the locals. Heck, when I first got my HD DirecTivo most of prime time was not in HD and if I did not subscribe to HBO and other HD channels there would have been little to watch.

At the current price point, yes is does make some sense to have a 2nd or 3rd HD Tivo and use them in other rooms - but the system was still designed for cablecards. Could they sell a few more if they allowed manual clear QAM mapping? Yes for sure. Would the profits of the sale of these extra Tivos cover the cost of the programming effort? Maybe not.

Folks have hacked the Tivo to add all sorts of new features and functions, perhaps the answer to this problem will come from that group?

Dennis


----------



## sfhub

dwynne said:


> They can get the amazing PQ all they want, but no PG info. An informed consumer should not buy an HD Tivo if they do not want to or can't get a cablecard - it was designed for cablecard and is required. Now someone who did not know better needs to exercise their 30 day return privileges and return the Tivo for a refund if they can't/won't get a cablecard.
> ...
> Folks have hacked the Tivo to add all sorts of new features and functions, perhaps the answer to this problem will come from that group?


There is no argument that with current functionality you need CableCARD or TiVo S3/HD are pretty much useless (as in manual recording only) for recording on digital cable, in particular HD locals.

That is the whole point of this thread. If TiVo would like to adjust the way they provide guide data then people with functioning PSIP (I believe 43% of the respondents to the poll many months ago indicated their systems had useful PSIP) would have guide data and TiVo's normal functionality. We already know adjusting the guide data works because TW Austin provides PSIP with channel #s that match their digital cable guide. When Tribune adjusted their guide data to include digital cable channels in the standard guide, TW Austin folks could use their TiVo's without CableCARD and record with guide data.

Possibly hacker community could address this but previous attempts led nowhere.


----------



## Saxion

dwynne said:


> Keep in mind, the S3 was sold for $800 when it was launched and I am sure they never imagined anyone would [...] spend all that money and only watch the locals.


Then why have the antenna connection, with all the requisite costs (hardware, software, guide support)? You _vastly _underestimate the market of people who only want to record local HD.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> Why do so many people in these threads try to project their personal preferences as moral imperatives for companies to kowtow to?


Let's tone down the rhetoric; no one is calling anyone immoral. We have a right, even a responsibility, to communicate product feedback to TiVo. All companies, TiVo included, love to get customer feedback; TiVo dedicates a webpage to it after all. This thread is simply an attempt to communicate to TiVo the amount of interest in this feature. Other features and fixes are also valid and ought to be similarly communicated.

If you personally don't care about this feature, then move on. Communicate your own desires to TiVo. But I take offense at any attempts to silence people who are simply expressing product feedback to TiVo, or question the validity of such feedback. That's for TiVo to decide.


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> The cost of, instead of doing that, just getting another CableCARD for your second TiVoHD is, what, $10 a month? So long as we're clear on what we're talking about.


Just so we're clear on what we're talking about, the proposal I'm talking about is for TiVo to adjust their guide data so people with useful PSIP (around 43% of users responding in the last poll) can use their TiVo's without CableCARD. This proof of concept is already shown to work in TW Austin. This is the *automatic* QAM mapping sub-proposal. Making it less a hassle to install TiVo helps TiVo and their customers.


aindik said:


> The TiVoHD can give them that amazing PQ on the QAM locals just like their TV can. But, just like their TV, the TiVoHD doesn't know what shows are on the channels when.


So can a Sony digital PVR with no monthly charges. The reason people pay more for TiVo (than other solutions) is for the added functionality. Basically for digital cable, even if you have no need to record encrypted channels, TiVo's entry point went from [cost of unit + $10/month] to [cost of unit + $10-$20/month + CableCARD hassle] Adjust the monthly #s to whichever subscription the consumer qualifies for.

You seem to feel the extra cost and hassle of CableCARD is no big deal for expanding TiVo to a larger audience. The same argument could be used to say TiVo is leaving money on the table and they should charge $20/month for their service. Why does TiVo keep tinkering with their monthly rates? Precisely because they have found that there is price sensitivity in that range.


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> If you personally don't care about this feature, then move on. Communicate your own desires to TiVo. But I take offense at any attempts to silence people who are simply expressing product feedback to TiVo, or question the validity of such feedback. That's for TiVo to decide.


Well said.


----------



## bicker

To communicate product feedback to TiVo:

http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm

Note that discussion threads host *both *sides of every issue raised in the thread. No perspective deserves an un-rebutted soap-box.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> To communicate product feedback to TiVo:
> 
> http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm


Thanks for the link. I submitted my feeling on the QAM mapping issue. My ultimate point was to allow manual mapping regardless of PSIP data. For example if I have digital channel 55.1 let me assign the ABC HD guide data to it with no intelligence required.


----------



## mattack

Phantom Gremlin said:


> The cable companies are *required* to sell you premium channels (such as HBO) without requiring you to purchase any other tier of service (except most basic).


Whatcha talking about, Willis?

From comcast.com's lineup listings:
You must subscribe to a specific tier to receive certain channels. Premium Services: You must subscribe to the individual premium service and a digital receiver in order to receive the multiplex version of that same channel.

I realize they can/are deceptive/tricky, especially making lifeline basic and such not clear.. but I have NEVER heard that you could get premium channels without a 'tier'.. and the first sentence of what I quoted seems to prove that.

Can you give a citation of how one can order HBO WITHOUT digital cable?


----------



## h00ligan

$4 a month (2 m cards) isn't worth a letter writing campaign to me. It sucks, however - I wouldn't have bought a tivo had this not been an issue, i would have been using something else - so tivo can be thankful i DID need a cablecard.


----------



## ciper

h00ligan said:


> $4 a month (2 m cards) isn't worth a letter writing campaign to me.


Its not just the cost of the cable card but in some areas you also need to pay for an "HDTV tier" which includes the unencrypted channels in the map! For me specifically the HDTV tier is 10$ so is 14$ a month worth a letter writing campaign?


----------



## bkdtv

ciper said:


> Its not just the cost of the cable card but in some areas you also need to pay for an "HDTV tier" which includes the unencrypted channels in the map! For me specifically the HDTV tier is 10$ so is 14$ a month worth a letter writing campaign?


Why would you need to pay for the HD tier if those channels are unencrypted? If they won't provide a CableCard to HDTV customers without that "tier," then tell them your TV isn't a HDTV.


----------



## ciper

bkdtv said:


> Why would you need to pay for the HD tier if those channels are unencrypted? If they won't provide a CableCard to HDTV customers without that "tier," then tell them your TV isn't a HDTV.


Let me understand this properly. Assume the following -

Locals are unencrypted HD QAM 256
I get a cable card for some random tier, say the one that includes MTV2 and Noggin

Will the Tivo be able to associate guide data with the local HD channels even though there is no configuration pushed to them specifically related to the HD channels in the clear? 
My feeling is no. My understanding is that I would need some type of channel map configured at the head end to tell my cable card where to put those channels. That means the cable co would need to create a "free HD channels" tier.


----------



## sfhub

ciper said:


> Let me understand this properly. Assume the following -
> 
> Locals are unencrypted HD QAM 256
> I get a cable card for some random tier, say the one that includes MTV2 and Noggin
> 
> Will the Tivo be able to associate guide data with the local HD channels even though there is no configuration pushed to them specifically related to the HD channels in the clear?
> My feeling is no. My understanding is that I would need some type of channel map configured at the head end to tell my cable card where to put those channels. That means the cable co would need to create a "free HD channels" tier.


CableCARDs download a channel map separate from the authorization to view channels. In my area you get the complete channel map regardless of which tier you subscribe to. Whether you can view a channel or not is handled by authorization and encryption. Your area could operate differently.


----------



## 1283

dwynne said:


> Keep in mind, the S3 was sold for $800 when it was launched and I am sure they never imagined anyone would pay $800 plus Tivo service fees and be too cheap to pay for a cablecard - or to spend all that money and only watch the locals.


I have two S3s, each with a 1TB drive, and I have limited basic only. I would add another TiVo if I don't have to pay Comcast for more CableCards.


----------



## Tiyuri

Is there any way to make Tivo tune to a 3 digit sub channel? For example my TV opines that Fox HD is on 2-804 but it seems I can only enter 2 digit sub channels on my Tivo.


----------



## aindik

bkdtv said:


> Why would you need to pay for the HD tier if those channels are unencrypted? If they won't provide a CableCard to HDTV customers without that "tier," then tell them your TV isn't a HDTV.


Is there such a thing as a TV with a CableCARD slot that doesn't do HD?

Also, my experience with Comcast is you can't just get a CableCARD. They have to come out and install it (at which time, they can see your TV).


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> Also, my experience with Comcast is you can't just get a CableCARD. They have to come out and install it (at which time, they can see your TV).


Some Comcast areas are now allowing customer pickup and self-installs. My area recently changed over to allowing self-installs. Other areas are still requiring an installer visit.


----------



## ciper

sfhub said:


> CableCARDs download a channel map separate from the authorization to view channels. In my area you get the complete channel map regardless of which tier you subscribe to. Whether you can view a channel or not is handled by authorization and encryption. Your area could operate differently.


Hmm... That is interesting and good info to know. I assumed they were one and the same. 
I should note that my cable co isn't handling security in the correct way. They are authorizing the card based on its number alone regardless of which device you have it installed in. They do this to preauthorize the units so a dumb tech can place them in your device and not need to call with the paired number.



sfhub said:


> Some Comcast areas are now allowing customer pickup and self-installs. My area recently changed over to allowing self-installs. Other areas are still requiring an installer visit.


I wish more would do this. I very much dislike the 1pm-5pm windows on weekdays that force you to miss work and then the installer doesnt show up until 5pm (had it happen three times).


----------



## h00ligan

ciper said:


> Its not just the cost of the cable card but in some areas you also need to pay for an "HDTV tier" which includes the unencrypted channels in the map! For me specifically the HDTV tier is 10$ so is 14$ a month worth a letter writing campaign?


here it is a bit different but you are right, there's a $5 a month gateway charge - the hd tier is something 5$ more... but you have a good point.


----------



## ciper

I'm sure many of you are aware of the HD Homerun product. I mention it because this thread reminds me of a tool used to configure it http://www.oshinetworks.com/HDHomeRun/QamMapper/
I know it may sound foolish but I'm disappointed that the random PC can map QAM channels and associate guide data with them but the Tivo cannot 

BTW does anyone have a link to the law that states the cable co. must provide local stations digitally and unencrypted?


----------



## Saxion

ciper said:


> BTW does anyone have a link to the law that states the cable co. must provide local stations digitally and unencrypted?


Note that cable companies are not _required _to carry the digital versions of local broadcast stations; but if they choose to, they must be unencrypted and available on the most basic tier of service.

Here is a link to FCC Sec. 76.901:



> "The basic service tier shall, at a minimum, include all signals of domestic television broadcast stations provided to any subscriber ..."


Here is a link to FCC Sec. 76.630:



> "Cable system operators shall not scramble or otherwise encrypt signals carried on the basic service tier."


----------



## ciper

Saxion said:


> Note that cable companies are not _required _to carry the digital versions of local broadcast stations; but if they choose to, they must be unencrypted and available on the most basic tier of service.


You have helped me. Thank you. I will use this information like a sword to cut my cable company a new arsehole.


----------



## bicker

Some cable companies will blow your concerns off, specifically because the quoted material doesn't indicate any requirement to provide *both *digital and analog signals *of the same station* in-the-clear, unless they're *both *on the most basic tier of service. That is why MSOs can choose to apply a special fee for HD service, including the HD signals for the local channels. In that case, the regulations don't require that they provide those signals in-the-clear.

If there is no HD fee, however, then they are not required to provide those signals in-the-clear, at least not yet.


----------



## aindik

bicker said:


> Some cable companies will blow your concerns off, specifically because the quoted material doesn't indicate any requirement to provide *both *digital and analog signals *of the same station* in-the-clear, unless they're *both *on the most basic tier of service.


It absolutely does require that.

The first regulation says that any OTA channel that the company provides to any subscriber must be in the basic tier. It doesn't only say analog channels. It says "all signals of domestic television broadcast stations provided to any subscriber." That includes analog and digital stations (and isn't even limited to local channels - back when TBS and WGN were simulcasts of OTA channels, they had to be in the basic tier, by this language, on every cable system in the country that carried them).

The second regulation says that any channel in the basic tier must be unencrypted.

So, if they carry the digital OTA channel, it must be in the basic tier, and because it's in the basic tier, it must be unencrypted.

Whether they are required to carry the channel or not is a subject of different law. But if they do carry the channel (whether voluntarily or because they're required to carry it), they must put it in the basic tier and it must be unencrypted.


----------



## sfhub

ciper said:


> I should note that my cable co isn't handling security in the correct way. They are authorizing the card based on its number alone regardless of which device you have it installed in. They do this to preauthorize the units so a dumb tech can place them in your device and not need to call with the paired number.


The purpose of pairing is more for copy protection than security.

You can watch encrypted programs as long as your card is activated and you are authorized to view the channel.

Where pairing comes into play is if the channel or program has CCI=non-zero. In this case the broadcaster has requested additional copy protection. The CableCARD will decrypt the channel as with CCI=0x00 channels/programs, but will then re-encrypt the stream, using information derived from the pairing, prior to passing the stream to TiVo (ie the host device)

If your pairing is broken or not entered correctly, then if your provider decides to implement copy protection using CCI=non-zero, for those channels and programs your CableCARD will not pass the streams to TiVo. However if your cable company doesn't implement copy protection (ie CCI=0x00) then pairing is not relevant, though it would be better to have the pairing correct because they might implement copy protection in the future and then people would start complaining their CableCARD was working fine before, but now they can't get HBO.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> That is why MSOs can choose to apply a special fee for HD service, including the HD signals for the local channels. In that case, the regulations don't require that they provide those signals in-the-clear.


*Absolutely not true.*

In case you had any doubt whether the above applies to all digital OTA stations, here is a link to FCC Sec. 76.5:


> FCC Sec. 76.5 - Definitions
> 
> Television station; television broadcast station. Any television broadcast station operating on a channel regularly assigned to its community by Sec. 73.606 or *Sec. 73.622 *of this chapter.


73.622 is the *digital *television table of allotments, as shown here:



> 73.622 Digital television table of allotments.
> 
> The following table of allotments contains the digital television (DTV) channel allotments designated for the listed communities in the United States, its Territories, and possessions.


Note that the NCTA has repeatedly asked the FCC for rulings that would allow them to encrypt digital OTA channels, and the FCC has chosen so far to not make such a ruling.


----------



## bicker

I won't argue with you about this; I don't have time or inclination, since I'm leaving tomorrow. The reality is that there are some MSOs that are charging extra for HD locals and encrypting them, so clearly there are folks at the MSOs, at least, who disagree with you. Until your argument prevails with *them*, or with the FCC and the FCC makes the MSOs change their practices, it won't matter to the subscribers affected. The effect on the subscribers is what I described, not what you described.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> The reality is that there are some MSOs that are charging extra for HD locals and encrypting them


There was an earlier time when that was true, but I don't know of a single market where that is currently true. If you can point me to a city and MSO, I'll get an appropriate letter sent to their legal dept.


----------



## sfhub

It's not just Saxion's position. dt_dc said the same thing and he is pretty spot on with FCC rules. Besides, the text of the FCC rules is pretty clear. If there are MSOs violating FCC rules, they need to be educated. Ask your local consumer watch TV show to help you if there is too much bureaucracy. Somehow when big companies get bad publicity on TV the right people get involved quickly.


----------



## mattack

aindik said:


> So, if they carry the digital OTA channel, it must be in the basic tier, and because it's in the basic tier, it must be unencrypted.


This may be going in circles in this thread.

But if it requires that it be "unencrypted", doesn't that also imply that requiring a CableCard, which is by definition a decryption device, shouldn't be required to be able to use the channels to their fullest extent in a Tivo?

Seems like that tortured logic should mean that the cable company is required to send out the required info (PSIP?) so this thread will be moot.

(Though I do realize that they already are required to send PSIP if it comes over the air, right? I have never really been clear why that one guy in Texas is so lucky and does get his digital OTA channels without cablecard with all functionality.)


----------



## mattack

Another question not exactly related to this thread but it reminds me.

Lets say I was willing to pay $2/month or whatever for a cablecard.

Is it in any way possible to get the cablecard but purposely NOT have all of the other programming mirrored to it? i.e. my household does get digital cable (and HD actually), but personally I would want the cablecards JUST for the OTA stations on cable... So I'm trying to avoid the $7 or whatever 'extra digital outlet'.

I suspect that what I want is not even possible. But if it is, I could imagine paying for one M card for my HD.. [I get more than enough stuff to record on my regular channels, so adding the extra channels would just be even more I don't have time to watch.. heh]


----------



## aindik

mattack said:


> This may be going in circles in this thread.
> 
> But if it requires that it be "unencrypted", doesn't that also imply that requiring a CableCard, which is by definition a decryption device, shouldn't be required to be able to use the channels to their fullest extent in a Tivo?


No, it doesn't. I was responding to a post in a mild hijack that started with a by the way, and then a question about the regs that require the cable company to send digital channels unencrypted.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> Seems like that tortured logic should mean that the cable company is required to send out the required info (PSIP?) so this thread will be moot.
> 
> (Though I do realize that they already are required to send PSIP if it comes over the air, right? I have never really been clear why that one guy in Texas is so lucky and does get his digital OTA channels without cablecard with all functionality.)


No, this thread is not moot even if your cable company sends out proper PSIP because TiVo has an implementation flaw right now where even if proper PSIP is sent, they do not provide guide data.

if you configure cable w/o having CableCARDs installed:
1) the guide data provided by TiVo only includes channels 0-99. There is no guide data for 7xx HD channels (or whatever your provider's HD grouping is)
2) there is no way (from end-user's perspective) to get the OTA channel guide to work with the cable input. If you choose OTA, it will always tune from the OTA antennae input.

*If* TiVo allowed (coordinated with Tribune) the guide data for a cable install (sans CableCARD) to include digital cable channel #s (or OTA channel #s as appropriate) then for many people (whose cable company's provide useful PSIP), this thread wouldn't be necessary. The people left would be the ones w/o proper PSIP, and they can argue with their MSO using FCC rules.

What TW Austin did was send PSIP out that used digital cable channel #s. So for example FOX was mapped to 702. Then the Tribune guide data was modified so an install w/o CableCARDs would have guide data for digital channels like 702. From there everything just worked, no CableCARD necessary. Guide data from Tribune. Channel mapping provided via PSIP.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> Lets say I was willing to pay $2/month or whatever for a cablecard.
> 
> Is it in any way possible to get the cablecard but purposely NOT have all of the other programming mirrored to it? i.e. my household does get digital cable (and HD actually), but personally I would want the cablecards JUST for the OTA stations on cable... So I'm trying to avoid the $7 or whatever 'extra digital outlet'.
> 
> I suspect that what I want is not even possible. But if it is, I could imagine paying for one M card for my HD.. [I get more than enough stuff to record on my regular channels, so adding the extra channels would just be even more I don't have time to watch.. heh]


In your area, $2 is the price for the *second* CableCARD in the same device. The price of the CableCARD is actually $7. That digital outlet fee bundles in the rental of the device (CableCARD, STB, etc.) + a mirror fee.

In your area it is possible to get CableCARD with just limited basic (as in the $14 variety limited basic channels 0-3x) Right or wrong, other areas sometimes force you to include larger packages before they will give you a CableCARD. It may take several calls before you find the right CSR that will allow the CableCARD install with just limited basic. Some people find it easier to get digital cable, get the CableCARD, then drop digital cable and expanded basic.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> But if it requires that it be "unencrypted", doesn't that also imply that requiring a CableCard, which is by definition a decryption device, shouldn't be required to be able to use the channels to their fullest extent in a Tivo?


CableCARDs, as used by TiVo's implementation, provide decryption *and* channel mapping services.

If useful PSIP is being passed through by your cable company, then from a technical perspective, all the channel mapping data for HD locals is already present in the PSIP and the CableCARD channel mapping services can be substitued with PSIP.

However with TiVo's implementation, while they recognize the channel mapping data in the PSIP, they will not provide the guide data to match the channels unless you choose CableCARD install.

The frustrating part for many folks on this thread is this has been shown to be a guide data configuration issue on TiVo's end. When TW Austin users got the proper guide data configured, everything worked using PSIP (instead of CableCARD) for channel mapping.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

mattack said:


> I realize they can/are deceptive/tricky, especially making lifeline basic and such not clear.. but I have NEVER heard that you could get premium channels without a 'tier'.. and the first sentence of what I quoted seems to prove that.
> 
> Can you give a citation of how one can order HBO WITHOUT digital cable?


Well, you could move to Tualatin, Oregon. Comcast here was perfectly willing to provision my service for basic + HBO. But I don't actually have that service, just paying $2 for 2nd cable card. First is free.

As to FCC rules, I haven't searched thru the actual regulations. However, here is a "dumbed down" version. I'll quote the relevant text below:

_"Multiplex" Services

Some per-channel services, like HBO, Showtime, and other premium movie services, may be offered on a multiplex basis, where multiple sub-channels of programming are available. The FCC has decided that multiplex services are to be treated as a per-channel service. A consumer is not required, therefore, to purchase any intervening tier or tiers of programming in order to subscribe to multiplex service.​_
But the above is not the entire story. That same page also prohibits "tier buy-through" but then removes the prohibition if the cable company is subject to "effective competition".

What I think it all means is that if your cable company offers *any* subscriber the ability to add HBO a-la-carte then it must allow every subscriber with just the basic tier of service to add HBO a-la-carte.

IANAL. YMMV.


----------



## jeepguy_1980

sfhub said:


> CableCARDs, as used by TiVo's implementation, provide decryption *and* channel mapping services.
> 
> If useful PSIP is being passed through by your cable company, then from a technical perspective, all the channel mapping data for HD locals is already present in the PSIP and the CableCARD channel mapping services can be substitued with PSIP.
> 
> However with TiVo's implementation, while they recognize the channel mapping data in the PSIP, they will not provide the guide data to match the channels unless you choose CableCARD install.
> 
> The frustrating part for many folks on this thread is this has been shown to be a guide data configuration issue on TiVo's end. When TW Austin users got the proper guide data configured, everything worked using PSIP (instead of CableCARD) for channel mapping.


This QAM mapping has me a bit confused. My bedroom Vizio TV will tell me what I am watching if I press the info button on a QAM channel. It will tell me the channel and the name of the show as well as provide guide data for the next several hours.

Yet, my Series3 in the living room says no programming data available and puts an * in the channel name. Why/how is my Vizio TV smarter than the Tivo?

Based on this PSIP explanation about the guy in TX, I too should get full guide data on my Tivo.


----------



## ciper

jeepguy_1980 said:


> Why/how is my Vizio TV smarter than the Tivo?


THANK YOU! This is exactly what I tried to point out in a previous post and but a few members refuse to understand it since they don't use the feature.

In real life my job puts me in a position where many people ask my opinion on or explain new technology. When the topic of Tivo comes up this is nearly always a concern. Digital tuners are common as dirt and can perform "qam mapping" with no user intervention required. I'm not even asking for Tivo to do it automatically - a fully manual mapping procedure would work just fine for many.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

jeepguy_1980 said:


> Why/how is my Vizio TV smarter than the Tivo?


This is easy to explain.

Many of the executives and investors of Vizio have major "skin in the game". Which makes them much more customer focused. And they are competing in a very cutthroat retail environment. A look at Vizio's web site tells you their TVs are sold at "Circuit City, Costco Wholesale, Sam's Club, Wal-Mart and other retailers nationwide".

So the combination of motivated executives and retail feedback inevitably leads to much better products.

OTOH, Tom Rogers, the TiVo CEO, is a "former NBC executive". He'd rather hobnob with network executives and jet back and forth between California and New York. He's probably on an ego trip. He probably wouldn't know what QAM was if it reached out and bit him in the ***.


----------



## sfhub

jeepguy_1980 said:


> This QAM mapping has me a bit confused. My bedroom Vizio TV will tell me what I am watching if I press the info button on a QAM channel. It will tell me the channel and the name of the show as well as provide guide data for the next several hours.


All that information you are seeing if from the PSIP data that was sent by the OTA broadcaster and passed through by your cable company (with minor modifications to account for cable delivery)

TiVo has access to the exact same information. The only piece of the information that TiVo is shown to be using is the virtual channel #. If you install TiVo w/o CableCARDs then do a channel scan, you will see the PSIP virtual channel #s if they are present.

However, TiVo is not designed at all to use OTA PSIP guide data for recording. TiVo has been using Tribune guide data for a very long time, if not always. There is information in the Tribune guide data that allows TiVo to be a smarter recorder. This data is not present in the OTA PSIP guide data. IMO it would be very difficult for TiVo to use the OTA PSIP guide data to implement its features.


jeepguy_1980 said:


> Yet, my Series3 in the living room says no programming data available and puts an * in the channel name. Why/how is my Vizio TV smarter than the Tivo?
> 
> Based on this PSIP explanation about the guy in TX, I too should get full guide data on my Tivo.


Let me explain the PSIP solution that TW Austin customers got implemented a little more clearly. TiVo understand PSIP virtual channel #s. In TW Austin, instead of sending OTA PSIP virtual channel #s, they send out virtual channel #s that match there digital cable lineup. So FOX-HD might be on 114.1, the PSIP TW Austin sends out might say 702. The digital cable guide *from Tribune* has guide data for 702. However, when you install TiVo without a CableCARD, it will normally only download guide data for channel #s 0-99. In that case, the PSIP virtual channel 702 is not associated with any guide data. TW Austin consumer(s) lobbied to have their *Tribune guide* used by TiVo corrected to include guide info for 702, and after that TiVo could function properly.

If TiVo and Tribune could be convince to provide guide data that matched PSIP virtual channel #s, you could have this benefit also. That is the automatic QAM mapping proposal.
1) provide the guide data for OTA channel #s and/or digital cable channels as appropriate *when the install is not using CableCARD.
2) let PSIP virtual channel mapping do the automatic QAM mapping for you

We know #2 is already happening in TiVo because we can see it understands the PSIP virtual channel # when you do a full channel scan.

So all that is left is #1.


----------



## sfhub

ciper said:


> I'm not even asking for Tivo to do it automatically - a fully manual mapping procedure would work just fine for many.


IMO it is actually a simpler task for TiVo to give you automatic mapping when useful PSIP virtual channel information is present than it is for them to give you a manual mapping feature.

The former mostly requires adjusting what guide data they provide you.

The latter requires new UI, more testing, etc. etc.

Personally I'd be more than happy to get the automatic mapping implemented by adjusting the guide data. My area passes through useful PSIP. Areas that don't can then badger their local cable provider to follow FCC rules and pass through PSIP information. Eventually then everyone can have access to this functionality. The last poll on this, 43% of the respondents said their cable company already provided useful PSIP.


----------



## a68oliver

sfhub said:


> TiVo has access to the exact same information. The only piece of the information that TiVo is shown to be using is the virtual channel #. If you install TiVo w/o CableCARDs then do a channel scan, you will see the PSIP virtual channel #s if they are present.


I can tell by my Samsung HD TV that the cable company now passes PSIP virtual channel numbers for the local HD stations. This was not fully implemented last summer, but is working now.

My Tivo HD does a channel scan and finds the encrypted and unencrypted digital channels EXCEPT the unencrypted local HD channels. I know they are there because I can manually tune to them using their QAM channel assignment number.

It finds one unencrypted digital cable barker channel with no PSIP and I believe a couple of ESPN radio channels. Therefore, I don't believe the encryption status of a channel is causing a problem with the scan. However, the only difference I know of is the PSIP data. Is there any other explanation? I believe My S3 (before I installed cable cards) scanned and found the unencrypted local HDs with the PSIP virtual channel numbers.

Why won't my Tivo HD find them in a scan? Even if QAM channel mapping worked, it would be of no use to me since my Tivo doesn't find the channels.


----------



## sfhub

a68oliver said:


> My Tivo HD does a channel scan and finds the encrypted and unencrypted digital channels EXCEPT the unencrypted local HD channels. I know they are there because I can manually tune to them using their QAM channel assignment number.


I'm guessing there is some data in the PSIP that TiVo is not liking.

Can you capture the stream on a PC and analyze using TSReader?


----------



## a68oliver

sfhub said:


> I'm guessing there is some data in the PSIP that TiVo is not liking.
> 
> Can you capture the stream on a PC and analyze using TSReader?


I think you may be right. Unfortunately, I do not have the necessary hardware to use TSReader.


----------



## mattack

sfhub said:


> In your area, $2 is the price for the *second* CableCARD in the same device. The price of the CableCARD is actually $7. That digital outlet fee bundles in the rental of the device (CableCARD, STB, etc.) + a mirror fee.


That's why I was referring to an M card.. But my idea was to be able to get _one_ cablecard just for the channel mapping reasons and NOT get the mirror fee, since I would be willing to do without the digital channels (except the network rebroadcasts) on the cablecard. I realize it is/was kind of a wacky idea.


----------



## sfhub

mattack said:


> But my idea was to be able to get _one_ cablecard just for the channel mapping reasons and NOT get the mirror fee, since I would be willing to do without the digital channels (except the network rebroadcasts) on the cablecard. I realize it is/was kind of a wacky idea.


I think you understand how it works, but in case what I said was confusing.

You don't have a choice on the mirror fee. It isn't broken out separately (some other cable companies do itemize it). You cannot get a primary CableCARD, STB, or PVR in your area w/o the digital outlet fee.

Your account includes one digital outlet fee bundled in, so if you just need the M-card and no other devices in your house, then it is "free" (or paid for already in your package)

If you need another primary CableCARD, STB, or PVR, then the digital outlet fee will be charged.


----------



## jeepguy_1980

Funny how cable companies advertise themselves as being better than satellite by claiming that they do not charge you for connecting extra rooms. Yet, as soon as you want everything you pay for in multiple rooms, they're just like satellite.


----------



## sfhub

jeepguy_1980 said:


> Funny how cable companies advertise themselves as being better than satellite by claiming that they do not charge you for connecting extra rooms. Yet, as soon as you want everything you pay for in multiple rooms, they're just like satellite.


I haven't seen the ad you are talking about (in my market). Sounds like false advertising to me. Maybe you can have a consumer watch group call them out on that advertising.


----------



## aindik

sfhub said:


> I haven't seen the ad you are talking about (in my market). Sounds like false advertising to me. Maybe you can have a consumer watch group call them out on that advertising.


Those used to be the ads, before digital cable existed. I don't think I've seen those any time in the recent past.


----------



## jeepguy_1980

aindik said:


> Those used to be the ads, before digital cable existed. I don't think I've seen those any time in the recent past.


I just moved about 3 months ago. We had TW and they played those adds all the time even when I left.

It's not really false advertising. They don't charge you for each additional room. However, they don't give you all of your services unless you pay for each additional room.

Where I'm at now, I have Cox. They don't charge extra for additional digital outlets, but they do charge extra for digital, even if you just want the digital version of the analog channels.


----------



## sfhub

jeepguy_1980 said:


> It's not really false advertising. They don't charge you for each additional room. However, they don't give you all of your services unless you pay for each additional room.
> 
> Where I'm at now, I have Cox. They don't charge extra for additional digital outlets, but they do charge extra for digital, even if you just want the digital version of the analog channels.


But they are comparing to DBS, which is digital right? In that case, both charge additional.

I guess if folks want to let them slide, it will just encourage the same behavior. I think they should really not charge additional or stop the advertising.

Otherwise, DirecTV can make the same claim by not charging additional outlet fees for 2 basic channels and if you want the rest of them you pay for, then you need to pay the additional outlet fees.

If you think this is far-fetched, more and more analog channels are being moved to digital-only, to open up bandwidth for more HD channels. Soon analog will be reduced to a very basic lineup.


----------



## vstone

sfhub said:


> ...
> If you think this is far-fetched, more and more analog channels are being moved to digital-only, to open up bandwidth for more HD channels. Soon analog will be reduced to a very basic lineup.


Comcast Chicago has zero analog channels, but out here in outer boondockia we have not lost any analog channels and all non-premium HD channels are still unencrypted (don't expect that to last).


----------



## ciper

vstone said:


> Comcast Chicago has zero analog channels, but out here in outer boondockia we have not lost any analog channels and all non-premium HD channels are still unencrypted (don't expect that to last).


Can you cite your source? I can't believe they have zero analog otherwise lifeline cable would requier a cable box.
Comcast in the SF bay area hasn't even moved completely away from 550mhz yet!


----------



## bicker

jeepguy_1980 said:


> Funny how cable companies advertise themselves as being better than satellite by claiming that they do not charge you for connecting extra rooms.


They're not advertising that here any longer.


----------



## toy4two

SugarBowl said:


> But it is a cable company problem, not Tivo.


Who cares who's problem it is, the reality is for TIVO to survive and grow THEY need to fix it, the cable co's could care less about TIVO's inability to work with QAM.

I think there should be a class action lawsuit against TIVO, why even advertise your unit is QAM compatible when none of the TIVO features you paid for work with QAM without cable cards, its like that lawsuit for computer companies who put stickers "VISTA CAPABLE" on their computers but none of the cool features of Vista like Aero interface worked.

Sure QAM works, but only if you like manual records, and only if you are willing to sign up for a hefty cable package, and sure if you pony up for a cable card(s). Lets see what this problem costs people like me:
I pay $0 for my basic cable, included for my complex. I would have to spend at least $60 a month for a digital cable package, cable cards for another $5 a month, add on that $12 a month for TIVO service, I just went from $0 + $12 = $12 a month to $60 + $5 + $12 = $78 a month! No way is the Tivo experience worth $78 a month.

Luckily I'm still in my 30 day return window and I'm sending my unit back and going with a TVGOS DVR like Sony. :down:

TIVO used to be the innovator, there are so many ways to solve this problem, all mentioned here, and one other one, license the TV Guide On Screen info which anyone can access for free. Or make the TIVO guide work like the TVGOS system, when you download guide data it includes, OTA, Analog Cable, Digital Cable all in the data. Or allow code monkeys like me the ability to add this functionality on our own.


----------



## bicker

toy4two said:


> I think there should be a class action lawsuit against TIVO, why even advertise your unit is QAM compatible


None of the advertisements I've seen mention QAM at all. The _technical specifications_ say it has QAM tuners. It does. Nothing incorrect there.


----------



## TolloNodre

toy4two said:


> I think there should be a class action lawsuit against TIVO...


Does anyone else think it's funny that post *#666* is the first one to drag out the cliche 'class action lawsuit'???


----------



## jrm01

Dag nab it you're right. I did a search. I was sure you were wrong. There is no way to get 665 posts without someone suggesting it. But they didn't!!

Why didn't we think of that earlier. It's the perfect solution.

I'll take the case. Non-contingent. Large retainer up front so I can get my law degree first.


----------



## toy4two

************, seems to suggest there is a linux script that remaps QAM channels, anyone here using it?

http://www.************.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58822


----------



## sfhub

I believe you need to burn a new PROM on the S3 before you can apply the scripts.


----------



## toy4two

sfhub said:


> I believe you need to burn a new PROM on the S3 before you can apply the scripts.


how hard is that for the lay person, does it involve soldering?


----------



## Omikron

toy4two said:


> how hard is that for the lay person, does it involve soldering?


Indeed it does. Read more about it in the "PROM Socketing" thread and the services thread in the BST section on the "other" forums.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

toy4two said:


> ************, seems to suggest there is a linux script that remaps QAM channels, anyone here using it?
> 
> http://www.************.com/forum/showthread.php?t=58822


Here is a post form this forum with some more info on the Hack. It seems DirectTV pointed at first but down in the links you can do other TiVo DVRs as well.

socket prom change to start hacking on 240 models and up though, as always.

ETA -poting with half a brain today - added the link


----------



## moyekj

Well if it wasn't obvious already what Tivo thinks about adding unencrypted QAM support without cablecard this TivoPony post makes it pretty clear (along with M-card support for S3s):
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876


TivoJerry said:


> ... Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development)...


 So perhaps the tuning resolver is the only hope left for proper unencrypted QAM support without cablecard (though it may be impossible to obtain one without renting cablecard(s) anyway).


----------



## sirius22

I am a "snowbird" and spend time in Florida and Maryland and both places they have HD digital for the network channels in QAM with Comcast enhanced basic analog cable. Our Tivo HD can record in HD using the channel scan, finding which QAM channels correspond to what, and then using manual recording by channel, time, and day. It is a pain but works. Over the air is too weak to be usable in either location. To get the same capability from Comcast I would apparently have to subscribe to their HD option $6.95 and get a DVR $11.95 ($18.90). To get the cablecard for Tivo I would have to subscribe to HD ($6.95 plus truck roll). In my case it would take two subscriptions. Direct viewing of HD or SD with a HD set is easier with the QAM clear channels than with a separate box and remote.

I am told that Comcast could arbitrarily change the QAM clear channel numbers periodically out of sheer cussedness but so far they haven't done that.

The online, schedule-your-tivo-by-website system does not support the QAM channels at all.

It seems obvious that modifying the software to allow the user to enter a QAM channel to analog channel concordance table would significantly change the competitive situation re Tivo vs cable company DVR by lowering the relative cost of the HD capable Tivo by $6.95 plus truck roll. This is an easy software change. Alternately, they could modify the online scheduler to do that. There would be no recurring effort to maintain or update the QAM to analog concordence on their part. (I can certainly see why they don't want to do the recurring effort for many many cable systems.)

So why doesn't Tivo do the obvious even without letters from us? Is it sheer incompetence or is there some other reason. I gather that Tivo is building DVRs or associated software for cable companies. Their corporate existence is probably dependent on the success of this effort. The obvious other reason is that they can't afford to irritate the cable companies or are in bed with the cable companies or actually have contractual relationships with cable companies constraining what they can do for us. If this is the case, can we expect the stand alone (non-cable-company) Tivo to go the way of Replay TV? Can we expect Tivo efforts to improve the standalone product software and services to decline and eventually cease? Will the highest and best use of a Tivo HD be as a boat anchor (after first filling the case with concrete)?


----------



## Adam1115

Suddenly several QAM locals are remapped correctly on Comcast... I suddenly had two 9-1's for channel 9 (one ota and one cable).

No guide data though.... Why wouldn't there be guide data if it's remapped correctly?


----------



## aindik

Adam1115 said:


> Suddenly several QAM locals are remapped correctly on Comcast... I suddenly had two 9-1's for channel 9 (one ota and one cable).
> 
> No guide data though.... Why wouldn't there be guide data if it's remapped correctly?


Because it's a cable channel, "correctly" in this case requires it to map to the cable channel number, not the OTA channel number.


----------



## Adam1115

aindik said:


> Because it's a cable channel, "correctly" in this case requires it to map to the cable channel number, not the OTA channel number.


No, that's what I'm saying, it is.

The cable channel is not 9-1, it's like 117-7 or something. SUDDENLY they are remapping to the correct location, just like if I were using the cable box.


----------



## aindik

Adam1115 said:


> No, that's what I'm saying, it is.
> 
> The cable channel is not 9-1, it's like 117-7 or something. SUDDENLY they are remapping to the correct location, just like if I were using the cable box.


By "cable channel," I mean the channel number you would tune your box to if you had a box. That's the number it needs to map to in order for you to get guide data. 9-1 is the OTA channel number. Since there's no such channel as 9-1 in the "cable with a box" lineup, TiVo doesn't know what channel 9-1 is.


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> Because it's a cable channel, "correctly" in this case requires it to map to the cable channel number, not the OTA channel number.


Neither one would be "correct"

OP is not using a CableCARD so it is very doubtful there is guide data for 9-1 or for channels > 99 unless he uses TW Austin.

Even if the PSIP mapped to 709 (or whatever digital cable channel # it "should" be) there would most likely be no guide data.

Only if he installed CableCARD would TiVo use the guide data set that includes guide data for 709.


----------



## Adam1115

aindik said:


> By "cable channel," I mean the channel number you would tune your box to if you had a box. That's the number it needs to map to in order for you to get guide data. 9-1 is the OTA channel number. Since there's no such channel as 9-1 in the "cable with a box" lineup, TiVo doesn't know what channel 9-1 is.


I think I see what you're saying. If I had a cable card, channel 9 would be like 652 or something...?


----------



## aindik

sfhub said:


> Neither one would be "correct"
> 
> OP is not using a CableCARD so it is very doubtful there is guide data for 9-1 or for channels > 99 unless he uses TW Austin.
> 
> Even if the PSIP mapped to 709 (or whatever digital cable channel # it "should" be) there would most likely be no guide data.
> 
> Only if he installed CableCARD would TiVo use the guide data set that includes guide data for 709.


Doesn't TW Austin work precisely because they map to 709 (or whatever)? Isn't that what makes it work? If other companies did that, wouldn't they work, too?


----------



## aindik

Adam1115 said:


> I think I see what you're saying. If I had a cable card, channel 9 would be like 652 or something...?


Yeah. Whatever number channel 9's HD channel is on a cable box.


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> Doesn't TW Austin work precisely because they map to 709 (or whatever)? Isn't that what makes it work? If other companies did that, wouldn't they work, too?


Yes that is precisely the way they work, but it an issue on both TW Austin's side and TiVo's side. TW Austin needed provide PSIP to map the channels to #s that appear in the guide data. TiVo needed to have Tribune provide guide data for those #s. If either one didn't do their part, it wouldn't have worked.

In OPs case, his guide data most likely doesn't have data for channel #s > 99, so it doesn't matter what the PSIP maps the channel to, they will never have guide data, until TiVo fixes their side.

That is why I say there is no "correct" channel # to map to. If TiVo had already don their part and there was guide data for 709 (made up # for discussion), then it would be accurate to say PSIP needs to map to the "correct" channel # of 709.

Basically for TiVo S2, user was given to choice to choose between analog cable or digital cable guide data sets.

With TiVo S3, you are no longer given this choice. It is directly tied to whether you use CableCARD or not.

TW Austin users were able to convince Tribune to add digital cable channel #s (for HD locals) to the guide their TiVo S3 was using.


----------



## aindik

sfhub said:


> Yes that is precisely the way they work, but it an issue on both TW Austin's side and TiVo's side. TW Austin needed provide PSIP to map the channels to #s that appear in the guide data. TiVo needed to have Tribune provide guide data for those #s. If either one didn't do their part, it wouldn't have worked.
> 
> In OPs case, his guide data most likely doesn't have data for channel #s > 99, so it doesn't matter what the PSIP maps the channel to, they will never have guide data, until TiVo fixes their side.
> 
> That is why I say there is no "correct" channel # to map to. If TiVo had already don their part and there was guide data for 709 (made up # for discussion), then it would be accurate to say PSIP needs to map to the "correct" channel # of 709.
> 
> Basically for TiVo S2, user was given to choice to choose between analog cable or digital cable guide data sets.
> 
> With TiVo S3, you are no longer given this choice. It is directly tied to whether you use CableCARD or not.
> 
> TW Austin users were able to convince Tribune to add digital cable channel #s (for HD locals) to the guide their TiVo S3 was using.


So, theoretically, people could use the same campaign for any consistently mapped channel, even one mapped to 9-1?

In that case, it seems like Tribune can fix this problem (for stations with PSIP info, anyway), and all TiVo needs to do is take the data from Tribune the way they always have.


----------



## sfhub

aindik said:


> So, theoretically, people could use the same campaign for any consistently mapped channel, even one mapped to 9-1?
> 
> In that case, it seems like Tribune can fix this problem (for stations with PSIP info, anyway), and all TiVo needs to do is take the data from Tribune the way they always have.


Yes, assuming the cable guide structure from Tribune is sufficiently generic that it can handle major.minor as well as major-only channel styles. Clearly their OTA guide can handle this (if you choose OTA, you see 2 right above 2.1) so it would be reasonable to work on the assumption that all their guides can.

That is really the whole point of arguing for "automatic" QAM mapping. It is mainly TiVo and Tribune getting together to consistently provide the right guide data for the cable users not using CableCARD but who do have useful PSIP. For locals (HD locals is what most people care about), either they should provide guide data for the digital cable channel #s or the OTA major.minor channel #s, depending on what the PSIP from the cable company passes ends up pointing to.

Manual QAM mapping is actually more work for TiVo because they have to come up with UI and they have to deal with channels moving around.


----------



## bicker

sirius22 said:


> So why doesn't Tivo do the obvious even without letters from us? Is it sheer incompetence or is there some other reason.


It is because your personal concerns are not shared by everyone, and TiVo's priorities don't necessarily support your goals.


----------



## tlwizard

I have a bunch of channels that came up during a channel scan. They are all 1-2, 1-4, 1-5 and a few others. They are the HD versions of the normal network channels. It's been this way for 1.5 years.

Now, with the new software, the names of the channels are finally coming up. 1-4 now reads WNBC_HD. Is there any hope that program data can be on the way for these channels? It'd be really nice to season pass the HD version of Lost instead of having to manually do it all the time and having a Now Playing List full of "Rec: 1-7 9:00 pm."

PS don't have cablecards and OTA doesn't work at my current residence.

Anyone else have channel names show up all of a sudden? Am I in the wrong thread at all?


----------



## sfhub

You are on the right thread, TiVo has stated they don't feel this is a high priority for them.


----------



## TiVo Steve

toy4two said:


> Luckily I'm still in my 30 day return window and I'm sending my unit back and going with a TVGOS DVR like Sony. :down:


Be aware that the Sony TVGOS system will most likely NOT work after next Feb. (You won't even be able to set the clock)! The Sony DHG-HDD250/500 units rely on the TVGOS signal passed in the VBI of an analog signal.


----------



## sfhub

The part about *native* (as opposed to reconstituted) VBI line 21 TVGOS going away is true, but the rest of the conclusions contradict the information relayed from a Gemstar technical contact:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=991391

Now if somehow Sony is unable to use the VBI data in the digital transmission and the user's cable company also dropped analog, then it might be the case that the Sony would stop working properly.


----------



## tlwizard

sfhub said:


> You are on the right thread, TiVo has stated they don't feel this is a high priority for them.


So, are the names showing up simply random? Has it been this way for other people all along and I'm now just joining the party?


----------



## sfhub

tlwizard said:


> So, are the names showing up simply random? Has it been this way for other people all along and I'm now just joining the party?


PSIP allows for virtual channel #'s to map channels to user friendly locations and it also supports station identifiers.

My area has had identifiers for a long time.

It could be your provider coincidentally starter passing that information through at the same time as the new OS download, or it could be the download fixed some problem that prevented you from seeing them in the past.


----------



## sirius22

bicker said:


> It is because your personal concerns are not shared by everyone, and TiVo's priorities don't necessarily support your goals.


Of course not --- but Tivo's priorities almost certainly DO include making money!

A Tivo HD is an unusual device in that it is sold rather than leased but is totally useless without the underlying service. I DO have a personal concern that my $300 investment not turn into a boat anchor and so I am concerned about the apparent conflict of interest between stand-alone Tivo and cable-company Tivo. Aren't you? Why not?


----------



## heisman

The PSIP info is showing up now with Comcast instead of ?????. This could be step one towards clear qam without a cable card.


----------



## sfhub

It's nice that your provider is now getting you proper PSIP, but there is no step towards QAM without CableCARD taken, unless TiVo takes a step. That is the bottleneck in the picture and TiVo has stated they feel this is a low priority. We will probably all eventually (some earlier, some later) have useful PSIP (for HD locals) since the FCC requires the passthrough, but unless TiVo decides to use the data, it is pretty much useless for the TiVo PVR.

However, it's always possible to change peoples' perceptions and perhaps if enough people complain TiVo will see it differently.


----------



## moyekj

Given Tivo's stance on this it may be more useful at this point to look for an alternate 3rd party solution to the problem. For ReplayTVs it was possible to setup a proxy server through which all Replay connections would go through and obtain custom guide listings (via xmltv for instance) among other things. Don't know what kind of security/encryption is involved to do a similar thing for Tivos but perhaps it's doable.


----------



## heisman

sfhub said:


> It's nice that your provider is now getting you proper PSIP, but there is no step towards QAM without CableCARD taken, unless TiVo takes a step.


That's what has happened. Tivo has taken the step with the latest software to show that data. I used to get "??????" on clear qam channels previous to the new download. Comcast has been passing the proper PSIP for years on my Pioneer plasma with TVGOS. Never had to map that system from day one.


----------



## tlwizard

sfhub said:


> PSIP allows for virtual channel #'s to map channels to user friendly locations and it also supports station identifiers.
> 
> My area has had identifiers for a long time.
> 
> It could be your provider coincidentally starter passing that information through at the same time as the new OS download, or it could be the download fixed some problem that prevented you from seeing them in the past.


Thank you kindly.


----------



## sfhub

heisman said:


> Comcast has been passing the proper PSIP for years on my Pioneer plasma with TVGOS.


PSIP has nothing to do with TVGOS.

The step TiVo needs to take is to provide Tribune *guide data*. TiVo has already been parsing the PSIP channel #s for ages, which is all they need to associate with the guide data, if they chose to provide it.

The channel identifiers could be used as a secondary validation, but the channel #s are already sufficient. That is why this is not a step in any direction. What is needed was already there prior to this OS release.

If you are saying TiVo should work with PSIP guide data, that is pretty much useless as PSIP channel guide data is often 12-24hrs ahead only.

If you are saying TiVo should work with TVGOS, then I think there is even less chance of that happening than automatic QAM mapping.


----------



## enigma_K

Saxion said:


> I personally know 3 people that would buy a TiVoHD if it fully supported local digital channels over cable w/o CableCARDs: my mom, my dad, and my best friend's parents. All of them: 1) own HD sets, 2) subscribe to "expanded" (analog) cable, 3) watch the local HD channels over unencrypted QAM, 4) have no interest in putting up an antenna, and 5) have no interest in paying the cable company one red cent to be able to record what they already receive today.
> 
> How many sales is TiVo willing to loose here? Given their tenacious financial position, they don't have the luxury of leaving any sales on the table by neglecting this feature.


Chalk me up as another. I didn't find this thread until after I bought my Tivo HD but I'm well within the 30 days to return it and return it I will. I'm still scanning through the 24 pages of posts on this topic hoping something has changed but wanted to post my agreement.

Oh and I have sent my comments to Tivo as well.


----------



## bicker

sirius22 said:


> Of course not --- but Tivo's priorities almost certainly DO include making money!


Absolutely and they've evidently determined that they can make more money spending their limited resources working on other issues.



sirius22 said:


> I DO have a personal concern that my $300 investment not turn into a boat anchor and so I am concerned about the apparent conflict of interest between stand-alone Tivo and cable-company Tivo. Aren't you? Why not?


Because when I buy things I do so fully aware that the world doesn't revolve around me.


----------



## heisman

sfhub said:


> If you are saying TiVo should work with PSIP guide data, that is pretty much useless as PSIP channel guide data is often 12-24hrs ahead only.
> 
> If you are saying TiVo should work with TVGOS, then I think there is even less chance of that happening than automatic QAM mapping.


I'm saying that until this latest software release by Tivo, my clear qam channels showed up as "???????????" in the guide. Now, those channels show up with proper station number and id. Obviously, Tivo has made an improvement to their software concerning those channels. The chances of matching up guide data with "???????????" is nil. The chances of matching up guide data with proper channel number and station id is much greater than nil. So, one can logically deduce that Tivo has taken a step towards providing guide data to clear qam channels sans cablecard.


----------



## sfhub

heisman said:


> So, one can logically deduce that Tivo has taken a step towards providing guide data to clear qam channels sans cablecard.


When you bring up "a step towards providing guide data" it implies TiVo is actively trying to accomplish that.

I just think you are drawing more conclusions than are warranted, especially given TiVo has said publicly sometime in the last 2 weeks that they are not working on it because they don't consider it a high priority.

I can give you any number of alternate explanations for what you are seeing.

I've never seen ???? on my system and I recall seeing the station identifiers on my friend's system when I helped him install his TiVo HD for the SuperBowl so PSIP processing for station identifiers was working for others prior to 9.3.

How do you know your cable system didn't fix their data coincidentally at or around the time you received 9.3?

How do you know fixing PSIP processing for your cable system (assuming that is what happened) was even an intentional act? Perhaps they got some updated drivers to fix some other problem and it happened to fix your problem also? Perhaps they fixed PSIP for some unrelated compliance issue. Perhaps they were working on some Closed Caption processing problem and saw the same problem in PSIP processing.

I think you probably meant to say having the channel identifier *could* be used to match up guide information. I would agree with that.

I suggest you listen to what TiVo says. They are in a better position to say whether they are working on providing guide data for QAM tuners than we are. They have said very recently that they aren't.

How about I put it this way, if you go out and throw around a football with a couple of friends, can I deduce you've taken one step towards the Heisman?


----------



## heisman

sfhub said:


> How about I put it this way, if you go out and throw around a football with a couple of friends, can I deduce you've taken one step towards the Heisman?


No, because my eligibility is used up. 

The reason I know it's not a coincidence is because many other users are reporting the same experience in various forums, and my Pioneer plasma has always received appropriate PSIP data through the same source.

I'm probably just a hopeless optimist.


----------



## Saxion

heisman said:


> The reason I know it's not a coincidence is because many other users are reporting the same experience in various forums


It is interesting that we are getting multiple reports of this. Although I've had good PSIP decoding on my TiVo for some time, I used to get the ???? too. Clearly it's what TiVo displays when it is not able to decode PSIP. It seems at least plausible that TiVo improved compatibility in their PSIP decoding, such that markets where it used to fail are now working. It could also be that your market just happened to fix their PSIP data at about the same time your TiVo downloaded its latest firmware...

The interesting question is, if TiVo did in fact increase compatibility in their PSIP decoding, why?


----------



## Saxion

sfhub said:


> especially given TiVo has said publicly sometime in the last 2 weeks that they are not working on it because they don't consider it a high priority.


To be fair, that isn't what TiVo said. Here is the exact quote:



TiVoPony said:


> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. *That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers*. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others.


The only thing that TiVoPony stated is that they feel it affects a small number of users, and that that is one consideration when setting priorities. He explicitly said that doesn't mean they aren't working on it.


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> To be fair, that isn't what TiVo said. Here is the exact quote:


To be fair there was some context in the surrounding paragraphs.

Once QAM remapping was mentioned in the same breath as Free Space Indicator in terms of priority that pretty much did it in for me.

You'll notice ATSC converters received different treatment of "that's being worked on" If QAM remapping was associated with that section, that might give me some hope.

I have no problem saying this is open to interpretation and I could be wrong, but I think the interpretation is reasonable. I'll word it more carefully in the future.

If you want to to see QAM mapping you better start convincing TiVo it affects more customers than they think.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876


> Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.
> 
> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).
> 
> I assume by 'digital setup support for S2' you're referring to the ATSC converter boxes just coming onto the market in advance of next February's cut over for antenna signals (cable is not affected). That's being worked on, but I don't have a date or support plans to share yet.


----------



## jrm01

I have a feeling that TiVo made some change with 9.3 regardng the clear-QAM channel identifier, but my results probably show the difficulty they face.

I got 9.3 last Friday. Prior to that I had seven clear-QAM HD cable channels that all had station identifiers as "????".

Now I have 5 with "????", one that has proper id and one (PBS) where the station id shows up as "Neighborhood" - including the lower-case letters.

My TV, using the clear-QAM properly identifies all seven channels.


----------



## a68oliver

jrm01 said:


> I have a feeling that TiVo made some change with 9.3 regardng the clear-QAM channel identifier, but my results probably show the difficulty they face.
> 
> I got 9.3 last Friday. Prior to that I had seven clear-QAM HD cable channels that all had station identifiers as "????".
> 
> Now I have 5 with "????", one that has proper id and one (PBS) where the station id shows up as "Neighborhood" - including the lower-case letters.
> 
> My TV, using the clear-QAM properly identifies all seven channels.


My TV finds PSIP identifiers on 3 of 6 clear QAM channels. My Tivo HD only detects 1 of the 6 channels in a channel scan. The one that it does detect does not have PSIP identifiers.

I can manually tune to all 6 channels by punching in the QAM channel numbers.

After receiving 9.3a, I decided to perform another channel scan to see if anything new showed up. It didn't. The new software did not affect PSIP OR channel scans.

Although it has been a while, I seem to remember that my S3 did actually decode PSIP channel numbers (at least 3 of the 6) prior to my installing cablecards. This would have been with 9.2. Since the cablecards download a channel map, the channel scan function is now removed from the menus.

It seems that PSIP functionality is somewhat erratic across the many users and cable systems.


----------



## Saxion

jrm01 said:


> Now I have 5 with "????", one that has proper id and one (PBS) where the station id shows up as "Neighborhood" - including the lower-case letters.


Just so we're clear...are all the clear QAM channels showing up at OTA-equivalent channel numbers (6.1, 8.1, etc) and only the text string associated with those channel numbers is messed up? Or are you saying the actual channel numbers are not mapped correctly?


----------



## dkaleita

I just moved to a new town (Batesville, Indiana). The local cable company here, Enhanced Telecommunications Corporation (ETC), told me in no uncertain terms that they do not and will not supply cable cards. Local (Cincinnati and Indianapolis) digital channels do come through on the QAM/dash channels, but of course my HD TiVo doesn't know what to do with them other than let me tune them in with no program data. So in my case, TiVo's suggestion to solve my problem with cable cards doesn't do me any good at all. In fact, ETC tells me that if I want any premium channels, I will need to use a DVR that they provide in lieu of my HD TiVo.

Am I totally screwed, or what?


----------



## moyekj

dkaleita said:


> I just moved to a new town (Batesville, Indiana). The local cable company here, Enhanced Telecommunications Corporation (ETC), told me in no uncertain terms that they do not and will not supply cable cards. Local (Cincinnati and Indianapolis) digital channels do come through on the QAM/dash channels, but of course my HD TiVo doesn't know what to do with them other than let me tune them in with no program data. So in my case, TiVo's suggestion to solve my problem with cable cards doesn't do me any good at all. In fact, ETC tells me that if I want any premium channels, I will need to use a DVR that they provide in lieu of my HD TiVo.
> 
> Am I totally screwed, or what?


 OTA may be an option that still allows you to tune the local HD channels and get rid of a cable bill completely.


----------



## sirius22

bicker said:


> Absolutely and they've evidently determined that they can make more money spending their limited resources working on other issues.
> 
> Because when I buy things I do so fully aware that the world doesn't revolve around me.


Maybe somebody can help me with this cost problem:

*Tivo HD and Comcast DVR Compared:*
(Total cost for three years excluding tax.)

*TIVO HD*
Tivo HD: $300
Truck roll for cable card: $50
Tivo monthly: $10.75
Reqd HD cable option monthly: $6.95
Total monthly: $17.70
Total for 3 years: $937.20

*Comcast DVR*
DVR monthly: $11.95
Reqd HD option: $6.95
Total monthly: $18.90
Total for 3 years: $680.40

So why would anybody buy the much more expensive Tivo HD over the Comcast DVR? Is it that Tivo is that much better?

And why would Tivo not want to reduce the cost of the Tivo option by $300.20 (32 percent)( cost of 3 years HD option from Comcast plus truck roll) at essentially no cost to themselves? Tivo HD would then cost $637 -- less than Comcast. To find out why, read my previous posts.

Maybe Tivo figures nobody will do this calculation -- but the people who can't would appear to be much more likely to pick the cable DVR anyway.

It is a mystery and a puzzlement!! (Or maybe not.)


----------



## bicker

sirius22 said:


> So why would anybody buy the much more expensive Tivo HD over the Comcast DVR? Is it that Tivo is that much better?


Yes, that's pretty-much the case.



sirius22 said:


> And why would Tivo not want to reduce the cost of the Tivo option by $300.20 (32 percent)


Most likely due to the amount of additional profit the other option affords them.


----------



## aindik

sirius22 said:


> Maybe somebody can help me with this cost problem:
> 
> *Tivo HD and Comcast DVR Compared:*
> (Total cost for three years excluding tax.)
> 
> *TIVO HD*
> Tivo HD: $300
> Truck roll for cable card: $50
> Tivo monthly: $10.75
> Reqd HD cable option monthly: $6.95
> Total monthly: $17.70
> Total for 3 years: $937.20
> 
> *Comcast DVR*
> DVR monthly: $11.95
> Reqd HD option: $6.95
> Total monthly: $18.90
> Total for 3 years: $680.40
> 
> So why would anybody buy the much more expensive Tivo HD over the Comcast DVR? Is it that Tivo is that much better?
> 
> And why would Tivo not want to reduce the cost of the Tivo option by $300.20 (32 percent)( cost of 3 years HD option from Comcast plus truck roll) at essentially no cost to themselves? Tivo HD would then cost $637 -- less than Comcast. To find out why, read my previous posts.
> 
> Maybe Tivo figures nobody will do this calculation -- but the people who can't would appear to be much more likely to pick the cable DVR anyway.
> 
> It is a mystery and a puzzlement!! (Or maybe not.)


Prices vary by location. In my area, the HD box fee is $9.95 for customers below Digital Classic (if you have digital classic, you need a CableCARD so this comparison would be meaningless), and the DVR fee is $13.95.

Assuming you go with the TiVo $299 three year Prepay, the total cost of ownership of Tivo is $649 upfront ($300 + $299 + $50 for the truck roll) plus $9.95 a month (present value of $331.99), for a total of $980.99.

Total cost of the Comcast DVR over three years is $0 upfront and $23.90 a month, present value of $797.44. So, TiVo costs $183.55 more than the Comcast DVR over the three years, and that number shrinks every time Comcast raises the monthly DVR fee. $183.55 is $5.50 a month for 36 months, which is the amount Comcast would have to raise the DVR fee for TiVo and Comcast DVR to break even on price.

(I used a 5% discount rate on all present value calculations).


----------



## hmm52

TiVo Steve said:


> Be aware that the Sony TVGOS system will most likely NOT work after next Feb. (You won't even be able to set the clock)! The Sony DHG-HDD250/500 units rely on the TVGOS signal passed in the VBI of an analog signal.


I've had two Sony HDD-250s for several years; first 9 months or so without cablecards. The Gemstar guide is kind of funky (& slow to download). It both allows and requires much user configuration. Adjusting the tune channel for clear QAM was necessary as I recall; certainly easy to do. ie cable ABC affiliate = 814 - just change "tune channel" to 117.2 or whatever. Thereafter guide data is fixed to 117.2 until/unless another change is required. I would think TiVo could enable the same flexibility for users.

Since November when Verizon Phila. changed their signal parameters, unencrypted local HDs have been very difficult to tune however. No for the Sony DVRs and TiVo S3. Yes for an LG tuner. Maybe for a Sony Tv (didn't take enough time to look). Never a problem with Comcast - through 11/06.

Some Sony DVR users are already receiving TVGOS info, & time, in the digital stream. CBS owned stations in the Houston and Minneapolis/St. Paul areas are broadcasting it now (not via VBI which is analog only). It should be common across the rest of the country by the end of the year. The Gemstar software update which allows this does not yet stick with a reset. One open question is whether the guide data will survive compression by some cable providers. The conventional VBI format will certainly not be available next year.

The issue that I'd like to see Verizon & TiVo resolve is that of tiling/pixelation on strong and weak signals. It's been a major annoyance with the S3 (and a Toshiba Tv); almost never a macroblock seen through 3 Sony cablecard tuners 11/05 to present. User interface of TiVo is easier and quicker.


----------



## jrm01

Saxion said:


> Just so we're clear...are all the clear QAM channels showing up at OTA-equivalent channel numbers (6.1, 8.1, etc) and only the text string associated with those channel numbers is messed up? Or are you saying the actual channel numbers are not mapped correctly?


The clear-QAM channels all show up on their OTA-equivalent channel. Just the station identifier is messed up.


----------



## moyekj

jrm01 said:


> The clear-QAM channels all show up on their OTA-equivalent channel. Just the station identifier is messed up.


 Depending where your cable company gets the feed from the channel name may not even correspond to the OTA channel name. For example in my market for a specific channel:
OTA: 7-1 = KABCDT
Cable (with Cox digital box): 707 = ABCHD
Cable (with Tivo & CableCard): 707 = KABCDT
Cable (with Tivo & no CableCard): 7-1 = ABCHD

So obviously the PSIP present in the cable version of the channel is different/lacking compared to the OTA PSIP information.


----------



## sfhub

hmm52 said:


> One open question is whether the guide data will survive compression by some cable providers.


It is highly unlikely compression will pose a problem. The digital TVGOS data is on a separate stream (or in a separate user_data area) from the video, just like digital CC.

Many STBs will re-constitute the digital TVGOS, CC, etc. streams into line21 VBI data upon output from the box if you are using analog outputs.


----------



## Saxion

jrm01 said:


> The clear-QAM channels all show up on their OTA-equivalent channel. Just the station identifier is messed up.


Ah, thanks. So, what did you mean by "my results probably show the difficulty they face"...why would this be a problem for TiVo?


----------



## hmm52

sfhub said:


> Many STBs will re-constitute the digital TVGOS, CC, etc. streams into line21 VBI data upon output from the box if you are using analog outputs.


Are you sure about this? The most technically astute posters on the relevant Sony DVR AVS thread tend to see it differently. - CC will be supported in digital to analog conversion, as it already is with FiOS. Not likely for TVGOS because of Gemstar licensing arrangements and equipment needed on the head end. Hope for simple converter boxes providing the data has all but evaporated from what I've read. Since early days with analog cable & OTA HD, I've retained outdoor UHF antenna; it's been needed in last 1 1/2 years with FiOS for this data & for times local HDs by cable are pixelating on the Toshiba and S3. It may have to be replaced due to channel reassignments next year - depending on how things play out with the Sony & TiVo DVRs.


----------



## jrm01

Saxion said:


> Ah, thanks. So, what did you mean by "my results probably show the difficulty they face"...why would this be a problem for TiVo?


My guess is (and it's only a guess) that they attempted (half-heartedly?) to make some changes to the software with this release to try and utilize the station-id for the clear-QAM channels. I say this since mine changed from all "????" to a mixture, with only one of seven correct.

As others have stated many times, the PSIP info that they have to work with is extremely unreliable and variable.

I still find it interesting that my PBS station ended up with a station-id of "Neighborhod". My TV QAM tuner correctly identifies it.


----------



## sfhub

hmm52 said:


> Are you sure about this? The most technically astute posters on the relevant Sony DVR AVS thread tend to see it differently. - CC will be supported in digital to analog conversion, as it already is with FiOS. Not likely for TVGOS because of Gemstar licensing arrangements and equipment needed on the head end. Hope for simple converter boxes providing the data has all but evaporated from what I've read.


I guess you can compare the most technically astute posters to the Gemstar tech and see who has a better grasp.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=13064099#post13064099


DataChanEngr said:


> To quell the subject on the Electronic Program Guide questions, here is the response to a letter our head of engineering received from our technical contact at Gemstar.
> 
> "January 21, 2008
> 
> Hello Michael - In reference to your inquiry, your customers utilizing both OTA and CATV will have no problems with FCC 03-273. As you are aware, the VBI signal carried by your station will cease and be picked up by your local CBS affiliate. VBI in its original form will no longer "natively" exist and all new EPG's and VBI 21's will be able to decode the digital format. As for legacy equipment, CATV operators will still transmit the VBI with their analog signal, mainly due to regulations regarding VBI 21. *Additionally, NTIA requires all CECB's to decode "legacy VBI", again, mainly due to VBI 21* (see fcc. gov/cgb/consumerfacts/CC_converters .html for more information.) *We have tested extensively with the RCA DTA800B and found it to pass VBI 10-21 encoding perfectly.*
> Other units complying with NTIA should produce similar results. Please let me know if you need any further information."


The Gemstar tech appears to be saying, because they are using the same transport as CC, the equipment that handles CC will handle TVGOS as well. They've gone further and tested the RCA DTA800B STB and found it passes line10 through line21 perfectly. He doesn't specifically mention head-end equipment, but given the equipment for CC needs to be there and TVGOS is really no different from a transport processing standpoint, I don't see the problem you are pointing out.

In particular, I don't see why you would need to get into proprietary licensing from Gemstar and special equipment. The TVGOS data can be treated just as opaque generic data without parsing.

As an analogy, you can pass encrypted files over the Internet without needing every intermediary to have a license for the decryption routines. The proprietary nature of TVGOS is end-to-end, not point-to-point.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> As others have stated many times, the PSIP info that they have to work with is extremely unreliable and variable.
> 
> I still find it interesting that my PBS station ended up with a station-id of "Neighborhod". My TV QAM tuner correctly identifies it.


In my area PSIP info is actually pretty reliable and stable. There was a time when it wasn't but now it is much better.

Regarding Neighborhod (sic), are you sure TiVo and your TV are actually trying to display the same field?

The PSIP spec limit for "Short Name" is 7 characters. This is what most TVs will display as the channel identifier. "Neighborhod" is clearly more than 7 characters.

There is a separate descriptor called "Extended Channel Name Descriptor" which doesn't have that limit.

My guess is your TV is displaying Short Name and TiVo is displaying the Extended Channel Name Descriptor and that accounts for why they are different (if I understand what you are saying)

It is possible TiVo is fixing some of their PSIP processing so they can be fully ATSC compliant. It is possible these fixes actually were for the OTA/ATSC side, but since the routines are shared, also affect the processing for the cable PSIP.


----------



## hmm52

Though it's off topic for any TiVo thread, I'll provide a link to an AVS - Sony post which goes into the details of this issue. I'm not "technically astute" enough in this or any CE area to discuss it in depth. All of us Sony owners were greatly relieved in February when TVGOS data began to be received in ATSC broadcasts once a host channel change was forced (in a few areas). Analog VBI not necessary in the future for most users, as it looks now.


----------



## jrm01

sfhub said:


> Regarding Neighborhod (sic), are you sure TiVo and your TV are actually trying to display the same field?
> 
> The PSIP spec limit for "Short Name" is 7 characters. This is what most TVs will display as the channel identifier. "Neighborhod" is clearly more than 7 characters.
> 
> There is a separate descriptor called "Extended Channel Name Descriptor" which doesn't have that limit.
> 
> My guess is your TV is displaying Short Name and TiVo is displaying the Extended Channel Name Descriptor and that accounts for why they are different (if I understand what you are saying)


I checked a little further and think I mis-stated the situation earlier. Actually the id is as follows:

OTA: "WQEDDT3"
TV QAM: "Neighbo"
TiVo QAM: "Neighborh.."

Bottom line, although TiVo seems to have made some minor mods in 9.3 in this area, it didn't help much. I'm not suggesting they were trying to fix this problem (QAM id on S3), but I would guess that they were in this code perhaps in anticipation of providing sub-channel capability for S2 support of DTV Converter Boxes.


----------



## sfhub

jrm01 said:


> I would guess that they were in this code perhaps in anticipation of providing sub-channel capability for S2 support of DTV Converter Boxes.


I haven't been following that thread so I might not know what I'm talking about, but at first glance that seems like an issue with IR blaster codes and guide data.

Why would S2 need or even be able to process PSIP? It doesn't have a QAM tuner so how does it get access to the PSIP data?


----------



## sfhub

OTA: "WQEDDT3"

This looks like the aforementioned "Short Name"

TV QAM: "Neighbo"

This looks like the extended channel name being forced into a 7 character buffer.

TiVo QAM: "Neighborh.."

This looks like the extended channel name being too long to display.

So it looks like TiVo is processing the extended channel name descriptor if it is present. That accounts for why it is different from your OTA.


----------



## hmm52

sfhub said:


> The Gemstar tech appears to be saying, because they are using the same transport as CC, the equipment that handles CC will handle TVGOS as well. They've gone further and tested the RCA DTA800B STB and found it passes line10 through line21 perfectly. He doesn't specifically mention head-end equipment, but given the equipment for CC needs to be there and TVGOS is really no different from a transport processing standpoint, I don't see the problem you are pointing out.
> 
> In particular, I don't see why you would need to get into proprietary licensing from Gemstar and special equipment. The TVGOS data can be treated just as opaque generic data without parsing.
> 
> As an analogy, you can pass encrypted files over the Internet without needing every intermediary to have a license for the decryption routines. The proprietary nature of TVGOS is end-to-end, not point-to-point.


I went back through all the Sony AVS posts from Jan. 21 to present. Because of the terseness of the response I got to my question about this issue, as if it had been discussed to death already, I expected to find many posts. Not so. As a flat out statement there was only the one following my inquiry. I questioned why Verizon ONT doesn't recover TVGOS VBI data from digitized analogs (presumably) as it does for CC. The answer, post #11494, 3/17/08, was as follows:

_"It would not be easy for them. It would require MPEG encoders and decoders.

When analog channels are digitized that means converted to MPEG video compression and all VBI is lost. To account for this the CC information is decoded and passed separately in the encoded stream (no longer in the VBI form). The Gemstar data would have to be decoded then passed in the digital stream and then the Gemstar data would have to be added at the MPEG to analog conversion stage. Since the Gemstar format is patented only a Gemstar licensed device could decode and encode the TVGOS data stream.

BTW - everyone that keeps thinking that in 2009 the cable provided analog channels will contain Gemstar data is just about certainly wrong. After 2009 the stations will not source the analog streams and the cable companies are going to have to convert the MPEG streams to an analog signal for old TVs. The stream will not have the analog Gemstar VBI signal but will have a regenerated CC VBI signal._

Until this February, the consensus among Sony DVR users seemed to be that TVGOS data couldn't be acquired past 2/09 without a firmware update from Sony - thought to be unlikely. That proved to be false. Gemstar is providing it in software. Speculation preceding implementation... Data should become available through FiOS for the first time - CBS affiliates as hosts.

Sorry to consume this much space on subject irrelevant to TiVo users.

Any thoughts about TiVo enabling/allowing users to fix any "tune channel" to any "guide channel" as Sony does? - for clear QAM


----------



## sfhub

hmm52 said:


> *When analog channels are digitized that means converted to MPEG video compression and all VBI is lost.* To account for this the CC information is decoded and passed separately in the encoded stream (no longer in the VBI form). The Gemstar data would have to be decoded then passed in the digital stream and then the Gemstar data would have to be added at the MPEG to analog conversion stage. Since the Gemstar format is patented only a Gemstar licensed device could decode and encode the TVGOS data stream.


There are various methods you _could_ use to encode VBI, but based on what the Gemstar tech said and this document, it appears the current encoding method encodes the *entire* waveform and reconstructs it on decoding. When you encode the entire waveform, it doesn't matter what proprietary formats are there, they all get encoded.
http://www.scte.org/documents/pdf/ANSISCTE212001DVS053.pdf


> 4.4 Other VBI Standards
> *The encoding method described in this standard is applicable to VBI standards in addition to those
> mentioned here because it is a general purpose method for representing a basic VBI waveform.* Most
> standards in current use use two-level luminance encoding, however this standard accommodates
> multi-level pulse-amplitude modulation (PAM) coding as well. The technique is applicable to both
> PAL and NTSC. If the MPEG-2 video syntax carried a video program in PAL format, the syntax
> described here can be used as-is to carry VBI data and reconstruct a PAL standard video waveform.





hmm52 said:


> Until this February, the consensus among Sony DVR users seemed to be that TVGOS data couldn't be acquired past 2/09 without a firmware update from Sony - thought to be unlikely. That proved to be false. *Gemstar is providing it in software. Speculation preceding implementation... Data should become available through FiOS for the first time - CBS affiliates as hosts.*


This is entirely consistent with what the Gemstar tech wrote, including the part about CBS. Again, I would trust the Gemstar tech to know their stuff.



> Any thoughts about TiVo enabling/allowing users to fix any "tune channel" to any "guide channel" as Sony does? - for clear QAM


I would say it is unlikely in the short term. The recent statement by TiVo did not make it sound very likely.


----------



## sirius22

bicker said:


> Yes, that's pretty-much the case.


Well what are those advantages? I am not familiar with Comcast's DVR but I gather it does not have the ability to access Internet video content or transfer content to or from a user computer. If you like these capabilities, Tivo is clearly better. Otherwise I am not sure there is a big difference.



> Most likely due to the amount of additional profit the other option affords them.


I assume you mean the profit they get from building cable company DVRs or software -- I agree. The $300.20 is not going to Tivo but to the cable company. The question is: are there going to be further instances of Tivo favoring the cable companies over their stand-alone customers?


----------



## aindik

sirius22 said:


> Well what are those advantages? I am not familiar with Comcast's DVR but I gather it does not have the ability to access Internet video content or transfer content to or from a user computer. If you like these capabilities, Tivo is clearly better. Otherwise I am not sure there is a big difference.


Here are some:
1) TiVoToGo
2) Multi-Room Viewing
3) Expandable Capacity (now officially supported)
4) Wishlists, including Auto-Recording Wishlists (this is probably the biggest one)
5) Customizable "Channels I Receive" list
6) Much better searching
7) Recording History
8) Folders
9) Undelete
10) Online scheduling
11) All the other features that have nothing to do with recording things on TV and watching things you recorded from TV (music, photos, internet video, etc.).

To be fair, the Comcast DVR has some advantages:
1) Multi-Channel "Season Passes" (or whatever the unit calls them to avoid using the trademarked "Season Pass" name)
2) Video On Demand
3) Free Space Indicator


----------



## bicker

sirius22 said:


> Well what are those advantages?


The most notable is a far superior user experience. Smoother FF and REW. Better recording settings; Season Pass capabilities; etc. I'm sure that there are dozens of threads that list the advantages -- most of them probably overstate the advantages, but they're still advantages and they're still significant.



sirius22 said:


> I assume you mean the profit they get from building cable company DVRs or software -- I agree.


Well, not only that, but also the work they're doing for the stand-alone TiVos that don't have to do with QAM mapping.



sirius22 said:


> are there going to be further instances of Tivo favoring the cable companies over their stand-alone customers?


There haven't been such instances yet. You're wrong about that.


----------



## ciper

aindik said:


> To be fair, the Comcast DVR has some advantages:
> 1) Multi-Channel "Season Passes" (or whatever the unit calls them to avoid using the trademarked "Season Pass" name)
> 2) Video On Demand
> 3) Free Space Indicator


1. A properly formed wishlist does this
2. True but doesnt unbox replace this (with a fee of course)
3. Install TivoWebPlus and you can get detailed information of where all the space is going.


----------



## mattack

ciper said:


> 3. Install TivoWebPlus and you can get detailed information of where all the space is going.


That doesn't work *ON THE TIVO UI*, right?

Regardless, it won't tell me "You have 3 hours at <some specific recording quality(*)>"
free, will it? Free meaning - all space EXCEPT for what I have specifically recorded. (i.e. recently deleted, suggestions all count as 'free' space.)

(*) I don't mean basic, best, etc., necessarily. It could be the maximum HDTV quality. I understand that it's much more complex now with so many different bitrates.


----------



## mattack

dkaleita said:


> I just moved to a new town (Batesville, Indiana). The local cable company here, Enhanced Telecommunications Corporation (ETC), told me in no uncertain terms that they do not and will not supply cable cards. Local (Cincinnati and Indianapolis) digital channels do come through on the QAM/dash channels, but of course my HD TiVo doesn't know what to do with them other than let me tune them in with no program data. So in my case, TiVo's suggestion to solve my problem with cable cards doesn't do me any good at all. In fact, ETC tells me that if I want any premium channels, I will need to use a DVR that they provide in lieu of my HD TiVo.
> 
> Am I totally screwed, or what?


Unless they are VERY small, they are required by the FCC to support cable cards. You should contact your local cable authority (in the local or state government, I believe) and provide this info to them, quoting FCC regulations.


----------



## aindik

ciper said:


> 1. A properly formed wishlist does this


When a show has a unique enough name, yes. When it's called something like "Friends" or "Lost," or "24" some other number or English word that's likely to be in the title of at least episodes of series if not series titles, it doesn't work quite as well as something that would use the internal series ID like a Season Pass.


----------



## sirius22

bicker said:


> The most notable is a far superior user experience. Smoother FF and REW. Better recording settings; Season Pass capabilities; etc. I'm sure that there are dozens of threads that list the advantages -- most of them probably overstate the advantages, but they're still advantages and they're still significant.


Aindik and Bicker: Thanks - that is a rather impressive list.



> Well, not only that, but also the work they're doing for the stand-alone TiVos that don't have to do with QAM mapping.


Do we know they are actually doing such work? What kinds of improvements are in the pipeline?



> There haven't been such instances yet. You're wrong about that.


You mean there haven't been excluding the QAM issue.

BTW aindik it seems to me that while trivial to implement a free space indicator (FSI) would not be in Tivo's interest. The storage on a Tivo is presumably nearly full all the time. If it is not recording what you want it to record it is recording ads. If not ad videos then tivo suggestions. The red lights on mine are on nearly all the time. So would the FSI indicate the actual free space (nominally zero) or the space excluding the Tivo suggestions but including the ads, or the space excluding everything but content the user specifically requested? If the latter, the FSI would help the user more effeciently use the Tivo reducing the space available for ads -- not a good idea from Tivo's point of view. There will never be a Tivo FSI.


----------



## aindik

sirius22 said:


> BTW aindik it seems to me that while trivial to implement a free space indicator (FSI) would not be in Tivo's interest. The storage on a Tivo is presumably nearly full all the time. If it is not recording what you want it to record it is recording ads. If not ad videos then tivo suggestions. The red lights on mine are on nearly all the time. So would the FSI indicate the actual free space (nominally zero) or the space excluding the Tivo suggestions but including the ads, or the space excluding everything but content the user specifically requested? If the latter, the FSI would help the user more effeciently use the Tivo reducing the space available for ads -- not a good idea from Tivo's point of view. There will never be a Tivo FSI.


This thread is long enough without turning it into an FSI thread. The FSI has been debated on this forum for as long as TiVo has existed as a product. That's why I put a smiley next to it.

To answer your question, it could show all of those things. I'd take a list that said the number of GB, and percentage of the hard drive, taken up by:
KUID Recordings
Unexpired Recordings
Expired Recordings
Suggestions
Recently Deleted Programs
Free


----------



## bicker

sirius22 said:


> You mean there haven't been excluding the QAM issue.


No. That is what I meant when I said you were wrong about that: TiVo does NOT favor Motorola/TiVo customers over stand-alone TiVo customers in that regard. In neither case do customers have the ability to effect QAM mapping.


----------



## aindik

bicker said:


> No. That is what I meant when I said you were wrong about that: TiVo does NOT favor Motorola/TiVo customers over stand-alone TiVo customers in that regard. In neither case do customers have the ability to effect QAM mapping.


That's not what he said. He said they favor "cable companies" over standalone customers, not that they favor cable DVR users of their software to buyers of their own hardware.

His position is, by requiring a CableCARD to (meaningfully) record HD locals that are available without one, this favors cable companies. I can see his point.


----------



## ciper

aindik said:


> His position is, by requiring a CableCARD to (meaningfully) record HD locals that are available without one, this favors cable companies. I can see his point.


I believe this as well. There must be some collusion that we are not aware of for Tivo to ignore the feature.


----------



## bicker

aindik said:


> His position is, by requiring a CableCARD to (meaningfully) record HD locals that are available without one, this favors cable companies. I can see his point.


Uh, I don't think that is what he was referring to (since we were talking about TiVo's direction of software development efforts), but even if it was, I can't see that point. TiVo doesn't require CableCARD for use of the stand-alone TiVo: The cable company does.

TiVo doesn't favor cable companies over stand-alone TiVo customers; cable companies favor cable companies over stand-alone TiVo customers.



ciper said:


> There must be some collusion that we are not aware of for Tivo to ignore the feature.


I believe that is an inexcusable accusation to make without documentary evidence that would stand up in court. If you can't prove an accusation so damning, then you shouldn't even suggest it publicly, even in an online forum.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> TiVo doesn't require CableCARD for use of the stand-alone TiVo: The cable company does.


Actually no. Have you used a generic digital TV with cable before? Nearly without fail even the low end sets are able to properly view and assign appropriate channel numbers to the local digital stations rebroadcast in QAM.

The Tivo is the *only* QAM capable device I know that requires a cable card to properly view unencrypted channels.



bicker said:


> I believe that is an inexcusable accusation to make without documentary evidence that would stand up in court. If you can't prove an accusation so damning, then you shouldn't even suggest it publicly, even in an online forum.


We are both entitled to our opinions. I believe collusion is the only reasonable explanation for the current state of affairs.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> Actually no. Have you used a generic digital TV with cable before?


Yes. 


ciper said:


> The Tivo is the *only* QAM capable device I know that requires a cable card to properly view unencrypted channels.


The TiVo does NOT require CableCard to properly view unencrypted channels. You can always tune in the channels; you just need to find them. TiVo doesn't provide QAM mapping for either cable companies or for stand-alone customers. Any QAM mapping you're getting through the Motorola/TiVo is provided by the Motorola box, NOT TiVo.



ciper said:


> We are both entitled to our opinions.


Accusations without proof are not as deserving as rebuttals to accusations without proof. Nuf Sed.


----------



## Adam1115

bicker said:


> The TiVo does NOT require CableCard to properly view unencrypted channels.


If you define viewing channels properly by turning your expensive TiVo into a 1985 VCR, then yea, I guess it works just DANDY with QAM!

I wonder if there is a mod to get the OLED to blink 12:00? Can TiVo include a subscription to TV Guide with their fee?


----------



## Saxion

Adam1115 said:


> I wonder if there is a mod to get the OLED to blink 12:00? Can TiVo include a subscription to TV Guide with their fee?




How about a mod to add support for VCR Plus+ numbers I can enter from my newspaper? Oh wait, that probably wouldn't work anyway without proper QAM mapping! 

Seriously, TiVo support for QAM channels is halfhearted at best, and demonstrably worse than any of their competitors (Sony DVRs, Media Center PCs). One has to wonder why TiVo seems incapable or unwilling to match their competition for features. Clearly the cable industry doesn't _like _having to carry local HD channels in the clear, and would just as soon keep that knowledge from consumers and/or make those channels difficult to use. TiVo seems to be playing right along with that mentality. Perhaps TiVo doesn't want to rock the boat when it comes to their relationship with the cable industry; after all, TiVo is dependent on cable for everything from the SDV tuning resolver to CableCARD support to adapting OCAP to fit TiVo's business model.


----------



## sfhub

Saxion said:


> Clearly the cable industry doesn't _like _having to carry local HD channels in the clear, and would just as soon keep that knowledge from consumers and/or make those channels difficult to use.


I think it is pointless for cable to try to keep HD locals secret. The first thing many people do when they get their new TV is run a scan and inevitably they see some HD locals.

All I know is what TiVo said, that they feel QAM mapping affects very few of their users and that affects the priority of the feature. I don't know if there is any conspiracy beyond that.


----------



## hmm52

Saxion said:


> Seriously, TiVo support for QAM channels is halfhearted at best, and demonstrably worse than any of their competitors (Sony DVRs, Media Center PCs). One has to wonder why TiVo seems incapable or unwilling to match their competition for features....


.

It's probably a mistake to enter, or re-enter, this argument but I will anyway - as a long term Sony DHG-HDD250 owner (2) but new to TiVo, with a Series3.

Some things should be pointed out about the Sonys. These DVRs were discontinued over 2 years ago. The cable landscape has changed since their production. When I initially used them clear QAM with Comcast, all non premium SDs & local HDs were tuned. The ability to set any "tune channel" to any guide channel was essential. They basically came with two software packages, Sony's & TVGOS contolled by Gemstar. The flexibilities in ordering & editing the guide, jumping ahead or back 12,24, 96, etc. hours, and user configuration of channel mapping are all features of TVGOS. They exist in any Gemstar enabled device regardless of manufacture.

The Sony software operates different functions - favorite groups, FSI, recordings list & history, group delete, adjustable buffer (30-90min), chapter marks, smart cue adjust, etc. The limited Sony firmware updates have not at all changed any of these functions. The Gemstar updates have made subtle changes to TVGOS, for the better but not without some bugs along the way, usually remedied in a week or so.

When I switched to FiOS 11/06, unencrypted channels became very limited - a ton of music & local interest channels, many other very obscure ones along with the locals SD and HD. Far different than when with Comcast. Since 11/07 due to a VZ Phila. change, the Sony's can't tune unencrypted locals in HD. The case can be made that Verizon is discouraging use of their service for clear QAM. Is it that different for other cable providers? Do most Comcast customers still get all the non premium digital SDs without cards or boxes? I actually don't know but I suspect that cable providers didn't care much about clear QAM use until sales of TVs with QAM tuners exploded in the last year and a half.

My point is that there are many Sony and TVGOS features that I wish the TiVos had which I would put ahead of clear QAM mapping - if all we're talking about is mostly local HDs, still available with correct channel mapping OTA. In basic recording and playback functions, the Sony is feature rich compared to the Spartan S3. A synthesis of the two would be perfect, one helluva DVR. Overall I think the S3 fits the landscape of 2008 better. 2 tuners, expandable storage, etc. etc. But it's somewhat frustrating that user control in fundamental areas seems intentionally restricted; or at least not a priority.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> If you define *viewing channels* properly by turning your expensive TiVo into a 1985 VCR, then yea, I guess it works just DANDY with QAM!


We were talking about *viewing channels*. They were HIS words, not mine. And we can definitely view channels without CableCARD. Abso-friggen-lutely can.

And the fact that he would need to use more words to mean what you think he meant shows how much more inappropriate his accusation was in the first place.



Saxion said:


> How about a mod to add support for VCR Plus+ numbers I can enter from my newspaper?


My TiVo S2 supports VCR Plus+.



Saxion said:


> One has to wonder why TiVo seems incapable or unwilling to match their competition for features.


Why not -- oh I don't know -- TAKE THEM AT THEIR WORD!!!! They have other things to work on that are more important.



sfhub said:


> All I know is what TiVo said, that they feel QAM mapping affects very few of their users and that affects the priority of the feature. I don't know if there is any conspiracy beyond that.


Indeed. :up:


----------



## sfhub

hmm52 said:


> My point is that there are many Sony and TVGOS features that I wish the TiVos had which I would put ahead of clear QAM mapping - *if all we're talking about is mostly local HDs, still available with correct channel mapping OTA.*[


Just so we are clear, you understand that w/o proper PSIP mapping TiVo's are reduced to worse than manual VCRs. You need to manually program them and it still might not record because the channel may have moved.

The way to make it work is to rent 1 or 2 CableCARDs, deal with getting them installed and authorized, and pay $0-$7/month per CableCARD.


----------



## Adam1115

bicker said:


> We were talking about *viewing channels*. They were HIS words, not mine. And we can definitely view channels without CableCARD. Abso-friggen-lutely can.
> 
> And the fact that he would need to use more words to mean what you think he meant shows how much more inappropriate his accusation was in the first place.


You are splitting hairs (and I think you know it.)

For most people that aren't splitting hairs, a TiVo properly 'viewing' a channel includes guide data. Nobody buys a tivo to be able to 'view' channels with no guide data and nothing but manual recordings.


----------



## hmm52

sfhub said:


> Just so we are clear, you understand that w/o proper PSIP mapping TiVo's are reduced to worse than manual VCRs. You need to manually program them and it still might not record because the channel may have moved.
> 
> The way to make it work is to rent 1 or 2 CableCARDs, deal with getting them installed and authorized, and pay $0-$7/month per CableCARD.


No. I'm not clear about this as I've only used the S3 with at least one cablecard; 2 for all but the first 3 weeks. You're not saying that they won't map OTA channels w/o a card inserted, are you? Excuse me for not reading back very far in this thread.

I also don't know if many providers still give you a pretty full lineup via clear QAM or pinch it down to mostly locals as Verizon does.

-----OTA meaning actually using antenna, not meaning broadcasts delivered by cable.


----------



## BobCamp1

aindik said:


> His position is, by requiring a CableCARD to (meaningfully) record HD locals that are available without one, this favors cable companies. I can see his point.


Of course it does. But who cares? Tivo designed their DVRs to be used with CableCards and/or antennas. They didn't believe anyone would use it with cable without CableCards. This is called "market research". Tivo could have spent time designing a toaster on the back of the unit as well, but decided against this because the market segments didn't align. Not too many people put an S3 in the kitchen, and it added too much hardware risk. (yes, I felt like I had to put that last sentence in there. )

Tivo's implementation is shoddy, and is not good for such an expensive device, but now they would have to spend time fixing it. Here is who they are fixing it for:

1. People with local cable companies who provide accurate PSIP data. I think less than half do this. (Mine doesn't.)
AND;
2. People who can't receive local channels with an antenna.
AND;
3. People with families who will never have any desire for a single one of the other 100 HD channels their cable service provides or will provide soon. Even though they bought an expensive HD recording device. 
AND;
4. People with families who will never want any premium channels, either SD or HD.
AND;
5. People whose cable companies do not and will never encrypt any SD channels they want to receive.
AND;
6. People who refuse to pay an extra $6-$10 a month even though they bought a several hundred dollar HD device which comes with its own three-year contract at $12 / month and a cable bill of at least $50 / month. Not to mention the several hundred/thousand dollar HDTV they also bought.
AND FINALLY;
7. People who bought the Tivo, took it home, realized it didn't have this feature they needed, and yet did not return it. Instead, they either paid a lot of additional money for a lifetime subscription or signed a one to three year contract. 

So when you combine all of these markets, there are 100 or so people (it feels like all of them are in this thread) who want this feature. Everyone else wanted Tivo to focus on MRV/T2G/SDV/pixelization/reboot issues. Which, thankfully, Tivo did and appears to be doing. I don't blame Tivo for this decision at all.

I'm sure someone will respond saying that they actually meet all of the criteria I listed, probably point by point. I don't doubt it -- as I said, most people in this thread really want this feature. It's just not a marketable feature -- most people outside this thread couldn't care less.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> You are splitting hairs (and I think you know it.)


Hey... he was making an accusation that required splitting much *finer *hairs. Let's keep such evaluations consistent. The simple fact is, no matter how you look at it, if you're looking at it with fairness, the accusation was inappropriate.


----------



## bicker

BobCamp1 said:


> Of course it does. But who cares? Tivo designed their DVRs to be used with CableCards and/or antennas. They didn't believe anyone would use it with cable without CableCards. This is called "market research". Tivo could have spent time designing a toaster on the back of the unit as well, but decided against this because the market segments didn't align.


I agree with this, Bob. It is important for folks to keep in mind that it is their company, and therefore they set the objectives and strategies. They don't owe us anything other than what they explicitly promised.



BobCamp1 said:


> So when you combine all of these markets, there are 100 or so people (it feels like all of them are in this thread) who want this feature. Everyone else wanted Tivo to focus on MRV/T2G/SDV/pixelization/reboot issues. Which, thankfully, Tivo did and appears to be doing. I don't blame Tivo for this decision at all.


Thanks for crystallizing the issue so well. :up:


----------



## sfhub

hmm52 said:


> No. I'm not clear about this as I've only used the S3 with at least one cablecard; 2 for all but the first 3 weeks. You're not saying that they won't map OTA channels w/o a card inserted, are you? Excuse me for not reading back very far in this thread.
> 
> I also don't know if many providers still give you a pretty full lineup via clear QAM or pinch it down to mostly locals as Verizon does.
> 
> -----OTA meaning actually using antenna, not meaning broadcasts delivered by cable.


TiVo will work with OTA through OTA antenna along side cable. You will have full guide data mapped to the OTA channel #s.

This thread is all about TiVo for cable. In that case, w/o CableCARD TiVo recording capabilities are seriously degraded to the point many would call it useless.

This feature of PSIP QAM mapping is pretty much only useful for HD locals because any "higher" channels require CableCARD for decryption. It is also technically useful for SD locals, but we don't mention it that often because most people only care about HD.

As for cable companies offering, what you can depend on is HD locals in the clear. This is a FCC rule. Some people find this useful because all they care about is HD locals. Other people find it useful because they record a significant amount of content from HD locals so they could get a second TiVo S3/HD and record all the HD locals on that one, freeing up their primary TiVo for watching and recording programs that require CableCARD.


----------



## sfhub

BobCamp1 said:


> Here is who they are fixing it for:
> 
> 1. People with local cable companies who provide accurate PSIP data. I think less than half do this. (Mine doesn't.)


1 is the only one that is true for me.

2-7 are not true for me yet I still want the feature.

Clearly then your statement of 1 AND 2 AND 3 ... AND 7 is not a true statement and saying the intersection of all those groups represents the ones interested in the feature is equally false.

Replace AND with OR and take the union of those groups and you have something more like it.


----------



## Adam1115

BobCamp1 said:


> Of course it does. But who cares? Tivo designed their DVRs to be used with CableCards and/or antennas.


No doubt. That is the crux of the complaint.



BobCamp1 said:


> They didn't believe anyone would use it with cable without CableCards. This is called "market research".


Really. So aside from the fact that it supports OTA and Analog, TiVo didn't think ANYONE would use it without cablecards.



BobCamp1 said:


> Here is who they are fixing it for:
> 
> 1. People with local cable companies who provide accurate PSIP data. I think less than half do this. (Mine doesn't.)


Nope, doesn't matter. A manual remap solution would allow ME to tell the box that QAM channel 84-9 is NBC in Denver.



BobCamp1 said:


> 2. People who can't receive local channels with an antenna.


Nope. I want it for channels provided in the clear that are not local channels. My cable company sends the digital equivalent of the analog channels I pay for unencrypted.

But ok, sure, there are also a ton of people who can't get the locals OTA.



BobCamp1 said:


> 3. People with families who will never have any desire for a single one of the other 100 HD channels their cable service provides or will provide soon. Even though they bought an expensive HD recording device.


HUNDREDS??? I have Comcast, they don't have hundreds. And frankly when they do they'll look like crap.

I bought an expensive recording device (is $199 for a TiVo HD "expensive"?), but that doesn't mean I have any desire to watch Knight Rider re-runs in HD-Lite or want to pay $100/mo to my cable company...



BobCamp1 said:


> 4. People with families who will never want any premium channels, either SD or HD.


Hate to break it to you, there are a lot of people who don't have premium channels.



BobCamp1 said:


> 6. People who refuse to pay an extra $6-$10 a month even though they bought a several hundred dollar HD device which comes with its own three-year contract at $12 / month and a cable bill of at least $50 / month. Not to mention the several hundred/thousand dollar HDTV they also bought.


ROFL. Uhm, that's hilarious. Comcast charges more than that JUST to get on the digital tier, then the $10 more a month for HD, then the $4-$10 a month for the cablecards, then the truck roll fee.

---

Oh and you missed the biggest one. The people who TRIED to get cablecards, realized it was a HUGE PAIN IN THE A** and gave up. Sorry, I don't have the patience to spend weeks or months fighting with Comcast to get cablecards. I get most of what I want OTA and on Analog and am fine with that.


----------



## sfhub

I was curious how many people cared about QAM mapping so I created this poll:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=391892

Let's get some data instead of injecting our own biased opinions.


----------



## 1003

*TiVoHD*
has multiple input options:
OTA antenna = supported if you receive signal
Analogue cable = Gets whatever channels the Evil Cable Company provides
Digital cable = Gets whatever channels the Evil Cable Company provides, BUT, if the provider does not pass through PSIP data its not supported.

Cable Cards are a security key, that allow conditonal access to encrypted channels. When channels are 'in the clear' cable cards should not be necessary. Requirement of cable cards to tune digital channels in the clear is only supporting TiVo, Inc. cable provider partners bottom line profits.

My local cable company is not interested in providing cable cards unless I choose an overpriced digital tier package. My high speed ineternet access gets me basic cable and that is enough for us. Up until January 2008 ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC all were PSIP mapped to broadcast channels. Since then it has been a game of 'hide and seek' with the channels being moved often, making the whole experience a nightmare...


----------



## Adam1115

sfhub said:


> I was curious how many people cared about QAM mapping so I created this poll:
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=391892
> 
> Let's get some data instead of injecting our own biased opinions.


Just because we aren't willing to buy a SECOND TiVo HD doesn't mean we don't care about QAM mapping....


----------



## aindik

Adam1115 said:


> Just because we aren't willing to buy a SECOND TiVo HD doesn't mean we don't care about QAM mapping....


If you're not willing to put more money in TiVo's pocket than you already have, then TiVo doesn't care if you care about QAM mapping.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> No doubt. That is the crux of the complaint.


A complaint similar to complaining about the fact that Southwest Airlines doesn't fly to Knoxville, TN.



Adam1115 said:


> Really. So aside from the fact that it supports OTA and Analog, TiVo didn't think ANYONE would use it without cablecards.


Rather, I think the issue is that they realized that that *had* to design it to work with CableCARD -- they evidently determined that designing it to work with cable without CableCARD was optional, and making it work with cable without CableCARD is simply not as important as some of you would want.



Adam1115 said:


> The people who TRIED to get cablecards, realized it was a HUGE PAIN IN THE A** and gave up. Sorry, I don't have the patience to spend weeks or months fighting with Comcast to get cablecards.


Blame the FCC for not issuing a clear, explicit specification for a massively robust separable security appliance, applicable to both cable -- and satellite, for that matter.



Adam1115 said:


> I get most of what I want OTA and on Analog and am fine with that.


Then QAM mapping isn't important to you either.


----------



## Adam1115

aindik said:


> If you're not willing to put more money in TiVo's pocket than you already have, then TiVo doesn't care if you care about QAM mapping.


More than I already have? My series 3 cost more than 3 TiVo HD's!

I guess I should throw it in the dumpster and buy an inferior DVR just to convince TiVo that it's a useful feature? 



bicker said:


> A complaint similar to complaining about the fact that Southwest Airlines doesn't fly to Knoxville, TN.


Err... what...? 



bicker said:


> Rather, I think the issue is that they realized that that *had* to design it to work with CableCARD -- they evidently determined that designing it to work with cable without CableCARD was optional, and making it work with cable without CableCARD is simply not as important as some of you would want.
> 
> Blame the FCC for not issuing a clear, explicit specification for a massively robust separable security appliance, applicable to both cable -- and satellite, for that matter.
> 
> Then QAM mapping isn't important to you either.


I have no idea what you are going on about...


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> Err... what...?


The point was that complaining that TiVo designed their HD DVRs to work with OTA or with CableCARDs is like complaining that Southwest Airlines doesn't provide service to specific cities you want to fly to. In other words, it is an unreasonable complaint.



Adam1115 said:


> I have no idea what you are going on about...


I don't believe that. I think you simply want to hold tight to the idea that TiVo is wrong for running their business in their own best interest instead of in your best interest. One point I made in that quote was that if you want to have a _justifiable_ sense of entitlement, then it needed to have come from the FCC issuing requirements ordering what you specifically wanted. The other point was that since you're "fine with" getting "most" of what you want OTA and on Analog, then QAM mapping isn't even important enough to you to warrant TiVo anything about it.


----------



## qili

have we established that it is the owners' fault that TiVo didn't design their hardware to be useful for their owners?


----------



## bicker

Hmmm.... so you're trying to say that TiVo isn't useful. 

You're wrong about that. Nice try though.


----------



## Adam1115

bicker said:


> I don't believe that. I think you simply want to hold tight to the idea that TiVo is wrong for running their business in their own best interest instead of in your best interest. One point I made in that quote was that if you want to have a _justifiable_ sense of entitlement, then it needed to have come from the FCC issuing requirements ordering what you specifically wanted. The other point was that since you're "fine with" getting "most" of what you want OTA and on Analog, then QAM mapping isn't even important enough to you to warrant TiVo anything about it.


WOW! CHILL OUT!

It's just a feature that I think would be cool / useful, if they don't add it, whatever, I still love my tivo. I never said they are 'wrong' or that I have any sense of 'entitlement'? Why are you so worked up people wanting a feature and trying to convince TiVo it would be useful? If you think it's a stupid feature, then leave this thread? Why are you obsessed with arguing with people who think a feature should be added? You don't care about QAM Mapping! Great! Move on!

BTW, yes, I get "MOST" (NOT EVERYTHING, which is why I would want it). But I expect to start losing channels in analog at some point, so it WILL become more important down the road. I hope TiVo adds qam mapping, if they don't, like I said, oh well, I'll have to get cablecards I guess...

I tried to get cablecards, Comcast spent two weeks showing up without them to finally claim they were out and wouldn't have them for months. It's just not worth the hassle to install cablecards. The cable company makes it as difficult as possible.

If TiVo never added features because it did 'most' of what we wanted (which is recording our shows), they wouldn't have added a lot of features on there now.


----------



## lew

This would only make sense if your cable company charged $$$ for the cable card and if it was your second unit. I think too many channels will be encrypted for this to be of much use (much longer) for anything other then HD locals. I guess I could see using one unit for just network shows and using MRV as necessary.

I don't know how often cable companies change the QAM assignments for HD locals. It might be a support nightmare if the user had to map the assignments.


----------



## sfhub

lew said:


> I don't know how often cable companies change the QAM assignments for HD locals. It might be a support nightmare if the user had to map the assignments.


With proper PSIP, the mapping can be done automatically and maintained through moves.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> WOW! CHILL OUT!


With respect, you're the one shouting. How about you post your points, and I'll post mine. I don't need your assistance in deciding what to post. Thanks anyway.



Adam1115 said:


> It's just a feature that I think would be cool / useful, if they don't add it, whatever, I still love my tivo.


That's not what seems to be coming from your messages. Thanks for clarifying your position.


----------



## mattack

I realize it's not exactly on topic for this thread, but I noticed that at least two channels I get, two of the PBS sub-channels, I think KQED HD and KQED Encore, do show up with the channel name on my Tivo HD. I haven't yet checked whether they show up on my S3 like that. They certainly didn't until recently, if they do now.

But I still don't get guide data. Since they have the HD & Encore names on them, that seems like it's "seeing" even more of the data than simply being at 9-1 and 9-2, right?


----------



## sfhub

HD and Encore are the textual names in the PSIP. 9.1 and 9.2 are the virtual channel #s in the PSIP. They have been there for a long time on some head-ends, at least over a year. It is possible TiVo HD just got around to decoding/seeing/displaying them recently or your head-end recently adjusted the PSIP. They are not going to help you get guide data. Only TiVo/Tribune can make the change to give you guide data for the PSIP mapped channels.


----------



## gastrof

lew said:


> ...I think too many channels will be encrypted for this to be of much use (much longer) for anything other then HD locals...


This is something I just don't get.

Cable companies have for YEARS provided cable channels (not just OTAs) unscrambled, with people only needing a cable-ready tuner to get them. No box needed unless you want things like PPV or pay channels (HBO, MAX, etc).

Why in the world are local cable liasons allowing the cable company to shut off access to those channels to digital viewers unless you rent a box (or cable cards)?

I know for a fact those channels can be put out over the lines UNscrambled, since there are at least TWO "traditional cable channels" that are unscrambled on our digital feed. My TV's own digital tuner can get them no problem. (And why they're doing this I have NO idea.)

So why are the local liasons allowing the cable companies to scramble all those channels on digital (requiring equipment rentals), when the analog versions of those channels didn't require a box to get them (and, in those areas that still have analog cable, STILL don't)?

I know this wouldn't solve the problem of mapping, but it'd be something.


----------



## bicker

Franchising authorities are evidently respecting the franchisee's efforts to gain control over use of their extended service, as long as such control is in accordance with the law, which restricts _only _the encryption of local broadcast channels.


----------



## sfhub

gastrof said:


> So why are the local liasons allowing the cable companies to scramble all those channels on digital (requiring equipment rentals), when the analog versions of those channels didn't require a box to get them (and, in those areas that still have analog cable, STILL don't)?
> 
> I know this wouldn't solve the problem of mapping, but it'd be something.


It isn't up to them. It is a choice the cable companies made.

Many cable companies chose to control access to expanded basic using a physical filter on your line, rather than encryption. They could have used encryption but chose not to. There were pros and cons to that approach.

Now they are choosing to use encryption to replace that filter. There are pros and cons to this approach also.


----------



## sfhub

bicker said:


> accordance with the law, which restricts _only _the encryption of local broadcast channels.


Actually the law restricts encryption of basic tier, which is not necessarily just local broadcast channels.


----------



## bicker

Granted. Here, the basic tier also includes CN8, New England Cable News, some shopping channels, and public access channels. I'm not sure why anyone would actually want to encrypt any of those.


----------



## jrm01

gastrof said:


> .
> 
> Why in the world are local cable liasons allowing the cable company to shut off access to those channels to digital viewers unless you rent a box (or cable cards)?
> 
> So why are the local liasons allowing the cable companies to scramble all those channels on digital (requiring equipment rentals), when the analog versions of those channels didn't require a box to get them (and, in those areas that still have analog cable, STILL don't)?
> 
> I know this wouldn't solve the problem of mapping, but it'd be something.


Thanks for the suggestion. My local Franchise Authority is in the process of negotiating a 10 year extension for Comcast and I have been offering them suggestions. I'll add this to the list.


----------



## vstone

We should remember that the basic tier is supposed to be cheap. Adding additional cable channnels cost money (unless its a shopping channel, which are subsidized).


----------



## a68oliver

gastrof said:


> This is something I just don't get.
> 
> (And why they're doing this I have NO idea.)


In the long run, isn't it cheaper for the cable company to scramble channels at the headend and turn them on and off for individual subscribers? Filter/trap systems almost require like channels to be placed adjacent to each other so that they can be trapped as a group. Any changes in your subscription require a truck roll to add/remove traps. Any changes in the channel alignment/packages also gets complicated.

On my Comcast system, there is basic, extended basic, digital starter, digital classic, digital preferred, sports entertainment package, plus all the individual pay tv channels. This would be a nightmare to manage using traps.


----------



## sfhub

a68oliver said:


> Any changes in your subscription require a truck roll to add/remove traps. Any changes in the channel alignment/packages also gets complicated.
> 
> On my Comcast system, there is basic, extended basic, digital starter, digital classic, digital preferred, sports entertainment package, plus all the individual pay tv channels. This would be a nightmare to manage using traps.


They only trap extended basic, not the others.

It is not really more or less difficult to extend the filter/trap model from analog to digital.

Encryption is easier to maintain whether analog or digital.


----------



## mattack

gastrof said:


> Cable companies have for YEARS provided cable channels (not just OTAs) unscrambled, with people only needing a cable-ready tuner to get them. No box needed unless you want things like PPV or pay channels (HBO, MAX, etc).


Apparently my system was one of the rare systems, but at least in the mid-late 90s (I think I first got cable at home at the end of '94 or '95), we got HBO (and sometimes other premium channels) *with no box*. They trapped it outside the house. Over many years, more and more went to digital only, with HBO being the last one (at least it was the only one I cared about at the time).

Heck, that's somewhat apropos to this thread, because I'd probably subscribe to some more channels (even though I already record more than I can watch) if I could get them without cablecards.

(Though strangely, our lineup seems to have changed in the past few weeks. History *came* to analog, replacing Oxygen, and CSPAN2 went away.. even stranger, the Tivo thinks that the new lineup is invalid, even though it matches the new channel I'm getting.)


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> Granted. Here, the basic tier also includes CN8, New England Cable News, some shopping channels, and public access channels. I'm not sure why anyone would actually want to encrypt any of those.


Actually, the cable companies would *love* to encrypt *all* the channels if they legally could.

I remember, about 20 years ago, a cable company around here did exactly that. Encrypted *all* channels.

I was there one day picking up a converter box. There were lines of people waiting. These people had scraped together a few dollars and a few coins. The people were there to make partial payment on their accounts. They were pleading with the CSRs to please, please, please turn on their TV service for just the next weekend.

It brought (figurative) tears of joy to my cold, capitalist heart!

But, alas, I don't think the cable companies are allowed to get away with that any more.


----------



## cwoody222

mattack said:


> Apparently my system was one of the rare systems, but at least in the mid-late 90s (I think I first got cable at home at the end of '94 or '95), we got HBO (and sometimes other premium channels) *with no box*. They trapped it outside the house. Over many years, more and more went to digital only, with HBO being the last one (at least it was the only one I cared about at the time).
> 
> Heck, that's somewhat apropos to this thread, because I'd probably subscribe to some more channels (even though I already record more than I can watch) if I could get them without cablecards.
> 
> (Though strangely, our lineup seems to have changed in the past few weeks. History *came* to analog, replacing Oxygen, and CSPAN2 went away.. even stranger, the Tivo thinks that the new lineup is invalid, even though it matches the new channel I'm getting.)


Time Warner (previously Adelphia) here is just now finally getting rid of HBO analog (ie: no box required) this July.


----------



## fallingwater

jfh3 said:


> Automatic QAM mapping that deals with MSO assignment changes is hard.
> 
> Basic manual mapping (like the Sony DHG series) is easy, if not trivial, all things considered.


Cable companies rarely if ever provide an unencoded QAM channel line-up to their subs, so you've got to figure it out yourself. And, as previously mentioned, many cable co.'s change their unencoded QAM line-ups from time to time.

Those are the intrinsic hurdles to manual QAM mapping. In addition some cable co.'s provide PSIP data for network channels, which doesn't (in my area) solve the problem but changes it. With PSIP data a channel no longer shows up as just another unscrambled QAM channel but rather with an OTA equivalent ATSC channel number. In a typical cable/OTA line-up a cable channel w/PSIP data will be adjacent to the OTA listing for the same channel, but without program info. Thus a manual recording is easier to set up than for raw QAM, (because the program info is just one entry away) but is still required.

Used w/o CC's, Sony's DHG recorder doesn't access PSIP data while TiVo HD/S3's do. (This is no longer true. Currently Sony's DHG recorder uses PSIP data to map to an OTA equivalent channel number. The Sony recorder can be manually tuned to either the unscrambled actual channel or to the PSIP number to receive a given station while TiVo must be tuned to the PSIP channel number.)

Keeping the above hurdles in mind, Sony's method of manually mapping channel numbers to any channel in the TVGOS+ display would be adequate EXCEPT that TVGOS+'s default is for channels to be displayed alphabetically by program service category, not numerically, so owner FOX usually gets the coveted 2nd spot after ABC. If a Sony user wants a normal looking channel line-up, and not a jumbled mess, not only do the channels have to be mapped but they have to be rearranged, a time consuming process!

TiVo apparently doesn't want to go beyond a CC solution for channel mapping, probably because it works, is simple, and doesn't create a whole slew of costly CS calls. It's probably a good business decision for TiVo, as TiVo is always struggling to squeeze bucks from its service.

Comcast has finally gotten their sh-t together regarding pricing consistency in my area; one standard-def digital STB is included with the service and a single CC is provided free in CC enabled devices. A second CC for S3 costs $1.79 monthly, and more importantly, an 'additional outlet' charge of $5.10 monthly is applied to each device utilizing CC's.

I've chosen to use (2) CC's in one S3, one M card in an HD, but another S3 and the Sony run w/o CC's. Total extra cost is thus $10.20 + $1.79 or $11.99 monthly for 3 digital 'outlets' (2 are hi-def; the other provides standard-def VOD). A 4th TV gets analog Extended Basic for no extra charge.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> ...
> With PSIP data a channel no longer shows up as an unencoded QAM channel but rather with an OTA equivalent ATSC channel number.


I presume you meant to say " as just another unencrypted"


> Used w/o CC's, Sony's DHG recorder doesn't access PSIP data while TiVo HD/S3's do.


 I presume that you're referring to the channel info only.


> TiVo apparently doesn't want to go beyond a CC solution for channel mapping, probably because it works, is simple, and doesn't create a whole slew of costly CS calls. It's probably a good business decision for TiVo, as TiVo is always struggling to squeeze bucks from its service.


 Agree, but they might change their minds if the cable companies would provide a consistent set of variables to work with.


----------



## tomherbst

In our house we have only have cable video service because it makes cable Internet service cheaper. Today I've been looking at the cable QAM channels because our normal DirecTv system is down for a reroof.

There is enough interesting content, that I was going to go buy a Series 3 tomorrow, but a quick check of this thread shows I'd be wasting my time. 

I miss TiVo - we are almost migrated to the new DirecTv boxes for MPEG4.

tom


----------



## Saxion

Tom, please consider expressing yourself in a quick email or letter to the TiVo executives identified earlier in this thread. Only by demonstrating the resulting lost sales can we convince TiVo to add proper clear QAM support.


----------



## mattack

tomherbst said:


> In our house we have only have cable video service because it makes cable Internet service cheaper. Today I've been looking at the cable QAM channels because our normal DirecTv system is down for a reroof.
> 
> There is enough interesting content, that I was going to go buy a Series 3 tomorrow, but a quick check of this thread shows I'd be wasting my time.


Wow, if you're willing to go out and buy a S3 *just like that*, I'm kind of amazed you wouldn't get cablecards.

Note *I* don't have cablecards, but the lifetime transfer option is what got me to S3&TivoHD (and 'future proofing' to a certain degree, though I don't have a HDTV yet)..


----------



## GreenMonkey

mattack said:


> Wow, if you're willing to go out and buy a S3 *just like that*, I'm kind of amazed you wouldn't get cablecards.
> 
> Note *I* don't have cablecards, but the lifetime transfer option is what got me to S3&TivoHD


Ditto

The cablecard from Charter is only $2/month. Clear QAM would be nice but I'm willing to spend $2 for my locals in HD. I know some folks on different cable companies are paying more though.


----------



## tomherbst

GreenMonkey said:


> Ditto
> 
> The cablecard from Charter is only $2/month. Clear QAM would be nice but I'm willing to spend $2 for my locals in HD. I know some folks on different cable companies are paying more though.


Comcast makes us buy a digital package to be able to get cablecard.

tom


----------



## Saxion

tomherbst said:


> Comcast makes us buy a digital package to be able to get cablecard.
> 
> tom


Ditto with Cox: digital gateway fee, plus 2 CableCARD rental fees, plus truck roll for installation.


----------



## GreenMonkey

tomherbst said:


> Comcast makes us buy a digital package to be able to get cablecard.
> 
> tom


OK, that sucks.

Charter tried to tell me I NEEDED the digital package, but I ignored them and the next CSR I talked to, I just asked for expanded basic + cablecard for a Tivo.


----------



## bicker

My understanding is that you can cancel the digital package and keep the CableCARDs.


----------



## TWinbrook46636

I don't get why people are opposed to improving the functionality of the TiVo interface. If you have no need for QAM remapping it doesn't affect you. Those of us who need it will welcome its addition. It's not like it's a high-priority item (obviously) for TiVo that will take away from other features. 

Of course if they haven't added something as simple as a red recording dot in grid view to show a program is set to be recorded I doubt they will add QAM mapping.


----------



## GoHokies!

I'm not opposed to improving the functionality of the Tivo interface,, I just think that this particular improvement needs to be at the bottom of the list - there are many, many more improvements that would benefit many more subscribers than the extremely limited subset of folks that would really benefit from QAM mapping. This particular minority just happens to be very, very vocal.


----------



## bicker

1. Robustness
2. Feature Functionality
_then_
3. Make it pretty


----------



## 1283

bicker said:


> 1. Robustness
> 2. Feature Functionality
> _then_
> 3. Make it pretty


Unfortunately, in the recent OS releases, #2 has degraded #1.


----------



## bicker

Well, they are both pretty high up there on the list... #3 is a very very very distant third.


----------



## fallingwater

TWinbrook46636 said:


> I don't get why people are opposed to improving the functionality of the TiVo interface. If you have no need for QAM remapping it doesn't affect you. Those of us who need it will welcome its addition. It's not like it's a high-priority item (obviously) for TiVo that will take away from other features.
> 
> Of course if they haven't added something as simple as a red recording dot in grid view to show a program is set to be recorded I doubt they will add QAM mapping.


Very true. QAM mapping and a Free Space Indicator wouldn't hurt anybody!

As you state, it's improbable that TiVo will implement either. TiVo has its own agenda, and it appears that these two improvements aren't in it.

Comcast charges $1.79 monthly for a second CC in S3 plus $5.10 monthly as an 'additional outlet fee' for any CC equiped TiVo. Is keeping cable providers happy part of TiVo's rationale for not pursuing QAM mapping?


----------



## 1003

*Back in the day*
TiVo innovated for thier customers. New features and fixes were focused on customers, not corporate partners. Things like folders,

Why would TiVo annoy thier cable partners by implementing a way for customers to easily access the FCC required clear channels. Cable Card rentals and digital tier packages are profitable and TiVo is being careful not to provide customers with a way to cut thier cable bill. If consumers don't buy the TiVo product, all they have is a handful of patents and lawyers to defend them.

Adding TiVo software to a cable box is a nice technical accomplishment but if there was really a huge groundswell of demand, it would be in general release today not endlessly testing.

TiVo seems focused on something other than thier customer. Most companies who do that fail. Will TiVo realize the folly of partnership with Evil Cabe Companies before they lose thier 'soul'? Customers who already purchased hardware and service made TiVo, Inc. what it is today. TiVo could toss us a bone, or they can choose to feed thier partners...


----------



## jlb

GreenMonkey said:


> Ditto
> 
> The cablecard from Charter is only $2/month. Clear QAM would be nice but I'm willing to spend $2 for my locals in HD. I know some folks on different cable companies are paying more though.


I guess I am lucky, then.....My one M Series card from Comcast is $0.



tomherbst said:


> Comcast makes us buy a digital package to be able to get cablecard.
> 
> tom


Isn't that illegal?


----------



## Adam1115

I think I'm going to 'give in' and try and get cablecards yet again... <Sigh>


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Is keeping cable providers happy part of TiVo's rationale for not pursuing QAM mapping?


As far as I've heard from TiVo folks, no, definitely not.



JJ said:


> TiVo seems focused on something other than thier customer.


Or perhaps they're simply focused on customers other than you and the folks who care about the same things you care about.


----------



## GoHokies!

JJ said:


> *Back in the day*
> Adding TiVo software to a cable box is a nice technical accomplishment but if there was really a huge groundswell of demand, it would be in general release today not endlessly testing.


Actually, the technical problems are quite real.

I'm not sure where you come off assuming that Tivo is a bunch of liars because they haven't satisfied your particular need - Tivo has come out and said that clear QAM is on the map, but waaay waaaay down on the list.

Instead, you see fit to call the employees that are nice enough to spend time here keeping us informed a bunch of liars. Awesome.


----------



## mattack

fallingwater said:


> Comcast charges $1.79 monthly for a second CC in S3 plus $5.10 monthly as an 'additional outlet fee' for any CC equiped TiVo. Is keeping cable providers happy part of TiVo's rationale for not pursuing QAM mapping?


They're allowed to charge you for a second CC.. But it sounds like the first CC is the 'free' one that counts instead of a cable box, for example..

Since both CCs are in _one_ device, I don't believe they're allowed to charge you an extra outlet fee. (If you had two CCs, one in each Tivo HD for example, they would be allowed to.)


----------



## fallingwater

JJ said:


> *Back in the day*
> TiVo innovated for thier customers. New features and fixes were focused on customers, not corporate partners. Things like folders,
> 
> Why would TiVo annoy thier cable partners by implementing a way for customers to easily access the FCC required clear channels. Cable Card rentals and digital tier packages are profitable and TiVo is being careful not to provide customers with a way to cut thier cable bill. If consumers don't buy the TiVo product, all they have is a handful of patents and lawyers to defend them.
> 
> Adding TiVo software to a cable box is a nice technical accomplishment but if there was really a huge groundswell of demand, it would be in general release today not endlessly testing.
> 
> TiVo seems focused on something other than thier customer. Most companies who do that fail. Will TiVo realize the folly of partnership with Evil Cabe Companies before they lose thier 'soul'? Customers who already purchased hardware and service made TiVo, Inc. what it is today. TiVo could toss us a bone, or they can choose to feed thier partners...


TiVo is walking a tightrope as it seeks to make a profit and at the same time keep its cable providers and customers satisfied. DVR Service isn't the cash cow envisioned during the early years. TiVo is the last standalone DVR survivor and still hasn't generated consistent profits.

Apart from cable/satellite DVRs, an increasing number of services now offer programming downloads from the internet, in direct competition for the same pool of entertainment dollars.


----------



## fallingwater

mattack said:


> They're allowed to charge you for a second CC.. But it sounds like the first CC is the 'free' one that counts instead of a cable box, for example..
> 
> Since both CCs are in _one_ device, I don't believe they're allowed to charge you an extra outlet fee. (If you had two CCs, one in each Tivo HD for example, they would be allowed to.)


Comcast CSR's used to 'wing it' at first, regarding CC pricing. We got free CC's with no 'additional outlet fees' for more than a year.

Now, pricing policies are being more closely adhered to. 'Additional outlet fees' are published in Comcast's printed price schedule available at the local Comcast store. For better or worse Comcast's current pricing is at least consistent and understandable.

http://www.comcast.com/Customers/FAQ/FaqDetails.ashx?Id=2651
http://www.comcast.com/Customers/FAQ/FaqDetails.ashx?Id=222
http://www.comcast.com/customers/faq/FaqDetails.ashx?Id=261

Comcast's Triple Play is a pretty good deal, overall. We've found it to work well with no technical problems. The new phone modems provide scorching internet speeds when connected directly to a PC. (8000+ Kb/sec.)

Comcast's one year promo rate for Triple Play is $130 ($147 after taxes and fees) and besides fast internet provides unlimited phone to US & Canada and the complete digital cable line-up w/HBO & Starz. When the year is up the price w/fees & taxes will be around $170.


----------



## 1003

GoHokies! said:


> Actually, the technical problems are quite real.
> 
> I'm not sure where you come off assuming that Tivo is a bunch of liars because they haven't satisfied your particular need - Tivo has come out and said that clear QAM is on the map, but waaay waaaay down on the list.
> 
> Instead, you see fit to call the employees that are nice enough to spend time here keeping us informed a bunch of liars. Awesome.


*Personal attack aside,*
if the market were really clamoring for 'Comcast TiVo' it would be in general release today, warts and all. Somehow Comcast cutomers deserve a more bug free and stable DVR than those of us who purchased retail hardware? A bitter pill...

TiVo/Comcast appear to have a mutual defense pact and if you are not a customer that provides extra profit you are the enemy. If Comcast were to pass the FCC mandated PSIP data and TiVo allowed this information to be processed from the OTA data there would not be a 'Clear QAM' issue to discuss...


----------



## GoHokies!

What personal attack? You call folks liars without a shred of evidence to back up your assertions, then say that point that out is a personal attack.

I've got no idea what you're getting on about by saying that "comcast customers deserve a more bug fere and stable DVR..."

Instead of your gigantic conspiracy theory that you seem to have, you should try looking at the facts, or at least provide some facts of your own to back up your wild statements. Tivo/Comcast have a mutual defense pact? C'mon, get real.


----------



## jrm01

Just to add to this frustration, it now appears that the channel scan of cable channels will no longer retain the clear-QAM channels in the Channel List since 9.4 update.

My post:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=401616


----------



## jccfin

I just spoke to Time Warner here in NYC and they told me that my basic service plan doesn't have HD channels even though I'm watching it everynight on my TV's ATSC/QAM tuner. If I get the cable card, they said that it will block those HD channels like ABC, NBC, CBS etc. So now I'm feel screwed as I just ordered a Series 3. I don't want to spend an extra $40 a month just so I can record those HD channels that I get now for $13. It really stinks that TiVo won't allow you to manually map the channels. Has anyone heard back from Tivo about this issue?


----------



## Zimm

The way I understand the FCC rules on this is that you cable company is legally required to offer the digital versions of the analog channels (when available) in their most basic service level. This means that they cannot block the HD channels with your service package, cablecard or no.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Saxion

Zimm is correct. Clearly the CSR was not very knowledgeable (as evidenced by the contradiction between what he said and the channels you watch all the time on your clear QAM tuner). The CableCARDs will enable correct channel mapping to your local HD rebroadcasted channels, so the TiVo can fully utilize them (with guide data). The CableCARDs will not block them.


----------



## jlb

This is how I watch....lifeline package from Comcast, one M Card, local HD on QAM.

Pardon my stupidity, but if a able operator decides to go all digitial after, or as part of the OTA transition, does that possibly mean that the laws and regulations regarding clear QAM become moot? I.e., if Comcast chooses to go all digital, will I all of sudden have no channels (my current analog locals plus the rebroadcast local HDs via clear QAM?

I'm confused on how the transition could effect QAM if at all.....

...from a regulations perspective.


----------



## jccfin

Well, I think they're making the case that they're offering you digital as oppose to HD. that's a big difference. Just because they offer you a digital SD signal doesn't mean they have to offer you a digital HD signal.

I hope they don't play this game of segregating the two and making people pay a two tier service!


----------



## Saxion

jlb said:


> if a able operator decides to go all digitial after, or as part of the OTA transition, does that possibly mean that the laws and regulations regarding clear QAM become moot?


Nope, the laws still apply.

Note that cable companies are not _required _to carry the digital versions of local broadcast stations; but if they choose to, they must be unencrypted and available on the most basic tier of service.

FCC Sec. 76.901 (link):



> "The basic service tier shall, at a minimum, include all signals of domestic television broadcast stations provided to any subscriber ..."


FCC Sec. 76.630 (link):



> "Cable system operators shall not scramble or otherwise encrypt signals carried on the basic service tier."


----------



## bicker

Zimm said:


> The way I understand the FCC rules on this is that you cable company is legally required to offer the digital versions of the analog *local broadcast *channels (when available) in their most basic service level.


Fixed your post. (The rules you're referring to apply to *local broadcast* channels.) Also, it should be noted that some MSOs consider the requirement to carry the HD signals deferred until February. Reasonable people disagree about that, so you may experience it either way.



Zimm said:


> This means that they cannot block the HD channels with your service package, cablecard or no.


For *cable networks*, they can offer channels as they see fit.


----------



## kamcma

Quick question. In my dorm I really have no control over the cable, but it is Cox basic with the clear QAM network channels. They do map the channels to the correct numbers so that they appear just as their OTA HD counterparts. If If I only care about these HD QAM channels and not the rest of the SD cable, can I tell a TiVo HD it's getting an antenna signal and it will work, maybe by plugging the cable line into the antenna input? Or is this wishful thinking?


----------



## vstone

No. The antenna connection is connected to an antenna tuner. The Cable connection has a cable tuner. Feeding the cable signal to the antenna tuner will not find the clear QAM signals, although it might find some of the cable analog signals.


----------



## Zimm

You know what gets me about this issue? I just tried to see if I could get OTA HD channels so I can get the guide data for those channels. As I suspected I have very bad reception. What I did notice is that all of the channels it was kinda able to tune mapped to the exact same channels that the QAM channels show up at in the guide. I kept the OTA channels in the guide although I can't tune them and they provide the guide data for the QAM channels that appear right below them. 

What this tells me is that Tivo is obviously capable of mapping the local HD's to their equivelent OTA channel assignment but they just refuse to link the OTA guide to them.

I know everyone is just going to say "Just get the cablecards and be done with it". I really don't feel like getting these troublesome things when it seems like all Tivo has to do is allow the OTA guide data to map to the QAM channels.

/rant


----------



## vstone

My feeling has always been that most cable plants keep screwing up the clear QAM settings, accidentally or on purpose. Time Warner Cable clear QAM channels used to correspond to their channel listings (CBS-HD on 805, etc.) About FEB 14, 2007 that changed, although they didn't ever admit that changes were made.

They refuse to admit that they have to support clear QAM tuners at all and refuse to release a clear QAM channel listing, probably because they would then have to publish changes to said listing.

Among the settings that some have seen are numbers listed 805, OTA PSIP #'s like 7-1, other numbers that appear to match freq-subchannels assignment 104-1, and sometimes just 0.

I think Tivo probably ahs figured that this would be a mess to wade into. I hope that the FCC will eventually look at clear QAM support, at which time Tivo will fall in line.


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> ...[They] refuse to release a clear QAM channel listing, probably because they would then have to publish changes to said listing.


To be clear, there is no requirement to publish a clear-QAM channel listing (and you should really bring that up to the FCC if you're concerned about it), and there is cost associated with any publishing of any information whatsoever, so unless there is a demonstrable profit advantage to publishing that information I see no reason to expect it to be published.

Regarding PSIP, as noted elsewhere, the requirement is to pass-through PSIP data provided to the MSO by the broadcaster. So first step is establishing that the feed that the broadcaster provides to the MSO actually has proper PSIP in it. Not easy, I'll grant you that, but that's the way things are. These kinds of concerns are too limited in scope to be satisfactorily address by CSRs on the line. Focus your attentions on corporate customer service, and/or engineers once you get access to them.


----------



## Saxion

vstone said:


> I think Tivo probably ahs figured that this would be a mess to wade into. I hope that the FCC will eventually look at clear QAM support, at which time Tivo will fall in line.


The solution may be nearer than you think.

At this point, the best hope for a solution to this problem is the tuning resolver. Although this device is usually discussed in the context of SDV, there is no technical reason it must be limited to this purpose. The TR is a very simple device. It maintains a channel map of all the cable virtual channel numbers and sends that to the TiVo upon request. The TiVo then sends the TR a virtual channel number whenever it wants to change channels, and the TR responds with a set of RF tuning parameters (frequency, subchannel, etc). If the TR needs to communicate with the headend to resolve an SDV request, it does so before responding.

The TR is not limited to resolving only SDV channels. It can resolve any channel. A CableCARD is not needed since the TR maintains its own channel map.

All that is required here is for TiVo to not tie support for the TR to the presence of CableCARDs, and for your cable company to agree to send you a TR even if you are unaffected by SDV.

As soon as TRs start showing up, someone can easily test this and we'll know if TiVo supports it. If not...we'll have a new letter writing campaign to focus on. 

(By the way, here is a link to the TR specs).


----------



## Saxion

Here are some quotes from the spec regarding the use of the TR for non-SDV channels and without CableCARDs:


> The Tuning Resolver (TR) consists of the hardware and software required to allow a UDCP device to tune *both linear and SDV programs*





> The TR and CableCARD operate *independently of each other*.





> The TR then sends the channel table to the UDCP *in place of the [CableCARD channel table] data*.





> For datatype_id 13 the UDCP sends an existing DH_pubKeyH for a currently bound CableCARD. *For a UDCP that is not bound to a CableCARD*, the UDCP may [long description of what to do if no CableCARD]


----------



## JYoung

vstone said:


> My feeling has always been that most cable plants keep screwing up the clear QAM settings, accidentally or on purpose. Time Warner Cable clear QAM channels used to correspond to their channel listings (CBS-HD on 805, etc.) About FEB 14, 2007 that changed, although they didn't ever admit that changes were made.
> 
> They refuse to admit that they have to support clear QAM tuners at all and refuse to release a clear QAM channel listing, probably because they would then have to publish changes to said listing.
> 
> Among the settings that some have seen are numbers listed 805, OTA PSIP #'s like 7-1, other numbers that appear to match freq-subchannels assignment 104-1, and sometimes just 0.
> 
> I think Tivo probably ahs figured that this would be a mess to wade into. I hope that the FCC will eventually look at clear QAM support, at which time Tivo will fall in line.


Interestingly enough, when my local Time-Warner realigned the clear QAM a couple of months back, they changed the QAM HD channels to match the OTA channel ids.
So QAM 2.1 is same channel as OTA 2.1.
But the channel IDs don't quite match.

OTA KCBSDT is id'ed at KCBS-DT on QAM.
OTA KNBCDT is iding as NBC4-LA on QAM.
OTA KABCDT is iding as KABC-DT on QAM.

Bizarre.


----------



## vstone

Saxion said:


> The solution may be nearer than you think.
> 
> At this point, the best hope for a solution to this problem is the tuning resolver. Although this device is usually discussed in the context of SDV, there is no technical reason it must be limited to this purpose. The TR is a very simple device. It maintains a channel map of all the cable virtual channel numbers and sends that to the TiVo upon request. The TiVo then sends the TR a virtual channel number whenever it wants to change channels, and the TR responds with a set of RF tuning parameters (frequency, subchannel, etc). If the TR needs to communicate with the headend to resolve an SDV request, it does so before responding.
> 
> The TR is not limited to resolving only SDV channels. It can resolve any channel. A CableCARD is not needed since the TR maintains its own channel map.
> 
> All that is required here is for TiVo to not tie support for the TR to the presence of CableCARDs, and for your cable company to agree to send you a TR even if you are unaffected by SDV.
> 
> As soon as TRs start showing up, someone can easily test this and we'll know if TiVo supports it. If not...we'll have a new letter writing campaign to focus on.
> 
> (By the way, here is a link to the TR specs).


That would be great, but if my system will not get SDV in the near future, there will be nothing in the cable system for the tuning resolver to talk to.


----------



## jrm01

JYoung said:


> Interestingly enough, when my local Time-Warner realigned the clear QAM a couple of months back, they changed the QAM HD channels to match the OTA channel ids.
> So QAM 2.1 is same channel as OTA 2.1.
> But the channel IDs don't quite match.
> 
> OTA KCBSDT is id'ed at KCBS-DT on QAM.
> OTA KNBCDT is iding as NBC4-LA on QAM.
> OTA KABCDT is iding as KABC-DT on QAM.
> 
> Bizarre.


Comcast Pittsburgh did the same thing here six months ago. It actually helps when doing manual recordings. I can't get my local ABC station OTA, but I keep it in my channel list just to see the guide/program info. Then when I set up the manual recording I know to select the WTAE-HD station, not the WTAEHD station.


----------



## Adam1115

Just hack you S3 and map QAM on your own...

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=61830


----------



## mattack

Do you have any evidence that that's actually possible on S3? There haven't been any new posts in that thread for a long time.


----------



## Adam1115

mattack said:


> Do you have any evidence that that's actually possible on S3? There haven't been any new posts in that thread for a long time.


Yes. It's actually possible.

You'll have to google 'other tivo forum' to find more though.


----------



## Saxion

Thanks Adam. It is possible to hack one's TiVo to get QAM channel mapping to work, but of course that method isn't for everyone. You have to be technically inclined, and deal with replacing a soldered chip on the TiVo motherboard, which utterly voids your warranty. I continue to advocate for an elegant solution, one that even my mom and dad could use (who by the way would both buy a TiVo HD if only it would support the clear QAM channels they already watch daily and which they already pay for, without requiring any more $$$ be sent to their cable company). _It shouldn't requiring hacking to record what we already pay for and which we can easily view on our TVs._ But that's just me...


----------



## flatpanelgeek

If you're using a QAM tuner and you're not getting program data or your channel mappings/allocations are not working, file a complaint with the FCC. Tell them your cable company is not sending QAM PSIP data.

https://esupport.fcc.gov/sform2000/formF!input.action?form_page=2000F


----------



## bicker

To be clear: If you're getting PSIP channel mappings/allocations but not program data, then the fault is generally with the broadcaster, not the cable company.


----------



## billyjoebob99

flatpanelgeek said:


> If you're using a QAM tuner and you're not getting program data or your channel mappings/allocations are not working, file a complaint with the FCC. Tell them your cable company is not sending QAM PSIP data.
> 
> https://esupport.fcc.gov/sform2000/formF!input.action?form_page=2000F


That's all well and good but even if the broadcasters and cable companies do everything perfectly we still won't have guide data for QAM channels on our TiVos.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Not to mention that filing an FCC complaint is next to useless in this case, because they've never shown an inclination to enforce this. Which is sad, because it would make all clear QAM capable devices a lot easier to use.


----------



## mattack

billyjoebob99 said:


> That's all well and good but even if the broadcasters and cable companies do everything perfectly we still won't have guide data for QAM channels on our TiVos.


Then what about that one guy in Texas where it 'just works'? Doesn't his cable system "do everything perfectly"?


----------



## cableguy763

Yes


----------



## vstone

Actually, maybe that cable company does it the way we'd all like, but FCC regs require passing the PSIP, which would assign it a number like 7-1. TWCSC used to put their channel lineup number in the PSIP, then pulled it out. Now they "don't support" QAM tuners, which are probably in 100&#37; of all TV sets sold in this country today.


----------



## mattack

Sorry, I guess my question wasn't phrased very well.

If his cable system does "do everything perfectly", what is it doing ABOVE AND BEYOND the FCC requirements? Basically, in a perfect world, where we could actually talk to cable system techs, what could we tell them that would make this automagically "just work"? Some of my cable channels do have the channel letters (brain fart -- what are they called?), not just the # show up, even though of course I get no guide data.


----------



## Roderigo

mattack said:


> If his cable system does "do everything perfectly", what is it doing ABOVE AND BEYOND the FCC requirements? Basically, in a perfect world, where we could actually talk to cable system techs, what could we tell them that would make this automagically "just work"? Some of my cable channels do have the channel letters (brain fart -- what are they called?), not just the # show up, even though of course I get no guide data.


Instead of mapping the channels to the off-air virtual channel number, they need to their digital lineup's channel number. So, as an example, instead of a channel being mapped to 2-1, it should be mapped to 702.


----------



## Scopeman

mattack said:


> Sorry, I guess my question wasn't phrased very well.
> 
> If his cable system does "do everything perfectly", what is it doing ABOVE AND BEYOND the FCC requirements? Basically, in a perfect world, where we could actually talk to cable system techs, what could we tell them that would make this automagically "just work"? Some of my cable channels do have the channel letters (brain fart -- what are they called?), not just the # show up, even though of course I get no guide data.


I am the "one guy in Texas where it just works" - at least, it worked for 18 months in 2006/2007.

For a very long time I had mapped QAM without cable cards (TWC cable co. here in Central Texas). I do not know why it stopped in mid-2007, but I suspect the TWC office discovered they could bend us over for another $5/month for a pair of CCards and went for it.

But my experience for that 18 months that I had this working is that it is a simple way to get your HD local signals.

The excuses that we are given are just that - excuses. The cable companies are carrying the local channels under the federal must-carry mandate. These channels have the same station ID numbers/names as the OTA channels that Tivo has the guide data for. Tivo could choose to map the data from one to the other, but they do not.


----------



## Roderigo

Scopeman said:


> These channels have the same station ID numbers/names as the OTA channels that Tivo has the guide data for.


This is where your assumption breaks down. While many times these channels have the same channel numbers as their OTA counterparts, that's certainly not true in 100% of the cable markets. Last time I yanked my cards it definitely wasn't true on my cable system.

Not sure what you mean by "station ID numbers," but the names frequently don't match between tivo's guide data, and the broadcast psip information. KQEDDT3 is definitely not the same as WORLD.


----------



## bicker

Roderigo said:


> Instead of mapping the channels to the off-air virtual channel number, they need to their digital lineup's channel number. So, as an example, instead of a channel being mapped to 2-1, it should be mapped to 702.


And while that will please you, it will piss off a lot of other customers who want PSIP to map to the off-air virtual channel number.


----------



## vstone

Roderigo said:


> Instead of mapping the channels to the off-air virtual channel number, they need to their digital lineup's channel number. So, as an example, instead of a channel being mapped to 2-1, it should be mapped to 702.


That would be nice, and some TWC systems did that until 2007, but that doesn't comply with the uneforced FCC regs, which call for the 7-1 format.


----------



## Zimm

All of this discussion would be moot if Tivo would simply allow the user to tell it what is on the QAM stations. If we could manually map the (already provided) guide data to the proper QAM channel we would be 100&#37; working. As I had said earlier in this thread, the Tivo has the proper guide data for these channels, they just insist on this idiot-proof mapping system that allows for ZERO user input/intervention. While I will agree that many people are inept when it comes to this type of thing, those of us who aren't should have a way of doing this. I don't care if it is a backdoor/uber-secret/unacknowledged feature; just give me a way to tell the Tivo that what it thinks should be on channel 113 is actually on QAM 13-1!

/rant


----------



## MediaLivingRoom

Can we have it my Dec 2008?


----------



## Roderigo

bicker said:


> And while that will please you, it will piss off a lot of other customers who want PSIP to map to the off-air virtual channel number.


It won't please or displease me, as I'm fine w/ having cablecards. The question I was answering was what would a cable company have to do to make clear qam work with the current tivo software.


----------



## Roderigo

vstone said:


> That would be nice, and some TWC systems did that until 2007, but that doesn't comply with the uneforced FCC regs, which call for the 7-1 format.


Don't know what the regs say or don't say. But, unlike what bicker says, I personally don't think this would "piss off a lot of other customers." If they're not complaining, the other people that would complain would be TV vendors, and I don't think they'd care much either.

Personally, I think it's easier for the consumer if they do this mapping. That way, it's channel 702, regardless of how you're viewing it - I wouldn't have to remember that on my cable box, I tune to 702, but I need to tune to 2-1 on my TV/Tivo w/o cards. If someone has cable, they're less likely to have an antenna, so they may not even have been exposed to the off-air virtual channel numbers.


----------



## bicker

Head over to avsforum.com if you don't believe me. Many there feel that the only legal PSIP is the one that maps to the broadcast virtual channel. (They're wrong about that; it doesn't specify what PSIP needs to map to.)


----------



## vstone

bicker said:


> Head over to avsforum.com if you don't believe me. Many there feel that the only legal PSIP is the one that maps to the broadcast virtual channel. (They're wrong about that; it doesn't specify what PSIP needs to map to.)


CFR: "For each digital transport stream that includes one or more services carried in-the-clear, such transport stream shall include virtual channel data in-band in the form of ATSC A/65B: ''ATSC Standard: Program and System Information Protocol for Terrestrial Broadcast and Cable (Revision B)'' (incorporated by reference, see § 76.602), when available from the content provider. With respect to in-band transport:
(A) ...
(D) Each channel shall be identified by a one- or two-part channel number and a textual channel name;"

Edit: Note that it is possible that the digital signals for some or all local OTA digital broadcast channels could be received via direct link instead of via antenna. In this case, the applicable channels' signals might not include the PSIP data.


----------



## bicker

Okay, just clarifying vstone: You are saying that that CFR states that it is the OTA virtual channel number "7-1" that is supposed to be present in PSIP data, not the cable virtual channel number "702". Right?


----------



## tjperez

bicker said:


> Okay, just clarifying vstone: You are saying that that CFR states that it is the OTA virtual channel number "7-1" that is supposed to be present in PSIP data, not the cable virtual channel number "702". Right?


I "think" the PSIP mainly refers to ATSC transmissions. QAM transmissions assume there is channel guide data downloaded "out of band" that defines what cable channel number it maps to.

This is the way cable has always worked throughout the analog years. In many cases OTA 2 will indeed be on Cable channel 2, but for many channels (especially UHF), the OTA channel will appear on whatever cable channel the cable operators want them to be on. That way they can group similar channels together or channels for a particular package together (makes it convenient to use one filter to block out channels not subscribed to).


----------



## bicker

tjperez said:


> I "think" the PSIP mainly refers to ATSC transmissions. QAM transmissions assume there is channel guide data downloaded "out of band" that defines what cable channel number it maps to.


However, the cable regulations do require pass-through of PSIP.


----------



## vstone

bicker said:


> Okay, just clarifying vstone: You are saying that that CFR states that it is the OTA virtual channel number "7-1" that is supposed to be present in PSIP data, not the cable virtual channel number "702". Right?


Yes

If the PSIP data is received ( as it would be from OTA, but not necessarily from a direct link) it must be used. In fact, if you read it carefully, if they received PSIP data with Discovery HD and used that channel in the clear, they would have to include the PSIP data. Presumably DHD wouldn't have a channel number, but could include the next 12 hours of programming schedule (which nobody uses anyway, to my knowledge).

For the record, Comcast here in Virginia tells me that they interpret CFR differently, but won't tell me how they interpret it.


----------



## vstone

tjperez said:


> I "think" the PSIP mainly refers to ATSC transmissions. QAM transmissions assume there is channel guide data downloaded "out of band" that defines what cable channel number it maps to.
> 
> This is the way cable has always worked throughout the analog years. In many cases OTA 2 will indeed be on Cable channel 2, but for many channels (especially UHF), the OTA channel will appear on whatever cable channel the cable operators want them to be on. That way they can group similar channels together or channels for a particular package together (makes it convenient to use one filter to block out channels not subscribed to).


Insert this as para B in the CFR posting:

"PSIP data describing a twelvehour time period shall be carried for each service in the transport stream. This twelve-hour period corresponds to
delivery of the following event information tables: EIT0, 1, 2 and 3;"

I presume that cable boxes use out of band info (ie not QAM PSIP data) to populate their cable boxes as their data ususlly goes for about a week, not 12 hours.

Although we generally refer to ATSC as being an OTA spec, it does define some QAM specs, including QAM PSIP tables, which are not the same as the OTA ones.


----------



## Roderigo

vstone said:


> "PSIP data describing a twelvehour time period shall be carried for each service in the transport stream. This twelve-hour period corresponds to
> delivery of the following event information tables: EIT0, 1, 2 and 3;"


Is this the only PSIP that's required? If so, it doesn't cover the channel mapping (which would be CVCT or TVCT tables).


----------



## tjperez

Does the FCC require accurate and useful event information or can they just stick "To Be Announced" in all of the slots?


----------



## vstone

Roderigo said:


> Is this the only PSIP that's required? If so, it doesn't cover the channel mapping (which would be CVCT or TVCT tables).


Refer back to posting #855.


----------



## vstone

tjperez said:


> Does the FCC require accurate and useful event information or can they just stick "To Be Announced" in all of the slots?


From ATSC-65/C (ATSC-65/B (i.e., previous revision) is implemented as law by reference) says: "The EIT shall be used to provide information for virtual channels ..", so my opinion would be yes. OTOH, I'd be hard pressed to believe that the FCC is interested in enforcing anything that is required, but that just be a conservative's angry look at the Bush administration.


----------



## pcbrew

I posted this over in another thread about Comcast taking Portland, OR all digital: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6834811#post6834811

There are links to some basic QAM Digital Tuning Adapter Comcast will be deploying. These will need the channel mapping data to operate and seems like there is a standard for it that TiVo could exploit to go after this market for the S3/THD, in addition to adding IR codes for the DTA boxes for the S2 models.

Pictures: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=154305&page_number=1&image_number=1
Pricing: http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=167256&site=cdn


----------



## dig_duggler

Errr, I've been busting my ass to get ABC (finally got a 2nd antenna and a uhf/vhf diplexer). I finally got it working, went to turn on 33-1 ant in my channels I receive when I noticed a nice 33-1 channel from my cbl (ABC3340 DT) in the list. It tunes. Yippee? 

This is recent. I did just rescan a week ago. I've searched back a few pages, but is there some pseudo-QAM support depending on the market that I'm unaware of? All but my Fox affiliate seems to have a channel (although all program guide data is 'To Be Announced'). I'm happy with my antenna coverage (at least until the transition, we'll see what happens then) but am happily annoyed that apparently there was some pseudo mapped QAM channel (probably very provider dependent) available?

I'm very ignorant on this matter, please fill me in (and call me an idiot if I missed something recently). Surely this is on the cable company side, but why would they suddenly do this?


----------



## aindik

dig_duggler said:


> Errr, I've been busting my ass to get ABC (finally got a 2nd antenna and a combiner). I finally got it working, went to turn on 33-1 ant in my channels I receive when I noticed a nice 33-1 channel from my cbl (ABC3340 DT) in the list. It tunes. Yippee?
> 
> This is recent. I've searched back a few pages, but is there some pseudo-QAM support depending on the market that I'm unaware of? All but my Fox affiliate seems to have a channel (although all program guide data is 'To Be Announced'). I'm happy with my antenna coverage (at least until the transition, we'll see what happens then) but am happily annoyed that apparently there was some pseudo mapped QAM channel available?
> 
> I'm very ignorant on this matter, please fill me in (and call me an idiot if I missed something recently).


TiVo will find the channel if the digital data is passed correctly, and you can tune it on the correct (OTA) channel number. It just has no idea what's on the channel when, so you can't schedule any recordings other than manually.


----------



## dig_duggler

Interesting. Since this call sign is available on the channel, does this mean that the channel information is coming from Tivo (or Tribune iirc)? If so, not having guide data makes no sense on the surface.


----------



## lessd

dig_duggler said:


> Interesting. Since this call sign is available on the channel, does this mean that the channel information is coming from Tivo (or Tribune iirc)? If so, not having guide data makes no sense on the surface.


The call sign comes from your cable co as the cable co are required to give you the HD networks for free. I just had a new cable card installed in a TiVo-HD and before the cable card was set up by the system the card remapped all the network channels to the cable co numbers, so if you can find a cable card in the street you will have the HD networks without the card being turned on, the card reverts to basic cable before activation.


----------



## moyekj

This is the first post I've seen confirming what was already suspected, that using a SDV Tuning Adapter without CableCards gives you proper channel mapping (and thus full guide data) for unencrypted QAM channels:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6869616#post6869616


----------



## Saxion

moyekj said:


> using a SDV Tuning Adapter without CableCards gives you proper channel mapping


Thanks for the info moyekj! That's good news. Now the only stumbling block is getting a TA without subscribing to digital cable (and that a TA is probably only available in markets with SDV).


----------



## Zimm

Couple questions that follows on this. 

Does the tuning adapter need to be paired to the host unit? 

Would a TA work on a non-SDV system?

The point here is to come up with a way to interact less with the cable company. The goal should be to only need to order basic cable from the cable company and take care of all the other issues on your own. This would avoid any extrenous and pointless fees associated with getting this done.


----------



## moyekj

Zimm said:


> Couple questions that follows on this.
> 
> Does the tuning adapter need to be paired to the host unit?
> 
> Would a TA work on a non-SDV system?
> 
> The point here is to come up with a way to interact less with the cable company. The goal should be to only need to order basic cable from the cable company and take care of all the other issues on your own. This would avoid any extrenous and pointless fees associated with getting this done.


 Yes, just like a regular set top box it needs to be registered with your cable company and needs to have firmware that will work with your local headend. So it's not like one can get a TA from eBay or somewhere else other than your local cable company and plug it in and everything will magically work.

Chances of someone being able to setup a functioning TA without having digital cable and CableCards (the whole thrust of this thread) are pretty slim which makes the fact that it does indeed solve the problem moot.


----------



## Saxion

Note: there is a new software-only fix for this being discussed in this thread. I can confirm that this fix works and has given me guide data on all my clear QAM channels!


----------



## Adam1115

Saxion said:


> Note: there is a new software-only fix for this being discussed in this thread. I can confirm that this fix works and has given me guide data on all my clear QAM channels!


Except that nobody is actually talking about speficially what was done...


----------



## ciper

edit: post removed.


----------



## Saxion

Adam1115 said:


> Except that nobody is actually talking about speficially what was done...



PM Stubby or post in his thread.
He will tell what you need to do and how much it will cost.
You send him your drive image over the internet.
He returns it to you but with antenna guide data mapped onto the clear QAM channels.


----------



## stubby

I can understand ciper's viewpoint. There's an unfortunate history of unscrupulous individuals profiteering from other people's work (selling prehacked units on eBay and the like). If I had stolen the work of others and was trying to profit from it, then I would agree with ciper's categorization of me.

However, I'm not doing that. To the best of my knowledge, the methods discussed on DDB require physically modifying your unit, and then applying patches to your tivo. My method, that I've developed on my own, uses neither the scripts nor the patches posted in that thread.


----------



## JamieP

stubby said:


> I can understand ciper's viewpoint. There's an unfortunate history of unscrupulous individuals profiteering from other people's work (selling prehacked units on eBay and the like). If I had stolen the work of others and was trying to profit from it, then I would agree with ciper's categorization of me.
> 
> However, I'm not doing that. To the best of my knowledge, the methods discussed on DDB require physically modifying your unit, and then applying patches to your tivo. My method, that I've developed on my own, uses neither the scripts nor the patches posted in that thread.


Someone here was contemplating offering a similar service a year or so ago, predating the posts at DDB. I can't find it now, but perhaps someone else can remember.

The method described "over there" involves altering/inserting some data structures in MFS. One way to do this is to put the drive in a hacked tivo, and run "tivosh" scripts to make the MFS changes. You can then put the drive back into a stock tivo. Another way (your way?) would be to write code that runs on a PC to make the MFS changes, possibly leveraging mfs-utils or some other existing tools to "grok" the MFS data structures. Both of these are only possible for an unhacked TiVo because the standard TiVo security checks do little to no checking of MFS data structures. This could change in the future, of course.

As a consumer, one thing I would be cautious of is ongoing support. TiVo hacks, in general, aren't maintenance free. As new software versions comes down the pike, there is a reasonably high likelihood that changes to the lineup and headend data structures may be required. If someone else modified your tivo for you, are you going to be in a position to cope with future software updates and channel lineup changes? Just something to think about. I suppose the worst case is that you reimage with a stock image, losing the QAM channel mapping and all your recordings.


----------



## ciper

JamieP said:


> As a consumer, one thing I would be cautious of is ongoing support. TiVo hacks, in general, aren't maintenance free. As new software versions comes down the pike, there is a reasonably high likelihood that changes to the lineup and headend data structures may be required. If someone else modified your tivo for you, are you going to be in a position to cope with future software updates and channel lineup changes? Just something to think about. I suppose the worst case is that you reimage with a stock image, losing the QAM channel mapping and all your recordings.


Very well said. A hacked Tivo is something that needs TLC at various times including, but not limited to, update roll outs. Even the most dedicated TCF members go on "vacations" from the forums from time to time. What would the end user do if his Tivo develops a problem and the vendor is not available? Even the Gurus from the forum wouldn't be able to help since they don't know exactly what modifications were done.


----------



## JamieP

JamieP said:


> Someone here was contemplating offering a similar service a year or so ago, predating the posts at DDB. I can't find it now, but perhaps someone else can remember.


Here is the previous offer I was thinking of.


----------



## hiker

Saxion said:


> That's really uncalled for. He's been enormously helpful to me.





JamieP said:


> Here is the previous offer I was thinking of.


Saxion,
I'm guessing that CoffeeIs4Closers never followed through in letting you test his supposed method?


----------



## Saxion

hiker said:


> Saxion,
> I'm guessing that CoffeeIs4Closers never followed through in letting you test his supposed method?


Yes, I never heard back from him and he already had some other volunteers. That thread died so I assume the tests were not successful.


----------



## Saxion

JamieP said:


> As new software versions comes down the pike, there is a reasonably high likelihood that changes to the lineup and headend data structures may be required. If someone else modified your tivo for you, are you going to be in a position to cope with future software updates and channel lineup changes? Just something to think about. I suppose the worst case is that you reimage with a stock image, losing the QAM channel mapping and all your recordings.


All good points. I can say that stubby's method maintained the QAM mapping across the recent firmware update from 9.4 to 11.0. So there is hope it will survive future updates.

In my market, clear QAM channel assignments have been stable for a long time, so I am reasonably confident I'll get some good mileage out of this hack. I also kept my original drive image and can return to it at any time, loosing the QAM mapping and my recordings. These are all risks I'm more than willing to take, but your situation might be different and stubby's fix might not be for you.

All I know is (at least for now) I have full TiVo guide data for all my clear QAM channels, without CableCARDs or Digital Cable or a Tuning Adapter, it works great, and I'm loving it!


----------



## vstone

Will the QAM mapping fix do any good for those of us whose PSIP tables are so screwed up[ that the Tivo says that we have 10 channels on channel 0?


----------



## stubby

It's possible, I've never played with clear-QAM "0 channels" (i.e., all the 0 channels I've seen were encrypted). Might be worth a try.


----------



## SteveHC1

Saxion said:


> Note: there is a new software-only fix for this being discussed in this thread. I can confirm that this fix works and has given me guide data on all my clear QAM channels!


- This procedure is WAY too complex for 99% of TiVo owners. TiVo NEEDS to give us the ability to re-map Guide channel data to our Clear QAM channels!!! It's relatively EASY for them to do it for crying out loud!!! I do NOT understand their resistance to it!!!


----------



## SteveHC1

Quote:
Originally Posted by fallingwater 
Is keeping cable providers happy part of TiVo's rationale for not pursuing QAM mapping?
As far as I've heard from TiVo folks, no, definitely not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJ 
TiVo seems focused on something other than thier customer.
Or perhaps they're simply focused on customers other than you and the folks who care about the same things you care about.

- I MUST disagree. When I personally inquired with TiVo reps about the lack of needed Clear QAM guide-channel re-mapping I was EXPLICITLY told that they're aware of the customer interest in it but that they have their own, privately-held reasons for not offering it. THAT tells me that they ARE actually taking into consideration cable companies' interests and this is NOT a good thing.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> As far as I've heard from TiVo folks, no, definitely not.
> 
> Or perhaps they're simply focused on customers other than you and the folks who care about the same things you care about.





GoHokies! said:


> Actually, the technical problems are quite real.
> 
> I'm not sure where you come off assuming that Tivo is a bunch of liars because they haven't satisfied your particular need - Tivo has come out and said that clear QAM is on the map, but waaay waaaay down on the list.
> 
> Instead, you see fit to call the employees that are nice enough to spend time here keeping us informed a bunch of liars. Awesome.


- Although I would NEVER call them "a bunch of liars," in general I HAVE to disagree. A) see my post above. B) There were recently some MAJOR disruptions of TiVo's Amazon VOD download service that persisted for quite awhile. In my communications with TiVo reps at the time they blamed Amazon for the problem and suggested I complain to Amazon - I knew darned well that it wasn't as they portrayed it to me so I went ahead and spoke with the Amazon folks. The folks at Amazon were fully aware of the issue and were FURIOUS that TiVo staff were trying to "blame" it on problems at Amazon's end. Amazon's corporate offices actually complained to TiVo's on the matter, and within a day or so BOTH companies' engineers were ordered to fix the problem - which they did almost IMMEDIATELY. But it would have dragged on even LONGER if I hadn't b*****d and moaned to BOTH of them and pointed out to BOTH of them that they were wasting time pointing fingers at each other rather than fixing the problem.


----------



## SteveHC1

Zimm said:


> You know what gets me about this issue? I just tried to see if I could get OTA HD channels so I can get the guide data for those channels. As I suspected I have very bad reception. What I did notice is that all of the channels it was kinda able to tune mapped to the exact same channels that the QAM channels show up at in the guide. I kept the OTA channels in the guide although I can't tune them and they provide the guide data for the QAM channels that appear right below them.
> 
> What this tells me is that Tivo is obviously capable of mapping the local HD's to their equivelent OTA channel assignment but they just refuse to link the OTA guide to them.
> 
> I know everyone is just going to say "Just get the cablecards and be done with it". I really don't feel like getting these troublesome things when it seems like all Tivo has to do is allow the OTA guide data to map to the QAM channels.
> 
> /rant


- I think you are absolutely CORRECT. For a LONG time TiVo was being shut out of the cable and satellite set-top box dvr market BY THE CABLE AND SAT. COMPANIES, who got other manufacturers to build cheaper KNOCK-OFF dvrs for them. TiVo ultimately had to FORCE the issue by filing patent infringement lawsuits, which they eventually won but not easily. But the wins did not guarentee TiVo a piece of that pie by any means. There is NO doubt in my mind that TiVo's refusal to offer us guide data re-mapping to Clear QAM is tied to this issue, as well as possibly their relationship with Tribune and ITS contractual relationships with the cable companies. TiVo needs to grow a few more you-know-whats and program in this capability for its customers!!!


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> To be clear, there is no requirement to publish a clear-QAM channel listing (and you should really bring that up to the FCC if you're concerned about it), and there is cost associated with any publishing of any information whatsoever, so unless there is a demonstrable profit advantage to publishing that information I see no reason to expect it to be published.
> 
> Regarding PSIP, as noted elsewhere, the requirement is to pass-through PSIP data provided to the MSO by the broadcaster. So first step is establishing that the feed that the broadcaster provides to the MSO actually has proper PSIP in it. Not easy, I'll grant you that, but that's the way things are. These kinds of concerns are too limited in scope to be satisfactorily address by CSRs on the line. Focus your attentions on corporate customer service, and/or engineers once you get access to them.


- Correct on all counts. At this point in time the only really viable solution would be for TiVo to just give us the darned (manual) re-mapping feature.


----------



## SteveHC1

billyjoebob99 said:


> That's all well and good but even if the broadcasters and cable companies do everything perfectly we still won't have guide data for QAM channels on our TiVos.


- CORRECT!!! My local broadcasters are doing it all correctly on the clear QAM channels and the cable company is passing along the data correctly. But because the cable company doesn't pass the relevant info on to Tribune - which they don't have to - and because TiVo prefers to just roll over and play dead on the issue - the proper guide data doesn't get downloaded. This is not rocket science, just corporate shenanigans.


----------



## sylan

SteveHC1 said:


> - This procedure is WAY too complex for 99% of TiVo owners.


Since it seems that Tivo is for whatever private reason unable to provide this functionality, it would be most productive (and greatly appreciated) if those in-the-know would publicly document their workarounds so that the rest of us in the "1%" can perhaps hold an open discussion over the method(s) and possibly improve upon it so that all can benefit.


----------



## SteveHC1

Scopeman said:


> I am the "one guy in Texas where it just works" - at least, it worked for 18 months in 2006/2007.
> 
> For a very long time I had mapped QAM without cable cards (TWC cable co. here in Central Texas). I do not know why it stopped in mid-2007, but I suspect the TWC office discovered they could bend us over for another $5/month for a pair of CCards and went for it.
> 
> But my experience for that 18 months that I had this working is that it is a simple way to get your HD local signals.
> 
> The excuses that we are given are just that - excuses. The cable companies are carrying the local channels under the federal must-carry mandate. These channels have the same station ID numbers/names as the OTA channels that Tivo has the guide data for. Tivo could choose to map the data from one to the other, but they do not.


- I think it's much more likely that it all "worked" for you for those 18 months simply because your cable company - for those 18 months - was providing Tribune with the proper data for its *full* "basic" lineup (i.e. including the local HD clear QAM channels).


----------



## SteveHC1

So can you tell I'm just a little P****D OFF at TiVo over this issue?

I think it's downright DISGUSTING that they REFUSE (and they DO "REFUSE") to offer us the guide data re-mapping capability. I need the stupid little games, Rhapsody access, etc. like a hole in the head. Live365 access is nice but also TOTALLY unnecessary. QAM data re-mapping is a NECESSITY.


----------



## ciper

Tivo asked me to take a survey a while back and one of the questions was "which of the following features is most interesting to you?" There were about 10-15 choices, one of which was free space indicator and another was for QAM mapping.

They have been aware of this issue since the very start and deliberately chose not to act. One "hack" to enable this mapping involves placing objects into the database, proving there is no need to even change the OS to support it! (other than a screen to help adjust settings).


----------



## SteveHC1

sylan said:


> Since it seems that Tivo is for whatever private reason unable to provide this functionality, it would be most productive (and greatly appreciated) if those in-the-know would publicly document their workarounds so that the rest of us in the "1%" can perhaps hold an open discussion over the method(s) and possibly improve upon it so that all can benefit.


- GREAT idea!


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> Tivo asked me to take a survey a while back and one of the questions was "which of the following features is most interesting to you?" There were about 10-15 choices, one of which was free space indicator and another was for QAM mapping.
> 
> They have been aware of this issue since the very start and deliberately chose not to act. One "hack" to enable this mapping involves placing objects into the database, proving there is no need to even change the OS to support it! (other than a screen to help adjust settings).


You're right about the OS per se not needing to be changed.

My Hitachi plasma's built-in TV GUIDE-branded programming guide feature (not to be confused with the TV Guide Channel) has the re-mapping feature and it works FLAWLESSLY.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> - This procedure is WAY too complex for 99% of TiVo owners. TiVo NEEDS to give us the ability to re-map Guide channel data to our Clear QAM channels!!! It's relatively EASY for them to do it for crying out loud!!! I do NOT understand their resistance to it!!!


I think that demonstrates the source of the conflict, here. What you *really *mean is that *you* need them to provide channel mapping. You're evaluating *their *actions based on *your *objectives, rather than *their own*. I suspect that, unless you happen to be a UU Pantheist, that if I evaluated your morality based on my moral code you wouldn't rank too highly, but does it make sense to evaluate your morality on someone else's moral code? Of course not, and by extension, it makes no sense to evaluate the folks who run a company based on a customer's unilaterally-imposed objectives. As I indicated, you *can *evaluate how well they serve your personal needs; you *can* evaluate how well they live up to the explicit promises they make to you; you just *cannot *evaluate how well they do what they're supposed to based on that.


----------



## Saxion

The Moxi HD DVR is finally shipping. I've known for some time that this TiVo competitor planned to support guide data on Clear QAM channels, based on a conversation I had with them at CES a couple years ago. Their new User's Guide confirms it:


> If you set up a Moxi HD DVR without a CableCARD inserted, you'll be asked during the onscreen setup process to conduct a scan for tunable channels. Some tunable HD channels in your lineup, discovered during the channel scan, may not match the electronic program guide (EPG) due to the way cable service providers choose to list them. Moxi refers to the channels with incorrect or missing data as "unmapped". To map them, go to Settings, and choose Channel List. Select the Channel Mapping option. When you select it, the vertical list will display all tunable channels that were not associated with an EPG channel at the time of your channel scan.
> 
> 1. Navigate an unmapped channel into center focus. Press the right arrow and then use the up/down arrows to review the list of available unassociated EPG channels.
> 
> 2. Determine which unmapped EPG channel applies to an unmapped scanned tunable channel by reviewing the current programming information presented or by watching the channel. When you find a match, press OK on the EPG channel and respond to the Map This Channel? confirmation.


Folks, this is a dead simple fix for this problem. No fears of mass consumer confusion or high support costs kept Moxi from adding this utterly simple feature. This proves that there is nothing keeping a DVR provider from supporting Clear QAM channels with guide data. Clearly Moxi had good reasons for adding support for this (i.e. keeping their customers happy and selling more DVRs) or they would not have done it. There is nothing special that separates TiVo from Moxi here that would keep TiVo from fixing this problem.

Keeping up with your competition is a given for any business. I am hopeful now that this feature is proven viable that TiVo will be forced to implement it.

(Even though I now have Clear QAM guide data via a hack, I am in full agreement with the others above that the correct fix for this is for TiVo to officially support it).


----------



## Meklos

If it can receive QAM, if it can scan QAM channels, it should allow us to tune to them.


----------



## aindik

Meklos said:


> If it can receive QAM, if it can scan QAM channels, it should allow us to tune to them.


It allows us to tune to them. It just doesn't know what's on them.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> ...As I indicated, you *can *evaluate how well they serve your personal needs; you *can* evaluate how well they live up to the explicit promises they make to you; you just *cannot *evaluate how well they do what they're supposed to based on that.


- In this case oh YES we CAN! We ALL bought our TiVos with TiVo's INSISTENCE in theur ADVERTISING that it would work in all respects with ALL cable and over-the-air systems - says so RIGHT in their own ADVERTISING. And It's certainly NOT like I'm the ONLY one asking for a correction of the problem!

No point in trying to justify ANY company's DELIBERATE failure to live up to its advertised promises now, is there???


----------



## SteveHC1

Saxion said:


> The Moxi HD DVR is finally shipping. I've known for some time that this TiVo competitor planned to support guide data on Clear QAM channels, based on a conversation I had with them at CES a couple years ago...There is nothing special that separates TiVo from Moxi here that would keep TiVo from fixing this problem.
> 
> Keeping up with your competition is a given for any business. I am hopeful now that this feature is proven viable that TiVo will be forced to implement it.
> 
> (Even though I now have Clear QAM guide data via a hack, I am in full agreement with the others above that the correct fix for this is for TiVo to officially support it).


The Moxi is a GREAT HD dvr, has a 500 gb drive and all cables, and currently does not require monthly or annual subscription fees. BUT - it's $800 and does not support antenna/OTA input (presumably does not have an ATSC tuner?). Hopefully by the time my 3-year TiVo subscription runs out the price will have come down a bit and it will support OTA recording.


----------



## mattack

Saxion said:


> Folks, this is a dead simple fix for this problem. No fears of mass consumer confusion or high support costs kept Moxi from adding this utterly simple feature.


Don't get me wrong. I DEFINITELY want this feature. I DEFINITELY would pay (up to a certain amount -- how much I don't know yet) a one time fee for this feature, even though I have lifetime subscriptions on my Tivos.

But you really don't think that some people will call Moxi if/when the QAM channels move and they miss TV shows? Even existing channel lineup changes cause problems, and from what others have said, some cable companies DO change QAM channels fairly often.

Again, I want it as a 'geek' option, but I can see why they don't provide it.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> - In this case oh YES we CAN! We ALL bought our TiVos with TiVo's INSISTENCE in theur ADVERTISING that it would work in all respects with ALL cable and over-the-air systems - says so RIGHT in their own ADVERTISING.


No, TiVo's advertising didn't project what you're contending. You're making that up. Pretty desperate of you, there. You should have given up while you were behind.


----------



## bicker

mattack said:


> But you really don't think that some people will call Moxi if/when the QAM channels move and they miss TV shows? Even existing channel lineup changes cause problems, and from what others have said, some cable companies DO change QAM channels fairly often.


Exactly. Anyone who thinks that we won't see frequent and vitriolic *****ing about the Moxi over this is delusional. And given the weak-minded nature of many online complaints, these folks will probably complain about the cable companies, not Moxi who put this unsupportable feature into the device they sold them.


----------



## ciper

I think this thread is relevant to this discussion. http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413454


----------



## vstone

Just to make life interesting Comcast SWVA has just modified the PSIP data to put both CBC and ABC on virtual channel 1-1.


----------



## lew

SteveHC1 said:


> - In this case oh YES we CAN! We ALL bought our TiVos with TiVo's INSISTENCE in theur ADVERTISING that it would work in all respects with ALL cable and over-the-air systems - says so RIGHT in their own ADVERTISING. And It's certainly NOT like I'm the ONLY one asking for a correction of the problem!
> 
> No point in trying to justify ANY company's DELIBERATE failure to live up to its advertised promises now, is there???


The tivo website is clear, cable cards are required for digital cable service. I did a google search. An early S3 ad, Television Week 9/4/06, specifically says two cable cards are required to record two HD channels.

I don't recall ever seeing anything from tivo (press release, ad, box wording) that didn't mention cable cards. I don't recall ever seeing anything that promised any digital service without cable cards.

I understand some users would like QAM mapping. Tivo might come up with a solution BUT there isn't any way to justify DELIBERATELY MAKING UP FACTS to support our position


----------



## 1003

lew said:


> The tivo website is clear, cable cards are required for digital cable service. I did a google search. An early S3 ad, Television Week 9/4/06, specifically says two cable cards are required to record two HD channels.


*TiVo website*
can say anything yesterday, today or tomorrow based on the daily whims of marketing department. I want the functionality as it was listed on the TiVoHD product box itself.

TiVoHD package says:
- Cable TV or Antenna Connection (Does not support satellite)
- CableCARDtm decoders* (from a cable company) may be required to recieve digital cable channels.
* Customers may need 2 CableCARDtm decoders for dual tuner functionality

Note that in the bullet point on the package it says that I may require CableCARDs, but use of CableCARD(s) is definately not specified as an actual requirement for receiving digital channels over cable. This is the same sort of vague language that created a loophole providing early TiVo adopters (like me) the ability to transfer lifetime service to a new box.

At the moment I have a case in with TiVo regarding my recently restored PSIP enabled channels [ABC, CBS, FOX and NBC] from Comcast. Accurate PSIP data should be a gift to TiVo/Tribune since this data will reduce the number of lineup changes going forward.

In my case I am getting 'almost' all the digital channels I actually want 'in the clear' without the need for CableCARD, but I also want TiVo program lineup support...


----------



## TWinbrook46636

aindik said:


> It allows us to tune to them. It just doesn't know what's on them.


If we could map them then it *would* know what's on them!


----------



## TWinbrook46636

mattack said:


> Don't get me wrong. I DEFINITELY want this feature. I DEFINITELY would pay (up to a certain amount -- how much I don't know yet) a one time fee for this feature, even though I have lifetime subscriptions on my Tivos.
> 
> But you really don't think that some people will call Moxi if/when the QAM channels move and they miss TV shows? Even existing channel lineup changes cause problems, and from what others have said, some cable companies DO change QAM channels fairly often.
> 
> Again, I want it as a 'geek' option, but I can see why they don't provide it.


A simple disclaimer in the manual and on the screen should do the trick. Yes, some people will still call but some people ALWAYS call.


----------



## ggersch

I just got my Tivo HD XL two weeks ago, and when I saw that it found all the #-# channels, along with some other data that must be part of the PSIP stream, I was happy. I thought maybe finally Tivo had enabled clear-QAM support.

<sigh> No such luck. I still had to call the cable company and wait for the tech to show up with the cards. It actually went well. The tech had a M-card (even though dispatch insisted I would get two singles), and he was done in 15 minutes.

But, I still had to wait a week to get the card, AND take time off from work.

The one thing I wasn't expecting though, is what the cable cards did to my tuners. They disabled all the analog and clear-QAM signals I was getting, and turned my wonderful Tivo into a dumb digital set top box.

COMCAST NOW OWNS MY TIVO TUNERS! 

I only get basic-basic cable. But, the notch filter was fairly loose, and I was able to get things like MSNBC and Hallmark. And with the QAM channels, I was finding all sorts of interesting things that weren't encrypted, like Bravo and Disney. Now, with the cable cards, they're all gone.

Damn. I know I wasn't legally entitled to those channels, but I figure if I could see them, and they were being sent into my home in the clear, my karma was fine.

And my wife is peeved that she has to mess with different remotes to watch MSNBC on the TV tuner. (Not peeved enough to pay for full cable though. She's really cheap. <grin>)


----------



## mattack

JJ said:


> *TiVo website*
> can say anything yesterday, today or tomorrow based on the daily whims of marketing department. I want the functionality as it was listed on the TiVoHD product box itself.
> 
> TiVoHD package says:
> - Cable TV or Antenna Connection (Does not support satellite)
> - CableCARDtm decoders* (from a cable company) may be required to recieve digital cable channels.
> * Customers may need 2 CableCARDtm decoders for dual tuner functionality
> 
> Note that in the bullet point on the package it says that I may require CableCARDs, but use of CableCARD(s) is definately not specified as an actual requirement for receiving digital channels over cable.


I think you're reading that wrong. I think what they're saying is that you MAY need 2. Not that you "may need". In other words, I think they're trying to point out the S-card vs M-card issue, without getting way technical. If your cable company only has S-cards, you need two of them, even on a TivoHD.


----------



## bicker

JJ said:


> Note that in the bullet point on the package it says that I may require CableCARDs, but use of CableCARD(s) is definately not specified as an actual requirement for receiving digital channels over cable.


What the #%$* do you think the words "may require" mean? That the requirement is up to your own personal discretion? In English, that's called "optional", not "required". 


JJ said:


> This is the same sort of vague language that created a loophole providing early TiVo adopters (like me) the ability to transfer lifetime service to a new box.


No, it isn't.



TWinbrook46636 said:


> A simple disclaimer in the manual and on the screen should do the trick.


No, it wouldn't. I think that assertion is is optimistic beyond reason.


----------



## Adam1115

ggersch said:


> The one thing I wasn't expecting though, is what the cable cards did to my tuners. They disabled all the analog and clear-QAM signals I was getting, and turned my wonderful Tivo into a dumb digital set top box.
> 
> COMCAST NOW OWNS MY TIVO TUNERS!
> 
> I only get basic-basic cable. But, the notch filter was fairly loose, and I was able to get things like MSNBC and Hallmark. And with the QAM channels, I was finding all sorts of interesting things that weren't encrypted, like Bravo and Disney. Now, with the cable cards, they're all gone.
> 
> Damn. I know I wasn't legally entitled to those channels, but I figure if I could see them, and they were being sent into my home in the clear, my karma was fine.


The cablecards are conditional access devices designed specifically to prevent you from receiving channels that you aren't paying for.

It has to work that way to be cablecard compliant.

But Comcast doesn't own ALL of your tuners, I use OTA with my TiVo.


----------



## 1003

TiVoHD package says:
- Cable TV or Antenna Connection (Does not support satellite)
- CableCARDtm decoders* (from a cable company) may be required to recieve digital cable channels.
* Customers may need 2 CableCARDtm decoders for dual tuner functionality



bicker said:


> What the #%$* do you think the words "may require" mean? That the requirement is up to your own personal discretion? In English, that's called "optional", not "required".


Dictionary.com
seems to have differing opinion. Definition 3 applied to the description on the box as a conditional clause would appear be most correct. So, its not required. Its not even a need.



> may
> -auxiliary verb, present singular 1st person may, 2nd may or (Archaic) may⋅est or mayst, 3rd may; present plural may; past might. 1. (used to express possibility): It may rain.
> 2. (used to express opportunity or permission): You may enter.
> 3. (used to express contingency, esp. in clauses indicating condition, concession, purpose, result, etc.): I may be wrong but I think you would be wise to go. Times may change but human nature stays the same.
> 4. (used to express wish or prayer): May you live to an old age.
> 5. Archaic. (used to express ability or power.)


Since the word may has opened the door to condition as far as CABLECard necessity the word require is only relavent to the lack of need.



> re⋅quire
> 1. to have need of; need: He requires medical care.
> 2. to call on authoritatively; order or enjoin to do something: to require an agent to account for money spent.
> 3. to ask for authoritatively or imperatively; demand.
> 4. to impose need or occasion for; make necessary or indispensable: The work required infinite patience.
> 5. to call for or exact as obligatory; ordain: The law requires annual income-tax returns.
> 6. to place under an obligation or necessity: The situation requires me to take immediate action.
> 7. Chiefly British. to desire; wish to have: Will you require tea at four o'clock?
> -verb (used without object) 8. to demand; impose obligation: to do as the law requires.


I am consistently amazed at those who argue against this feature. TiVo needs to remain relavent in a world of competing DVR products that increasingly offer features that customers actually want.

Steadfastly refusing to offer guide data to channels that we pay for and receive looks more like corporate suicde every day. Perhaps a lesson from General Motors about igoring your customers wants and desires is in order...

Resorting to colourful language (like "*#%$**") only reinforces my point...


----------



## lew

The first defintion, the one you omitted is the relevent one.


> (used to express possibility): It may rain


In other words tivo is saying: 
It is possible cable cards may be required to receive digital cable channels.
*You are being intentionally deceptive*in skipping the relevent definition. I guess you don't want to admit you're wrong, you don't have to It's obvious.

*No one is arguing against the feature* but we don't know what resources are required to program and support such a feature.



JJ said:


> TiVoHD package says:
> - Cable TV or Antenna Connection (Does not support satellite)
> - CableCARDtm decoders* (from a cable company) may be required to recieve digital cable channels.
> * Customers may need 2 CableCARDtm decoders for dual tuner functionality
> 
> 
> 
> Dictionary.com
> seems to have differing opinion. Definition 3 applied to the description on the box as a conditional clause would appear be most correct. So, its not required. Its not even a need.
> 
> Since the word may has opened the door to condition as far as CABLECard necessity the word require is only relavent to the lack of need.
> 
> I am consistently amazed at those who argue against this feature. TiVo needs to remain relavent in a world of competing DVR products that increasingly offer features that customers actually want.
> 
> Steadfastly refusing to offer guide data to channels that we pay for and receive looks more like corporate suicde every day. Perhaps a lesson from General Motors about igoring your customers wants and desires is in order...
> 
> Resorting to colourful language (like "*#%$**") only reinforces my point...


----------



## bicker

JJ said:


> Dictionary.com
> seems to have differing opinion.


So you basically think you get to select the third definition as the one relevant to the case, distort even its meaning as necessary to favor your ranting. 

You're wrong. At this point, it is clear to me that nothing other than that statement will have any relevance from your standpoint. You're simply wrong.



JJ said:


> I am consistently amazed at those who argue against this feature.


You're consistently lying about the point people are making to you. Repeatedly you've lied about this, simply proving more definitively that you recognize the lack of merit in your own arguments, thereby prompting your desperate action of *arguing against what no one has said*.



JJ said:


> Resorting to colourful language (like "*#%$**") only reinforces my point...


No, it simply reinforces how frustrating it is to discuss something with someone like you who is refusing to post with intellectual integrity, i.e., lying about what people are saying to you, and distorting even the meaning of words to try to defend your indefensible assertions.

Again, you're wrong. You're simply wrong.


----------



## jcthorne

No,

What this issue means TO ME is that I have a valid cable channel line up that Tivo simply has no desire to support. I have and pay for the cannel delivery from Comcast. Tivo will not supply guide data for the channel linup that I recieve. Tivo wants me to subscribe to a MUCH more expensive cable lineup that they DO support simply because it is easier for them.

I want Tivo to support with guide data the channel line up that I subscribe to. I knew they did not support it when I purchased the Tivo. I also know they did not support satelite TV lineups. Does not mean that Tivo should not stop splitting hairs and just support all valid and sold cable tv channel lineups regardless of Comcast's desires to sell you tv programming I do not need or desire to pay for.

I pay $12 a month for all local stations, both analog and digital formats. Analog disappearing in a few months. Tivo chooses not to supply data for the digital ones. For whatever reason and wants me to pay over $60 a month to get the SAME channels with guide data. Just not going to happen. I use the OTA and the CATV channels that they do support as the additional 48 a month is much better used for other things in our household than CATV.

OH, Merry Christmas to all. Especially TIVO. And thanks for all the new features this year that I really do enjoy!


----------



## markens

jcthorne said:


> What this issue means TO ME is that I have a valid cable channel line up that Tivo simply has no desire to support. I have and pay for the cannel delivery from Comcast. Tivo will not supply guide data for the channel linup that I recieve. Tivo wants me to subscribe to a MUCH more expensive cable lineup that they DO support simply because it is easier for them. ...


This post (in its entirety) is well stated and reflects my views, too. With the additional complication that my cable company does not supply nor support digital set top boxes or cable cards. So I can't get cable cards even if I wanted to. I MUST use customer-supplied QAM-capable equipment in order to receive the digital signals provided as part of my subscription.

I've never had to rescan the lineup, so the underlying RF channel assignments are very stable. Obviously, my S3 works fine for this except for not getting program guide info (which is the same as the equivalent OTA stations).


----------



## bicker

jcthorne said:


> ... I have a valid cable channel line up that Tivo simply *has no desire to support*.


Yes, that's a good way of putting it, though that almost makes it sound like it is personal, when it is not.



jcthorne said:


> Tivo wants me to subscribe to a MUCH more expensive cable lineup that they DO support simply because it is easier for them.


No, not "easier" -- rather, "more profitable".



jcthorne said:


> Does not mean that Tivo should not stop splitting hairs and just support all valid and sold cable tv channel lineups regardless of Comcast's desires to sell you tv programming I do not need or desire to pay for.


Nor does it mean the opposite.



jcthorne said:


> Just not going to happen.


And that is definitely your choice; absolutely don't let anyone tell you that you must subscribe to higher tiers of cable service. Just don't project an obligation onto TiVo to make up for your unwillingness to do so.



jcthorne said:


> OH, Merry Christmas to all. Especially TIVO. And thanks for all the new features this year that I really do enjoy!


Have a Blessed New Year!


----------



## toy4two

I too was really disappointed when I hooked up my brand new TIVO HD who's sole reason for buying was to record my local HD's I get for free. Man did I feel cheated. 

Is there ANY boxes out there that can record local HD, I just want a DVR to record my 4 basic HD channels without a cable card? I am hoping Microsoft's Media Center can do this?


----------



## bicker

The new Moxi costs about $800.


----------



## Budget_HT

FWIW, my sister in law lives in a condo with "pre-paid" expanded analog cable service. She had no individual account with Comcast. 

Then she wanted to upgrade from her stand-alone SD single-tuner TiVo to a TiVo HD unit. We checked with Comcast about her scenario and the ability to get one M card or two S cards.

She had to set up an individual account with Comcast so they could bill her above and beyond the expand basic analog service contracted for with the condo association. 

End result, it costs her $1.79 per month for the cable card that enables her TiVo to have guide data for all of the digital versions of the channels allowed in her service package, including the cable versions of every OTA HDTV channel in our area.

I have heard of another case where a person had limited basic cable service (about $15 per month) and was able to get the cable card for an extra $2 per month, with no need to upgrade the service package.

Be advised that the Comcast CSRs will attempt to upsell every time, but when pressed, will allow you to order just what you need and no more (at least in our area).


----------



## jimmystewart

Question - 
On feb 17th, presumably cable companies will no longer be receiving an analog signal from broadcasters. Presumably, cable companies will start dropping analog signals altogether and their set-top boxes will down-convert to analog. (that's what verizon already does with fios-tv). Obviously some companies will do that sooner than others. But it is an eventuality.

At that point, what happens to everyone using cable-ready signals? does Tivo add the clear-Qam broadcast channels to the guide data? or do those peoples TiVos become bricks if they don't pay for cable cards? just curious.

(I'm only interested in tuning HD broadcast channels CBS, NBC, FOX, ABC, CW, PBSetc)


----------



## UserNotFound

Short version: Basic service + cablecards = HD shows + guide data without digital tier pricing.

Long version:

I have bare minimum basic cable service that I pay roughly $10 a month for.

I ordered two cablecards from Charter last week. I was prepared to put up a fight about getting them, but the CSR obviously didn't care and said "It lets me do it, so there you go".

After the tech left, I initially thought I couldn't tune the QAM channels anymore, because tuning to 90-1 (fox) just gave me a black screen. After a couple minutes of trying various things, it dawned on me to look in the 700 range. There were the remapped QAM channels. I also have the music channels (900 range) and a couple odd channels in the 200-300's.

If it turns out that Charter charges me anything more than the $4 a month for the card rental I'll report back here.


----------



## bicker

jimmystewart said:


> Question - On feb 17th, presumably cable companies will no longer be receiving an analog signal from broadcasters.


That is not a good assumption. http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6551380.html?nid=3341

All that happens on February 17 is that broadcasters cannot put analog signals out over-the-air. That doesn't mean that that cannot still provide them directly to cable companies.



jimmystewart said:


> Presumably, cable companies will start dropping analog signals altogether and their set-top boxes will down-convert to analog.


If your cable company hasn't already done that, then they probably won't for at least four or five years. They had an option to go truly "all-digital" back before they began incurring the cost of complying with the separable security ban. A very small number did; the rest effectively decided to continue providing analog service over the coax until at least 2012 (and that date in the law could be extended).



jimmystewart said:


> (that's what verizon already does with fios-tv). Obviously some companies will do that sooner than others. But it is an eventuality. At that point, what happens to everyone using cable-ready signals?


They become reliant on digital signals, via digital converters if necessary. In some cases (i.e., people using the TiVo S1) it may necessitate buying contemporary equipment, in order to maintain current capabilities.



jimmystewart said:


> does Tivo add the clear-Qam broadcast channels to the guide data?


Within the context of current and previous series equipment, I suspect that the answer is definitively No. All you need is a TiVo HD with CableCARDs, and you can tune in any linear channel your cable company provides you.


----------



## jcthorne

UserNotFound said:


> Short version: Basic service + cablecards = HD shows + guide data without digital tier pricing.
> 
> Long version:
> 
> I have bare minimum basic cable service that I pay roughly $10 a month for.
> 
> I ordered two cablecards from Charter last week. I was prepared to put up a fight about getting them, but the CSR obviously didn't care and said "It lets me do it, so there you go".
> 
> After the tech left, I initially thought I couldn't tune the QAM channels anymore, because tuning to 90-1 (fox) just gave me a black screen. After a couple minutes of trying various things, it dawned on me to look in the 700 range. There were the remapped QAM channels. I also have the music channels (900 range) and a couple odd channels in the 200-300's.
> 
> If it turns out that Charter charges me anything more than the $4 a month for the card rental I'll report back here.


Unfortunatly for Comcast customers, this is simply not true. Cablecards can only be added to a digital subscription. For me to get cable cards for guide data would add $50 a month for the same channels I use now. $50 a month because Comcast will not provide cable cards for the channels I already pay to revieve. THere is no tier in between. If it was just the $2 a month CC rental, do you think there would be so many in this topic asking for the QAM support?


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> What the #%$* do you think the words "may require" mean? That the requirement is up to your own personal discretion? In English, that's called "optional", not "required".
> No, it isn't.


"May require" suggests there are some circumstances in which cable cards aren't required. I don't agree with the posters who think "may require" only refers to customers who don't require encrypted channels.

I think Budget_HT has a good case and Markens has an excellent case. There isn't any reason to assume a cable card would be required if a cable system doesn't encrypt *any* channels and doesn't require (or supply) STB.

I think tivo's remedy would be to provide a complete refund, including pre-paid or lifetime service, to those *very few* customers who use a cable system which uses open QAM for all digital channels.

Given the state of the economy tivo may not have enough availability of programmers to provide all requested features.



Budget_HT said:


> FWIW, my sister in law lives in a condo with "pre-paid" expanded analog cable service. She had no individual account with Comcast.





markens said:


> With the additional complication that my cable company does not supply nor support digital set top boxes or cable cards. So I can't get cable cards even if I wanted to. I MUST use customer-supplied QAM-capable equipment in order to receive the digital signals provided as part of my subscription.
> 
> I've never had to rescan the lineup, so the underlying RF channel assignments are very stable. Obviously, my S3 works fine for this except for not getting program guide info (which is the same as the equivalent OTA stations).


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> "May require" suggests there are some circumstances in which cable cards aren't required.


No -- that is what someone might choose to infer, but that is not what those words imly.



lew said:


> I think Budget_HT has a good case and Markens has an excellent case. There isn't any reason to assume a cable card would be required if a cable system doesn't encrypt *any* channels and doesn't require (or supply) STB.


The condition does not reference encryption at all. Instead you're imposing your own personal desires and wishes regarding things onto words that were intended to communicate something other than what you perhaps would have preferred.


----------



## Adam1115

jcthorne said:


> Unfortunatly for Comcast customers, this is simply not true. Cablecards can only be added to a digital subscription. For me to get cable cards for guide data would add $50 a month for the same channels I use now. $50 a month because Comcast will not provide cable cards for the channels I already pay to revieve. THere is no tier in between. If it was just the $2 a month CC rental, do you think there would be so many in this topic asking for the QAM support?


That is not correct. Comcast will rent you cablecards with lifeline, you will only receive digital locals.

If you 'accidentally' receive extra analog channels, there is a good chance you won't after adding cablecards.

If a CSR told you you can't add cablecards, they are wrong. (Hint- they will also rent you a BASIC Digital box that will receive HD locals on lifeline....)


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> No -- that is what someone might choose to infer, but that is not what those words imly.
> 
> The condition does not reference encryption at all. Instead you're imposing your own personal desires and wishes regarding things onto words that were intended to communicate something other than what you perhaps would have preferred.


I'm a FiOS subscriber, have two cable cards and subscribe to channels that require cable cards even if tivo implements QAM mapping.

Personal desires, wishes or preference have nothing to do with my post.

The term "may" indicates cable cards are required under some circumstances but not required under others. The linked definition used the word "possible" as a definition.

Although the term doesn't reference encryption we know QAM mapping is only possible for unencrypted channels. We already agreed the wording on the box allows tivo to require cc for digital channels, even if a customer is only interested in the unencrypted channels.

I'll submit the only poster in this thread that has a right to complain about language on the box is markens . Tivo (on the box) doesn't say cable cards are always required for digital channels. A customer in a system that doesn't use any type of conditional access could reasonably expect tivo would work in a system that not only doesn't offer cable cards but doesn't even use STB.

The web site language indicates cable cards are required for digital channels. I'll speculate that at one time tivo was going to support some kind of QAM mapping but later decided it wasn't worth it.

The language on the box is incorrect. Cable card *are* required for digital channels. Tivo is incorrectly using the word possible.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Personal desires, wishes or preference have nothing to do with my post.


Given that your post advocated for things not explicitly promised, there is no other rational expectation. Just because it wouldn't actually change your own situation doesn't mean that you don't want it to be as you implied.



lew said:


> The term "may" indicates cable cards are required under some circumstances but not required under others.


No, it means that maybe they're required and maybe they're not. It's a warning. People who refuse to pay heed do so at their own peril.



lew said:


> Although the term doesn't reference encryption we know QAM mapping is only possible for unencrypted channels.


Which has nothing to do with the fact that you injected encryption into what you claimed TiVo was implying with their promotional materials, without there be any basis for doing so.



lew said:


> A customer in a system that doesn't use any type of conditional access could reasonably expect tivo would work in a system that not only doesn't offer cable cards but doesn't even use STB.


I respect your right to want things to be that way, but AFAIC it is just your own personal desire.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> No, it means that maybe they're required and maybe they're not. It's a warning. People who refuse to pay heed do so at their own peril.


Which is why tivo's statement is inherently deceptive. The truth is cable cards *are required, not may be required.* Tivo can't require something that doesn't exist, specifically cable cards for a cable system that doesn't have any form of conditional security.

Tivo, properly, has the correct language on their website.

I'm not arguing for QAM mapping, only the right for those few (if any) customers to obtain a refund. I only read one poster who knows of such a system.


----------



## Budget_HT

jcthorne said:


> Unfortunatly for Comcast customers, this is simply not true. Cablecards can only be added to a digital subscription. For me to get cable cards for guide data would add $50 a month for the same channels I use now. $50 a month because Comcast will not provide cable cards for the channels I already pay to revieve. THere is no tier in between. If it was just the $2 a month CC rental, do you think there would be so many in this topic asking for the QAM support?


I think you might want to force this issue with Comcast. While some details and prices vary from region to region, their general policies seem to be fairly consistent across the nation. We have seen that some individuals at Comcast may be insufficiently trained and/or intentionally misdirected to make you believe that you cannot have cable cards with analog basic or limited basic cable service.

One understandable exception to what I just stated might exist in a place where Comcast has convinced the local regulatory folks to agree to bundling items that do not require it technically.

If I were you I would go to the highest local management at Comcast in your area and politely explain your situation and your understanding that other Comcast customers elsewhere are not subject to the digital constraints that have been explained to you by their sales force.

We started here with the same misunderstandings within the Comcast ranks that you are seeing, almost 2 years ago. We had to escalate many times to get them to provide the service their own policies and website descriptions specify. I know personally because I have helped a half dozen friends and family members with this issue.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Which is why tivo's statement is inherently deceptive.


There is no difference between TiVo's statement and much of the comparable statements made by other manufacturers. Evidently, you have a problem with standard US commercial advertising. That's your prerogative. However, to highlight one company, doing essentially what most companies do, is dishonest. To assert that they have some special obligation, because you want them to, is not realistic.


----------



## billyjoebob99

lew said:


> "May require" suggests there are some circumstances in which cable cards aren't required. I don't agree with the posters who think "may require" only refers to customers who don't require encrypted channels.


Forgive me for stepping into your "discussion" but doesn't the box state that "*Two* cable cards may be required". Not all cable companies offer M-cards. Aren't they just stating the facts? You will need at least a cable card, maybe two.

If it says "may" on the original series 3 box then there is a small point to be made. But if you are talking about the TiVoHD box then it seems not at all deceptive.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> There is no difference between TiVo's statement and much of the comparable statements made by other manufacturers. .


I don't have an issue with the wording on tivo's website:



> Requires a CableCARD decoder from your cable company to receive digital and HDTV


The wording on the box:



> CableCARDtm decoders* (from a cable company) may be required to recieve digital cable channels.


The wording on the box isn't accurate and certainly not comparable to statements made by other companies. I don't recall companies using the word "MAY" to refer to a required componenet. As an example every printer box I've ever read says something like a non-included cable is required.

You're distorting the meaning of the wording MAY on the box as much as others in this thread, just in the other direction. The fact that tivo changed the wording confirms my point. I'll conceed there are very few customers that have a right to rely on the wording on the box but those few customers who have a "in the clear" cable system are in that category.



billyjoebob99 said:


> Forgive me for stepping into your "discussion" but doesn't the box state that "*Two* cable cards may be required". Not all cable companies offer M-cards. Aren't they just stating the facts? You will need at least a cable card, maybe two.
> 
> If it says "may" on the original series 3 box then there is a small point to be made. But if you are talking about the TiVoHD box then it seems not at all deceptive.


The issue being discussed has nothing to do with the requirement for 2 S cards vs 1 M card. Some customers can receive all the stations they need without cable cards. Tivo won't supply guide data and as a result customers need cable card(s) even if their channels aren't encrypted and can be tuned with the tivo tuner.


----------



## billyjoebob99

lew said:


> The issue being discussed has nothing to do with the requirement for 2 S cards vs 1 M card. Some customers can receive all the stations they need without cable cards. Tivo won't supply guide data and as a result customers need cable card(s) even if their channels aren't encrypted and can be tuned with the tivo tuner.


I understand what's being discussed. I'm a huge supporter of QAM mapping and have gone round and round with TiVo about it. But I could have sworn that there was wording on the box referring to *Two* cable cards. Sorry if I was wrong.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> You're distorting the meaning of the wording MAY on the box as much as others in this thread, just in the other direction.


Except my definition is almost surely the one supported by the reality that consumers will face. My definition fosters preparedness; The other definition fosters disappointment.


----------



## jcthorne

Budget_HT said:


> I think you might want to force this issue with Comcast. While some details and prices vary from region to region, their general policies seem to be fairly consistent across the nation. We have seen that some individuals at Comcast may be insufficiently trained and/or intentionally misdirected to make you believe that you cannot have cable cards with analog basic or limited basic cable service.
> 
> One understandable exception to what I just stated might exist in a place where Comcast has convinced the local regulatory folks to agree to bundling items that do not require it technically.
> 
> If I were you I would go to the highest local management at Comcast in your area and politely explain your situation and your understanding that other Comcast customers elsewhere are not subject to the digital constraints that have been explained to you by their sales force.
> 
> We started here with the same misunderstandings within the Comcast ranks that you are seeing, almost 2 years ago. We had to escalate many times to get them to provide the service their own policies and website descriptions specify. I know personally because I have helped a half dozen friends and family members with this issue.


I pushed this issue with Comcast Houston a long way up the chain. Finally got someone in management to agree to rent me the M cablecard for $1.99 a month. They rolled a truck to install (also a local requirement and a $40 charge) The 'tech' had no idea. I did actually convince him to speak with Tivo CS on speakerphone while he was on the line with his tech support. Frustration ensued and he left. I called to schedule a higher level tech and the whole mess with no cable cards started over. Called the manager back that authorized the first time only to be told that they tried and would not attempt 'modification of customer equipment' to install. And no, I cannot install myself. If I wish to subscribe to digital cable, they would supply a box or perhaps attempt installation of a cable card again, no guarentee it would work.

Then the $40 truck roll showed up on my bill....Took several more phone calls to get that removed.

So, if you know of someone specific in Comcast Houston that can make a single M card be issued to me for $1.99 a month on my current basic cable subscription then I would like to hear it.

I would much rather Tivo just support the cable lineup I have and pay for.


----------



## ciper

Canadian customers are farked completely by the lake of QAM. Canadian cable co's do not have cablecards and obviously many have clear QAM channels.


----------



## B. Target

jcthorne said:


> I would much rather Tivo just support the cable lineup I have and pay for.


That really is the bottom line, everything else is just smoke to hide a corporate decision that favors the cable providers over the end user (their customers).


----------



## Budget_HT

jcthorne said:


> I pushed this issue with Comcast Houston a long way up the chain. Finally got someone in management to agree to rent me the M cablecard for $1.99 a month. They rolled a truck to install (also a local requirement and a $40 charge) The 'tech' had no idea. I did actually convince him to speak with Tivo CS on speakerphone while he was on the line with his tech support. Frustration ensued and he left. I called to schedule a higher level tech and the whole mess with no cable cards started over. Called the manager back that authorized the first time only to be told that they tried and would not attempt 'modification of customer equipment' to install. And no, I cannot install myself. If I wish to subscribe to digital cable, they would supply a box or perhaps attempt installation of a cable card again, no guarentee it would work.
> 
> Then the $40 truck roll showed up on my bill....Took several more phone calls to get that removed.
> 
> So, if you know of someone specific in Comcast Houston that can make a single M card be issued to me for $1.99 a month on my current basic cable subscription then I would like to hear it.
> 
> I would much rather Tivo just support the cable lineup I have and pay for.


I wish had more to offer, but your situation in Houston is not good.

FWIW, we picked up the M card at the local cable office and installed it ourselves with a short phone call to Comcast for them to cofigure their equipment to recognize the cable card installed in the HD TiVo. No truck roll and no installation fee, just $1.79 per month going forward, which we pay in advance every 6 months instead of dealing with such a small amount every month (because everything but the cable card is paid for by the homeowners' association).

If I were you, my next step would be to put it in writing and send your story to Comcast headquarters, office of the President. Perhaps an assistant there can cause the Houston folks to shape up.

Good Luck!


----------



## UserNotFound

Adam1115 said:


> If you 'accidentally' receive extra analog channels, there is a good chance you won't after adding cablecards.


A little bird told me that he has seen otherwise, although not sure about with Comcast.


----------



## Adam1115

UserNotFound said:


> A little bird told me that he has seen otherwise, although not sure about with Comcast.


It varies by market.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

jcthorne said:


> Unfortunatly for Comcast customers, this is simply not true. Cablecards can only be added to a digital subscription. For me to get cable cards for guide data would add $50 a month for the same channels I use now. $50 a month because Comcast will not provide cable cards for the channels I already pay to revieve. THere is no tier in between. If it was just the $2 a month CC rental, do you think there would be so many in this topic asking for the QAM support?


Comcast is not a "monolithic" entity. Different regions have different policies.

Here's my cable bill:

Limited Basic Service $7.28
2nd Cablecard For Multi Cablecard Device $1.79
-----
Total Comcast Cable Television $9.07

First Cablecard is free here.

Of course, the price is misleading since further down the bill they add another $1.60 for "Taxes, Surcharges & Fees".


----------



## jccfin

For the last time, I don't know why people are STILL arguing over whether or not you need to have cable cards to receive basic service but the fact is that the FCC MANDATES that all OTA channels be received WITHOUT any additional equipement from cable co. other than your TV&#8217;s digital tuner. That&#8217;s a fact.

That means that when a subscriber subscribes to basic service, they should be able to tune to those channels and that it&#8217;s Tivo&#8217;s fault for relying so much on Tribune to have the correct channel line-up. Tivo should have implemented manual mapping a long time ago so that if Tribune is stupid, which they are in many cases, customers would not be looking at an erroneous program guide.

I just purchased a new Sony XBR6. These new TV&#8217;s, including Samsungs, all now have TV Guide built in. Even this simple OTA guide has the ability to manually map the channels you scan. So, now I have the correct program guide on my TV hooked up directly to cable but my Tivo is still stuck in the 1980&#8217;s.

Tivo should wake up and smell the century.


----------



## vstone

My cablecardless Tivo S3 now finds my CBS Hd station on virtual channel 1-1. Unfortunately, thanks to Comcast, the virtual channel of ABC HD is also 1-1. How do you want Tivo to handle this latest in a series of screwups (or not) by the cable company?


----------



## ciper

Cable cards were created to handle Security. NOTHING MORE.
Clear QAM has no security
It's not a stretch to say clear qam with no security should not require a security device like a cable card.



jccfin said:


> I just purchased a new Sony XBR6. These new TVs, including Samsungs, all now have TV Guide built in. Even this simple OTA guide has the ability to manually map the channels you scan. So, now I have the correct program guide on my TV hooked up directly to cable but my Tivo is still stuck in the 1980s.
> 
> Tivo should wake up and smell the century.


ARGHHH Now even TV's have the ability to map guide data?! For petes sake Tivo stop adding bullcrap like Youtube and "more info" popups so your time can be spent implementing a feature that should have existed from the start.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> It's not a stretch to say clear qam with no security should not require a security device like a cable card.


Obviously TiVo uses CableCARD for more than just security, so yes it is a stretch. Remember, they designed TiVo, not you. :up:


----------



## mattack

jccfin said:


> For the last time, I don't know why people are STILL arguing over whether or not you need to have cable cards to receive basic service but the fact is that the FCC MANDATES that all OTA channels be received WITHOUT any additional equipement from cable co. other than your TVs digital tuner. Thats a fact.


A Tivo is not a "TV's digital tuner".

The Tivo *DOES* receive all OTA channels WITHOUT any additional equipment... It just doesn't have "Tivo-ness" without cablecards.

*I* think that is a bad thing. *I* would pay extra (a one time fee) for QAM remapping to be added to Tivo. But I understand why it has not been added (though not as a hidden/techy option).


----------



## Saxion

vstone said:


> How do you want Tivo to handle this latest in a series of screwups (or not) by the cable company?


If your cable company utterly screws up its PSIP data, or constantly changes PSIP and/or frequency assignments just for the fun of it, then clearly CableCARDs or a Tuning Adapter would be required for you. But such rare cases should not deny the vast majority of people with stable, FCC-compliant Clear QAM cable from getting their TiVos to work with it.

There is a chicken-vs-egg issue here...the fewer people who complain to their cable companies & FCC about poor Clear QAM service, the more cable companies can get away with obfuscating Clear QAM service, which leads to fewer people who use it...

Clear QAM service was intended by the FCC to be both _required _and _useful_. I say, hold your cable company's feet to the fire and get them to legally comply. Others have done so, to great success, myself included.


----------



## 1283

ciper said:


> Cable cards were created to handle Security. NOTHING MORE.


Wrong. Channel mapping is handled by the CableCard, which is why we have threads like this.


----------



## fallingwater

jccfin said:


> For the last time, I don't know why people are STILL arguing over whether or not you need to have cable cards to receive basic service but the fact is that the FCC MANDATES that all OTA channels be received WITHOUT any additional equipement from cable co. other than your TVs digital tuner. Thats a fact.
> 
> That means that when a subscriber subscribes to basic service, they should be able to tune to those channels and that its Tivos fault for relying so much on Tribune to have the correct channel line-up.


S3/HDTiVos tune all unscrambled QAM channels without EPG info from a CableCARD. The FCC doesn't mandate EPG info.



> Tivo should have implemented manual mapping a long time ago so that if Tribune is stupid, which they are in many cases, customers would not be looking at an erroneous program guide.
> 
> I just purchased a new Sony XBR6. These new TVs, including Samsungs, all now have TV Guide built in. Even this simple OTA guide has the ability to manually map the channels you scan. So, now I have the correct program guide on my TV hooked up directly to cable but my Tivo is still stuck in the 1980s.
> 
> Tivo should wake up and smell the century.


It's TiVo's decision whether or not to develop and provide manual QAM mapping. Forum posters' and other DVR users' decision is whether or not to use TiVo with or without CableCARD(s) 
http://www.docs.sony.com/release/DCRreference_faq.pdf

The latest digitally supplied version(s) of TVGOS are much easier to configure and organize (map manually) and (at least in my location) appear to be much more stable than TVGOS used to be. Digital TVGOS is available at these locations:
http://www.rabbitears.info/market.php?request=tvgos

Sony's discontinued DHG-HDD500/250 DVRs, which manually map unscrambled QAM or use a CableCARD are available relatively cheap on eBay; around $500(+) for 500Gbs or $400 for 250Gbs.


----------



## vstone

The requirement for cable carriage of OTA stations includes, basically, passing the video stream, and some of the PSIP data, which includes the channel number (like 7.1) and the first three (I think) sections (progarms/hours/etc - I'm not sure which) of the programming data, or current plus next two programs/hours. This is info required for the OTA broadcast. However, there is no requirement for a signal passed directly to the cable company via fiber optic (or whatever) to carry any of this info - it does not come under FCC purview. If this direct signal doesn't include this PSIP data, there is no requirement for the cable company to create (although since some of this info does have to be populated with something, you'd think they'd be reasonable about what they plug in there).

As a side comment, I've stated several times I have noted changes in PSIP data, as identified by digital TV sets, that were apparently unknown to local and head end operators. This applies to a Comcast system in VA and a Time Warner system in SC.

As another comment, my S3 cablecardless Tivo sensed changes in the PSIP data that were not seen by a digital TV set (the TV set required a rescan), so we know that the Tivo analyzes the PSIP streams on a continuing basis. Unfortunately, not all OTA digital channels have their PSIP streams changed and some are assigned to the same number (both ABC HD and CBS HD are assigned to virtual channel 1-1).


----------



## ciper

c3 said:


> Wrong. Channel mapping is handled by the CableCard, which is why we have threads like this.


I don't think you read my reply very well. Let me post it again -



ciper said:


> Cable cards were created to handle Security. NOTHING MORE.


They may facilitate a dozen other features if the platform is configured that way but the sole purpose when designing the cable card was to separate security from the box.

Now the SDV dongle on the other handle was designed to handle CHANNEL MAPPING


----------



## lew

Looks like FiOS (Boston) is currently having "issues" with PSIP data.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6992611#post6992611

I can sort of understand tivo not wanting to tackle QAM mapping, until/unless tivo is convinced the process is solid. Right now the issue is a few posters that would like to save a few dollars in CC rental fees. The posts would be a lot more critical if the mapping failed and "favorite" shows didn't get recorded. Why didn't tivo tell me to check the settings? Didn't tivo know the mapping was wrong?

Don't get me wrong. It might be useful to purchase a second tivo to record clear QAM (network) channels. Use MRV to grab encrypted shows from my other tivo. I understand tivo not wanting to spend a single dollar if they know a cable system may "break" the mapping with no notice.


----------



## aindik

lew said:


> Right now the issue is a few posters that would like to save a few dollars in CC rental fees.


These posts would be almost silly if the cable companies would a) issue CableCARDS without requiring a subscription beyond Limited Basic and b) not charge "additional outlet" fees for second, third, etc. TiVos with CableCARDs (which I have gotten my cable company to stop doing, but I'm in the minority).

If each M-Card only cost an extra $2 a month, I bet people would gladly pay it. But with an AO fee, it costs $10.90 a month. With a required upgrade to a digital package you don't otherwise want, it could cost over $30 a month.


----------



## lew

You have a cable company that doesn't want to provide cc, under the terms you're willing to pay.

There isn't anything that stops the same cable company from, accidentally , changing the channel mapping and not being careful with the PSID data.

There isn't anyway tivo can win.

Some people, including you were able to argue "negotiate" with their cable company. At least one poster was able to sign up for one month, downgrade to basic but keep their cc.

I wonder how many people are going to spend the money for tivo hardware and service but only subsribe to basic cable. A lot of those customers would just go OTA.



aindik said:


> These posts would be almost silly if the cable companies would a) issue CableCARDS without requiring a subscription beyond Limited Basic and b) not charge "additional outlet" fees for second, third, etc. TiVos with CableCARDs (which I have gotten my cable company to stop doing, but I'm in the minority).
> 
> If each M-Card only cost an extra $2 a month, I bet people would gladly pay it. But with an AO fee, it costs $10.90 a month. With a required upgrade to a digital package you don't otherwise want, it could cost over $30 a month.


----------



## jccfin

lew said:


> You have a cable company that doesn't want to provide cc, under the terms you're willing to pay.
> 
> There isn't anything that stops the same cable company from, accidentally , changing the channel mapping and not being careful with the PSID data.
> 
> There isn't anyway tivo can win.
> 
> Some people, including you were able to argue "negotiate" with their cable company. At least one poster was able to sign up for one month, downgrade to basic but keep their cc.
> 
> I wonder how many people are going to spend the money for tivo hardware and service but only subsribe to basic cable. A lot of those customers would just go OTA.


There are thousands of Tivo users like me who's in densely populated cities like Manhattan where OTA is not an option. I want to have OTA channels without being extorted to pay for extra [email protected] equipment that the cable company wants to peddle. The FCC made rules that stated as much but for some reason theres a loophole that the cable companies and their cohorts such as Tivo are more than willing to exploit. To them I wish nothing but bad will. I hope they lose all their customers and they both die of painful deaths.


----------



## bicker




----------



## Saxion

jccfin said:


> There are thousands of Tivo users like me...where OTA is not an option.


You are far from alone. According to one study, a full 36% of U.S. households cannot receive OTA digital service from at least one network. That's an astounding number. Clearly, "going OTA" just isn't an option for many people.

If 64% of the U.S. population was a large enough target market to add OTA support to the TiVo S3/HD, then surely 36% of the U.S. population is a large enough target market to add guide support for Clear QAM recording.


----------



## ciper

Saxion said:


> You are far from alone. According to one study, a full 36% of U.S. households cannot receive OTA digital service from at least one network.


That is partly the reason cable companies offer "lifeline" or less than 20 channel cable at ~12$ a month. I personally know many people who have the restricted cable offering. Its not that they are cheap or trying to save money either.

If you live in an apartment or condo you are pretty much forced into using cable TV and nothing else. There is no antenna and many of the units have no place to install satellite. Even those that have a balcony facing the right direction would have to start a fight with the management just to prove it's illegal to stop them. Most do not want the headache or stigma.

Many of those same people would love to use a TiVo so they could record the news that is on while they are driving or Conan Obrien while they sleep. (for example)

This is where QAM mapping screws this all up. I'm repeating myself but often adding a cable card would increase the cable bill by at least 45$ just to see a channel that the TV can already get in HD/digital.


----------



## slowbiscuit

If all you want is lifeline basic on cable and are somewhat capable with PCs, you don't need a Tivo. There are plenty of HTPC solutions available for clear QAM channels and I could easily build a dual-tuner one for $400 or so.


----------



## MickeS

ciper said:


> That is partly the reason cable companies offer "lifeline" or less than 20 channel cable at ~12$ a month.


It's $22/month here... which is why OTA is so appealing.


----------



## jccfin

slowbiscuit said:


> If all you want is lifeline basic on cable and are somewhat capable with PCs, you don't need a Tivo. There are plenty of HTPC solutions available for clear QAM channels and I could easily build a dual-tuner one for $400 or so.


Youre then trading one headache for another. I have no interest in building anything. Many times those hobbled solutions are so much inferior to the Tivo product. The only thing missing on the Tivo is the manual channel map function. Whereas, who knows how many problems home built solutions have.


----------



## bicker

The difference is that the HTPC would actually serve the need you've placed such priority. on.


----------



## jccfin

bicker said:


> The difference is that the HTPC would actually serve the need you've placed such priority. on.


Except you're giving up other needs. So there's no benefit in the end.


----------



## bicker

Life is always a series of trade-offs.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


>


I have (no current) use for QAM mapping. We don't know how much time it would take tivo to implement, and support, such a feature.

I have some question regarding tivo's priority list. We got pizza and you tube. No progress on issues with FiOS signal, QAM mapping and now problems with series 1 units being unable to connect (dial up and broadband) and consequently running out of guide data.


----------



## MickeS

lew said:


> We got pizza and you tube.


"Let them eat pizza!"


----------



## bicker

I suspect Domino's is paying TiVo, for the cost of adding the service, plus some. If folks can put together a business case showing how these other issues are actually sources of substantial profits, I bet _they'd _get done too.


----------



## BobCamp1

bicker said:


> I suspect Domino's is paying TiVo, for the cost of adding the service, plus some. If folks can put together a business case showing how these other issues are actually sources of substantial profits, I bet _they'd _get done too.


The S1 issue is a no-brainer: Tivo is clearly violating its service agreement. A lawyer's dream.

The other issues have no real business case. Tivo and FIOS do not officially support each other (and with good reason, apparently). There are not a lot of people who can afford a Tivo and yet can't afford/don't want cable. Plus, that system would be very fragile and would give the dumb customer more ways to ruin their Tivo. I think the poll in this forum said less than 200 people want this PITA-to-implement feature.

I bet at least 200 people watch Youtube or order pizza. Why, I don't know.


----------



## bicker

I think it is easy to claim violation, and claim that lawyers would agree, but in the absence of a judgment stating there was a violation, or even the launching of a class-action suit with the backing of a recognized, prestigious law firm, it's probably nothing more than bravado, and therefore easily ignored.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> I think it is easy to claim violation, and claim that lawyers would agree, but in the absence of a judgment stating there was a violation, or even the launching of a class-action suit with the backing of a recognized, prestigious law firm, it's probably nothing more than bravado, and therefore easily ignored.


I hope you're not suggesting those series 1 customers that can't get guide data should even need to think about a lawyer to get service issues resolved. It sounds like one problem is the number of customers who posted on TCF *instead of contacting tivo* although the increasing number of series 1 units that haven't made successful connections should have triggered something.


----------



## bicker

Well clearly, an unreported problem surely cannot be considered to constitute violation of anything. You have a good point there.


----------



## Sapphire

aindik said:


> These posts would be almost silly if the cable companies would a) issue CableCARDS without requiring a subscription beyond Limited Basic and b) not charge "additional outlet" fees for second, third, etc. TiVos with CableCARDs (which I have gotten my cable company to stop doing, but I'm in the minority).


The "additional outlet" fees from my cable company are only 50 cents and they charge per device, not per CableCARD. So in total I pay 50 cents in additional outlet fees because we have in total two devices (not including cable modem) hooked up.


----------



## jccfin

bicker said:


> I suspect Domino's is paying TiVo, for the cost of adding the service, plus some. If folks can put together a business case showing how these other issues are actually sources of substantial profits, I bet _they'd _get done too.


Yea, it's called repeat customer. I got suckered this first time. I will not be buying another unit from them again until manual mapping is done.

Please don't tell me it's difficult to accomplish since Sony Bravias can now get TV Guide OTA for free and even that FREE service has guides that you can manually map. How stupid and incompetent do you have to be to not do this simple task by now?

The real reason probably has nothing to do with how difficult it is but the fact that they dont want to because theyre in cahoots with either the cable company or Tribune or some other business to not do this.


----------



## bicker

The "repeat customer" you refer to has become a myth. Mass-market consumers are substantially price-drive more than anything else, now, and so the value of customer loyalty is almost zero. It's a shame, but that's the reality of the mass-market today. Cut costs, cut prices. That's all there is.


----------



## slowbiscuit

jccfin said:


> The real reason probably has nothing to do with how difficult it is but the fact that they don't want to because they're in cahoots with either the cable company or Tribune or some other business to not do this.


No, it probably has something to do with them not wanting to support QAM mapping because they don't want to get the calls when your Tivo fails to record a channel that your cableCo moved around one day.

This has been repeated ad nauseum and you can ***** all you want about it, but you need to put in a request with Tivo. If they don't respond and you've just gotta have it, take your business elsewhere. People do sell turnkey HTPCs, you know. Or buy the new Moxi HD DVR for $800, which does support it.


----------



## aindik

Raj said:


> The "additional outlet" fees from my cable company are only 50 cents and they charge per device, not per CableCARD. So in total I pay 50 cents in additional outlet fees because we have in total two devices (not including cable modem) hooked up.


Really? What company? What does the company charge if you're not using CableCARDs - you're an ordinary customer using their boxes - and you want a second box?

Our additional outlet fees (Comcast) are $8.90 (per TV). They're something in the $6 range for people who only subscribe to Limited Basic or Digital Starter and want a second outlet.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> The "repeat customer" you refer to has become a myth. Mass-market consumers are substantially price-drive more than anything else, now, and so the value of customer loyalty is almost zero. It's a shame, but that's the reality of the mass-market today. Cut costs, cut prices. That's all there is.


A few companies earn customer loyalty and are able to command premium pricing. Apple, particularly IPOD, is a good example. Luxury cars are another example. Tivo is (used to be) in that category. Tivo will inevitably lose price sensitive customers to provider supplied DVRs.

I don't know if QAM mapping is worth the resources but the more items tivo is "missing" the harder it will be to position tivo as a premium product.


----------



## bicker

Many Apple customers can attest Apple does not earn customer loyalty in the manner you assert. TiVo does just as good of a job as Apple providing features that customers want. Many things that Apple customers want aren't provided, just like QAM mapping is not provided for TiVo. Apple loses price sensitive customers to SanDisk and other MP3 players. 

No difference.


----------



## Sapphire

aindik said:


> Really? What company?


Service Electric Cable TV which was the first cable TV company in the nation.



> What does the company charge if you're not using CableCARDs - you're an ordinary customer using their boxes - and you want a second box?
> 
> Our additional outlet fees (Comcast) are $8.90 (per TV). They're something in the $6 range for people who only subscribe to Limited Basic or Digital Starter and want a second outlet.


First SD box free, second box $3.95 per month (SD) or $10/month (HD). HD DVR is $13/month. Each outlet in addition to your first outlet is 50 cents/month.

Comcast probably includes converter box rental in your additional outlet fee, right? Ours is broken out into equipment rental and per outlet fee.

Also, when we signed up in 2007 the CableCARDs were $125 each to purchase. No monthly fees. I was told that now you can't purchase them anymore, only rent them for $2.95/month each.

My total bill before I got 30 meg DOCSIS3 internet was $108.55 including franchise fee. $41.95/month for 10meg internet, $5 for high def, $59.95 for expanded basic.

Expanded basic went up January 1 to $62.95, and I now have 30 meg internet for $79.95. Still not a bad deal overall.


----------



## aindik

Raj said:


> Comcast probably includes converter box rental in your additional outlet fee, right?


Yep. Which makes it easier when I tell CSRs that they're not supposed to charge me for it when I'm using my own box. 

$8.90 AO fee, plus $6.50 if your AO is an HD box, or $15.95 if it's a DVR.


----------



## ciper

It seems that even manual scanning of the channels and setting up recordings by time no longer works. The conspiracy theorist in me says this is intentional to force everyone to use cable cards while the trusting side says it was a simple mistake.

See this thread for more details http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6997440#post6997440

It's getting to the point that every device with a QAM tuner is able to map channels except the TiVo. There was a time when TiVo was the innovator and others would follow suit. It sucks that they aren't anymore.


----------



## lrhorer

If there were any significant amount of programming even remotely worth viewing on OTA channels, I might have more sympathy on a personal level for this issue. Leaving my personal preferences aside, however, the simple fact is there is a universally supported solution to this issue mandated by FCC regulations and implemented by CATV providers and CE manufacturers, including Tivo, alike. It's called CableCards. The intent and function of CableCards is to allow 3rd party devices - not just Tivos - to interoperate properly with every CATV system without the need to lease STBs or other receivers from the CATV company. TiVo (and other manufacturers) have expended the resources to develop systems (like the S3 and UDCP Televisions) which employ CableCards to that very end, which includes providing dynamic channel mapping. If you don't like the pricing of the CableCards in your area, complain to the local franchise authority, or do without. You can certainly appeal to Tivo to provide a manual mapping capability to the Tivo, but don't whine when they decide this non-standard utility is not worth the resources it would take them to develop. They are in no way required to do so. If you like some other system better than the Tivo because it provides services the Tivo does not, then get one of those systems, instead. If not, then you will just have to live with the "extra" costs associated with having the Tivo, or do without.


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> It's getting to the point that every device with a QAM tuner is able to map channels except the TiVo.


My 62" Mitsubishi DLP can't. In fact, with only 1 exception of which I know, no off the shelf CableCard device supports this feature.



ciper said:


> There was a time when TiVo was the innovator and others would follow suit. It sucks that they aren't anymore.


QAM channel mapping is anything but innovative. If anything, it's just about the opposite of innovation, applying a band-aid to a contemporary device in order to allow it to operate in an obsolete fashion. 'Not that such engineering is rare in industry, of course. Backwards compatibility is often an issue in development, but it definitely cannot be called an aspect of innovation.


----------



## ciper

lrhorer said:


> My 62" Mitsubishi DLP can't. In fact, with only 1 exception of which I know, no off the shelf CableCard device supports this feature.


You must have missed that many new televisions from multiple manufacturers have this ability. Including Vizio for petes sake.



lrhorer said:


> QAM channel mapping is anything but innovative. If anything, it's just about the opposite of innovation, applying a band-aid to a contemporary device in order to allow it to operate in an obsolete fashion. 'Not that such engineering is rare in industry, of course. Backwards compatibility is often an issue in development, but it definitely cannot be called an aspect of innovation.


Innovation often solves an existing problem.


----------



## slowbiscuit

ciper said:


> You must have missed that many new televisions from multiple manufacturers have this ability. Including Vizio for petes sake.


You must have missed that almost no TVs sold today have Cablecard slots, so that's the only way you could possibly map channels (assuming you wanted to on a TV, which can't record anything).


----------



## bicker

Good point... I wonder which sold more units, last year: CableCARD-compatible DVRs or CableCARD-compatible televisions. CableCARD-compatible televisions could be substantially more exclusive &#252;ber-geek-ware than TiVos.


----------



## jrm01

ciper said:


> You must have missed that many new televisions from multiple manufacturers have this ability. Including Vizio for petes sake.


What Vizio TV on the market today uses cablecards?


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> Good point... I wonder which sold more units, last year: CableCARD-compatible DVRs or CableCARD-compatible televisions. CableCARD-compatible televisions could be substantially more exclusive über-geek-ware than TiVos.


How many (any?) cc compatible televisions can accomodate a SDV tuning adapter? How many current TV sets can accomodate cc? CC TVs seem to be history.


----------



## jccfin

slowbiscuit said:


> You must have missed that almost no TVs sold today have Cablecard slots, so that's the only way you could possibly map channels (assuming you wanted to on a TV, which can't record anything).


I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake. The people who are here complaining about the lack of QAM mapping support are talking about free and clear OTA channels that the FCC mandates have to be tunable WITHOUT the need for additional equipment from the cable company.

The fact of the matter is that as it stands now, users of Tivo cant do it properly. What do you geniuses think Tivo should do about it? It has nothing to do with what the customer should do but what the service/device seller should do since Tivo owners purchased it do something simple.

When free services start to move ahead of paid services I would say that theres something wrong. This is not the only complaint of merit that weve heard on this forum lobbied against Tivo. The other beef I have is Tivos 1990s interface. It reminds me of applications on the computer thats DOS based with a Windows interface slapped on top of it. At this point, their interface should be in 16:9 HD. Not stretched 4:3 SD. They should downconvert to SD and not upconvert into HD. They have it backwards.

All of this makes me sad that the superior Replay went out of business and the inferior Tivo survived. Replays interface is 10 times better than Tivo. Even after seeing Replay, Tivo still doesnt get it. At least Bill Gates had enough brains to copy Apple when he saw a better product. The management of Tivo is just plain indifferent now they know that theres no real competition.

So , no, Tivo users arent crazy or outrageous when they ask for something that should have been there in the first place. After all, this suppose to be Tivos bread and butter. They should be able to do this better than anyone. My Sonys free TV guide can map channels how hard would it be for Tivo to do the same?


----------



## jccfin

jrm01 said:


> What Vizio TV on the market today uses cablecards?


Dont kid yourself. Most TV manufacturers have stopped including cable slots because theres been mass confusion over the standard and the lack of support for pay per view. The consortium just completed the new Tru2way standard and most manufacturers have said they will support this new standard. I expect that youll start to see them by the end of this year the beginning of next in their newer TVs. This new system will allow for pay per view and channel guides just like a cablebox.


----------



## jccfin

slowbiscuit said:


> You must have missed that almost no TVs sold today have Cablecard slots, so that's the only way you could possibly map channels (assuming you wanted to on a TV, which can't record anything).


Both Samsung and Sony TVs have free TV Guide service which downloads program guides OTA or through cable. These free guides have the ability for you to map channels.

This year's models will also be able to download that information directly from the web.

Oh, and did I mention that this service is FREE!?


----------



## lew

jccfin said:


> Dont kid yourself. Most TV manufacturers have stopped including cable slots because theres been mass confusion over the standard and the lack of support for pay per view. The consortium just completed the new Tru2way standard and most manufacturers have said they will support this new standard. I expect that youll start to see them by the end of this year the beginning of next in their newer TVs. This new system will allow for pay per view and channel guides just like a cablebox.


Not just confusion. Can any cable card TV set handle a SDV device? I suspect a lot of consumers select a TV set based on price and screen size. CC sets never really caught on. The average person isn't going to pay a premium price for a TV set, just to save a few dollars a month in STB rental fees.


----------



## jccfin

lew said:


> Not just confusion. Can any cable card TV set handle a SDV device? I suspect a lot of consumers select a TV set based on price and screen size. CC sets never really caught on. The average person isn't going to pay a premium price for a TV set, just to save a few dollars a month in STB rental fees.


I don't understand your question about cc TV set handling a SDV device? What do you mean?

I don't think TV manufact. chaged a premium for a cablecard slot? At least no one thinks of it that way. I bought a Panny 42" plasma 4 years ago that had a cable card slot. I didn't buy it because of it and I didn't think of the cost of that slot anymore than I thought of being charged for that one HDMI jack or RCA jack.


----------



## bicker

jccfin said:


> The fact of the matter is that as it stands now, users of Tivo can't do it properly. What do you geniuses think Tivo should do about it? It has nothing to do with what the customer should do but what the service/device seller should do since Tivo owners purchased it do something simple.


I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." The fact of the matter is that the TiVo isn't made to do what you want it to do. And you haven't proven that making it do what you want it to do is more important to TiVo than everything that TiVo is doing. The more you argue, the more you provide a forum for highlighting the weakness of your argument.



jccfin said:


> When free services start to move ahead of paid services I would say that there's something wrong.


No, no, no. You don't get a pass on that. Are you saying that there is a free service that does everything that TiVo does, PLUS what you want TiVo to do. No? Then put that inane, vacuous argument away, because, again, the more you argue that, the more you provide a forum for highlighting the weakness of that argument.



jccfin said:


> This is not the only complaint of merit that we've heard on this forum lobbied against Tivo.


It isn't "of merit" because you state it is. Again, I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." What is "of merit" is determined by the owners of TiVo, not you.



jccfin said:


> The other beef I have is Tivo's 1990's interface.


So one complaint that is resolved by getting CableCARDs working, and another complaint that is cosmetic in context. Contrast that with features that cause TiVo to crash without recovery afterward; features that do not supply closed captions, so deaf customers can actually USE the feature; etc. With as much respect as is humanly possible, given the circumstances, your complaints seem petty compared to others.


----------



## lew

Bicker--I'm sure we can come up with a list of features that we might use but probably aren't worth the effort it would take tivo to implement. An example, occasionally I want to setup a first run only SP for both the SD and HD versions of a show. The 28 rule results in tivo only recording the SP with higher priority. 

My concern is an increasing number of features that "should" be included but for whatever reason tivo is having issues doing it. Getting Dominos to pay a couple of dollars is nice but not if it's at the expense of core issues. I hope tivo got money "up front" from Dominos. A number of posters won't use it because the Dominos doesn't accept coupons on tivo generated orders. Perhaps marketing dollars either goes to customer coupons or tivo commissions?

Your closed caption example is a good example. Although tivo may be complying with legal requirements closed captioning is a "feature" that should be added. I'm not sure if it's practical to add it to You Tube videos but it should at least be included with Netflix.

The connection problems with Series 1 units is another example.

Analog channels going to grey is a new "feature" with the 11.X software for S3 units. 

Issues with FiOS is another example. Tivo doesn't want to solve the problem. Then put a warning on the box that warns customers.

QAM mapping is somewhere in the middle. I think it's a feature that should be on tivo's list, but maybe not high enough to get implemented. I think posters are under-estimating the support costs, even if the feature is "unofficial" and underestimating the complaints if recordings get missed. 

My concern isn't with QAM but rather a pattern of not addressing problems/basic features.

It shouldn't take a class action law suit before tivo fixes the problems with S1 units. It shouldn't take government action before tivo includes closed captioning with Netflix movies. Many of the movies originate with Starz on Demand. I'd expect the closed caption tracks are available.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> My concern is an increasing number of features that "should" be included but for whatever reason tivo is having issues doing it.


That's your characterization, not theirs, and a prejudicial one. In the case of QAM mapping, there has been no indication whatsoever that TiVo is not pursuing that feature for any other reason than they don't feel it is important enough to do right now, an explanation that is not readily implied by your assertion that they're "having issues" -- a term typically used to indicated actual difficulty.



lew said:


> Getting Dominos to pay a couple of dollars is nice but not if it's at the expense of core issues.


TiVo has not given you any reason to assume that the inclusion of the service to Dominos came "at the expense of core issues". You're trying to support your personal preferences with assertions that are not based on known facts. It's self-serving reasoning: "I think X is good because the characteristics of X are good."



lew said:


> It shouldn't take a class action law suit before tivo fixes the problems with S1 units. It shouldn't take government action before tivo includes closed captioning with Netflix movies.


You may be wrong on both accounts. TiVo's obligations regarding all the issues you mentioned are not definitive, just because you choose to believe they are. I won't talk about the S1 issue or the Netflix issue, here, but rather keep on topic with the QAM mapping issue; there is nothing that prompts TiVo to pursue that feature until they determine that it would provide them a sufficient ROI. Nothing.


----------



## jccfin

Bicker, your name is apropos.



bicker said:


> I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." The fact of the matter is that the TiVo isn't made to do what you want it to do. And you haven't proven that making it do what you want it to do is more important to TiVo than everything that TiVo is doing. The more you argue, the more you provide a forum for highlighting the weakness of your argument.


The basic premise of a DVR has basically two components. A TV guide and scheduling software component and a hardware component that allows for you to easily store and playback those programs. As far as I'm concerned , it's not fulfilling the 50% of what it's supposed to do. I want to know how I can easily correct the channel guide and record programs when the guide is incorrect??!? Please enlighten me genius?

And please don't tell me that I would have to go spend more money to do what it's supposed to do already. That's completely deficient. The FCC states that you're suppose to be able to receive these without the need for cablecard. The loophole that cable companies exploit is that they ARE showing these channels but just at the channels that you expect. Why do you think that is? Because they want stupid people to pay for their cable cards. It's an additional revenue source.

So, unlike you, when a big business asks me to bend over, I don't comply. You, on the other hand, asks how much and whether or not you should bring the Vaseline.



bicker said:


> No, no, no. You don't get a pass on that. Are you saying that there is a free service that does everything that TiVo does, PLUS what you want TiVo to do. No? Then put that inane, vacuous argument away, because, again, the more you argue that, the more you provide a forum for highlighting the weakness of that argument.


No, I'm saying that when a free TV Guide is more flexible than one for which you have to pay for, you're a moron to keep paying for it. And an even bigger one to not complain about it.



bicker said:


> It isn't "of merit" because you state it is. Again, I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." What is "of merit" is determined by the owners of TiVo, not you.


Last time I checked, I'm still a Tivo owner.



bicker said:


> So one complaint that is resolved by getting CableCARDs working, and another complaint that is cosmetic in context. Contrast that with features that cause TiVo to crash without recovery afterward; features that do not supply closed captions, so deaf customers can actually USE the feature; etc. With as much respect as is humanly possible, given the circumstances, your complaints seem petty compared to others.


Sorry but once again, you're slow on the uptake. What part of, I don't want to pay cable companies for their cable cards do you not understand? Nowhere did Tivo state that you HAVE TO have cable cards when using cable service for basic OTA channels when I researched the product before purchase. If they were so proud of the fact that you MUST have cable cards in order for their device to work why don't they spell it out in large bold print in their ads? Without manual mapping, the Tivo is nothing but a fancy doorstop since your wouldn't have the correct channel lineup for you to record properly.


----------



## bicker

jccfin said:


> Bicker, your name is apropos.


Your's isn't. :shrug: I think you went off the rails when you started with the "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake" crap -- I found it offensive and it wasn't even directed at me. So perhaps you should change your handle to reflect your penchant for making childish statements and engaging in other juvenile rhetoric.



jccfin said:


> As far as I'm concerned , it's not fulfilling the 50% of what it's supposed to do.


That's because you refuse to follow the instructions already given to you and get CableCARDs, like a child refuses to do his chores. If I turn my HDTV so the screen faces the wall, I'm going to have problems seeing the screen -- does that make my complaints about picture quality valid? Of course not.



jccfin said:


> And please don't tell me that I would have to go spend more money to do what it's supposed to do already.


Grow up and be accountable for your own decisions, and for your own responsibility to learn about what you purchase before you purchase it. The world doesn't exist to serve your whims. It isn't all about you.



jccfin said:


> The FCC states that you're suppose to be able to receive these without the need for cablecard.


The FCC requirements are complied with 100%, despite your puerile efforts to make it sound otherwise.



jccfin said:


> So, unlike you, when a big business asks me to bend over, I don't comply.


Either you are, or you're complaining without standing.



jccfin said:


> You, on the other hand, asks how much and whether or not you should bring the Vaseline.


Yes indeed, you need to change your handle so it makes clear that you act like a crude little boy.

Get over yourself. Grow up. Pay for the services you want. Stop complaining that you aren't king.


----------



## lew

Bicker--My prior post didn't read the way I intended.

My point was to list some items which are more important, should be ahead of QAM mapping, on tivo's "to do list". A couple are "bugs": S1 connections and grey screen analog issues. At some point tivo either has to get a solution for FiOS issues or state the unit doesn't work with FiOS. I don't have an issue with FiOS but I have no reason to doubt the posters who have issues. Closed captioning, should be ahead of QAM mapping. My guess is they're going to be forced to add it, tivo might as well get some goodwill by doing it before they're forced to do it.

My point is QAM mapping is a feature that has some value to some customers but may never make it high enough up tivo's "to do list" to get implemented. Tivo doesn't have the resources to implement every feature that makes sense to some customers.

I think the wording on the box, but not in the website, is misleading. Cable cards are required, not may be required.


----------



## jccfin

bicker said:


> Yes indeed, you need to change your handle so it makes clear that you act like a crude little boy.


I know you are but what am I?

Look, I guess we have to agree that we disagree and leave it at that. I believe, as do many posters here, that shelling out more money for cable cards, especially when we already shelled out a ton for their service, are not the solution to this simple problem.

Tivo needs to get moving on this and stop sitting with their thumbs up their butts.:down:

BTW, Tribune filed for chapter 11 in Dec. I hope your TV guide does not become erroneous. I doubt the employees there care much about the guide when their jobs are on the line.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Bicker--My prior post didn't read the way I intended. My point was to list some items which are more important...


I understood that. My point is that it is unreasonable for folks to (specifically) expect that TiVo should take on any work (other than fixing issues which TiVo has decided are bugs).

Folks who are not happy with the way TiVo has presented its offering, should sell their TiVos and move on. No one should feel entitled to expect TiVo to change their offering away from what they specified that they were providing, unless it is the best decision for their owners.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> I understood that. My point is that it is unreasonable for folks to (specifically) expect that TiVo should take on any work (other than fixing issues which TiVo has decided are bugs).
> 
> Folks who are not happy with the way TiVo has presented its offering, should sell their TiVos and move on. No one should feel entitled to expect TiVo to change their offering away from what they specified that they were providing, unless it is the best decision for their owners.


Agreed, except tivo should better disclose their offering. The box should say *cable cards are required for digital cable*, same wording that's on tivo's website. Likewise tivo should either get a solution for FiOS issues or disclose the fact that the unit may not work reliably with FiOS.

I thought tivo could/should add QAM mapping as an unsupported feature, similar to the 30 second skip. Based on some of the posts in this thread I changed my opinion. My guess is tivo would get too many complaints when "tivo missed my show".


----------



## jccfin

People who are aware of manual mappings know that channels change all the time. It's one of the reasons we're asking for it. Why would we complain when the shows we want to record is missed due to a channel change? That's an inherent risk. That makes no logical sense? The people who complain about missed shows are those who use cablecards who expected things to stay the same since Tribune, the cable company, and Tivo should automatically switch for them.

That's why we call it *manual* mapping.

"Folks who are not happy with the way TiVo has presented its offering, should sell their TiVos and move on. No one should feel entitled to expect TiVo to change their offering away from what they specified that they were providing, unless it is the best decision for their owners."

That's indeed what's happening. A check of their recent 10Q shows:

Three Months Ended 
(Total Cumulative Subscriptions in thousands) 
Oct 31, 2008 3,460 
July 31, 2008 3,623 
April 30, 2008 3,801 
Jan 31, 2008 3,946 
Oct 31, 2007 4,067 
July 31, 2007 4,197 
April 30, 2007 4,342 
Jan 31, 2007	4,444

By selfishly sticking to only your perceived Tivo perfection, more and more people are choosing to vote with their feet. It's only a matter of time when the firm collapses and you too will move with your feet, except you won't be doing it voluntarily. It reminds me of that German Jewish quote that said something like this. "When they came for my neighbor who was a gypsy, I didn't say anything. When they came for my other neighbor who's a homosexual, I didn't say anything either. When they finally came for me there was no one for me to go to."

Or Ben Franklin, ""We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately."


----------



## lew

jccfin said:


> People who are aware of manual mappings know that channels change all the time. It's one of the reasons we're asking for it. Why would we complain when the shows we want to record is missed due to a channel change? That's an inherent risk. That makes no logical sense? The people who complain about missed shows are those who use cablecards who expected things to stay the same since Tribune, the cable company, and Tivo should automatically switch for them.


Many people are asking for mapping based on PSIP, with manual mapping if that doesn't work. At least some people will be upset if tivo doesn't at least give a warning message if the mapping changes. Some people will accept the inherent risk but many others will still blame tivo. I'll speculate tivo will get more people complaining about missing programs then the number of people currently complaining about the cable card requirement for digital cable. I'll further speculate at least some of the resources that could have gone to QAM mapping went to SDV development.

Some of the subscriber lost are DTV subscribers. Tivo has an uphill fight against provider supplied DVRs. Apples to Apples tivo is more expensive and a basic cable supplied DVR is OK for many customers.

People have to pick the DVR that does what they want. Moxi doesn't handle OTA. Tivo requires cable cards for digital channels. Neither works with satellite.

Tivo is going to lose more customers with bugs then they're going to lose by not adding an unsupported feature.


----------



## RussInSanDiego

Can anyone confirm that having a cablecard will actually allow you to view over-the-air ATSC channels rebroadcast on analog cable?


----------



## aindik

RussInSanDiego said:


> Can anyone confirm that having a cablecard will actually allow you to view over-the-air ATSC channels rebroadcast on analog cable?


There is no such thing as ATSC channels on analog cable. ATSC channels are digital by definition.

Do you mean view your digital local channels? If you subscribe to the basic package and you have a valid CableCARD, you should be able to see your digital locals.

If you subscribe to the basic package and you don't have a valid CableCARD, you can see your locals, but TiVo won't know what they are and therefore won't be able to record anything on them other than manually by time.


----------



## lew

RussInSanDiego said:


> Can anyone confirm that having a cablecard will actually allow you to view over-the-air ATSC channels rebroadcast on analog cable?


Cable Cards in most (all?) cable systems will map(use) the digital version of your stations.


----------



## RussInSanDiego

aindik said:


> There is no such thing as ATSC channels on analog cable. ATSC channels are digital by definition.
> 
> Do you mean view your digital local channels? If you subscribe to the basic package and you have a valid CableCARD, you should be able to see your digital locals.


Well then, these are the over-the-air ATSC channels that are showing up on basic analog cable. And I can see them and tune them just fine, via Live TV. Sans cablecard.



aindik said:


> If you subscribe to the basic package and you don't have a valid CableCARD, you can see your locals, but TiVo won't know what they are and therefore won't be able to record anything on them other than manually by time.


And therein lies the rub. You can't even reliably do *THAT*. I have had the TiVo suddenly refuse to record *MANUAL* programs on a rebroadcast digital channel with the explanation, *"This program was not recorded because it was no longer in the program guide."* Why would a MANUAL program need anything from the program guide? Especially when the very same season pass HAD been working. _Sigh._


----------



## aindik

RussInSanDiego said:


> Well then, these are the over-the-air ATSC channels that are showing up on basic analog cable. And I can see them and tune them just fine, via Live TV. Sans cablecard.


They're still digital. Not analog. You are using a digital tuner to see them.



RussInSanDiego said:


> And therein lies the rub. You can't even reliably do *THAT*. I have had the TiVo suddenly refuse to record *MANUAL* programs on a rebroadcast digital channel with the explanation, *"This program was not recorded because it was no longer in the program guide."* Why would a MANUAL program need anything from the program guide? Especially when the very same season pass HAD been working. _Sigh._


Sometimes you see that error when that's not really the problem. Could it be that the channel moved?


----------



## RussInSanDiego

aindik said:


> They're still digital. Not analog. You are using a digital tuner to see them.


Yes, I understood that perfectly well.



aindik said:


> Sometimes you see that error when that's not really the problem. Could it be that the channel moved?


Moved how? It's still identified as exactly the same channel designation (i.e., 15-1 for KPBS-HD). It's a manual recording, designating that the TiVo should record channel 15-1 from 6PM to 7PM. If the cable company is remapping 15-1 to a different frequency, why should I care? The TiVo tuner seems able to find 15-1 when I use Live TV. When I set up a recording, I'm not telling it a frequency to record on. I'm telling it a channel to record on. Since I can command the Live TV system to go to 15-1 and it finds it right away, why wouldn't the manual-program do the same danged thing? And how would program guide information be in any way relevant??? And if it's not, then their error message is itself erroneous, and needs to be fixed.


----------



## aindik

RussInSanDiego said:


> Yes, I understood that perfectly well.


Well, you said they were showing up on basic analog cable. They were not.

On the rest of your post, if you can find it with Live TV, I have no idea why you shouldn't be able to find it with a manual recording.


----------



## markens

RussInSanDiego said:


> Moved how? It's still identified as exactly the same channel designation (i.e., 15-1 for KPBS-HD). It's a manual recording, designating that the TiVo should record channel 15-1 from 6PM to 7PM. If the cable company is remapping 15-1 to a different frequency, why should I care? The TiVo tuner seems able to find 15-1 when I use Live TV. When I set up a recording, I'm not telling it a frequency to record on. I'm telling it a channel to record on. Since I can command the Live TV system to go to 15-1 and it finds it right away, why wouldn't the manual-program do the same danged thing? And how would program guide information be in any way relevant??? And if it's not, then their error message is itself erroneous, and needs to be fixed


You've actually exactly identified one of the core issues. When you say "watch channel 15-1" the TiVo DOES need to know the underlying channel frequency to tune to. It just does this behind the scenes.

Look at the simpler case for OTA: the mapping between digital x.y and underlying RF frequency is contained in the channel lineup data (which could be considered part of the program guide). This information is visible in the channel list in settings. You can also do a manual scan, which causes the TiVo to go through every channel and construct a map of additional mappings it finds along the way. Typically, channels found via scanning are not in the program guide although you can watch them and schedule manual recordings.

If a broadcaster changes the underlying RF channel, then the TiVo won't be able to find it without (1) the channel lineup data being updated by TiVo, or (2) doing a rescan of channels. In case (2), program guide info will likely not be present until (1) happens. Until the mapping is updated, any recording scheduled for 15-1 will fail because it's tuning to the wrong underlying frequency.

This is not a problem OTA in practice because broadcasters must have FCC approval before they can change frequencies. (Although watch out: many underlying frequenices for digital signals WILL change on Feb 17; this is the subject of another thread.)

Mapping on cable QAM is similar, but with additional complications that have been discussed at length in this thread. But the issue remains: the TiVo must know what underlying frequency to tune to when you ask for channel 15-1. When the mapping changes (which the cable companies may do at any time), then existing mapping is no good and the TiVo will not be able to find it again without cable cards, or until a recan is done to find the clear-QAM channels again.

So even if a manual mapping was possible, it would have to be redone whenever the underlying RF frequency changes. Most of us who are asking for this capability presumably understand the risks of this, but it is clearly an issue.


----------



## jrm01

RussInSanDiego said:


> And therein lies the rub. You can't even reliably do *THAT*. I have had the TiVo suddenly refuse to record *MANUAL* programs on a rebroadcast digital channel with the explanation, *"This program was not recorded because it was no longer in the program guide."* Why would a MANUAL program need anything from the program guide? Especially when the very same season pass HAD been working. _Sigh._


That was a minor bug introduced with 11.0 software. It only affects recordings that were scheduled prior to the update, for a time after after the update. If you have a SP doing this, delete the SP and re-enter it. It should then work.


----------



## jrm01

jccfin said:


> Dont kid yourself. Most TV manufacturers have stopped including cable slots because theres been mass confusion over the standard and the lack of support for pay per view. The consortium just completed the new Tru2way standard and most manufacturers have said they will support this new standard. I expect that youll start to see them by the end of this year the beginning of next in their newer TVs. This new system will allow for pay per view and channel guides just like a cablebox.


They quit making TVs with cablecard capability because they found that the added cost wasn't worth it considering that less than 2% of the people ever used it.


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake. The people who are here complaining about the lack of QAM mapping support are talking about free and clear OTA channels that the FCC mandates have to be tunable WITHOUT the need for additional equipment from the cable company.


The FCC mandate does no such thing. The FCC mandate only requires the local channels be unencrypted. Quite to the contrary, both the letter and the intent of the FCC regulations explicitly require the CATV company provide CableCards as a means of allowing 3rd party devices to work seamlessly with the CATV system. No mention whatsoever is made of requiring 3rd party devices to work without the presence of CableCards.



jccfin said:


> The fact of the matter is that as it stands now, users of Tivo cant do it properly.


The fact of the matter is, you are wrong. I haev no problems whatsoever receiving and recording every ordinary CATV channel on my CATV company's line-up.



jccfin said:


> What do you geniuses think Tivo should do about it? It has nothing to do with what the customer should do but what the service/device seller should do since Tivo owners purchased it do something simple.


That you purchased a device to do something the manufacturer never intended is not the manufacturer's fault, whether that task is simple, or not.



jccfin said:


> When free services start to move ahead of paid services I would say that theres something wrong.


First of all, there is no such thing as a free service. OTA channels cost us vastly more than CATV companies would ever dream to charge us. Secondly, I don't see how this applies in the least to the discussion at hand.



Jojo said:


> This is not the only complaint of merit that weve heard on this forum lobbied against Tivo. The other beef I have is Tivos 1990s interface. It reminds me of applications on the computer thats DOS based with a Windows interface slapped on top of it. At this point, their interface should be in 16:9 HD. Not stretched 4:3 SD. They should downconvert to SD and not upconvert into HD.


No, it should not. I vote 100,000 times no against this silly and useless notion. It's completely wasteful of resources while delivering *ZERO* benefits. It also is not the topic of this thread.



Jojo said:


> All of this makes me sad that the superior Replay went out of business and the inferior Tivo survived. Replays interface is 10 times better than Tivo. Even after seeing Replay, Tivo still doesnt get it. At least Bill Gates had enough brains to copy Apple when he saw a better product.


Bill Gates rarely if ever copied any superior products. If you're talking about Windows, you've got to be kidding. A more inferior product has rarely been foist upon the American public.



Jojo said:


> The management of Tivo is just plain indifferent now they know that theres no real competition.


What planet are you living on? The competition gets stiffer for Tivo every day. What's more, I haven't observed any great indifference on the part of TiVo, just a reasonable response to a far less than well reasoned set of requests.



jccfin said:


> So , no, Tivo users arent crazy or outrageous when they ask for something that should have been there in the first place.


It was supposed *NOT* to be there. A significant part of the idea of CableCards is to deliberately eliminate such issues.



jccfin said:


> They should be able to do this better than anyone. My Sonys free TV guide can map channels how hard would it be for Tivo to do the same?


What Sony model do you have?


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> You must have missed that many new televisions from multiple manufacturers have this ability. Including Vizio for petes sake.


Please provide model numbers.



ciper said:


> Innovation often solves an existing problem.


By definition, innovation supposedly always solves existing problems. No innovation is required to solve this problem, however.


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> Don't kid yourself. Most TV manufacturers have stopped including cable slots because there's been mass confusion over the standard and the lack of support for pay per view.


Well, the bottom line reason is no one had much interest in using the CableCard slots, and CableCard TVs could not be sold at a premium.



jccfin said:


> The consortium just completed the new Tru2way standard and most manufacturers have said they will support this new standard.


Which also requires CableCards.



jccfin said:


> I expect that you'll start to see them by the end of this year the beginning of next in their newer TVs. This new system will allow for pay per view and channel guides just like a cablebox.


But doesn't exist now. The very first tru2way TVs are either due to hit the market or have just hit some test markets (I don't recall the dates). Your comment concerned TV sets available to the mass public right now. I suspect, like my Mitsibishi, most of these sets will also lack the ability to map the local channels without CableCards.


----------



## RussInSanDiego

> Mapping on cable QAM is similar, but with additional complications that have been discussed at length in this thread. But the issue remains: the TiVo must know what underlying frequency to tune to when you ask for channel 15-1. When the mapping changes (which the cable companies may do at any time), then existing mapping is no good and the TiVo will not be able to find it again without cable cards, or until a recan is done to find the clear-QAM channels again.


I understand what you're saying about remapping of QAM channels, and it would certainly explain what's going on, but for one thing: At the same time as the To-Do list history was giving me this excuse about why it wasn't able to record my program from channel cbl 15-1, I was able to tune to cbl 15-1 on Live TV *without having to scan channels again*.


----------



## jrm01

lrhorer said:


> If you're talking about Windows, you've got to be kidding. A more inferior product has rarely been foist upon the American public.


Not even close to being true. Many products much more inferior have been foisted, it's just that none have been so successful.


----------



## RussInSanDiego

jrm01 said:


> That was a minor bug introduced with 11.0 software. It only affects recordings that were scheduled prior to the update, for a time after after the update. If you have a SP doing this, delete the SP and re-enter it. It should then work.


To which kind of update are you referring? A guide update (I hope not) or a software update? If it's a guide update, then I'll have to re-enter all Season Passes for OTA digital channels every few days, no?


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> Both Samsung and Sony TVs have free TV Guide service which downloads program guides OTA or through cable.


So does my Mitsubishi, although its performance was terrible. Half the time it would not update, it was a royal pain to set up, and it frequently had the setup evaporate. It does not work without CableCards.



jccfin said:


> These free guides have the ability for you to map channels.


They are not free. You just don't pay a monthly fee for them to the provider.



jccfin said:


> This year's models will also be able to download that information directly from the web.


While sort of a neat feature, I suspect such a feature will not work reliably, and may not work at all without CableCards, depending upon the implementation.



jccfin said:


> Oh, and did I mention that this service is FREE!?


Oh, and did I mention you are completely deluding yourself? Do you think all the people involved in creating and maintaining the service work without a paycheck because for them it's a hobby? Do you think their employers avoid marking up the product to their customers because they just like you? To paraphrase an old saying, one of the most expensive things in existence is a free lunch. It wouldn't surprise me if that "free" service costs you (and me) more than double the cost of a Tivo subscription and the cost of CableCards combined. That, whether either of us make any use of it at all. Oh, yeah, that's a sweet deal. 

Rather, you are being reamed right up the wazoo and seemingly enjoying it. At least Tivo and the Cable Company clearly outline what they are charging you and give you the option to not use the service and then not pay for it.


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> I don't understand your question about cc TV set handling a SDV device? What do you mean?


I think he means a Tuning Adapter. Currently, none do.



jccfin said:


> I don't think TV manufact. chaged a premium for a cablecard slot?


Of course they do.



jccfin said:


> At least no one thinks of it that way.


They do if they don't have their heads in the sand.



jccfin said:


> I bought a Panny 42" plasma 4 years ago that had a cable card slot. I didn't buy it because of it and I didn't think of the cost of that slot anymore than I thought of being charged for that one HDMI jack or RCA jack.


Then you are being foolish. Every single artifact added to a device costs the manufacturer money. They take that cost, add a profit margin, and then pass the result on ultimately to the consumer. Now, yes, there is some wiggle room in the size of the profit margins all the way down the line, so that a TV with four inputs may not be any more expensive than one with three. What's more, the four input TV may compromise features in some other area to reduce the cost of putting in the extra input, but every single little bit of plastic, metal, glass, or software code is added in to the overall cost. Have you never noticed that only high end, high cost TVs tend to have lots of inputs? The reason has to do with market demographics, but the cost has to do with the number of inputs, among of course other things.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." The fact of the matter is that the TiVo isn't made to do what you want it to do. And you haven't proven that making it do what you want it to do is more important to TiVo than everything that TiVo is doing. The more you argue, the more you provide a forum for highlighting the weakness of your argument.


Perhaps even more importantly, he hasn't properly shown why it should be  more important to TiVo. They make a device that functions the way it is supposed to. Added features represent value added, and any company must consider carefully before they add value to a product if it is unlikely to provide additional revenue, or at least prevent the loss of revenue. This is a feature that may be difficult and possibly a bit expensive to implement, yet to my eye holds little chance of garnering additional revenue.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> It isn't "of merit" because you state it is. Again, I'll throw your own words back at you, "I think some of you are a bit slow on the uptake." What is "of merit" is determined by the owners of TiVo, not you.


No, the merit of any complaint is determined by the reality surrounding the complaint along with market pressures, or in some cases along with existing law. It needs to be figured out whether or not the complaint has merit by TiVo's engineering team, and then one assumes if it requires any significant outlay of cash it must be approved by someone fairly senior in the Tivo organization - with an eye to those market pressures. If the cost of the fix is trivial, certainly the Tivo organization should be efficient enough to be able to effect it without intervention from the senior management team, let alone the board of directors or an investor referendum. No company that required an investor vote for every single little issue could ever survive.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> My concern is an increasing number of features that "should" be included but for whatever reason tivo is having issues doing it.


I am not noticing any such trend.



lew said:


> The connection problems with Series 1 units is another example.


It is also a completely different issue. The series I connection problem actually prevents the Series I units' core features from working. There is nothing whihc requires a company to make sure that obsolete units sold in the distant past must continue to work, but the other issue is that those customers are also continuing to pay a monthly fee (or obtained a lifetime contract) for a service they are not receiving, and that is a *MAJOR* problem. One cannot legally charge a fee and then refuse to provide service under the terms of the contract. The Series I users are not in breach of that contract, so TiVo must either provide them with proper service or refund their money.



lew said:


> Issues with FiOS is another example. Tivo doesn't want to solve the problem. Then put a warning on the box that warns customers.


Since it is FIOS's signal producing the problem, why should they? If they should, then why shoudn't FIOS be required to do the same thing, warning potential new customers they may have a problem if they own a TiVo?



lew said:


> QAM mapping is somewhere in the middle. I think it's a feature that should be on tivo's list


I'm not so certain it should. The whole idea of separable secuirty is that it be ubiquitous. Circumventing it on anyone's part tends to undermine its value.



lew said:


> My concern isn't with QAM but rather a pattern of not addressing problems/basic features.


What evidence do you have they are not? Just because a problem - especially an intermittent one - is not fixed in two days does not mean they are not working on it.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> My point was to list some items which are more important, should be ahead of QAM mapping, on tivo's "to do list". A couple are "bugs": S1 connections and grey screen analog issues.


There is no question that from both an ethical standpoint and if they want to stay in business, any company needs to address any serious bugs with their products. They also need to meet the needs of as many of their clients and potential clients as they can quite apart from fixing bugs. That said, I'm not sure that manual QAM mapping of rebroadcast local stations simply because they are sent out in the clear is a good idea.



lew said:


> At some point tivo either has to get a solution for FiOS issues or state the unit doesn't work with FiOS.


This is false.
1. Most FIOS users who are TiVo owners are not having problems.

2. The problems with FIOS systems have to do with the fact FIOS signals do not meet established industry standards.



lew said:


> I don't have an issue with FiOS but I have no reason to doubt the posters who have issues.


Actually, I do have a problem with FIOS, or at least its techncial representatives. They seem to have little clue as to what the issues surrounding these quite easy to rectify problems are. Instead, they just blame TiVo and feed the customer a line of @#[email protected]%. I also have a little bit of a problem in that many of the FIOS subscribers buy the line of @#%%^.



lew said:


> Closed captioning, should be ahead of QAM mapping. My guess is they're going to be forced to add it, tivo might as well get some goodwill by doing it before they're forced to do it.


I am not familiar at all with the technical issues surrounding the Closed Captioning issue, so I don't know who is at fault at the crux of the issue.



lew said:


> My point is QAM mapping is a feature that has some value to some customers but may never make it high enough up tivo's "to do list" to get implemented. Tivo doesn't have the resources to implement every feature that makes sense to some customers.


One of my points is that just because it makes sense to some customers does not mean it's a good idea, even if it costs TiVo nothing.



lew said:


> I think the wording on the box, but not in the website, is misleading. Cable cards are required, not may be required.


No, they are not required to receive the locals if the locals are broadcast in analog on the CATV system, which is the case for many CATV systems. They are not required for OTA reception, which many people prefer over the CATV lineup for digital / HD reception. They are only required if you are a digital CATV subscriber.


----------



## lrhorer

jrm01 said:


> Not even close to being true. Many products much more inferior have been foisted, it's just that none have been so successful.


Hmm, you may have me, there. I'm having trouble thinking of any product more inferior, however. 'Maybe some of the junk on the infomercials.


----------



## jrm01

RussInSanDiego said:


> To which kind of update are you referring? A guide update (I hope not) or a software update? If it's a guide update, then I'll have to re-enter all Season Passes for OTA digital channels every few days, no?


The 11.0 software update. I was getting this on both of my SP for clear-QAM Record by Time & Channel. TiVo engineers put some tracking routines on my TiVo and suggested the fix. It worked. Just recreated the SP and all is fine now.


----------



## vstone

The Tivo does do a rescan of the PSIP data, but I can't tell you how often. I also can't say if there is enough spare processing power to monitor it continuously while recording two programs, watching a recorded program, transferring a program to another Tivo/PC, and calling in for/processing new program data.


----------



## jcthorne

lrhorer said:


> I'm not so certain it should. The whole idea of separable secuirty is that it be ubiquitous. Circumventing it on anyone's part tends to undermine its value.


I was at least following your argument up to this point. QAM mapping IS NOT ASKING TO CIRCUMVENT any security system.

The local HD channels via clear QAM are a legitimate cable line up that I PAY FOR and Tivo choses not to support. I am asking for support for that valid lineup, not the circumvention of any security system.


----------



## markens

vstone said:


> The Tivo does do a rescan of the PSIP data, but I can't tell you how often. I also can't say if there is enough spare processing power to monitor it continuously while recording two programs, watching a recorded program, transferring a program to another Tivo/PC, and calling in for/processing new program data.


This is a different operation than a channel scan (or cable card mapping update), which defines the underlying channel frequency in the first place. PSIP data can't be received until the TiVo knows which channel to tune to. Sure, once that happens then PSIP data is evaluated on an ongoing basis. If the underlying RF frequency changes, the process starts over again.


----------



## ciper

I never said anything about the TV's which support QAM mapping having cable cards or not.



ciper said:


> You must have missed that many new televisions from multiple manufacturers have this ability. Including Vizio for petes sake.


----------



## bicker




----------



## lrhorer

jcthorne said:


> I was at least following your argument up to this point. QAM mapping IS NOT ASKING TO CIRCUMVENT any security system.


'Not a security system, separable security. Separable security is the name for a standard system which allows an intermediate object (either hardware or software) to provide an interface between CATV companies security measures and other protocols (including channel mapping) - whatever they may be - and 3rd party device protocols - whatever they may be. It allows the CE device and the CATV system to each "do their own thing", without having to worry about interoperability issues. It also allows the consumer to purchase a 3rd party device and attach it to the CATV system, confidant it will work. In short, it allows the user to install the security system in his own device, employing his own tuner and remote. It is precisely designed to do what people who are asking for QAM mapping are asking.



NJRonbo said:


> The local HD channels via clear QAM are a legitimate cable line up that I PAY FOR and Tivo choses not to support. I am asking for support for that valid lineup, not the circumvention of any security system.


The issue is not simple, which is to say the area is a bit gray. In fact, the CATV companies are not required to necessarily deliver the local channels unencrypted. Should they choose, they can encrypt them. In that case, however, they must provide some means for each and every subscriber to receive those channels, and since most franchises specifically limit the costs for basic service, this generally means they would have to supply them for free. In practical terms, for non-DCR sets that means an STB. TiVo owners with basic service would no doubt also receive CableCards free, as they are cheaper than an STB. Thus, the fact the channels are unencrypted is more or less incidental.

The intent of separable security is to integrate the need for CATV systems to protect their content with the desire for a seamless, uncluttered, straightforward viewing experience. The result of that intent is the CableCard. Any DCR manufacturer who provides a means of delivering digital service without the intervention of a CableCard is circumventing the intent of separable security. I'm not saying it is illegal, or even in any way enethical. It's just another stone in the path of what has already been an unnecessarily long and rocky road.

Your claim - which has some merit - is that you are already paying for those services. It was the intent of the FCC, however, that part and parcel of the cost of the service would be CableCards.

You know, that does spark off an idea. It is possible you might be able to convince your local franchise authority to induce the CATV company to provide CableCards to basic subscribers at a reduced rate, or even as part of the basic package. It wouldn't hurt to try, and doing so would positively affect more than just TiVo owners.


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> I never said anything about the TV's which support QAM mapping having cable cards or not.


Which is the point. TVs which are capable of receiving digital signals but don't support CableCards pretty much must support QAM remapping. Those which support CableCards don't, because it is intended CableCards will provide channel mapping.


----------



## ciper

lrhorer said:


> 'Not a security system, separable security. Separable security is the name for a standard system which allows an intermediate object


I thought (and still believe) the main focus of the cable card was to handle security so that it was separated from the box. Frequency reallocation, psip data, call letters, guide info and other items related to the topic of QAM mapping were not the goal of the cable card. This seems to be proven by the lack of two way communication which required the creation of the SDV dongle



lrhorer said:


> Which is the point. TVs which are capable of receiving digital signals but don't support CableCards pretty much must support QAM remapping.


Not my point but that is right. My point is that multiple devices from multiple manufacturers are able to map QAM channels. TiVo doesn't even need to innovate to add QAM mapping, just try out the different QAM mapping devices and use the good parts from each.

Right now people are already doing recordings by time on manually scanned channels. This has reduced the TiVO to essentially a tapeless VCR on those channels.

I really really want to take TiVo up on the holiday offer (still active) for my bedroom but my cable bill would increase by 15$ if I added a second unit and wanted the clear QAM channels even though I already have cablecards in the front room.


----------



## vstone

markens said:


> ...
> PSIP data can't be received until the TiVo knows which channel to tune to.
> ...


How does the Tivo know what channel to tune to to get the PSIP data? My Tivo found it without any action by me. I only knew the PSIP data had been seen when I noticed it in the channel list. Your statement seems to imply that the PSIP data is part of the video stream. This is not true.


----------



## vstone

lrhorer said:


> ...
> In fact, the CATV companies are not required to necessarily deliver the local channels unencrypted.
> ...


I don't agree. they are not required to carry the digital signals (ie must carry doesn't apply) until the analog signals are shut down. However, if they do carry them, they must not be encrypted. For all the specifics in the CFR, some things are inferred (accidentally or on purpose) rather than stated.


----------



## vstone

Tivo w/o a cablecard does support automatic QAM remapping just like your TV set (as long as the PSIP data is reasonably populated). It just does not allow you to remap to the program data to make the Tivo useful.

Thanks to my cable company, my Tivo, which used to find a bunch of channel 0's, now finds two channel 1-1's and two channel 1-2's. The TV set sees this and just requires an additional button push to get to the second channel. The Tivo has no way to get through this mess for program data, even though though the viewer can find the second channel while viewing in real time. Rather than create a new feature, I think Tivo is waiting for the FCC to put the hammer down on cable companies (both of whom are ignoring this issue) before they wade into this mess of customer support.


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> How does the Tivo know what channel to tune to to get the PSIP data? My Tivo found it without any action by me. I only knew the PSIP data had been seen when I noticed it in the channel list. Your statement seems to imply that the PSIP data is part of the video stream. This is not true.


Uh, I don't think markens' statement implies that PSIP data is part of the video stream, but rather his statement implies that it is part of the ATSC broadcast signal on/for a specific channel. I am relatively sure that that is the case. PSIP is a required part of the transport stream for every terrestrial broadcast channel. This isn't some side-band signaling type arrangement. Each transport stream is self-defining.

The question of the hour is how does the TiVo know where to get the PSIP data. The only rational answer I see, so far, is that its scans all ATSC-compatible frequencies for it. Some folks claim that there is no channel scan done. I believe that there is. Perhaps (and I really have no idea if this is possible) there can be a channel scan for PSIP data that is quicker than a channel scan that actually de-multiplexes transport stream and confirms a lock on the signal for each sub-channel's audio and video streams?


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> I don't agree. they are not required to carry the digital signals (ie must carry doesn't apply) until the analog signals are shut down. However, if they do carry them, they must not be encrypted. For all the specifics in the CFR, some things are inferred (accidentally or on purpose) rather than stated.


I've posted the relevant portions of the various regulations that contribute to this reality, before... I don't have them handy this morning. When a must-carry channel has more than signal, it gets to determine which of its signals is the must-carry signal. Only the must-carry signal must be provided unencrypted.​


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> Rather than create a new feature, I think Tivo is waiting for the FCC to put the hammer down on cable companies (both of whom are ignoring this issue) before they wade into this mess of customer support.


Just researching PSIP a little bit, this morning, and I found this:


> Finally, a couple of comments noted, in response to our inquiry in the Third DTV Periodic Review NPRM, that *PSIP information may not be passed through to cable and satellite subscribers*. We will address such program-related PSIP issues in our DTV Must Carry proceeding.


[Source: FCC 07-228, ¶189.]

Huh? Does an FCC Order actually prohibit passing PSIP data through to cable and satellite subscribers? Can someone fill in the details here -- not based on information that was put out before FCC 07-228, but rather, specifically, based on information that was put out *after* FCC 07-228? (To be clear, there are MANY references in the documentation saying that cable must pass-through PSIP data and regarding what data must be included (i.e., ATSC A/65C ¶5.2). My question is specifically regarding this statement in this FCC order, and what IT means.)


----------



## jrm01

> PSIP information may not be passed through to cable and satellite subscribers


I think that this is just some poor grammer on the part of the report.

I don't think that it means that they may not do it (i.e. not permitted), but rather means "there may be ocassions where they are not doing it".


----------



## bicker

Ah... grammar. That makes sense.


----------



## fallingwater

Moxie's new DVR competition provides unscrambled QAM mapping, a FSI, and a pretty GUI. TiVo apparently is already taken notice of Moxi's GUI with the new _TiVo Search_ interface.

Does heat from these Forums actually result in sales? Stay tuned.


----------



## bicker

Heat from the forum? Doubtful. But go back a second... Are you saying that the Moxi DVR supports QAM mapping to its program guide and recording capability? If you can post screen-shots of this it would be greatly appreciated.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Dave Zatz says it can, based on his talk with Digeo at CES. I would assume that if they provide mapping, it would be so that you could get guide info on and record the channels. Wouldn't be much point otherwise.


----------



## bicker

Thanks for the link... that paragraph really draws a comparison of note: QAM mapping (on the Moxi) versus TiVo Desktop functionality (watch recorded video on computer, TTG, TTCB) -- I cannot believe that anyone would assert that the Moxi wins that dichotomy.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Heat from the forum? Doubtful.


TiVo may be well insulated but surely you jest! Following the QAM mapping squabble has been amusing!



> But go back a second... Are you saying that the Moxi DVR supports QAM mapping to its program guide and recording capability? If you can post screen-shots of this it would be greatly appreciated.


Unfortunately I can't provide screenshots, but here's Moxi's User Guide:
http://moxi.com/support/MC4R/MoxiHDDVR_userguide.pdf

Go to page 77 for Moxi's directions for unscrambled QAM mapping:

*Channel Scanning

If you set up a Moxi HD DVR without a CableCARD inserted, youll be asked during the onscreen setup process to conduct a scan for tunable channels. If you need to perform a channel scan at a later time, you can initiate one by going to Channel List, selecting Channel Scan, and pressing OK. If youre in the middle of onscreen setup:

1. Select Begin Scan by highlighting the button and pressing OK on the Moxi remote. The scan can take around 20 minutes.
2. When the scan is complete, select Restart by highlighting the button and pressing OK on the Moxi remote.
3. Some tunable HD channels in your lineup, discovered during the channel scan, may not match the electronic program guide (EPG) due to the way cable service providers choose to list them. Moxi refers to the channels with incorrect or missing data as unmapped. To map them, go to Settings, and choose Channel List. Select the Channel Mapping option.

Channel Mapping

In the Moxi Menu, navigate to Settings, and then select the Channel List option

If there are unmapped tunable channels, the Channel Mapping card appears. When you select it, the vertical list will display all tunable channels that were not associated with an EPG channel at the time of your channel scan. You can select Map All to map all of the channels at once. To map an individual channel:

1. Navigate an unmapped channel into center focus. Press the right arrow and then use the up/down arrows to review the list of available unassociated EPG channels.
2. Determine which unmapped EPG channel applies to an unmapped scanned tunable channel by reviewing the current programming information presented or by watching the channel. When you find a match, press OK on the EPG channel and respond to the Map This Channel? confirmation. The channel will not display in the list as a mapped channel.
3. If you determine that you mapped an EPG channel to a tunable channel in error, from the Channel Mapping card, navigate to the mapped channel, press OK, and respond to the confirmation, Un-map this channel? Follow procedures in the steps above to map the channel correctly.*


----------



## bicker

So basically, now, if folks are overly-concerned about the lack of QAM mapping on the TiVo, we can just refer them to the Moxi. Sounds fair.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> Heat from the forum? Doubtful. But go back a second... Are you saying that the Moxi DVR supports QAM mapping to its program guide and recording capability? If you can post screen-shots of this it would be greatly appreciated.


from the Moxi user guide.



> Channel Mapping - tunable channels (discovered during a channel scan) that can not be automatically mapped to the electronic program guide are listed in this menu option in order to allow the user to manually map the channel to the EPG. Refer to the Installation chapter for Channel Mapping instructions.


Moxi supports QAM mapping and has better equipment. Tivo supports OTA, dialup and has features like TTG and MRV which Moxi doesn't currently offer.

I don't think Moxi is worth the price, compared to TivoHD, but customers that want QAM mapping have a product.

edited to say Fallingwater beat me to the cut and paste.

After/IF moxi has enough customers using QAM mapping tivo may be able to decide if the pros outweigh the negatives.


----------



## bicker

Definitely.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> I don't think Moxi is worth the price, compared to TivoHD, but customers that want QAM mapping have a product.


Moxi costs $800. A single HDTiVo with ⅓ the storage costs more than $600 and a HDTiVo XL with twice the storage $1000.

Moxi is competitive considering its relatively cheap and very flexible external storage option as long as getting an external analog tuner dongle isn't a hassle. The dongle enables recording manually in standard-def from external sources on Moxi similiar to using TiVo's antenna input for that purpose.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7005703#post7005703



> After/IF moxi has enough customers using QAM mapping tivo may be able to decide if the pros outweigh the negatives.


Moxi may be the best thing that's happened since ReplayTV for TiVo users!


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> *Moxi costs $800. A single HDTiVo with ⅓ the storage costs more than $600* and a HDTiVo XL with twice the storage $1000.
> 
> Moxi is competitive considering its relatively cheap and very flexible external storage option as long as getting an external analog tuner dongle isn't a hassle. The dongle enables recording manually in standard-def from external sources on Moxi similiar to using TiVo's antenna input for that purpose.
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7005703#post7005703
> 
> Moxi may be the best thing that's happened since ReplayTV for TiVo users!


A DIY person can replace the internal drive in the TivoHD for not much more then $100. Double the storage of Moxi, less money. A person who's not a DIY*er* can add the WD DVR Expander for around $130. A savings of $70 and more storage then the Moxi.

At Moxi's pricing a 1T drive should be standard, JMO.

Moxi doesn't offer MRV or TTG. Moxi has already said new features such as MRV might cost extra money.


----------



## fallingwater

At present Digeo is intentionally limiting sales and keeping its DVR price fixed.

Unfortunately TiVo's MRV doesn't always work without fussing. Often one TiVo doesn't see another unless it's rebooted. Add the transfer time, about &#190; realtime, and it's easiest to watch the program in the other room.

But why should a user have to fiddle with a new product?

The most important reason for replacing an internal HDD instead of adding an outboard one isn't saving $30; it's the added reliability of using one HDD in an application instead of two. Moxi's system for using multiple external HDD's one at a time is more useful than merely adding one; no more having to transfer programs to DVD. Competitive means more than cheapest.


----------



## 1283

fallingwater said:


> Unfortunately TiVo's MRV doesn't always work without fussing. Often one TiVo doesn't see another unless it's rebooted. Add the transfer time, about ¾ realtime, and it's easiest to watch the program in the other room.


Other than a few minor UI issues, MRV has worked very well. I just transferred a bunch of programs for over 24 hours without any problem. Around 25 Mbps between THD units, which is about twice as fast as HD realtime.


----------



## fallingwater

When it works without needing to be fussed with MRV works great! But that's a topic for another thread.

With both Sony's discontinued hi-def DVR and now Moxi offering unscrambled QAM channel mapping, TiVo is at a disadvantage. Still, unscrambled QAM channel mapping may not generate enough revenue for TiVo to care.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> When it works without needing to be fussed with MRV works great! But that's a topic for another thread.


Then why did you bring it up in this thread?  If you're going to bring something up, as a defense for an assertion you're making, expect that people who disagree with you will highlight the weakness in your argument.



fallingwater said:


> With both Sony's discontinued hi-def DVR and now Moxi offering unscrambled QAM channel mapping, TiVo is at a disadvantage.


You must be using the word "disadvantage" in a manner inconsistent with its definition, or engaging in some pretty strange rhetoric. As you, yourself, pointed out, QAM mapping is of limited value. So the only thing you've proven that TiVo is at a disadvantage in the competition for, specifically, HDDVRsthatsupportCableCARDSandQAMmapping. You haven't established, and I believe many folks would disagree with the assertion, that the TiVo is at a disadvantage vis a vis the Moxi, in any *broader *context.


----------



## lew

You've given this a lot of thought. Moxi meets your needs better then currently produced tivo's.

Tivo supports OTA and Moxi and supports customers that get cable but don't want to rent cable cards(QAM maping). I'm not sure which company is missing a bigger market.

I hope you come back and post a review after you've had a chance to purchase and install a Moxi. Tivo doesn't meet your needs, it's good there is a product that does.



fallingwater said:


> At present Digeo is intentionally limiting sales and keeping its DVR price fixed.
> 
> Unfortunately TiVo's MRV doesn't always work without fussing. Often one TiVo doesn't see another unless it's rebooted. Add the transfer time, about ¾ realtime, and it's easiest to watch the program in the other room.
> 
> But why should a user have to fiddle with a new product?
> 
> The most important reason for replacing an internal HDD instead of adding an outboard one isn't saving $30; it's the added reliability of using one HDD in an application instead of two. Moxi's system for using multiple external HDD's one at a time is more useful than merely adding one; no more having to transfer programs to DVD. Competitive means more than cheapest.


----------



## vstone

bicker said:


> Uh, I don't think markens' statement implies that PSIP data is part of the video stream, but rather his statement implies that it is part of the ATSC broadcast signal on/for a specific channel. I am relatively sure that that is the case. PSIP is a required part of the transport stream for every terrestrial broadcast channel. This isn't some side-band signaling type arrangement. Each transport stream is self-defining.
> 
> The question of the hour is how does the TiVo know where to get the PSIP data. The only rational answer I see, so far, is that its scans all ATSC-compatible frequencies for it. Some folks claim that there is no channel scan done. I believe that there is. Perhaps (and I really have no idea if this is possible) there can be a channel scan for PSIP data that is quicker than a channel scan that actually de-multiplexes transport stream and confirms a lock on the signal for each sub-channel's audio and video streams?


Well, I guess for OTA the transport stream includes the video streams and data streams. For QAM there are multiple transport streams, one per frequency. Each transport stream probably holds several video streams and at least one data stream. Tuning to that freq allows the Tivo to inspect the data stream(s) and identify the virtual channels. But since there is no tuner dedicated to inspecting PSIP data, it would appear that short of a channel scan, the Tivo can only review a given PSIP data stream, Perhaps my Tivo found channel 1-3 when I tuned to the frequency containing 1-1 (assuming they're on the same transport stream/freq).


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> A DIY person can replace the internal drive in the TivoHD for not much more then $100. Double the storage of Moxi, less money. A person who's not a DIY*er* can add the WD DVR Expander for around $130. A savings of $70 and more storage then the Moxi.
> 
> At Moxi's pricing a 1T drive should be standard, JMO.
> 
> Moxi doesn't offer MRV or TTG. Moxi has already said new features such as MRV might cost extra money.





fallingwater said:


> At present Digeo is intentionally limiting sales and keeping its DVR price fixed.
> 
> Unfortunately TiVo's MRV doesn't always work without fussing. Often one TiVo doesn't see another unless it's rebooted. Add the transfer time, about ¾ realtime, and it's easiest to watch the program in the other room.
> 
> But why should a user have to fiddle with a new product?
> 
> The most important reason for replacing an internal HDD instead of adding an outboard one isn't saving $30; it's the added reliability of using one HDD in an application instead of two. Moxi's system for using multiple external HDD's one at a time is more useful than merely adding one; no more having to transfer programs to DVD. Competitive means more than cheapest.





fallingwater said:


> When it works without needing to be fussed with MRV works great! But that's a topic for another thread.





bicker said:


> Then why did you bring it up in this thread?


I didn't. Lew did in the first post quoted above.



fallingwater said:


> With both Sony's discontinued hi-def DVR and now Moxi offering unscrambled QAM channel mapping, TiVo is at a disadvantage. Still, unscrambled QAM channel mapping may not generate enough revenue for TiVo to care.





bicker said:


> If you're going to bring something up, as a defense for an assertion you're making, expect that people who disagree with you will highlight the weakness in your argument.


Which is why I replied to lew as I did.



> You must be using the word "disadvantage" in a manner inconsistent with its definition, or engaging in some pretty strange rhetoric. As you, yourself, pointed out, QAM mapping is of limited value. So the only thing you've proven that TiVo is at a disadvantage in the competition for, specifically, HD DVRs that support CableCARDS and QAM mapping. You haven't established, and I believe many folks would disagree with the assertion, that the TiVo is at a disadvantage vis a vis the Moxi, in any *broader *context.


As you acknowledge, I used 'disadvantage' specifically in reference to QAM mapping and 'limited' doesn't mean 'no' or 'none'. Moxi has other features which TiVo lacks which may put TiVo at a disadvantage, but, as you infer, I didn't refer to them.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> You've given this a lot of thought. Moxi meets your needs better then currently produced tivo's.
> 
> Tivo supports OTA and Moxi and supports customers that get cable but don't want to rent cable cards(QAM maping). I'm not sure which company is missing a bigger market.
> 
> I hope you come back and post a review after you've had a chance to purchase and install a Moxi. Tivo doesn't meet your needs, it's good there is a product that does.


Your post is OT here. I've discussed some of Moxi's pros and cons vis a vis TiVo in the Moxi thread.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7006054#post7006054


----------



## ciper

I want to point out that this thread has the eighth greatest number of views and fifth highest number of replies in this forum. That doesn't count all the other threads about QAM mapping (we all know there have been many).

Here are a couple more long threads on this topic
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413454
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=391892
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=327716
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=337457
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=318215

The only topic I can find that has more combined threads/replies overall would be *CABLECARD PROBLEMS*! Many of those wouldn't exist if the people were able to map clear QAM. That makes me chuckle 

Since this topic and the problems it creates are generating the most traffic on this subforum it might mean the topic is important than some of you would like to admit


----------



## bicker

Many of the messages are about how *unimportant* this issue is. Count those messages as -1, each.


----------



## aindik

Comcast in the PA suburbs is sending out postcards that say all packages Digital Starter and above include one regular fully functional digital box _plus_ two bare bones "digital adapters" capable of tuning digital versions of basic and expanded basic stations. (Essentially, a QAM tuner capable of channel mapping, which can't do PPV, VOD, or premium channels).

I wonder if you can substitute a CableCARD for these "digital adapters." IOW, I wonder if their willingness to allow three outlets on a single plan without additional charge means they'll be more receptive to the argument that there shouldn't be an "additional outlet fee" unless you're renting a fully featured box from them.

Of course, this doesn't help people who only subscribe to Limited Basic, who are probably this thread's biggest posters, but I thought it was relevant anyway.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> Many of the messages are about how *unimportant* this issue is. Count those messages as -1, each.


I might count them as 0 but not -1. Suggestions aren't important to some but that doesn't mean they aren't needed. Phone line support is not important to some, again it doesnt mean it isn't needed. OTA support is not needed by some..... etc

You've made it very clear how you stand on the issue, at least to me. Why stick around in a thread about a feature you have no use for?


----------



## lew

ciper said:


> I might count them as 0 but not -1. Suggestions aren't important to some but that doesn't mean they aren't needed. Phone line support is not important to some, again it doesnt mean it isn't needed. OTA support is not needed by some..... etc
> 
> You've made it very clear how you stand on the issue, at least to me. Why stick around in a thread about a feature you have no use for?


It would be -1 IF you thought QAM mapping would consume resources that would otherwise be spent on a feature you want.


----------



## ciper

The idea that QAM mapping would generate too many support requests or complaints doesn't seem valid since they could easily say "for best results use a cable card, this feature is only for areas where they are not available" or "Cable cards make sure the channel mapping is always up to date, manual mapping may result in missed recordings" etc...



lew said:


> It would be -1 IF you thought QAM mapping would consume resources that would otherwise be spent on a feature you want.


In that case I believe TiVo should get negative over 9000 for implementing Pizza Hut, Youtube, Rapsody, Swivel Search, Creating TiVo Desktop when free alternatives exist, forcing approved external hard drives that fail quite often, breaking suggestions on the S1 then having to fix them, breaking guide data downloads then having to fix them,,,,  you get what I mean

Now if they put the resources into making the TiVo a DLNA reciever then I'd be glad to forgive them for focusing on more important tasks. These days pretty much everyone supports the damn standard except the TiVo 

DLNA support would make TiVo a killer app again.


----------



## 1003

*Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...

*FACTS:*
*TiVo* channel scan identifies PSIP data (why recognize what you won't use?)
*Comcast* locally supplies PSIP data for the 'big4' networks (headend GA10439)
-WAGA HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-5.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-804
-WGCL HD Frequency-108.10 PSIP-46.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-809
-WSB HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-2.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
-WXIA HD Frequency-98.3 PSIP-11.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
-There are several additional digital channels not yet PSIP mapped
*Comcast *returned to boadcasting PSIP data in December, after stripping it from the signal since January 2008
*Comcast* will not provide CableCARDs locally without a monthly subscription to a digital tier package
*TiVoHD* properly recognizes the PSIP data from Comcast with station identities when cable channels are manually scanned
*HDHomerun* on Vista Media Center identifies and adds both the frequency and PSIP channels to the guide
*Avermedia* tuners in Vista Media Center automatically replaced the already programmed frequency identities with PSIP channel labels
*TiVoHD* packaging does not state that CableCARD(s) are required to receive digital cable signals or that guide data will not be available without them

*MY PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON AVAILABLE FACTS:*
*MicroSoft* wants my business and is improving Vista Media Center to capture customers other than those who are locked into CableCARDS
*I'm* no longer willing to contiue wasting more time trying to fight Comcast policy of not providing CableCARDs unless a digital tier is purchased
*TiVo* is currently using the excuse that Comcast does not publish the PSIP channel data. TiVo case number 10409849
*Comcast* would prefer that Clear QAM and PSIP remain a secret to protect thier profits by up-selling digital tiers and CableCARD rentals for DTV
*TiVo* appears to be protecting thier Comcast relationship at the expense of thse of us who bought hardware and services directly
*If* Comcast were to someday 'break' PSIP I would certainly blame them and not TiVo for the problem
*Providing *program listings for PSIP effectively puts the ball back in Comcast's court to provide PSIP and make it accurate to avoid angry cancelling customers
*Disconnect* in the 'last mile' appears to be Tribune/TiVo choosing not to populate program data to the channel identificatons that already exist, and exactly how prohibitive would the cost (to Tribune) be to simply populate existing data (from OTA listings) into existing database fields?

Shouting louder does not make the facts go away despite the efforts of some posters. Then again this thread continues to remain at the top because of those who oppose QAM mapping for whatever reason they may have...


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> I might count them as 0 but not -1.


Why am I not surprised that you'd consider perspectives that you disagree with worth nothing.  I am a little surprised that you'd post such an obviously self-serving piece of silliness.



ciper said:


> You've made it very clear how you stand on the issue, at least to me. Why stick around in a thread about a feature you have no use for?


If you actually read the thread, instead of just dumping your own tidbits into it, you would know why.



JJ said:


> Why do 'contrarians' continue to post in this thread if the issue is so unimportant? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...


Which is also a very nicely self-serving way of basically saying that you disagree with people and want them to go away because you want to have an unrebutted soap-box.

Lew hit the nail on the head. He's obviously been _reading _the thread.


----------



## ciper

You know I don't even want QAM mapping necessarily but rather Guide data to a specific channel mapping. The distinction is that I could assign HBO guide data to channel three if I wanted then set my satellite box to autotune to HBO at a certain time which is connected to the antenna input of the THD.



bicker said:


> Why am I not surprised that you'd consider perspectives that you disagree with worth nothing.


Alright Ill rephrase the reply. I'd count every detracting post as -1 and every regular support reply as a +1. Posts by others who've tried hard to counter the arguments against the topic are counted as +2 for the dedication and energy.

If people weren't passionate in feeling QAM mapping is the right thing to do they wouldn't spend the surprising effort to write such long, well worded, replies.

Other threads where disagreement is present usually fizzle out because the people involved don't care enough to keep the discussion going.


----------



## bicker

Some of the most passionate discussions about television, online, are those pertaining to science fiction. Un-remarkably, that passion indicates almost nothing about what networks should do in terms of what programming to provide.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> Some of the most passionate discussions about television, online, are those pertaining to science fiction. Un-remarkably, that passion indicates almost nothing about what networks should do in terms of what programming to provide.


I was really disappointed when Enterprise was canceled.

At least I can watch the remaining episodes in HD with no commercials on HDNet.


----------



## vstone

JJ said:


> *Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
> in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...
> 
> *FACTS:*
> *TiVo* channel scan identifies PSIP data (why recognize what you won't use?)
> *Comcast* locally supplies PSIP data for the 'big4' networks (headend GA10439)
> -WAGA HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-5.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-804
> -WGCL HD Frequency-108.10 PSIP-46.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-809
> -WSB HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-2.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
> -WXIA HD Frequency-98.3 PSIP-11.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
> -There are several additional digital channels not yet PSIP mapped
> *Comcast *returned to boadcasting PSIP data in December, after stripping it from the signal since January 2008
> *Comcast* will not provide CableCARDs locally without a monthly subscription to a digital tier package
> *TiVoHD* properly recognizes the PSIP data from Comcast with station identities when cable channels are manually scanned
> *HDHomerun* on Vista Media Center identifies and adds both the frequency and PSIP channels to the guide
> *Avermedia* tuners in Vista Media Center automatically replaced the already programmed frequency identities with PSIP channel labels
> *TiVoHD* packaging does not state that CableCARD(s) are required to receive digital cable signals or that guide data will not be available without them
> 
> *MY PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON AVAILABLE FACTS:*
> *MicroSoft* wants my business and is improving Vista Media Center to capture customers other than those who are locked into CableCARDS
> *I'm* no longer willing to contiue wasting more time trying to fight Comcast policy of not providing CableCARDs unless a digital tier is purchased
> *TiVo* is currently using the excuse that Comcast does not publish the PSIP channel data. TiVo case number 10409849
> *Comcast* would prefer that Clear QAM and PSIP remain a secret to protect thier profits by up-selling digital tiers and CableCARD rentals for DTV
> *TiVo* appears to be protecting thier Comcast relationship at the expense of thse of us who bought hardware and services directly
> *If* Comcast were to someday 'break' PSIP I would certainly blame them and not TiVo for the problem
> *Providing *program listings for PSIP effectively puts the ball back in Comcast's court to provide PSIP and make it accurate to avoid angry cancelling customers
> *Disconnect* in the 'last mile' appears to be Tribune/TiVo choosing not to populate program data to the channel identificatons that already exist, and exactly how prohibitive would the cost (to Tribune) be to simply populate existing data (from OTA listings) into existing database fields?
> 
> Shouting louder does not make the facts go away despite the efforts of some posters. Then again this thread continues to remain at the top because of those who oppose QAM mapping for whatever reason they may have...


All of your comments are based on PSIP tables being properly populated. This is not always the case and may not even be the case on a majority of cable systems. To expect Tivo/Tribune to correct a situation not of their making that they have no control over when the FCC won't wade into (to fix the deficiencies in the law as passed by Congress or even enforce it as is) is a bit much. You would prefer that Tivo risk a working relationship with cable companies in correcting other Tivo related problems to fix this. That is a valid position, but perhaps Tivo sees it otherwise. If cable companies care to abuse PSIP dat accidently or on purpose, Tivo won't be able to force their hand short of action by local franchise authorities (who probably don't understand the issue, assuming they even know about it) or the FCC.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

JJ said:


> *Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
> in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...


umm, maybe becasue you missed an important FACT
not everyone uses Comcast and TiVo sells a _stand alone_ product to be used on all the cable systems.

so the conclusion is - you have your own personal desire that does not match with the broader picture the businesses involved have to deal with.


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> You've made it very clear how you stand on the issue, at least to me. Why stick around in a thread about a feature you have no use for?


Hey the dude's handle is _*bicker*_. Basically he gets off by espousing contrarian yet consistent positions about issues ranging from obvious to the arcane to mind-fug with posters with whom he disagrees. 
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6968688#post6968688



JJ said:


> *Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
> in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...


Why not? Even disagreeable posters keep an issue up-front in these Forums.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> If people weren't passionate in feeling QAM mapping is the right thing to do they wouldn't spend the surprising effort to write such long, well worded, replies.


even when there are simple things they could do now to actuallyrecord the QAM channels. It is not the TiVo they want to use, I understand that - but still they will not even respond to threads looking ofr people to support a hack to do QAM mapping. The hack may be primitive and kludgy currently but no real takers to put their TiVo and money where their posts are.

What is TiVo to make of all this?

I would say put the effort into a campaign to get the new FCC that is most likely coming under the new administration to address the issue of non compliance to a simple rule. Give TiVo a level playing field that lets them add the feature without a lot of hassle or customer support and all excuses are gone.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> ... espousing contrarian yet consistent positions about issues ranging from obvious to the arcane to mind-fug with posters with whom he disagrees.


No different from ciper, yourself and many other contributors, except I'm generally more polite about it than many posters, never flaming before being flamed.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...there are simple things (TiVo users) could do now to actually record the QAM channels. It is not the TiVo they want to use, I understand that - but still they will not even respond to threads looking for people to support a hack to do QAM mapping. The hack may be primitive and kludgy currently but no real takers to put their TiVo and money where their posts are.
> 
> What is TiVo to make of all this?


Do you have a link to such a hack?

I used to think it unimportant, but after following this thread I support the call for TiVo to develop QAM mapping. Digital TVGOS, a far less sophisticated product, now makes manual QAM mapping an easy task.

TiVo, by mandating only CableCARDS for QAM mapping and supporting only STB's and not (yet?) DTAs for digital standard-def, requires many S3 and S2 users to pay higher cable bills than necessary.

Could there be a TiVo agreement with cable providers which isn't apparent? I hope not.


----------



## slowbiscuit

JJ said:


> *Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
> in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...
> 
> *FACTS:*
> *TiVo* channel scan identifies PSIP data (why recognize what you won't use?)
> *Comcast* locally supplies PSIP data for the 'big4' networks (headend GA10439)
> -WAGA HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-5.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-804
> -WGCL HD Frequency-108.10 PSIP-46.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-809
> -WSB HD Frequency-98.804 PSIP-2.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
> -WXIA HD Frequency-98.3 PSIP-11.1 CableCARD/ComcastMap-803
> -There are several additional digital channels not yet PSIP mapped


Hard to take you seriously when you can't even get the 'facts' straight. WSB is on 98.3 and WXIA is on 108.30, and PSIP is not correct for WAGA (shows up as '0-0' on my set). And none of the other locals are mapped, including PBS, MyNetwork, CW, etc.

But as vstone posted, it doesn't matter. Comcast here is still not compliant (assuming it's their fault) just like many other areas, so your argument has some huge holes from the get-go. And as you may know they recently moved channels around which would've broken recordings for manually mapped QAM channels (WATL and WUPA HD streams moved to channel 29). Local channels have been moved at least once a year here, and I'm not surprised Tivo doesn't want to take the calls for it.


----------



## jccfin

JJ said:


> Shouting louder does not make the facts go away despite the efforts of some posters. Then again this thread continues to remain at the top because of those who oppose QAM mapping for whatever reason they may have...


They oppose it because they lack a brain and are argumentative with nothing else better to do than to come to a thread they oppose to troll.


----------



## slowbiscuit

JJ said:


> Shouting louder does not make the facts go away despite the efforts of some posters. Then again this thread continues to remain at the top because of those who oppose QAM mapping for whatever reason they may have...


Sorry, forgot to respond to this...

*No one here opposes QAM mapping*, and as best as I can tell your multicolored post is the closest to shouting that I can see other than the emphasis I just provided. What we've been doing is trying to explain why it *may* not be a feature that Tivo considers to be worth pursuing.

You might not like the reasoning, but don't make it something else because you don't like what's being said.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> Do you have a link to such a hack?


there were two threads here but I forget the forum. The threads died off due to lack of interest. 


> I used to think it unimportant, but after following this thread I support the call for TiVo to develop QAM mapping. Digital TVGOS, a far less sophisticated product, now makes manual QAM mapping an easy task.


okay. It does not fit the TiVo simplistic approach though that is subjective and people can call for QAM mapping as much as they want. 


> TiVo, by mandating only CableCARDS for QAM mapping and supporting only STB's and not (yet?) DTAs for digital standard-def, requires many S3 and S2 users to pay higher cable bills than necessary.
> 
> Could there be a TiVo agreement with cable providers which isn't apparent? I hope not.


I dispute that it is "many users" as most actually want digital cable and/or HD. Kind of why they got the Tivo HD. The number of users affected would be a major driver in any decision by TiVo - I would think.

any stated agreement by TiVo and cable companies would, I think, be illegal but IANAL


----------



## jccfin

slowbiscuit said:


> Sorry, forgot to respond to this...
> 
> *No one here opposes QAM mapping*, and as best as I can tell your multicolored post is the closest to shouting that I can see other than the emphasis I just provided. What we've been doing is trying to explain why it *may* not be a feature that Tivo considers to be worth pursuing.
> 
> You might not like the reasoning, but don't make it something else because you don't like what's being said.


Again, YOURE making a far BIGGER assumption by saying that QAM mapping is less of an issue for Tivo users than ordering from Dominos. Or any of the numerous other craplets they have chosen to develop before QAM mapping. To anyone who has a logical mind, Tvio should first and foremost do what it was intended before anything else. That is, be able to let its users easily record and playback programs. QAM mapping is very important in that regard because without it, some users wouldnt be able to do it.

The fact of the matter is that Tivo has shown a consistent pattern of being slow to respond to Tivo users wishes. Partly, this has to do with the fact that they spend much more on their advertising than they dedicate to development. It reminds me of that Apple commercial. Here, take a look.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

jccfin said:


> To anyone who has a logical mind, Tvio should first and foremost do what it was intended before anything else.


TiVo inc was intend to be a for profit business.
TiVo DVR was developed to make revenue for TiVo inc.

selling/subscribing those DVRs by making them of value to end users is the business model. TiVo will look at what Return on Investment they get from adding a feature.

that is how logical minds see it.

I think the confusion may stem from the fact that it was slightly gray in the past since the DVR was actually developed by the original CEO of TiVo who figured out how to make an economical DVR and was way more into how the DVR worked than how the Business of TiVo inc. worked. 
TiVo inc. was not getting ahead in that mode so a change was made to bring in CEO who looks far more now at how Tivo inc. works versus how a DVR works. Times have changed and of course not everyone likes the new reality, but there it is none the less.


----------



## jccfin

ZeoTivo, actually, like any other tech company, Tivo is in the business of making continual improvements to its product or else it becomes extinct. The fact that they&#8217;re slow to innovate and implement user&#8217;s wishes tells me that they&#8217;re not long for this world. Making improvements means that you&#8217;re move likely to attract more people who would be interested in your products because it now has some functionality that the end user wants. You&#8217;re enlarging the subset of people you&#8217;re useful to.

Again, implementing stupid things like Dominos before more useful features like QAM mapping, they&#8217;re shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> It does not fit the TiVo simplistic approach though that is subjective and people can call for QAM mapping as much as they want.


TiVo's approach is actually a curious mixture of simplistic mixed with digitally arcane! 



> I dispute that it is "many users" as most actually want digital cable and/or HD. Kind of why they got the Tivo HD. The number of users affected would be a major driver in any decision by TiVo - I would think.


TV watchers can receive both hi-def and digital standard-def without having to use either a Cable STB or CableCARDS. Of course the number who want to save on monthly fees IS a significant factor. 'Many' is perhaps subjective, but how many users actually order TiVo from their Pizza Parlor? (Or something like that! )


----------



## slowbiscuit

jccfin said:


> Again, YOU'RE making a far BIGGER assumption by saying that QAM mapping is less of an issue for Tivo users than ordering from Dominos. Or any of the numerous other craplets they have chosen to develop before QAM mapping. To anyone who has a logical mind, Tvio should first and foremost do what it was intended before anything else. That is, be able to let its users easily record and playback programs. QAM mapping is very important in that regard because without it, some users wouldn't be able to do it.


Again, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't say that it's less of an issue than revenue enhancements, just that they might have reasons not to pursue it. And users cannot 'easily' record programs if the channel is moved around without their knowledge, they've got to play 'find the channel' when Judge Judy doesn't record (and the wife gets PISSED). 
And I happen to agree that Tivo is slow to respond to user requests, but I don't know why and neither do you.

But IMO this horse has been flogged to death, and there's not much reason to post here until new info is posted (if ever).


----------



## bicker

slowbiscuit said:


> Again, you're putting words in my mouth.


Because his argument doesn't hold water unless he argues against things people haven't said.


----------



## jccfin

slowbiscuit said:


> And users cannot 'easily' record programs if the channel is moved around without their knowledge, they've got to play 'find the channel' when Judge Judy doesn't record (and the wife gets PISSED).


It's still better than NOT being able to record AT ALL!

That doesn't happen that often anyway because if you watch TV everday you can easily see that you can not tune to a specific channel that the cable compnay has moved which means you'll need to re-map. Unless you just happen to be traveling and the cable company decides to move a channel during at exact moment but how often does that happen?

It's also worthwhile to note that there's not that many channels to map anyways since most of the people asking for this are not watching 100 channels, only mostly the broadcast channels. So how hard is it for you to keep track of 7-8 channels?

The idea here is simple, I'd rather be able to enjoy remap 99% of the time just so that I might miss recording something 1% of the time that the channel's been moved.


----------



## Roderigo

JJ said:


> *MY PERSONAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON AVAILABLE FACTS:*
> *MicroSoft* wants my business and is improving Vista Media Center to capture customers other than those who are locked into CableCARDS


This is the most useful thing in your post. You've looked at how the tivo works for you, decided there's a better product that meets your needs, and presumably will cancel your tivo subscription. If enough people do this, maybe tivo will take action.

A lot of your facts are based on your particular cable company's configuration, and that helped you come to your conclusion that something else was better *for you*. However, those facts don't translate to every tivo user. Last I checked, even though Comcast had PSIP data when I got my series3 box, currently they do not. And, in my area, I was able to get cablecards with a limited basic package. So the "facts" for my configuration are different, and lead me to a different conclusions. Tivo has to figure out how many people end up with your conclusions vs how many end up with my conclusions.

Now, on to some specific comments:


JJ said:


> *TiVo* channel scan identifies PSIP data (why recognize what you won't use?)


Tivo does use it. They put the channel in the guide, and allow you to tune to it. Your complaint is that they don't allow you to get the "full tivo functionality" on that channel. Also, tivo is required to discover the PSIP data based on the cablecard requirements.



JJ said:


> *TiVoHD* packaging does not state that CableCARD(s) are required to receive digital cable signals or that guide data will not be available without them


Cablecards are *NOT *required to "receive digital cable signals." And, there are *some* locations where cablecards are *not* required to associate guide data with the digital channels. So, my view is the packaging is correct - cablecards "may" be required. Also, I'm guessing that cable companies aren't really "passing through" PSIP, but creating PSIP. If they're doing that, they could just as easily create PSIP mapping WAGA HD to PSIP 804, instead of PSIP 5.1.



JJ said:


> *TiVo* is currently using the excuse that Comcast does not publish the PSIP channel data. TiVo case number 10409849


What exactly did tivo say? Strange that this is in your "conclusions" section, not your "facts" section.



JJ said:


> *Comcast* would prefer that Clear QAM and PSIP remain a secret to protect thier profits by up-selling digital tiers and CableCARD rentals for DTV
> *TiVo* appears to be protecting thier Comcast relationship at the expense of thse of us who bought hardware and services directly


I don't see enough data to justify this conclusion based on the "facts" in your post. Maybe it's true, but you're gonna need to give me some more facts before I'll agree with you here.



JJ said:


> *If* Comcast were to someday 'break' PSIP I would certainly blame them and not TiVo for the problem


Tivo needs to decide how much it will cost to support QAM mapping based on how many of their users will come to your conclusion, vs how many people will call tivo when things don't work.



JJ said:


> Disconnect in the 'last mile' appears to be Tribune/TiVo choosing not to populate program data to the channel identificatons that already exist, and exactly how prohibitive would the cost (to Tribune) be to simply populate existing data (from OTA listings) into existing database fields?


Again, your conclusions are valid from your specific configuration, but the question for tivo is "how prohibitive would the cost be to simply populate existing data (from OTA listings) into existing database fields * only in the areas where that matches what the cable company is doing.*


----------



## ZeoTiVo

jccfin said:


> ZeoTivo, actually, like any other tech company, Tivo is in the business of making continual improvements to its product or else it becomes extinct. The fact that theyre slow to innovate and implement users wishes tells me that theyre not long for this world.


we will see. The MOXI box is out and can map QAM channels. I am not seeing a mass exodus over to MOXI nor have I seen an actual, I bought MOXI review yet. The uptake seems slow.


----------



## Zimm

So I have a scenario for you folks on this matter.

Comcast in my area has announced that they will be moving all the expanded basic cable channels to digital. In fact they are currently simulcasting the channels in digital already. There has been some question as to whether they are planning to encrypt the channels once they stop the analog channels. Until they are able to get an exemption (which they may not) they should be leaving these unencrypted. In the current state once this happens all those with TivoHD's will be required to get a CableCARD in order to have guide data for these channels. Along with this comes all the headaches associated with these devices.

If Tivo were to institute this feature we would be able to map the guide data to these QAM channels and would not have to change anything in our relationship with the cable company. Unfourtunately if this does not happen we would be forced to get CableCARD's and use them for something other than their designed purpose (channel mapping instead of security). We would also be forced to pay the fees associated with getting the cards beyond the initial one (~$7 each per month).

This situation (which seems likely to increase in frequency with the cable companies trying to free up bandwidth) would make this feature a much more useful tool than the current arguments (getting the local HD's to map).

I am sure some will poke holes in this but it is something to consider.


----------



## jccfin

ZeoTiVo said:


> we will see. The MOXI box is out and can map QAM channels. I am not seeing a mass exodus over to MOXI nor have I seen an actual, I bought MOXI review yet. The uptake seems slow.


The problem is that Moxi has its own set of problems.

People don't seem to understand that by making the Tivo a more flexible device, it helps every user. The converse would be the status quo where they're losing thousands of users every quarter until the company goes bankrupt.


----------



## SteveHC1

To enable manual QAM remapping of guide data to different channels would cost NOTHING - especially when compared to the cost of adding all of the new features that TiVo's added and which relatively few consumers use regularly. The ability to manually remap guide data to channels is fundamental to a TiVo unit's basic purpose. And therec are millions upon MILLIONS of cable subscribers who subscribe to only "Basic" or "Limited Basic" cable and who thus have their cable lines connected directly to their tvs' "cable-ready" HDTV tuners to avoid the cable box subscription fees and/or to simplify their lives in general.

The FACT of the matter is that TiVo fought to get their OWN dvrs back INTO the CABLE COMPANIES' set-top converter boxes - they even went into COURT over the issue!!! Get the picture now (no pun intended)?

TiVo's *refusal* to allow manual remapping of QAM guide data to user-specified channels is flat-out anti-consumerism. PERIOD. We either accept their crazy position or we don't... for this reason I for one will probably NOT purchase a new TiVo-branded HD dvr when my current one eventually goes belly-up (I bought a 3-yr. subscription up-front when I bought the unit, so it makes no sense for me to trash the dvr right now). I want a dvr that does what it's advertised to do, PERIOD.


----------



## SteveHC1

fallingwater said:


> Moxie's new DVR competition provides unscrambled QAM mapping, a FSI, and a pretty GUI. TiVo apparently is already taken notice of Moxi's GUI with the new _TiVo Search_ interface.
> 
> Does heat from these Forums actually result in sales? Stay tuned.


As far as far as I can tell, the only major deficiency of the MOXI dvr is that it doesn't accommodate or support OTA recording, at least not out-of-the-box. I'm hoping that by the time I'm ready to buy one (as soon as either my TiVo HD goes belly-up or my TiVo 3-yr. subscription runs out, whichever occurs first) they will have added a built-in ATSC tuner with an antenna coax input.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> Heat from the forum? Doubtful. But go back a second... Are you saying that the Moxi DVR supports QAM mapping to its program guide and recording capability? If you can post screen-shots of this it would be greatly appreciated.


Yes, the MOXI supports program guide data remapping to user-specified channels.

So does the my Hitachi plasma 1080i tv (!) which I bought YEARS ago and which has TV Guide Programming built into it.

This is NOT rocket science we're talking about. It's NOT new and it's NOT expensive, complicated or difficult to implement. TiVo has simply deliberately chosen to not incorporate it into its products.


----------



## SteveHC1

The "limited" or otherwise most-basic cable tier in each geographical monopoly is the most heavily REGULATED by state and/or local governments. Consequently, cable companies make very little off of "basic" subscribers. Cable companies therefor are looking for ways to get "basic" subscribers to switch to less regulated, more profitable tiers.

Their current strategy in this regard is to try to take advantage of current regulatory loopholes and analog-to-digital transition-related confusion by moving local digital and/or local HD channels to their "expanded basic" or "digital" or "HD" tiers - in other words, anything BUT keeping them in their most BASIC tiers.

As many if not most of the non-basic tiers' channels are scrambled/encrypted, one then becomes pretty much FORCED to go with a CableCard or set-top converter box - paying for the rental, of course, in addition to the higher cost of the higher tier.

Enter TiVo, the original mass market dvr creator. When cable companies saw the product, a few first incorporated TiVos into some of their converter boxes.

Then came along other manufacturers, who under-cutted TiVo in deals with cable companies and converter box manufacturers. Nation-wide, cable companies and box manufacturers went with other dvr manufacturers or designed their own to cut costs and avoid having to pay TiVo.

TiVo took the cable companies and converter box manufacturers to court, c/o patent infringements, etc. Via in-court and out-of-court settlements, TiVo essentially got itself back into the converter box dvr business.

End result: a) Cable companies are now being brought to court and/or government regulatory agencies in an effort to stop them from moving local digital and/or HD channels to higher-priced tiers, AND b) no support from TiVo for manual remapping of clear QAM channel guide data.

The only viable way that I see to force TiVo to change in this regard is to slap them with a class-action lawsuit complaining of their product not fully living up to their advertised claims. I on my own do not have the resources to do that, and the end result of such a lawsuit would probably be only that TiVo would have to give us some small credit on our subscription fees for (x) period of time along with having to modify their advertising and product labeling to some degree.

It'll probably be much easier - for me, at least - to simply go with a properly modified MOXI product next time around, as I do NOT foresee me EVER needing or wanting a higher-priced cable tier.

I take some small comfort in knowing (or at least believing) that given our extended economic recession, as more people discover that they can receive crystal-clear local digital and HD reception over-the-air, more people will drop their cable company subscriptions. I think the current, higher-than-expected demand for those federally-provided TV Digital Converter Box "Coupons" bears witness to my belief here. So I really hope that out-of-the-box support for OTA input on the MOXI units becomes a reality, and that the price on that product goes DOWN.

To those of you who are old enough: Remember when cable first became available? Its selling point was the improved reception, primarily of BROADCAST channels - we didn't have the plethora of "cable-only" channels that we now see (the *majority* of which, as far as I'm concerned, is nothing more than unbelievably profit-producing syndicated re-runs and other assorted junk that we *used* to call "filler" because such programming was ORIGINALLY used by BROADCAST channels as a cheap way to "fill up" their expanded broadcast day so they could take in more advertising dollars!).


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> Many of the messages are about how *unimportant* this issue is. Count those messages as -1, each.


Sorry, "Bicker." You want to "keep it real"? Then do the counting - you'll find at least 95% of the posts "pro-clear QAM remapping."

It's such a big deal, I think, because although we all basically love our TiVo's we feel we were to some extent deceived by the product's advertising and labeling. Then we find that there's a relatively easy "fix" that the company could implement if it wanted to but it deliberately chooses NOT to largely because of its strategy behind its relationships with other companies (particularly CABLE companies).

I think most TiVo owners/subscribers are a lot like Apple/Mac product users. We love the product, and when we see room for improvement or greater functionality we hope the company will respond. But in this case they DON'T - much like Apple's decision to stick with non-user replaceable batteries in their iPods.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> You may be wrong on both accounts. TiVo's obligations regarding all the issues you mentioned are not definitive, just because you choose to believe they are. I won't talk about the S1 issue or the Netflix issue, here, but rather keep on topic with the QAM mapping issue; there is nothing that prompts TiVo to pursue that feature until they determine that it would provide them a sufficient ROI. Nothing.


- Yes there is. A class-action lawsuit complaining about false advertising. But that would STILL provide no guarantee that TiVo would settle by providing clear QAM remapping capability if it doesn't want to.


----------



## SteveHC1

- In my previous posts, when I referred to dvrs in cable companies' set-top boxes I should have referred to SATELLITE companies' set-top boxes as well.

Thought I'd mention this before BICKER caught it... ;-)


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> The tivo website is clear, cable cards are required for digital cable service. I did a google search. An early S3 ad, Television Week 9/4/06, specifically says two cable cards are required to record two HD channels.
> 
> I don't recall ever seeing anything from tivo (press release, ad, box wording) that didn't mention cable cards. I don't recall ever seeing anything that promised any digital service without cable cards.
> 
> I understand some users would like QAM mapping. Tivo might come up with a solution BUT there isn't any way to justify DELIBERATELY MAKING UP FACTS to support our position


- Sorry, but I DID. NO WHERE did I find on the product labeling (outer box) or non-electronic advertising for my TiVo HD that it said that a CableCard was *required* for cable company - provided digital or HD programming, only for "premium" (scrambled/encrypted) channels. And when I CALLED TiVo to ensure that it would function as advertised WITHOUT a cablecard I was assured that it would - there was NO mention of its inability to auto record clear QAM channels' programming from guide data without a cablecard. NONE.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> I'll submit the only poster in this thread that has a right to complain about language on the box is markens . Tivo (on the box) doesn't say cable cards are always required for digital channels. A customer in a system that doesn't use any type of conditional access could reasonably expect tivo would work in a system that not only doesn't offer cable cards but doesn't even use STB.
> 
> The web site language indicates cable cards are required for digital channels. I'll speculate that at one time tivo was going to support some kind of QAM mapping but later decided it wasn't worth it.
> 
> The language on the box is incorrect. Cable card *are* required for digital channels. Tivo is incorrectly using the word possible.


- Well then you can add me and probably many others to the "list" that currently consists of only "markens" ;-)

At any rate, no, cablecards are NOT required for [all] "digital channels," only 
(a) for the reception of *encrypted* digital channels and (b) the ability to auto program recording (from the guide data) of programs on clear QAM channels. Furthermore, (b) was NOT specified on the product's labeling when I purchased it, nor was I informed of it when I called TiVo prior to my purchase.

This is NOT a complicated issue folks!


----------



## bicker

Zimm said:


> Comcast in my area has announced that they will be moving all the expanded basic cable channels to digital. In fact they are currently simulcasting the channels in digital already. There has been some question as to whether they are planning to encrypt the channels once they stop the analog channels. Until they are able to get an exemption (which they may not) they should be leaving these unencrypted.


No exemption is necessary, according to the law.

The only point you made in the rest of your message was that you didn't like having to deal with CableCARDs. That's a shame, but that's the authorized and supported method.



jccfin said:


> The problem is that Moxi has its own set of problems.


And your job as consumer is to choose the product that serves your needs the best, not whine about the fact that no one is making things exactly they way you want them to be made, for a price of your own personal choosing.



jccfin said:


> People don't seem to understand that by making the Tivo a more flexible device, it helps every user.


TiVo making a more robust device helps every user, more. TiVo making a more reliable device helps every user, more.

Furthermore, TiVo's first obligation is to its owners, not it subscribers. So adding new fee-based services perhaps helps the owners more. It isn't all about us.



jccfin said:


> The converse would be the status quo where they're losing thousands of users every quarter until the company goes bankrupt.


Whoa! Quantum leap, with no foundation for your assertion whatsoever. What helps "every user" (an assertion that you haven't proven, by the way), doesn't necessarily translate into any significant amount of additional revenue, and doesn't necessarily translate into any significant amount of additional profit. I'll let you project your own personal proclivities a little bit, and grant that it surely won't hurt subscribers if they added this feature, but don't you for one minute try to assert that adding this feature is the best investment TiVo can make with its development dollars. You've not demonstrated that you are qualified to make that determination; you don't have access to the data to make that determination; and your consumerist bias is so incredibly thick that there is no reason to think that even if you were qualified and even if you had access to the necessary data to make that determination, that you would do so objectively, based on reason and within the context of the fiduciary responsibilities owed to the owners.



SteveHC1 said:


> To enable manual QAM remapping of guide data to different channels would cost NOTHING


Bull.



SteveHC1 said:


> especially when compared to the cost of adding all of the new features that TiVo's added and which relatively few consumers use regularly.


Post proof. What you fail to understand is that many of the features that TiVo has added recently actually raise revenues. Profit is revenue minus expense. If all you have is expense, for something, then it is *not* profitable.











SteveHC1 said:


> TiVo's *refusal* to allow manual remapping of QAM guide data to user-specified channels is flat-out anti-consumerism.


You say that as if consumerism is a right. It isn't. It is a cancer. Entitlement mentality is a major social ill. You seem to forget that the marketplace is a two way street. It doesn't exist to serve just consumers. The marketplace needs to serve both consumers and suppliers, and it does so by hinging transactions based on an agreement satisfactory to *both* sides. If either side doesn't like the conditions, then the two sides _walk away_ -- the supplier doesn't get the sale, and the consumer doesn't get the product or service. If you didn't like the terms and conditions for TiVo DVRs and the TiVo service, then you should have walked away. Don't blame TiVo, or anything else, for that matter, for your failure to fulfill your responsibility to yourself.



SteveHC1 said:


> The "limited" or otherwise most-basic cable tier in each geographical monopoly is the most heavily REGULATED by state and/or local governments. Consequently, cable companies make very little off of "basic" subscribers.


Indeed, FWIR the rate is sometimes less than cost-of-service (with the cable company compensated by the franchising authority with more lenient regulatory conditions otherwise, or else the cable company just bumps up other, unregulated fees, to compensate -- to subsidize the limited basic service).



SteveHC1 said:


> Cable companies therefor are looking for ways to get "basic" subscribers to switch to less regulated, more profitable tiers.


So far, I don't know of anywhere where subscribers of limited basic service have to have to worry about this. Not even in Comcast's "all-digital" system in Chicago -- analog service is still provided in-the-clear. And in many places, that will be the case through 2012. It is going to slowly go away though, and they will be switching to true all-digital. When they do so, the cost of any box necessary to receive limited basic service will *still* be regulated by the franchising authority. So it is still your elected representatives or their appointees deciding how much this will cost you, not the cable company, not TiVo.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> Sorry, "Bicker." You want to "keep it real"? Then do the counting


I don't have to. TiVo has market research to do only counting that actually matters.



SteveHC1 said:


> you'll find at least 95% of the posts "pro-clear QAM remapping."


As far as I know, there are no "anti-clear QAM remapping" people. The two groups in this thread are those attacking TiVo because TiVo isn't giving them what they want, and those defending TiVo for focusing on other things first. And those attacking TiVo are mostly the same few people, and those defending TiVo are the same few people.



SteveHC1 said:


> I think most TiVo owners/subscribers are a lot like Apple/Mac product users. We love the product, and when we see room for improvement or greater functionality we hope the company will respond. But in this case they DON'T - much like Apple's decision to stick with non-user replaceable batteries in their iPods.


What you are describing is people taking business too personally. It's not a good thing. Hopefully, you'll recognize that you're causing your own dissatisfaction and disappointment. What's really a shame is that you are also working very hard to spread such dissatisfaction and disappointment based on unfounded expectations onto others. Entitlement mentality is not healthy.


----------



## ciper

Although it starts out as a mess I believe this thread is worth reading if you are interested in clear QAM channels

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413813


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> I don't have to. TiVo has market research to do only counting that actually matters.
> 
> As far as I know, there are no "anti-clear QAM remapping" people. The two groups in this thread are those attacking TiVo because TiVo isn't giving them what they want, and those defending TiVo for focusing on other things first. And those attacking TiVo are mostly the same few people, and those defending TiVo are the same few people.
> 
> What you are describing is people taking business too personally. It's not a good thing. Hopefully, you'll recognize that you're causing your own dissatisfaction and disappointment. What's really a shame is that you are also working very hard to spread such dissatisfaction and disappointment based on unfounded expectations onto others. Entitlement mentality is not healthy.


- WHY in God's name are you ON this thread" Bicker"? Just to argue with the rest of us? Give it a rest, man! If you don't see any need for or have no interest in the thread's SUBJECT, or if you wish to simply make lame attempts to criticize or insult others, I'm sure there must be some thread or topic elsewhere that may better suite your needs.


----------



## bicker

I'm on this thread because I have interests with regard to what is being discussed that I want to see represented in the discussion.

Why are you on this thread? Just to harass me? If you don't like reading my messages, then put me on your Ignore list.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> I'm on this thread because I have interests with regard to what is being discussed that I want to see represented in the discussion.
> 
> Why are you on this thread? Just to harass me? If you don't like reading my messages, then put me on your Ignore list.


- Will do. Thanks for the advice.


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> Although it starts out as a mess I believe this thread is worth reading if you are interested in clear QAM channels
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413813


I checked out the thread. The participants discuss a known, verifiable and duplicated problem with TiVo's ability to schedule manual recordings on channels for which there is no Guide data. I posted a detailed "work-around" procedure that has worked for me. It's a royal PIA, but at least for me it works and will hopefully work for others as well.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> It's such a big deal, I think, because although we all basically love our TiVo's we feel we were to some extent deceived by the product's advertising and labeling.


 how many do you think are in this 'we"


> Then we find that there's a relatively easy "fix" that the company could implement if it wanted to


going further out on the limb here. It is not a relatively easy fix for a company that must support anything it includes in the product. Even hackers admit the mapping can be done but the hard part is that the hack has to be redone as the mapping changes. So TiVo introduces a manual mapping that will have a high probability of season passes failing at some point!? Not very easy anymore is it?


> but it deliberately chooses NOT to largely because of its strategy behind its relationships with other companies (particularly CABLE companies).


 and this is why posters come down on you - for spouting off about conspiracies you have no proof or clue about and thinking a class action lawsuit over wording on the box is your answer versus going after the real problem of the FCC not enforcing the standards.

basically this thread started off orderly with a call to write in and express interest but has now degenerated into a thread finding all the evil reasons for something that at the end of the day is not TiVo inc's real target market.


----------



## lew

The box says cable cards may be required, tivos website says cable cards *are required* for digital stations.

Markens was the only poster who had a cable system *that doesn't use cable cards* IF your cable system uses cable cards you had no right to assume you'd be able to use your tivo without cable cards.

Doesn't tivo offer a 30 day money back guarantee? I'd hope customers would use that option if the they're unable to get their tivo to work with their system.

*This will never happen* but it's a shame tivo can't just sell us a cable card for $50. Call to activate tivo and tivo will take care of activating the cable card with our cable system.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Well then you can add me and probably many others to the "list" that currently consists of only "markens" ;-)
> 
> At any rate, no, cablecards are NOT required for [all] "digital channels," only
> (a) for the reception of *encrypted* digital channels and (b) the ability to auto program recording (from the guide data) of programs on clear QAM channels. Furthermore, (b) was NOT specified on the product's labeling when I purchased it, nor was I informed of it when I called TiVo prior to my purchase.
> 
> This is NOT a complicated issue folks!


----------



## vstone

Roderigo said:


> ... Also, tivo is required to discover the PSIP data based on the cablecard requirements.
> ...[/b]


This is very interesting, but I don't understand why this would be a requirement since cable companies don't use the PSIP tables and often don't even populate them correctly, completely, or at all.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> ...
> TiVo's *refusal* to allow manual remapping of QAM guide data to user-specified channels is flat-out anti-consumerism. PERIOD.
> ...


 They don't refuse to allow it, they just don't themselves. Even if they could and did somehow refuse, it would not necessarily indicate anti-consumerism. They allow users nto do a great deal of stuff (that they don't directly support) without getting excited about it.


----------



## Zimm

bicker said:


> No exemption is necessary, according to the law.
> 
> The only point you made in the rest of your message was that you didn't like having to deal with CableCARDs. That's a shame, but that's the authorized and supported method.


How do you figure? The separable security law requires MSO's to use a separtable security method (i.e. CableCARD's) in all new boxes it distributes. The required boxes for the new expanded basic channels they are sending out would need to include CableCARD's if they are to be in compliance with this law. As far as has been experienced, these do NOT have them. This means that the cable company willl either violate the separable security law or leave the channels unencrypted.

In either case, my point that you so easily dismiss is that if these channels are left unencrypted we would still be forced to get (and pay for) CableCARD's to maintain our current level of service. If the Tivo was capable of mapping to the new channel locations we would avoid this.


----------



## lew

Cable companies generally do a good job finding "loopholes" and getting any exemptions they need.

FiOS is exempt from the requirement. Cablevision is using a separable security method that pre-dates cable cards and they are essentially exempt.

I'm sure Comcast has a way to work around the requirement.

I suspect cable systems would be able to at least get exemptions for the boxes they're giving out for free.



Zimm said:


> How do you figure? The separable security law requires MSO's to use a separtable security method (i.e. CableCARD's) in all new boxes it distributes. The required boxes for the new expanded basic channels they are sending out would need to include CableCARD's if they are to be in compliance with this law. As far as has been experienced, these do NOT have them. This means that the cable company willl either violate the separable security law or leave the channels unencrypted.
> 
> In either case, my point that you so easily dismiss is that if these channels are left unencrypted we would still be forced to get (and pay for) CableCARD's to maintain our current level of service. If the Tivo was capable of mapping to the new channel locations we would avoid this.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> how many do you think are in this 'we"
> going further out on the limb here. It is not a relatively easy fix for a company that must support anything it includes in the product. Even hackers admit the mapping can be done but the hard part is that the hack has to be redone as the mapping changes. So TiVo introduces a manual mapping that will have a high probability of season passes failing at some point!? Not very easy anymore is it?
> and this is why posters come down on you - for spouting off about conspiracies you have no proof or clue about and thinking a class action lawsuit over wording on the box is your answer versus going after the real problem of the FCC not enforcing the standards.
> 
> basically this thread started off orderly with a call to write in and express interest but has now degenerated into a thread finding all the evil reasons for something that at the end of the day is not TiVo inc's real target market.


Judging from my reviewing not just the postings in this thread but many, many others - both on this website and TiVo's own - I'd say the number of people in my "we" is VERY high.

As far as the "difficulty" of enabling of re-mapping Guide data to user-specified channels, I KNOW it can be done because it IS done in other tv products by other manufacturers (and not just in the MOXI product) and it seems to work FLAWLESSLY. All of the newer features that TiVo has recently introduced are FAR more difficult and complex to achieve than what we all have been asking for.

As far as my "conspiracy" ideas, etc. - I DO know what I speak of. I've spoken at length with both TiVo staff as well as others in the field, and have kept abreast of corporate maneuverings in this area for quite a long time now.

I believe I clearly stated that even a lawsuit would not produce the desired result, although others in other forums have suggested this as a possible action.

Even if the FCC DID go after those cable companies who don't accurately transmit the proper data regarding their clear QAM channel transmissions, that would not solve the problem. Many TiVo subscribers have very clearly documented that even when their company HAS properly relayed the data they are STILL unable to get their TiVo to schedule Season Passes to programs on these clear QAM channels because of TiVo's functioning being tied too tightly - almost exclusively - to Tribune's Guide data, which is based entirely on whatever the cable companies choose to share with Tribune - and this the FCC has absolutely NO jurisdiction over that I am aware of. I suspect a LARGE part of the problem is in the contractual relationship between TiVo and Tribune... if this is the case then shouldn't TiVo switch from Tribune to TV Guide as the provider of its guide data??? THEY don't seem to have a problem with remapping, for whatever reason.

BTW - The only poster that I know of who has "come down" on me over this stuff is "Bicker" - and from what I've read of his posts in response to OTHER posters, he consistently does the same to just about EVERYONE. Maybe that's why his "handle" IS "Bicker"? ;-)

Anyway, I do indeed wish the letter-writing campaign would succeed. But those who have tried have not succeeded. TiVo's response to us has NOT been that user re-mapping of clear QAM channels' program data would be too difficult to implement; on the contrary, their response has consistently been that they've made the decision not to pursue it for corporate strategy reasons AND that they have no inclination to reconsider - they have actually SAID this. Instead they are choosing a line of product development that competes with an ever-growing number of other companies' products, very soon to include even the television manufacturers themselves... who by the way are beginning to produce tv's that connect directly to home networks and who are entering into contractual relationships DIRECTLY with broadcasters, streaming and download-to-storage video licensees, etc. I think that if TiVo would at least get rid of the bugs in their software and enable user-defined channel remapping - instead of working on things like being able to order Dominos Pizza from a TiVo menu, they would be more likely to at least "hold their own" in the face of more and more competition.


----------



## jrm01

Just a simple question.

If somehow I were able to convince my local Comcast unit to provide guide info to Tribune Media Services for the clear-QAM channels as part of the Comcast Basic lineup would TiVo then automatically have the guide data. Of course this would require them to provide this for channel 2-1 (clear-QAM) as well as 208 (the mapped channel).

I know that this would probably be a losing battle, but if somehow I managed to do it, would it work?

I did get them to provide proper PSIP and mapping to OTA-equivalent channel numbers last year by filing a complaint with the FCC and having a joint meeting with them and the Local Franchise Authority. Maybe I'm ready for another battle.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> The box says cable cards may be required, tivos website says cable cards *are required* for digital stations.
> 
> Markens was the only poster who had a cable system *that doesn't use cable cards* IF your cable system uses cable cards you had no right to assume you'd be able to use your tivo without cable cards.
> 
> Doesn't tivo offer a 30 day money back guarantee? I'd hope customers would use that option if the they're unable to get their tivo to work with their system.
> 
> *This will never happen* but it's a shame tivo can't just sell us a cable card for $50. Call to activate tivo and tivo will take care of activating the cable card with our cable system.


Well *I* certainly had the right to assume that my TiVo HD would work with MY local cable system on all "basic" channels WITHOUT a cablecard! TiVo TOLD me it would! And they were *partially* correct, just "neglected" to tell me - and everyone else in this situation, as far as I can tell - that their product does not support Season Pass functionality on clear QAM channels. As a result, I FULLY expected user-defined channel remapping, or at LEAST the ability to manually schedule repeat recordings without (a) the pretty-well documented bugs in their software that have made this so difficult to do for so many people, and (b) the ability to manually enter a TITLE for such recordings. Maybe we'll at least get THAT in a future software revision - TiVo acknowledges that at least THAT is a frequently-sighted consumer request.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> They don't refuse to allow it, they just don't themselves. Even if they could and did somehow refuse, it would not necessarily indicate anti-consumerism. They allow users nto do a great deal of stuff (that they don't directly support) without getting excited about it.


Please see a subsequent post of mine. TiVo's been pretty clear that it was a corporate strategy type of decision as opposed to it being a feature too difficult to incorporate into their product. Unfortunately.


----------



## JWThiers

jccfin said:


> ZeoTivo, actually, like any other tech company, Tivo is in the business of making continual improvements to its product or else it becomes extinct. The fact that theyre slow to innovate and implement users wishes tells me that theyre not long for this world. Making improvements means that youre move likely to attract more people who would be interested in your products because it now has some functionality that the end user wants. Youre enlarging the subset of people youre useful to.
> 
> Again, implementing stupid things like Dominos before more useful features like QAM mapping, theyre shooting themselves in the foot.


Not getting into whether QAM mapping is more import than the Dominoes Crapplet, but the Crapplet gets them advertising money from Dominoes.


----------



## SteveHC1

jrm01 said:


> Just a simple question.
> 
> If somehow I were able to convince my local Comcast unit to provide guide info to Tribune Media Services for the clear-QAM channels as part of the Comcast Basic lineup would TiVo then automatically have the guide data. Of course this would require them to provide this for channel 2-1 (clear-QAM) as well as 208 (the mapped channel).
> 
> I know that this would probably be a losing battle, but if somehow I managed to do it, would it work?
> 
> I did get them to provide proper PSIP and mapping to OTA-equivalent channel numbers last year by filing a complaint with the FCC and having a joint meeting with them and the Local Franchise Authority. Maybe I'm ready for another battle.


Yes, it WOULD work. And if your efforts with your local cable company to provide Tribune with updated clear QAM channel/programming data DO succeed, be prepared to start talking to a LOT of people about it as this has been a long-standing issue for many years now and the cable companies have successfully avoided having to announce their clear QAM channel assignments and reassignments throughout.


----------



## lew

SteveHC1 said:


> Well *I* certainly had the right to assume that my TiVo HD would work with MY local cable system on all "basic" channels WITHOUT a cablecard! TiVo TOLD me it would! And they were *partially* correct, just "neglected" to tell me - and everyone else in this situation, as far as I can tell - that their product does not support Season Pass functionality on clear QAM channels. As a result, I FULLY expected user-defined channel remapping, or at LEAST the ability to manually schedule repeat recordings without (a) the pretty-well documented bugs in their software that have made this so difficult to do for so many people, and (b) the ability to manually enter a TITLE for such recordings. Maybe we'll at least get THAT in a future software revision - TiVo acknowledges that at least THAT is a frequently-sighted consumer request.


*Tivo said no such thing.* From tivo's website:


> HD TiVo DVRs have two built-in digital tuners but require CableCARD(s) to tune digital cable channels. Without CableCARDs, an HD TiVo DVR can tune only basic cable channels that are broadcast with an analog signal.


Seems clear to me.

Even the box says cable cards may be required. It's not tivo's fault you wrongly assumed cable cards wouldn't be required for clear QAM stations. The few (one?) poster(s) who is in a cable system that doesn't use cable cards for any customers, all stations in the clear, has a point.

The quality of the Tribune guide data is one of the reasons why tivo is a better DVR then the FiOS DVR. Assuming you're correct regarding the issue with Tribune guide data tivo will never implement QAM mapping.

Maybe the best anyone can hope for is a mapping to the OTA lineup for broadcast stations.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> *Tivo said no such thing.* From tivo's website:
> 
> Seems clear to me.
> 
> Even the box says cable cards may be required. It's not tivo's fault you wrongly assumed cable cards wouldn't be required for clear QAM stations. The few (one?) poster(s) who is in a cable system that doesn't use cable cards for any customers, all stations in the clear, has a point.
> 
> The quality of the Tribune guide data is one of the reasons why tivo is a better DVR then the FiOS DVR. Assuming you're correct regarding the issue with Tribune guide data tivo will never implement QAM mapping.
> 
> Maybe the best anyone can hope for is a mapping to the OTA lineup for broadcast stations.


TiVo DID tell me that it would work - verbally, over the phone. That and their on-the-box labeling is what's most significant legally. People buying the product from an in-store display are not likely to first read through pages upon pages on a website first i a hunt for all of their online-only fine print! But it's a moot point.

As far as mapping to OTA lineups, I believe THAT data TiVo's Guide gets from Tribune as well. Unfortunately.


----------



## SteveHC1

Zimm said:


> ...In either case, my point that you so easily dismiss is that if these channels are left unencrypted we would still be forced to get (and pay for) CableCARD's to maintain our current level of service. If the Tivo was capable of mapping to the new channel locations we would avoid this.


- My point EXACTLY.


----------



## Zimm

lew said:


> Cable companies generally do a good job finding "loopholes" and getting any exemptions they need.
> 
> FiOS is exempt from the requirement. Cablevision is using a separable security method that pre-dates cable cards and they are essentially exempt.
> 
> I'm sure Comcast has a way to work around the requirement.
> 
> I suspect cable systems would be able to at least get exemptions for the boxes they're giving out for free.


Okay, let's grant that then. It's slimy but we are talking about cable companies here...

My point still remains, if these channels are left unencrypted this feature would become very much more useful. From my understanding Comcast has already cut over to digital for the expanded basic channels in Portland and is not encrypting them.


----------



## lew

SteveHC1 said:


> TiVo DID tell me that it would work - verbally, over the phone. That and their on-the-box labeling is what's most significant legally. People buying the product from an in-store display are not likely to first read through pages upon pages on a website first i a hunt for all of their online-only fine print! But it's a moot point.
> 
> As far as mapping to OTA lineups, I believe THAT data TiVo's Guide gets from Tribune as well. Unfortunately.


The on box labeling says cable cards may be required. I understand you called and got bad information. I think you have grounds to request a refund. You set up the tivo, read the manual and discovered the rep on the phone gave your wrong information. *Did you ask for a refund? *

Cable cards work. I can understand tivo not wanting to spend money on a system that doesn't work as well.

Maybe posters should spend some time trying to get better cable card pricing from their cable company.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> The on box labeling says cable cards may be required. I understand you called and got bad information. I think you have grounds to request a refund. You set up the tivo, read the manual and discovered the rep on the phone gave your wrong information. *Did you ask for a refund? *
> 
> Cable cards work. I can understand tivo not wanting to spend money on a system that doesn't work as well.
> 
> Maybe posters should spend some time trying to get better cable card pricing from their cable company.


- Right now I'm renting a condo, but my plan is to buy a house within 9 months, invest in a good antenna, dump cable altogether and get whatever else I need or want from TiVo's Internet-based services. As TiVo was (and I believe still IS) the only HD dvr that fully supports OTA recording with Season Pass-like capability I decided to not go for a refund. Also, when I bought the TiVo unit cable companies were still having tremendous difficulties with their then-new cablecard equipment; often you couldn't even GET a cablecard without having to wait for weeks for one, many that were out there at the time were defective and needed to be replaced, and once it came in the installers and c.o. tech. staff weren't proficient enough to get them working correctly - and there was no end in sight to the problems. So at the time it just seemed to me that cablecards just weren't worth hassling with, especially given that they were only being distributed in my area with a rental fee IN ADDITION to requiring subscription to much higher-priced tiers.

As you might have guessed, I'm no fan of cable companies.


----------



## fallingwater

SteveHC1 said:


> Yes, the MOXI supports program guide data remapping to user-specified channels.
> 
> So does the my Hitachi plasma 1080i tv (!) which I bought YEARS ago and which has TV Guide Programming built into it.
> 
> This is NOT rocket science we're talking about. It's NOT new and it's NOT expensive, complicated or difficult to implement. TiVo has simply deliberately chosen to not incorporate it into its products.


At this point it's probably best to ignore Moxi as QAM mapping competition for TiVo because Moxi is available in such limited numbers. 
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GQ8MT8/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=

Digeo doesn't inspire great confidence. Using the only contact link Digeo provides just stalled out when I tried to send them a message.
http://www.digeo.com/culture_contact.jsp

Year old news, yet...
http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/15/digeo-lays-off-half-of-its-employees-replaces-ceo/

----

OTOH, digitally sourced TVGOS provides manual QAM mapping in a simple easy to use fashion which requires that a user remap if necessary to maintain accuracy. TVGOS is included in the price of the component providing it and isn't burdened with the cost of maintaining customer call centers.

TVGOS works well enough in my area that I've replaced a HDTiVo with a discontinued Sony hi-def DVR. Giving up the second tuner is a fair tradeoff for saving $5.20 monthly on the cable bill. (As a bonus, manually mapping unscrambled QAM in my area provides several channels not available when CableCARDS do the mapping, including a second PBS station.)

Many people are having to deal with financial shortcomings at this time. Offering a system which can save money on TV viewers' cable bills may be more competitive than offering pizza on a whim. Actually, although TiVo's pizza application is new, the concept of ordering pizza on a whim isn't:

*Alexander Graham Bell's notebook entry of 10 March 1876 describes his successful experiment with the telephone. Speaking through the instrument to his assistant, Thomas A. Watson, Bell utters these famous first words, "Mr. Watson -- come here -- I want to see you. And pick up a pizza on the way, please!"*


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> The tivo website is clear, cable cards are required for digital cable service. I did a google search. An early S3 ad, Television Week 9/4/06, specifically says two cable cards are required to record two HD channels.
> 
> I don't recall ever seeing anything from tivo (press release, ad, box wording) that didn't mention cable cards. I don't recall ever seeing anything that promised any digital service without cable cards.
> 
> I understand some users would like QAM mapping. Tivo might come up with a solution BUT there isn't any way to justify DELIBERATELY MAKING UP FACTS to support our position


You quote TiVo's website accurately. Unfortunately what TiVo's website states isn't true.

HDTiVo receives and records unscrambled QAM cable channels fine without requiring a CableCARD, just can't provide TiVo's EPG data for searches and automatic recordings.

Here's SteveHC1's workaround in the Coffee House thread _Recording on a Tivo with no guide data_ to enable manual recordings in case TiVo's latest s/w causes problems.
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7013156#post7013156


----------



## SteveHC1

fallingwater said:


> At this point it's probably best to ignore Moxi as QAM mapping competition for TiVo because Moxi is available in such limited numbers.
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GQ8MT8/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=
> 
> Digeo doesn't inspire great confidence. Using the only contact link Digeo provides just stalled out when I tried to send them a message.
> http://www.digeo.com/culture_contact.jsp
> 
> Year old news, yet...
> http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/15/digeo-lays-off-half-of-its-employees-replaces-ceo/


- Well now THAT'S a bummer! Less competition usually results in less incentive to improve one's product... :-(



fallingwater said:


> OTOH, digitally sourced TVGOS provides manual QAM mapping in a simple easy to use fashion which requires that a user remap if necessary to maintain accuracy. TVGOS is included in the price of the component providing it and isn't burdened with the cost of maintaining customer call centers.
> 
> TVGOS works well enough in my area that I've replaced a HDTiVo with a discontinued Sony hi-def DVR. Giving up the second tuner is a fair tradeoff for saving $5.20 monthly on the cable bill. (As a bonus, manually mapping unscrambled QAM in my area provides several channels not available when CableCARDS do the mapping, including a second PBS station.)
> 
> Many people are having to deal with financial shortcomings at this time. Offering a system which can save money on TV viewers' cable bills may be more competitive than offering pizza on a whim.


- I certainly do agree with you on this stuff about the TV Guide "On Screen Guide." On my Hitachi set I have never received erroneous guide data, and its remapping feature has proven (at least to me) to be both simple to use and pretty much flawless in its execution. Also, its data stream is actually BROADCASTED along with stations' OTA signals, so you're not dependent on an iInternet connection for its receipt. Most if not all cable companies do transmit the data stream, I assume it's simply retransmitted along with local broadcast channels' signals, but it IS slower in transmission speed - at least when received OTA - than is Tribune's Internet-based delivery system (thus TV manufacturers that have it built into their sets recommend that you leave the set turned OFF overnight at least once in awhile to give it enough time to receive the whole set of data).


----------



## vstone

CFR only requires unencrypted signals for the basic tier, often call broacast basic - i.e., OTA channels plus whatever else they feel like throwing in there or is required locally - shopping channels, local govt access, CSPAN, etc. We even had WSN until recently.

Extended basic channels do not fall into this category, whether analog or digital, and can be encrypted to whatever extent the cable companies like. Many of the unencrypted HD cable channels are likely (IMO) to be encrypted as corresponding analog channels are shut down.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> CFR only requires unencrypted signals for the basic tier, often call broacast basic - i.e., OTA channels plus whatever else they feel like throwing in there or is required locally - shopping channels, local govt access, CSPAN, etc. We even had WSN until recently.
> 
> Extended basic channels do not fall into this category, whether analog or digital, and can be encrypted to whatever extent the cable companies like. Many of the unencrypted HD cable channels are likely (IMO) to be encrypted as corresponding analog channels are shut down.


- Correct. Some cable companies have already started transferring local basic channels to higher-priced tiers (under digital transmission), and THIS is what the cable companies are currently being brought to court and regulatory agencies over, in an attempt to get them to stop and require them to be transmitted unencrypted as they were under analog transmission. I am hopeful regarding the outcome.


----------



## vstone

Programming data is part of the OTA data stream and cable companies are required to relay the next 12 hours (I think) or so of data if they receive it. It should be there if the cable comp. receives the signal OTA. It the signal is received via fiber optic, there are no requirements for the data stream to include this. If the data stream doesn't include this, there is no requirement for the cable comp to generate it. I very seriously doubt if Tivo even looks for this data, much less uses it since they make money by selling you the data.

If your TV is slow in getting programming data, it may be that it depends on the old TV Guide system where the data was transferred via the analog vertical blanking interval on PBS stations or the Discovery channel. I sincerely hope this isn't the case. I don't believe there is an equivalent to analog VBI on digital signals.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - Correct. Some cable companies have already started transferring local basic channels to higher-priced tiers (under digital transmission), and THIS is what the cable companies are currently being brought to court and regulatory agencies over, in an attempt to get them to stop and require them to be transmitted unencrypted as they were under analog transmission. I am hopeful regarding the outcome.


I am not hopeful that our city will do a d*** thing about this or anything else. Their only concern seems to be that as rates rise, so do the fees based on gross receipts.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> I am not hopeful that our city will do a d*** thing about this or anything else. Their only concern seems to be that as rates rise, so do the fees based on gross receipts.


Often in these types of situations a state's Attorney General's office will pick up the ball, and many times they'll try to band together with other states' AG's, probably in an effort to win citizens' votes in their next election. I HOPE this turns out to be the case with THIS issue, THAT'S for sure! A VERY large swath of the country's population cannot afford anything BEYOND basic cable.

As for the TV Guide OTA program guide, I really hope it does not simply disappear along with analog tv. That would be a real shame. It has been a reallygreat public service for quite a few years now, and like I said before, competition is always good for the consumer - even when it concerns something as trivial-sounding as transmitted guide data sources.


----------



## bicker

Zimm said:


> How do you figure?


I went back to your original message and in neither message was there any indication that you were talking about DTAs. They do not need an exemption if they're using STBs with CCs.



Zimm said:


> If the Tivo was capable of mapping to the new channel locations we would avoid this.


Of course, but it isn't really that important, AFAIC. I'd rather TiVo focus on improving robustness and reliability first, and then get to this after that.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> Judging from my reviewing not just the postings in this thread but many, many others - both on this website and TiVo's own - I'd say the number of people in my "we" is VERY high.


I disagree. I think a far more reliable indicator is TiVo's actions. The fact that they're not doing what you want them to indicates to me that their market research indicates that few subscribers are so highly motivated by this feature to raise it in the priority list higher than the other things that they're doing and planning to do instead, if any.

I think you're making a lot of assertions of fact substantiated only by your claim that you have special knowledge -- a claim I simply do not believe. Sorry.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> lew said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Did you ask for a refund? *
> 
> 
> 
> - Right now I'm renting a condo, but my plan is to buy a house within 9 months, invest in a good antenna, dump cable altogether and get whatever else I need or want from TiVo's Internet-based services. As TiVo was (and I believe still IS) the only HD dvr that fully supports OTA recording with Season Pass-like capability I decided to not go for a refund. Also, when I bought the TiVo unit cable companies were still having tremendous difficulties with their then-new cablecard equipment; often you couldn't even GET a cablecard without having to wait for weeks for one, many that were out there at the time were defective and needed to be replaced, and once it came in the installers and c.o. tech. staff weren't proficient enough to get them working correctly - and there was no end in sight to the problems. So at the time it just seemed to me that cablecards just weren't worth hassling with, especially given that they were only being distributed in my area with a rental fee IN ADDITION to requiring subscription to much higher-priced tiers.
> 
> As you might have guessed, I'm no fan of cable companies.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer the question.


----------



## lew

vstone said:


> Programming data is part of the OTA data stream and cable companies are required to relay the next 12 hours (I think) or so of data if they receive it. It should be there if the cable comp. receives the signal OTA. It the signal is received via fiber optic, there are no requirements for the data stream to include this. If the data stream doesn't include this, there is no requirement for the cable comp to generate it. I very seriously doubt if Tivo even looks for this data, much less *uses it since they make money by selling you the data*.


 Tivo charges a subscription fee, they don't charge for just guide data. Go to any of the FiOS DVR threads. The Tribune guide data is excellent.



bicker said:


> I disagree. I think a far more reliable indicator is TiVo's actions. The fact that they're not doing what you want them to indicates to me that their market research indicates that few subscribers are so highly motivated by this feature to raise it in the priority list higher than the other things that they're doing and planning to do instead, if any.
> 
> I think you're making a lot of assertions of fact substantiated only by your claim that you have special knowledge -- a claim I simply do not believe. Sorry.


I have a different prospective, still speculation. I think it shows the reliability and stability of QAM mapping is very suspect. I'll speculate handling the phone calls when the first indication of a need to remap is missed shows is a big issue.

A previous poster said cable systems that get the broadcast stations via fiber optic (instead of OTA) may not have PSIP data. We know FiOS has issues correctly handling PSIP data.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> BTW - The only poster that I know of who has "come down" on me over this stuff is "Bicker" - and from what I've read of his posts in response to OTHER posters, he consistently does the same to just about EVERYONE. Maybe that's why his "handle" IS "Bicker"? ;-)


oh bicker and I go way back. He came on the forum around the time of cable card coming about and did the same kind of posting against cable companies being forced to provide cable cards. I disagreed with him and we did indeed go for many rounds over that. For a while I was accusing him of being a cable company shill, it became that heated.

but he was consistent and had some logic behind his argument and never resorted to any flaming. On other topics we have agreed, like QAM mapping, and other times disagreed. I do think he has a level of "arguing for argument's sake" but I have not seen him take a side he does not agree with just to argue.
I will say this - as often as you want to post a rebuttal or other facts he will be there to reply in kind and not tire of it. This could go another 20 pages.

I, myself, think you have a very tenuous argument and it is heavily biased by your dislike of cable and large companies in general. I have rebutted what I wanted to already and realize you will just stick with your 'facts' so I see no point in continuing this personally. You and Bicker have fun with that. 

PS - to say not many have argued against you ideas - is like saying not many have argued against the idea "that all vanilla ice cream _must _be white in color".
Many may think that is not the case but few would bother to spend much time on the topic as it has no real bearing on them directly. Color me the same - I just chimed in cause of your insistence on some illegal conspiracy.


----------



## Zimm

bicker said:


> I went back to your original message and in neither message was there any indication that you were talking about DTAs. They do not need an exemption if they're using STBs with CCs.


My appoligies, I was thinking about the DTA's when I wrote the post but failed to mention them specifically. I am referring to their use of the cheap DTA's they are offering to those with expanded basic currently to tune the new digital channels. Unless they get an exemption for those they will not be able to encrypt the digital versions of the expanded basic channels.



bicker said:


> Of course, but it isn't really that important, AFAIC. I'd rather TiVo focus on improving robustness and reliability first, and then get to this after that.


Now we are getting into preferences. All of us who have been argueing for this feature are of the opinion that it is something Tivo should do. You obviously do not share that opinion and would rather them do something else. What makes your preference more important than ours? Can you demonstrate that more people would rather Tivo "focus on improving robustness and reliability" than offer a method for QAM mapping?


----------



## vstone

It may very well be that Tivo has already done the work and is waiting for cable systems' PSIP data to become reasonably reliable before turning it on. We can dream, can't we?


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Zimm said:


> Can you demonstrate that more people would rather Tivo "focus on improving robustness and reliability" than offer a method for QAM mapping?


I imagine TiVo will follow sales of MOXI as close as they can.
menawhile TiVo has the TiVo search in beta for public feedback and tru2way work for the series 4. Both of these way outtrump QAM mapping, unless people respond to QAM mapping by getting MOXI for that feature.


----------



## slowbiscuit

SteveHC1 said:


> - Right now I'm renting a condo, but my plan is to buy a house within 9 months, invest in a good antenna, dump cable altogether and get whatever else I need or want from TiVo's Internet-based services. As TiVo was (and I believe still IS) the only HD dvr that fully supports OTA recording with Season Pass-like capability I decided to not go for a refund. Also, when I bought the TiVo unit cable companies were still having tremendous difficulties with their then-new cablecard equipment; often you couldn't even GET a cablecard without having to wait for weeks for one, many that were out there at the time were defective and needed to be replaced, and once it came in the installers and c.o. tech. staff weren't proficient enough to get them working correctly - and there was no end in sight to the problems. So at the time it just seemed to me that cablecards just weren't worth hassling with, especially given that they were only being distributed in my area with a rental fee IN ADDITION to requiring subscription to much higher-priced tiers.


Wah. You don't want to bother with a card for clear QAM and you want to go OTA eventually, so you really don't need a Tivo. There are quite a few DVRs, including HTPCs and the new Dish DTVPal DVR, that give you a great reason to switch since it's obvious this box will not meet your needs.

IMO if all you want is clear QAM and/or OTA, HTPCs are superior to a Tivo anyway unless you just have to have that UI. Tons of nice features that Tivo will never have, such as auto commercial skip and support for playback of every video format. Netflix streaming that works. Transcoding on the fly and non-crippled network playback/transfer. And yes, 'SPs' that work. If you don't want to build one, buy one. Plenty of vendors out there.

You have other options, so pick one. As you said, Tivo ain't gonna budge on this so you're just bloviating here.


----------



## bicker

Zimm said:


> bicker said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd rather TiVo focus on improving robustness and reliability first, and then get to this after that.
> 
> 
> 
> Now we are getting into preferences. All of us who have been argueing for this feature are of the opinion that it is something Tivo should do. You obviously do not share that opinion
Click to expand...

You're incorrect (or presenting your perspective in a manner intended to mislead, one or the other). Read the words *right before* the beginning of your reply.



Zimm said:


> and would rather them do something else. What makes your preference more important than ours?


Because QAM mapping is not necessary to record programs and play them back, but robustness and reliability is. It is the difference between wanting things to work a certain way (QAM mapping), versus wanting things to work (robustness/reliability).



Zimm said:


> Can you demonstrate that more people would rather Tivo "focus on improving robustness and reliability" than offer a method for QAM mapping?


TiVo does not release such proprietary data. Luckily, I don't need to demonstrate it for it to be true. And beyond that, you can get a good idea about what the data actually shows in terms of what is important by looking at what TiVo actually does.


----------



## ciper

fallingwater said:


> TVGOS works well enough in my area that I've replaced a HDTiVo with a discontinued Sony hi-def DVR. Giving up the second tuner is a fair tradeoff for saving $5.20 monthly on the cable bill. (As a bonus, manually mapping unscrambled QAM in my area provides several channels not available when CableCARDS do the mapping, including a second PBS station.)


I noticed that cablecard mappings often are not complete when it comes to receiving stations that are available. Using a cablecard often grants you a few new digital stations but you lose some of the others. Getting the cable company to fix this is nearly impossible.

BTW what model Sony DVR?



JWThiers said:


> Not getting into whether QAM mapping is more import than the Dominoes Crapplet, but the Crapplet gets them advertising money from Dominoes.


It's true. I wouldn't mind to pay 10$ for a "QAM Mapping" license for each of my TiVos...



SteveHC1 said:


> I checked out the thread. The participants discuss a known, verifiable and duplicated problem with TiVo's ability to schedule manual recordings on channels for which there is no Guide data. I posted a detailed "work-around" procedure that has worked for me. It's a royal PIA, but at least for me it works and will hopefully work for others as well.


I know a work around exists for now but my point of posting that thread is that TiVo broke manual recordings of clear QAM channels.

With QAM mapping any missed shows would solely be the Cable Co's fault for changing frequencies. With the current manual scan / manual recording solution *TiVo is breaking it*. So much for trying to do things the robust way.


----------



## Zimm

bicker said:


> You're incorrect (or presenting your perspective in a manner intended to mislead, one or the other). Read the words *right before* the beginning of your reply.
> 
> Because QAM mapping is not necessary to record programs and play them back, but robustness and reliability is. It is the difference between wanting things to work a certain way (QAM mapping), versus wanting things to work (robustness/reliability).
> 
> TiVo does not release such proprietary data. Luckily, I don't need to demonstrate it for it to be true. And beyond that, you can get a good idea about what the data actually shows in terms of what is important by looking at what TiVo actually does.


lol, even when someone offers a valid and strong reason to support this feature you still argue against it.

I have now concuded you are no longer worth arguing with or listening to. Welcome to the lan called Ignore.


----------



## jrm01

jrm01 said:


> Just a simple question.
> 
> If somehow I were able to convince my local Comcast unit to provide guide info to Tribune Media Services for the clear-QAM channels as part of the Comcast Basic lineup would TiVo then automatically have the guide data. Of course this would require them to provide this for channel 2-1 (clear-QAM) as well as 208 (the mapped channel).
> 
> I know that this would probably be a losing battle, but if somehow I managed to do it, would it work?
> 
> I did get them to provide proper PSIP and mapping to OTA-equivalent channel numbers last year by filing a complaint with the FCC and having a joint meeting with them and the Local Franchise Authority. Maybe I'm ready for another battle.


I never noticed this Support Article before:

http://www.tivo.com/setupandsupport...t_Guide_Data_for_Rebroadcast_HD_Channels.html

It seems to imply that even if I were able to get Comcast to provide the channel info to TMS they wouldn't accept it or publish guide info for it.


----------



## bicker

Zimm said:


> lol, even when someone offers a valid and strong reason to support this feature you still argue against it.


In other words, you refuse to acknowledge that I wrote, "I'd rather TiVo focus on improving robustness and reliability first, and then get to this after that," despite the fact that it is there in black-and-white, and I actually gave you two chances to *read what you're replying to*. Instead, you'd prefer to just cover your eyes and insist that I don't want the feature implemented *because that's easier to argue against*. So you're basically lying about what I've written, even though it is right there in black and white, just to rationalize your attack on me.



Zimm said:


> I have now concuded you are no longer worth arguing with or listening to. Welcome to the lan called Ignore.


Thank goodness. I know that there is no chance that my rational logic will have any positive effect on folks who have already made their minds up to hate TiVo for not kowtowing to their every wish.


----------



## atmuscarella

Well I have stayed out of this up to know mostly because I don't have cable- but have to add my 2 cents. 

It is my personal opinion that TiVo can not afford to ever allow a competitor to offer a feature they do not (assuming it is technically/legally possible). If TiVo ever loses it's status as the superior/premium DVR solution then it is the beginning of the end for them. 

And yes niche features matter. When someone can look at another DVR solution and say "I wish my TiVo could do that" it destroys the vision of TiVo being a superior/premium product. Which I would suggest is not where TiVo wants to go.

There are becoming a number of features available in the DVR world that TiVo does not offer but technically (and I assume) legally could. This QAM mapping is one of them, others are such things as being able to record HD through component inputs, being able to add and remove USB/esata drives and not lose your recordings, be able to record more than 2 things at once, and others. 

I understand that adding some of these features may not be directly profitable. But history has shown that allowing someone to eat part of your lunch because you thought what they were providing wasn't directly profitable leads to disaster. 

Thanks,


----------



## bicker

atmuscarella said:


> It is my personal opinion that TiVo can not afford to ever allow a competitor to offer a feature they do not (assuming it is technically/legally possible). If TiVo ever loses it's status as the superior/premium DVR solution then it is the beginning of the end for them.


Well, I think there are many previous events which we can as readily point to as "the beginning of the end for them". The lack of QAM mapping, I think, is pretty low on the list of such events _which have already happened_. No one has proven that there is a long-term profitable business model for an independent, stand-alone HD DVR in the United States. 
We hope that there is, but that's just a hope.

Beyond that, it is my fervent hope that a half-dozen competitors produce and sell far superior DVR products, as compared to TiVo. I'm not sure why any DVR user would be opposed to that potentiality.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

atmuscarella said:


> It is my personal opinion that TiVo can not afford to ever allow a competitor to offer a feature they do not (assuming it is technically/legally possible). If TiVo ever loses it's status as the superior/premium DVR solution then it is the beginning of the end for them.


Yes, that is a valid concern for TiVo. Certainly they faced that with lack of dual tuners, then lack of HD, then when they introduced the expensive S3 that really was not different enough from cable DVRs to warrant the high cost from the mainstream market.

However the features you mention others having that TiVo does not are spread across various competitors so there is still a lack of a specific direct competitor that can be turned to. I mention Moxi in this thread but others ahv correctly pointed out that the company behind Moxi is unproven with a shaky track record. Also Moxi lacks some features that TiVo users do not see as niche such as MRV/TTG. Still Moxi is the closest thing since they also can do cable cards and thus record directly from digital cable channels.

So while QAM mapping should certainly be a watch item for TiVo to make sure it does not end up hurting sales, at the moment the only way that will happen is if Moxi sales start growing significantly or if people just give up on cable and go OTA with the solutions that are cheaper than a TiVo HD.

However, no one in this thread will be able to reply with facts pointing to something/anything that shows no QAM mapping is hurting TiVo sales significantly enough to make including it a high priority for TiVo. Might be a second tier priority and that might mean we see the feature at some point but if QAM mapping was truly important to me, I would be looking at other alternatives and not wait around for the feature.


----------



## lew

I agree, to a point. It's not enough to add a feature (like QAM mapping) but the feature has to work. Look at some of the recent threads. FiOS isn't passing PSIP data. Tivo loses if they way customers learn they need to "re-map" their channels is missed recordings. Adding a feature, that by design is prone to fail, is a horrible idea.

I don't think the units have the hardware to encode HD signals received via component inputs.

I wish tivo would give us a choice of external drive vendors. I can't see tivo opening it up to any drive but Seagate has a couple of external drives designed for DVR use. I think tivo should invite Seagate to submit those drives for certification.



atmuscarella said:


> Well I have stayed out of this up to know mostly because I don't have cable- but have to add my 2 cents.
> 
> It is my personal opinion that TiVo can not afford to ever allow a competitor to offer a feature they do not (assuming it is technically/legally possible). If TiVo ever loses it's status as the superior/premium DVR solution then it is the beginning of the end for them.
> 
> And yes niche features matter. When someone can look at another DVR solution and say "I wish my TiVo could do that" it destroys the vision of TiVo being a superior/premium product. Which I would suggest is not where TiVo wants to go.
> 
> There are becoming a number of features available in the DVR world that TiVo does not offer but technically (and I assume) legally could. This QAM mapping is one of them, others are such things as being able to record HD through component inputs, being able to add and remove USB/esata drives and not lose your recordings, be able to record more than 2 things at once, and others.
> 
> I understand that adding some of these features may not be directly profitable. But history has shown that allowing someone to eat part of your lunch because you thought what they were providing wasn't directly profitable leads to disaster.
> 
> Thanks,


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lew said:


> I can't see tivo opening it up to any drive but Seagate has a couple of external drives designed for DVR use. I think tivo should invite Seagate to submit those drives for certification.


You might want to check out the seagate drives are *failing* threads on the forum. I think TiVo should invite anyone but seagate.


----------



## atmuscarella

bicker, I feel I need to "bicker" with you just a little :
-
-
-


> Originally Posted by *bicker*
> Well, I think there are many previous events which we can as readily point to as "the beginning of the end for them". The lack of QAM mapping, I think, is pretty low on the list of such events which have already happened.


Please note that I did not say the lack of QAM mapping would be the beginning of the end for TiVo, I said: _If TiVo ever loses it's status as the superior/premium DVR solution then it is the beginning of the end for them._ Which I do understand is certainly debatable but is my current position. 
-
-
-


> Originally Posted by *bicker*
> No one has proven that there is a long-term profitable business model for an independent, stand-alone HD DVR in the United States.
> We hope that there is, but that's just a hope.


Sadly I agree
-
-
-


> Originally Posted by *bicker*
> Beyond that, it is my fervent hope that a half-dozen competitors produce and sell far superior DVR products, as compared to TiVo. I'm not sure why any DVR user would be opposed to that potentiality.


I agree competition is good for us consumers and my dollars will support whoever best meets my needs.
-

Thanks,


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> You might want to check out the seagate drives are *failing* threads on the forum. I think TiVo should invite anyone but seagate.


Seagate offers an external eSATA drive, designed for DVR use. They have a 1T model ($199.99 ordered from Seagate).

Go back a year or so and look at the issues posters had using some WD drives. Presumably a solution designed (and tested) for DVR use wouldn't have the issues we've seen with other drives.


----------



## sbourgeo

atmuscarella said:


> And yes niche features matter. When someone can look at another DVR solution and say "I wish my TiVo could do that" it destroys the vision of TiVo being a superior/premium product. Which I would suggest is not where TiVo wants to go.


I wonder how many customers said "I wish I could order a pizza from my TiVo"?


----------



## atmuscarella

Just some general clarification on some of the features I mention:

*Swappable external drives:* Other DVR vendors (such has Dish Sat HD DVRs) allow the user to remove an external drive and install another for basically unlimited storage - when you want to watch something saved on a previously installed drive you just reconnect it.

*QAM mapping*: Honestly I don't know (or care) much about it but if Moxi or anyone else does it successfully then TiVo needs to figure it out also.

*HD Recording through Component inputs*: This is available now for PCs vis a USB device.

*Recording more than 2 things at once*:Several DVRs out there that can do 3 things at once and of course PCs can be built with even more.

Thanks,


----------



## lew

sbourgeo said:


> I wonder how many customers said "I wish I could order a pizza from my TiVo"?


I wonder how much money Domino's is paying tivo for that feature. Money upfront? A % of sales. Coupons can't be used. Is Domino's giving tivo some/all of the marketing dollars that otherwise would go to customer discounts (coupons).

Jrm01 provided a link to tivo's website. 


> Unlike analog channels, which are mapped to fixed base frequencies to comply with industry-wide broadcast standards, digital channels can be broadcast on any frequency your cable provider chooses, and the frequency can be changed at any time.


This says it all. Tivo doesn't think QAM mapping can be reliable. Frequencies can change at any time, with no notice.

I can't see tivo going with a system that is inherently unreliable. A system that may require manual re-mapping--with no advance notice.

I wouldn't mind QAM for just broadcast channels, if it could be established the cable system didn't change those frequencies or PSIP data could make re-mapping automatic and seamless.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *lew*
> I don't think the units have the hardware to encode HD signals received via component inputs.


This brings to mind something that has Interested me for awhile with DVRs - I find the lack of a defined hardware update cycle somewhat perplexing. Things like TVs have an annual refresh cycle (even if there is really very little change) and things like PCs have a more fluid/continuous refresh cycle, but TiVo DVRs seem to have no hardware refresh cycle.

Not sure if matters much - just one of those things that get into my head 

Thanks,


----------



## CuriousMark

atmuscarella said:


> There are becoming a number of features available in the DVR world that TiVo does not offer but technically (and I assume) legally could. This QAM mapping is one of them, others are such things as being able to record HD through component inputs, being able to add and remove USB/esata drives and not lose your recordings, be able to record more than 2 things at once, and others.


Don't forget the "gas gauge" (free space indicator). It is also a feature that many have simply come to expect, whether it makes any real sense or not.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

sbourgeo said:


> I wonder how many customers said "I wish I could order a pizza from my TiVo"?


the correct question from TiVo inc.'s perspective is two fold

1. How many advertisers say "I wish I could advertise on TiVo"?

2. How many customers/revenue dollars will they lose because of advertising on the DVR?


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lew said:


> I wouldn't mind QAM for just broadcast channels, if it could be established the cable system didn't change those frequencies or PSIP data could make re-mapping automatic and seamless.


currently Tivo uses the QAM mapping as delivered to the cable card by the cable company. When the cable office says it is sending a hit to the card it basically is sending a refresh of the mapping. if some channels are not visible, a common complaint, it is because the back end system did not pull together the correct tier of channels that the customer is billed for.
The question you pose is one of "can TiVo get that mapping from the cable company regardless of cable card being installed" If so, then can TiVo use that data from the TiVo only system to set the digital tuner to the right frequency.
I have no idea if the mapping can be obtained that way and how often the Cable company would send that to the TiVo without cable cards, since TiVo can not send a shout out back to the cable company to ask for it.

This leaves S3 models in the land of manual mapping without a cable card along with all the risk of manual mapping already discussed.

tru2way will change all that - If the right APIs are in tru2way then the TiVo can ask for the mapping (I assume) at any time to ensure it is the latest and greatest. If TiVo has the mapping without cable cards or tuning adapter then the series 4 would be able to get any unencrypted digital channel without cable cards - what a cool box that will be and *my speculation * is that this is what TiVo is working towards to solve the whole clear QAM hoorah.


----------



## lew

I was wondering if the cable systems basically leave the broadcast frequencies alone (manual mapping would work) or if enough of them correctly handle PSIP data (assuming tivo can monitor the data). Could a compromise solution just handle those cable channels that have OTA equivalents. Assuming the cable sytem correctly includes the PSIP data use that data to map to the OTA version of the guide data.

I agree a possible S4 will probably handle these issues. Cable Cards work, I can't see tivo devoting many (any?) resources to a QAM mapping solution that doesn't work as well--just to save some posters a few dollars per month in cable card rental fees.



ZeoTiVo said:


> currently Tivo uses the QAM mapping as delivered to the cable card by the cable company. When the cable office says it is sending a hit to the card it basically is sending a refresh of the mapping. if some channels are not visible, a common complaint, it is because the back end system did not pull together the correct tier of channels that the customer is billed for.
> The question you pose is one of "can TiVo get that mapping from the cable company regardless of cable card being installed" If so, then can TiVo use that data from the TiVo only system to set the digital tuner to the right frequency.
> I have no idea if the mapping can be obtained that way and how often the Cable company would send that to the TiVo without cable cards, since TiVo can not send a shout out back to the cable company to ask for it.
> 
> This leaves S3 models in the land of manual mapping without a cable card along with all the risk of manual mapping already discussed.
> 
> tru2way will change all that - If the right APIs are in tru2way then the TiVo can ask for the mapping (I assume) at any time to ensure it is the latest and greatest. If TiVo has the mapping without cable cards or tuning adapter then the series 4 would be able to get any unencrypted digital channel without cable cards - what a cool box that will be and *my speculation * is that this is what TiVo is working towards to solve the whole clear QAM hoorah.


----------



## dplaflamme

There's been a lot of talk about Comcast here, and I'm a former Comcast customer. When I was a customer of theirs, I used cable cards.

Now I live in an apartment complex that has its own cable system, which advertises HD channels in its line-up but only provides them via QAM. Alas, my home is not well suited for using an antenna for OTA signals, either, so I've split my cable signal and feed it to both the cable input and the antenna input. My TiVo HD finds the QAM channels but denies that there's program data from them.

TiVo tells me my "cable company" doesn't support HD channels. That means, it doesn't support HD the way TiVo wants to, with cable cards.

I've been a TiVo user for more than nine years now; I think I'm on my fourth unit, having passed two on to family members and lost one in a divorce. I know how good TiVo can be with program data.

And all I want is a way to tell my own TiVo, "Please use the OTA data for _this_ station in the lineup for _this_ channel that you found when you scanned. Please."

For a small minority of us, we have no alternative. If it was a huge effort, I'd understand, but it's not, from what I read and from what I can tell just from looking at various TiVo displays.

That's why I care, at least.


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> ...
> Tivo doesn't think QAM mapping can be reliable. Frequencies can change at any time, with no notice.
> 
> I can't see tivo going with a system that is inherently unreliable. A system that may require manual re-mapping--with no advance notice.


I think this is very obvious and don't see why evryone expects Tivo to fix the cable companies. In a Comcast system in VA and a Time Warner channel in SC, system techs have convinced me that neither they nor the head end techs actually understand any of this stuff.


> I wouldn't mind QAM for just broadcast channels, if it could be established the cable system didn't change those frequencies or PSIP data could make re-mapping automatic and seamless.


 Channels other than broadcast basic will likley eventually be encrypted, although some aren't now. This may also reflect a failure of the techs to understand how the system can be used (as opposed how they've been told it will be used). Changing PSIP data could actually be pivked up by the Tivo on the fly.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> currently Tivo uses the QAM mapping as delivered to the cable card by the cable company. When the cable office says it is sending a hit to the card it basically is sending a refresh of the mapping. if some channels are not visible, a common complaint, it is because the back end system did not pull together the correct tier of channels that the customer is billed for.
> The question you pose is one of "can TiVo get that mapping from the cable company regardless of cable card being installed" If so, then can TiVo use that data from the TiVo only system to set the digital tuner to the right frequency.
> I have no idea if the mapping can be obtained that way and how often the Cable company would send that to the TiVo without cable cards, since TiVo can not send a shout out back to the cable company to ask for it.
> 
> This leaves S3 models in the land of manual mapping without a cable card along with all the risk of manual mapping already discussed.
> 
> tru2way will change all that - If the right APIs are in tru2way then the TiVo can ask for the mapping (I assume) at any time to ensure it is the latest and greatest. If TiVo has the mapping without cable cards or tuning adapter then the series 4 would be able to get any unencrypted digital channel without cable cards - what a cool box that will be and *my speculation * is that this is what TiVo is working towards to solve the whole clear QAM hoorah.


??? tru2way uses cablecards!


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> ??? tru2way uses cablecards!


and that is why it is my speculation.
I make an assumption that the QAM channel map can be obtained through tru2way without needing a cable card.

Someone with more fundamental knowledge of the details may come along and show where this is all wrong  but the cable cards are not tuning the digital stream - they are merely providing the map and keys to unencrypt as needed.


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> I was wondering if the cable systems basically leave the broadcast frequencies alone (manual mapping would work) or if enough of them correctly handle PSIP data (assuming tivo can monitor the data). Could a compromise solution just handle those cable channels that have OTA equivalents. Assuming the cable sytem correctly includes the PSIP data use that data to map to the OTA version of the guide data.
> 
> I agree a possible S4 will probably handle these issues. Cable Cards work, I can't see tivo devoting many (any?) resources to a QAM mapping solution that doesn't work as well--just to save some posters a few dollars per month in cable card rental fees.


The rules about PSIP data actually say that some of the PSIP data must be passed from the source for unencrypted channels. For broadcast signals received OTA, it should be there. For broadcast signals received via fiber optic "there is no controlling authority." If it's there, it should be passed. Theoretically if the HBO signal included PSIP data assigning it to virtual channel 1 and was unencrypted (itself unlikely), cable companies would have to allow that by law. However, the last case is probably technically impossible.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> and that is why it is my speculation.
> I make an assumption that the QAM channel map can be obtained through tru2way with needing a cable card.
> 
> Someone with more fundamental knowledge of the details may come along and show where this is all wrong  but the cable cards are not tuning the digital stream - they are merely providing the map and keys to unencrypt as needed.


Tru2way is primarily a way for the cable company to allow access to their services (PPV, VOD, etc) via their interface. They want to control the interface so they can sell you VOD rather than allowing you to download a video from Amazon (unless they decide to allow it). The theoretical S4 will, as I understand it, have a Tivo mode that will be like an S3/HD with a cablecard and tuning adepater. The Tivo menu will allow access to an STB mode controlled by the cable company and I don't it will even allow recording movies. I cannot fathom what the tru2way software would do in the absense of a cablecard giving it the virtual channel map. For encrypted channels, the PSIP data is essentially undefined, since the cable company uses proprietary protocols for supplying virtual channel mapping.


----------



## jrm01

vstone said:


> Theoretically if the HBO signal included PSIP data assigning it to virtual channel 1 and was unencrypted (itself unlikely), cable companies would have to allow that by law. However, the last case is probably technically impossible.


Actually, I believe, that the channel mapping can be (and usually is) changed by the cable company per regulations.


----------



## ciper

TiVo used to be cool. They did things their way. You could tell it was started by geeks.

Now they have been diluted. The drawn out court case with a certain satellite provider is proof of this. Even if I agree with TiVo I would hope they would use innovation to draw customers rather than suing them away from a competitor.



atmuscarella said:


> And yes niche features matter. When someone can look at another DVR solution and say "I wish my TiVo could do that" it destroys the vision of TiVo being a superior/premium product. Which I would suggest is not where TiVo wants to go.


It's not even looking at another DVR. When the person looks at their Television which gets guide data and can map it to the channels with no extra hardware while the TiVo already requires a monthly fee and cannot do it without extra crap from the cable company the technical reasons behind it don't matter.

TiVo is already losing significant sales because of it.



lew said:


> Tivo doesn't think QAM mapping can be reliable. Frequencies can change at any time, with no notice.


People are already using clear QAM. If the frequencies changed as often as eluded to in this thread the home theater forum would be full of complaints. Every other company which supports clear QAM mapping seems to think it's stable and many of them are quite a bit larger than TiVo with access to more market research.

The clear QAM mapping in televisions relies on far less reliable guide data than the TiVo so you would think it would be a mess,,, yet over and over people have said, in this very thread even, that it works well.


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> TiVo used to be cool. They did things their way. You could tell it was started by geeks.
> 
> Now they have been diluted. The drawn out court case with a certain satellite provider is proof of this. Even if I agree with TiVo I would hope they would use innovation to draw customers rather than suing them away from a competitor.
> 
> It's not even looking at another DVR. When the person looks at their Television which gets guide data and can map it to the channels with no extra hardware while the TiVo already requires a monthly fee and cannot do it without extra crap from the cable company the technical reasons behind it don't matter.
> 
> TiVo is already losing significant sales because of it.
> 
> People are already using clear QAM. If the frequencies changed as often as eluded to in this thread the home theater forum would be full of complaints. Every other company which supports clear QAM mapping seems to think it's stable and many of them are quite a bit larger than TiVo with access to more market research.
> 
> The clear QAM mapping in televisions relies on far less reliable guide data than the TiVo so you would think it would be a mess,,, yet over and over people have said, in this very thread even, that it works well.


As far as the "frequency" with which clear QAM frequency assignments are SUPPOSEDLY changed by cable companies goes, all *I* can say is this:

As far as clear QAM transmission of local stations' digital broadcasts:
At my previous residence, in Connecticut, where I lived for over 5 years (with Cox being my cable provider), the frequency assignments NEVER changed - not even ONCE. And since I moved to Florida (Comcast), ALSO they have not changed even ONCE.

As far as clear QAM transmission of cable-only channels - There have been only a few frequency reassignments over the years, but the cable companies always reported them to TV Guide and Tribune - so my TiVo has been able to "detect" them accordingly.

So at least in my two areas, the only real problem with TiVo has been with the clear QAM transmissions of locally-broadcast digital/HD stations - which at least for me is a problem. But I know the issue is pretty much the same nation-wide, at least for people without cablecards.

YESY the problem is of the cable companies' making. But ALSO yes, at least as fare as I could tell, TiVo could modify its product a bit to adjust to the problem if it WANTED to.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> I cannot fathom what the tru2way software would do in the absense of a cablecard giving it the virtual channel map. For encrypted channels, the PSIP data is essentially undefined, since the cable company uses proprietary protocols for supplying virtual channel mapping.


the tru2way also allows for communicating back to headend via DOCIS hardware. My assumption is that tru2way can use the proprietary protocols via a standard API, since that is what tru2way is all about - an OCAP with standards so it works for any cable company head end.
If a channel map can be obtained in this way and not need a cable card to hold the mapping then TiVo could have access to that mapping and use it on its interface side to map guide data.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> TiVo is already losing significant sales because of it.


and your data for this is ....


----------



## slowbiscuit

Agreed. Really dumb comment with no basis in fact.


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> TiVo used to be cool. They did things their way. You could tell it was started by geeks.


TiVo has changed over time. It's had to to survive. TiVo Forums have changed as well.



> Now they have been diluted. The drawn out court case with a certain satellite provider is proof of this. Even if I agree with TiVo I would hope they would use innovation to draw customers rather than suing them away from a competitor.


TiVo, like everyone else, has gotta' do what it needs to protect itself and succeed.



> ...the technical reasons behind (TiVo's choice not to provide QAM mapping) don't matter.


TVGOS's system is very simple, requires no tech support, and viewers decide whether or not to take advantage of it.



> TiVo is already losing significant sales because of it.


TiVo is probably losing some sales because of CableCARD hassles and fees, additional fees for cable outlets when CableCARDS are required, all in addition to the regular price of TiVo Service.



> People are already using clear QAM. If the frequencies changed as often as eluded to in this thread the home theater forum would be full of complaints. Every other company which supports clear QAM mapping seems to think it's stable and many of them are quite a bit larger than TiVo with access to more market research.
> 
> The clear QAM mapping in televisions relies on far less reliable guide data than the TiVo so you would think it would be a mess,,, yet over and over people have said, in this very thread even, that it works well.


Unscrambled QAM mapping which requires that a user insert the correct channel number into a program's description in an EPG, ala TVGOS, is absurdly simple and requires no customer service. PSIP errors or frequency changes are irrelevant.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> I imagine TiVo will follow sales of MOXI as close as they can.
> meanwhile TiVo has the TiVo search in beta for public feedback and tru2way work for the series 4. Both of these way outtrump QAM mapping, unless people respond to QAM mapping by getting MOXI for that feature.


Moxi sales will be interesting to follow, considering the extremely limited release of their hi-def DVR, and the company's limited accessibility.

Don't forget Moxi's absurdly simple FSI though.

(A similiar TiVo version wouldn't count Suggestions, programs which are subject to deletion, or deleted programs which could be recovered, as unavailable space, but would simply tally the percentage of HDD space occupied by all other programs as of the moment the FSI was selected.)


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> BTW what model Sony DVR?


http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...51&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038349

Either 250 GB as above or 500 GB as DHG-HDD500. On eBay prices range from around $400 to $600.

AVS Forum thread:
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=537711


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> I thought (and still believe) the main focus of the cable card was to handle security so that it was separated from the box. Frequency reallocation, psip data, call letters, guide info and other items related to the topic of QAM mapping were not the goal of the cable card.


The main impetus for developing separable security was the ability to incorporate security in a modular fashion into 3rd party devices, yes, but the whole idea of separable security was to establish an intermediate between all the CATV protocols and the receiver protocols, not just security protocols. Encryption is the biggest piece of the nut, but all interoperability features are by intent supposed to be handled by the separable security device or software.



ciper said:


> This seems to be proven by the lack of two way communication which required the creation of the SDV dongle


Not in the very least. First of all, SDV and its requirement for a 2-way host has nothing directly to do with separable security or CableCards. Like all other digital services, SDV requires CableCards, but otherwise they are unrelated. (One note: a Tuning Adapter can actually provide channel mapping without a CableCard.)

A lot of people share this misapprehension. The issue came about not because of CableCards, but because the CE manufacturers convinced the FCC they should require CableLabs to develop a unidirectional host standard which the CE manufacturers could follow as an economical means of providing their part of separable security without having to build 2-way hosts. At the time, the compromise was considered to be that the 3rdparty devices could not receive interactive services, but would be able to receive all the regular video channels. The regulation then specifically excluded all 2-way services from the UDCP spec. The fly landed in the ointment when CATV companies decided to start deploying standard video channels on an interactive protocol: SDV.

I'll say that again: it was the UDCP host standard - to be followed by CE manufaturers - which caused the problem, not the CableCard specs.



ciper said:


> Not my point but that is right. My point is that multiple devices from multiple manufacturers are able to map QAM channels. TiVo doesn't even need to innovate to add QAM mapping, just try out the different QAM mapping devices and use the good parts from each.


Which they essentially must, because they don't support CableCards. Any device which supports CableCards doesn't need such a facility, and really probably should not implement it.



ciper said:


> I really really want to take TiVo up on the holiday offer (still active) for my bedroom but my cable bill would increase by 15$ if I added a second unit and wanted the clear QAM channels even though I already have cablecards in the front room.


Some CATV companies do indeed overcharge for CableCards. I believe this should be addressed at some level. Asking CE manufacturers (like TiVo) to band-aid the issue is not the best method of resolution.


----------



## lrhorer

fallingwater said:


> Unfortunately TiVo's MRV doesn't always work without fussing.


I don't often do MRV, but I use TTCB daily, and I've never had to fuss with any of the transfers, other than when LAN problems intervene. In fact, I have somone up in the attic right now pulling a new Ethernet cable. I don't know if it was chewed by a rodent or it was pulled tight against a sharp edge, or what, but it was working fine until a few weeks ago, and now is getting tons of errors in one direction, resulting in slow TTG. That's hardly the Tivo's fault.



fallingwater said:


> Often one TiVo doesn't see another unless it's rebooted.


Once or twice, I have had to reboot a TiVo to resolve a network issue (or, more properly, a reboot resolved the issue; there may have been some other way to resolve it), but certainly not regularly.



fallingwater said:


> Add the transfer time, about ¾ realtime, and it's easiest to watch the program in the other room.


Is this over wireless? If not, then you are having some sort of LAN issue. Even TTCB should be much faster than that, and MRV is *much* faster:










The 16 - 17 Mbps TTCB transfer rates can be a bit of a problem for very high bandwidth HD: I have a number of 18+ Mbps videos which require starting the video 5 or 10 minutes early in order to guarantee there won't be any pauses, but the majority of HD can easily transfer from a PC or server real time. MRV, peaking at over 40 Mbps, is easily more than 2x real time for even the highest def 1080i MPEG 2.



fallingwater said:


> But why should a user have to fiddle with a new product?


Well, first of all, fiddling is usually half the fun of owning a product. That said, I rarely if ever fiddle with the TiVos. I watch programming. Every ten days to two weeks, I see what HD movies are upcoming and tell one of the TiVos to record some additional programs. Otherwise, they hum along quietly without my touching them. The video server and backup server require far more fiddling. And the Windows workstations? Forget about it. They crash and burn more often than rockets in the 1950s.



fallingwater said:


> The most important reason for replacing an internal HDD instead of adding an outboard one isn't saving $30; it's the added reliability of using one HDD in an application instead of two.


Well, I won't argue the point too much. Certainly it may be high on most people's list. My personal #1 reason is similar, but not quite that. The main reason I prefer to upgrade the internal drive is it provides a backup solution in case the drive fails. Simply pop out the dead drive, replace it with the original and presto! One is back in business with little delay. One may then replace the dead drive at leisure, once again putting the original drive back on the shelf. Two of my 3 TiVos have dual drives. Since I have the original drives on the shelf, I'm not really concerned that much about the day to day reliability of the online drive systems.



fallingwater said:


> Moxi's system for using multiple external HDD's one at a time is more useful than merely adding one; no more having to transfer programs to DVD.


Well in my system, transferring to DVD is not an option. Almost none of my videos will fit on a DVD. I agree swappable external drives is a nice feature, although I would not make use of it myself.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> You've given this a lot of thought. Moxi meets your needs better then currently produced tivo's.


'And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Of course, one migh wish for a product which meets every last wish, but generally speaking this would result in a much more expensive product.



lew said:


> Tivo supports OTA and Moxi and supports customers that get cable but don't want to rent cable cards(QAM maping). I'm not sure which company is missing a bigger market.


I have no hard data to support the opinion, but I suspect OTA is a much broader market. Lots of users have both CATV and OTA feeds.



lew said:


> Tivo doesn't meet your needs, it's good there is a product that does.


Absolutely, assuming it is in fact the case. A range of choices is always a good thing, regardless.


----------



## lrhorer

JJ said:


> *Why do 'contrarians' continue to post*
> in this thread if the issue is so *unimportant*? Seems to be a distinct contradiction there...


For the most part, this entire forum is dedicated solely to something that in the scheme of things is extremely unimportant: TV programs and the recording and playback thereof. The question could be readily applied to this entire forum. Why does anyone post here at all when all the issues are so unimportant? The answer is the same to both questions: other than those seeking advice, most people who post here enjoy doing so. The enjoyment has little or nothing to do with how important any topic may be.

No offense intended, but that was a really silly question.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> *This will never happen* but it's a shame tivo can't just sell us a cable card for $50. Call to activate tivo and tivo will take care of activating the cable card with our cable system.


What happens a months later when the CATV system decides to switch from a Cisco to a Motoriola system, or vice versa, as several local franchises have done in the last few months? What happens when the customer moves to another town?


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> - Right now I'm renting a condo, but my plan is to buy a house within 9 months, invest in a good antenna, dump cable altogether and get whatever else I need or want from TiVo's Internet-based services. As TiVo was (and I believe still IS) the only HD dvr that fully supports OTA recording with Season Pass-like capability I decided to not go for a refund.


The regulatory quagmire aside, the position of many people in these threads totally flummoxes me. You are having a cow about the requirement to spend an extra $3 - $20 a month on a system which it was intened every CATV subscriber should have, yet you gladly shell out many hundreds or even in some cases thousands of dollars a month for the privilege of watching OTA services, whether you actually watch them, or not. If you really want to save money, force the networks to adopt PBS' financial model, or shut them down entirely. The money you save could rent dozens of CableCards.

On the other side of the coin, if you don't mind being forced to shell out hundreds or even thousands of dollars a month for OTA programming, why are you complaining about $3 or $4 a month?



SteveHC1 said:


> Also, when I bought the TiVo unit cable companies were still having tremendous difficulties with their then-new cablecard equipment; often you couldn't even GET a cablecard without having to wait for weeks for one, many that were out there at the time were defective and needed to be replaced, and once it came in the installers and c.o. tech. staff weren't proficient enough to get them working correctly -


Since my first CableCard setup was installed more than a year prior to the release of the Series III Tivo, I went through all of this long before anyone had such an experience with a TiVo.



SteveHC1 said:


> and there was no end in sight to the problems.


Oh, bull crap! The problems were in every case resolved within a couple of weeks. Few things annoy me more than moronic whining about how difficult something is to install. Installation issues are transient, and with most devices only encountered once. It is the day to day operation of a unit that is important, not (within reason) how much trouble it is or is not to install. I'll take the most difficult system on Earth to install if it performs magnificently thereafter over an easy to install system with lousy performance and poor stability 1000 times over.



SteveHC1 said:


> So at the time it just seemed to me that cablecards just weren't worth hassling with, especially given that they were only being distributed in my area with a rental fee IN ADDITION to requiring subscription to much higher-priced tiers.


No offense, but that is a highly self-centered viewpoint. Although far from being the utility they should have been, they still represent a viable and desirable means of obtaining an important and significant ultimate goal. Any artifice (or personal desire, for that matter) which circumvents that intent places some level of roadblock to that goal. Whether you realize it or not, anything which allows CATV subscribers to not employ CableCards may eventually result in your having no choice for 3rd party devices, at all.



SteveHC1 said:


> As you might have guessed, I'm no fan of cable companies.


Then why are you playing into their hand? Subscribers not having CableCards is something the CATV companies would prefer. As it happens, I don't like many of the business practices of a lot of CATV companies, either. It's a major reason why I quit working for one. They aren't a patch on the national broadcast networks, however.


----------



## ciper

lrhorer said:


> Oh, bull crap! The problems were in every case resolved within a couple of weeks. Few things annoy me more than moronic whining about how difficult something is to install. Installation issues are transient, and with most devices only encountered once. It is the day to day operation of a unit that is important, not (within reason) how much trouble it is or is not to install. I'll take the most difficult system on Earth to install if it performs magnificently thereafter over an easy to install system with lousy performance and poor stability 1000 times over.


Taking 4-5 days off of work because of a troublesome install costs the person money even if the truck rolls are free (time off work). A missed show because of a frequency change is annoying but can be dealt with at any time and most likely the missed show will be reran or can be downloaded.

My cable cards are still not mapped properly

There have been 3 times over the last 8 months when I had to call the cable company since I lost a portion or all of my channels

Just saying.


----------



## lrhorer

ZeoTiVo said:


> your dislike of cable and large companies in general.


What say you, SteveHC1? IS ZeoTiVo accurate in that assessment? If so, why is it you hate the CATV companies, whose revenues are collectively around $80 billion a year, yet you love the national networks so much, when they are raking in the better part of $1 trillion a year? At least with the CATV company, you can choose not to pay them.


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> Taking 4-5 days off of work because of a troublesome install costs the person money even if the truck rolls are free (time off work).


True. I admit I am fortunate in having a rather flexible schedule 2 days a week, and in being able to work from home. That said, it should never take more than 1 day to fix an issue. Adamantly refuse to allow the tech to leave - no matter what - until the issue is fixed, and I can just about guarantee you it will be resolved. I had a handful of cases where a tech called me into the field and we worked until the wee hours of the morning to get issues fixed.



ciper said:


> My cable cards are still not mapped properly
> 
> There have been 3 times over the last 8 months when I had to call the cable company since I lost a portion or all of my channels
> 
> Just saying.


'Sounds as if you may be plagued with some incompetent tech staff at your local CATV company. Unfortunately, this is all too common. OTOH, such issues are not limited to the TiVo. I had similar issues with the SA 8300HD during the 9 horrible months I was renting it. There really is no excuse for such nonsense.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> the tru2way also allows for communicating back to headend via DOCIS hardware. My assumption is that tru2way can use the proprietary protocols via a standard API, since that is what tru2way is all about - an OCAP with standards so it works for any cable company head end.
> If a channel map can be obtained in this way and not need a cable card to hold the mapping then TiVo could have access to that mapping and use it on its interface side to map guide data.


I don't doubt that tru2way w/o cablecard could do this if the cable comps. wanted to do so (and it had been designed that way), I just can't think of why they would. Why would they choose to allow access to the tru2way API without part of tru2way (the cablecard) being in place. I just don't see why you would assume that. I can see why you & I might want that, but I can't make the leap to assuming that it would be so. Allowing access to the tru2way API outside of the Tivo tru2way sandbox makes no sense to me. Why bother when all of that could be accomplished just by assigning PSIP virtual channel numbers that correspond to the published channel lineup for all unencrypted channel? Why create an unnecessary API call?


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> Why would they choose to allow access to the tru2way API without part of tru2way (the cablecard) being in place. I just don't see why you would assume that. I can see why you & I might want that, but I can't make the leap to assuming that it would be so.


Ok, like I said it was speculation on my part and that should certainly be made clear.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> What say you, SteveHC1? IS ZeoTiVo accurate in that assessment? If so, why is it you hate the CATV companies, whose revenues are collectively around $80 billion a year, yet you love the national networks so much, when they are raking in the better part of $1 trillion a year? At least with the CATV company, you can choose not to pay them.


- LOL!!! I've GOTTA get to bed LOL!!! But I'll log on sometime on Sunday (whoops! It already IS Sunday!) to address all of your comments to me tonight on this thread. But for the moment, let me say that I'm NOT against "big corporations" per se - that's YOUR false assumption. I have come over the years to despise cable companies because I've seen their business practices do nothing but deteriorate over the years. And I NEVER said - or even IMPLIED - that I will have to spend even $1 more per month in abandoning cable than I would have to spend if I STUCK with cable - in fact, quite the contrary. For a relatively small up-front investment I will be free of monthly cable bills FOREVER. And for a VERY low-cost Netflix subscription I'll get a FAR better picture from a Blu-Ray disc than I *EVER* will from HBO-HD.

'Nuff for now. Catch you later!


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> Well, first of all, fiddling is usually half the fun of owning a product.


I suspect that this is the _opposite _of the perspective held by the vast majority of television viewers in the United States.


----------



## ciper

lrhorer said:


> Adamantly refuse to allow the tech to leave - no matter what - until the issue is fixed, and I can just about guarantee you it will be resolved. I had a handful of cases where a tech called me into the field and we worked until the wee hours of the morning to get issues fixed.
> 'Sounds as if you may be plagued with some incompetent tech staff at your local CATV company. Unfortunately, this is all too common. OTOH, such issues are not limited to the TiVo. I had similar issues with the SA 8300HD during the 9 horrible months I was renting it. There really is no excuse for such nonsense.


The problem is that for some companies there is only one guy who can fix the issue who sits at a certain computer at the head end. He may either not answer or has gone home already and the tech at my place is unable to do anything else. The normal people can only make changes in the billing system which them feeds information into the "provisioning" server. If the billing codes are not setup properly then nearly everyone is powerless since its the only interface they have.

Cable techs were at my house so often I got to know them. One of the guys started to become the "TiVo Expert" and he flat out told me they never taught him anything about cable cards other than calling to get a hit. Luckily he knew the guy at the headend who could fix things and was able to Nextel him most of the time.

I also spent many hours on the phone with support to the point I had the direct number of the supervisor and her email account. The main issue that still plagues me is not getting the correct map to receive the digital version of the ADS for channels 2-99. I was able to get many account credits and such but eventually just gave up.

BTW I mentioned the holiday deal earlier. I just put 1247.48 on my credit card which includes two THD with lifetime, free wireless adapter and free shipping.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> I don't often do MRV, but I use TTCB daily, and I've never had to fuss with any of the transfers, other than when LAN problems intervene. In fact, I have somone up in the attic right now pulling a new Ethernet cable. I don't know if it was chewed by a rodent or it was pulled tight against a sharp edge, or what, but it was working fine until a few weeks ago, and now is getting tons of errors in one direction, resulting in slow TTG. That's hardly the Tivo's fault.
> 
> Once or twice, I have had to reboot a TiVo to resolve a network issue (or, more properly, a reboot resolved the issue; there may have been some other way to resolve it), but certainly not regularly.
> 
> Is this over wireless? If not, then you are having some sort of LAN issue. Even TTCB should be much faster than that, and MRV is *much* faster:
> 
> The 16 - 17 Mbps TTCB transfer rates can be a bit of a problem for very high bandwidth HD: I have a number of 18+ Mbps videos which require starting the video 5 or 10 minutes early in order to guarantee there won't be any pauses, but the majority of HD can easily transfer from a PC or server real time. MRV, peaking at over 40 Mbps, is easily more than 2x real time for even the highest def 1080i MPEG 2.
> 
> Well, first of all, fiddling is usually half the fun of owning a product. That said, I rarely if ever fiddle with the TiVos. I watch programming. Every ten days to two weeks, I see what HD movies are upcoming and tell one of the TiVos to record some additional programs. Otherwise, they hum along quietly without my touching them. The video server and backup server require far more fiddling. And the Windows workstations? Forget about it. They crash and burn more often than rockets in the 1950s.
> 
> Well, I won't argue the point too much. Certainly it may be high on most people's list. My personal #1 reason is similar, but not quite that. The main reason I prefer to upgrade the internal drive is it provides a backup solution in case the drive fails. Simply pop out the dead drive, replace it with the original and presto! One is back in business with little delay. One may then replace the dead drive at leisure, once again putting the original drive back on the shelf. Two of my 3 TiVos have dual drives. Since I have the original drives on the shelf, I'm not really concerned that much about the day to day reliability of the online drive systems.
> 
> Well in my system, transferring to DVD is not an option. Almost none of my videos will fit on a DVD. I agree swappable external drives is a nice feature, although I would not make use of it myself.


Going into MRV problems in excruciating detail is way OT here.

By and large my LAN works consistently, usually requiring a router reboot once a week or so, but the TiVo MRV issue isn't solved by rebooting the router. I use a powerline carrier system at the old slower rate which is why transfers are relatively slow. Not a problem! But having to reboot TiVo to enable it to 'see' others occurs more than occasionally and is a PITA.

Regardling 'fiddling', some of it's fun, some not:

For me a new digital product shouldn't require 'fiddling' to give it more storage. I don't enjoy opening computer-based electronics to swap HDD's although I have. Echostar and Moxi have hit on an ideal solution to provide unlimited storage, but E*'s new OTA DVR doesn't offer it and Moxi doesn't offer OTA!

Latest versions of TVGOS have made fiddling with manual QAM mapping kinda' fun! I know many QAM sub-channel numbers already so it's not a big hassle. YMMV!


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...51&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038349
> 
> Either 250 GB as above or 500 GB as DHG-HDD500. On eBay prices range from around $400 to $600.


There's an eBay _Buy It Now_ listing for a DHG-HDD500 for $500 + $30 shipping right now. Search eBay for:

*Sony 500GB DVR No monthly fee-uses CableCard
DHG-HDD500,not the DHG-HDD250 -2x the Hard Drive Space!*

(Isn't there a TiVo Forums rule against showing direct links to active eBay items? Otherwise I'd provide it.

Somebody bid the reserve price of $350 last night so _Buy It Now_ is gone with three days to go. There are three DHG-HDD500's on eBay right now.)


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> - LOL!!! I've GOTTA get to bed LOL!!! But I'll log on sometime on Sunday (whoops! It already IS Sunday!) to address all of your comments to me tonight on this thread. But for the moment, let me say that I'm NOT against "big corporations" per se - that's YOUR false assumption.


I didn't assume anything whatsoever. I asked you if ZeoTiVo's assertion concerning your dislike of large corporations was correct. The answer is either "Yes", or "No". If the answer is "No", then no further comment is required. If the answer is, "Yes", then my follow-up question should be addressed.



SteveHC1 said:


> I have come over the years to despise cable companies because I've seen their business practices do nothing but deteriorate over the years.


Well, it is a dangerous practice to tar an entire industry with a brusch based upon personal experience. That said, this is certainly true of the CATV companies with which I have had dealings.



SteveHC1 said:


> And I NEVER said - or even IMPLIED - that I will have to spend even $1 more per month in abandoning cable than I would have to spend if I STUCK with cable


Neither did I. Go back and read my posts. What I pointed out is that right now, at this very moment, you are paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service, whether you use it or not.



SteveHC1 said:


> in fact, quite the contrary. For a relatively small up-front investment I will be free of monthly cable bills FOREVER. And for a VERY low-cost Netflix subscription I'll get a FAR better picture from a Blu-Ray disc than I *EVER* will from HBO-HD.


No, not a far better picture, but a better picture in some cases. It's not the point, however. The point is, even if you throw your TV in the trash and never watch another program the rest of your life, you will still be forced to pay several thousand dollars a year for OTA programming. The amount some people pay in a single year for OTA programming could easily pay for several lifetime subscriptions to the most expensive services of the most expensive CATV company in the USA.

Your Netflix account won't save you a single penny of that amount.

Netflix also won't allow you to keep several thousand different programs on hand: you've got to send them back. There are also lots of programs which will never be available from NetFlix. None of this is the point, however.


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> The problem is that for some companies there is only one guy who can fix the issue who sits at a certain computer at the head end.


Except for very small franchises this is not the case. Most have at least 3 or 4 senior engineers available to the company. They are not directly available to the subscriber, of course, but can usually be called upon by any field technician or at the very least by his supervisor.



ciper said:


> He may either not answer or has gone home already and the tech at my place is unable to do anything else.


Again, except in very small systems, this is virtually never the case. At least one senior engineer is always on call, and competent technicians and junior engineers are usually available. They just are not too likely to be the one sent to your house.



ciper said:


> The normal people can only make changes in the billing system which them feeds information into the "provisioning" server. If the billing codes are not setup properly then nearly everyone is powerless since its the only interface they have.


True, but actual problems beyond that point, as opposed to operator error, are rare.



ciper said:


> Cable techs were at my house so often I got to know them.


A couple of decades ago, I knew every single tech of the local CATV system, all 60 or so of them. Of course, that's because they worked for one or the other of my colleagues, or for me, personally. 



ciper said:


> Luckily he knew the guy at the headend who could fix things and was able to Nextel him most of the time.


Ordinarily every tech knows who the engineers are and how to contact them, or least how to have the dispatcher contact whoever is on call. Of course, the actual reporting structure varies from system to system, and may change over time. TWC's local reporting structure is nothing like what it was when I left.


----------



## lrhorer

vstone said:


> I don't doubt that tru2way w/o cablecard could do this if the cable comps. wanted to do so (and it had been designed that way), I just can't think of why they would. Why would they choose to allow access to the tru2way API without part of tru2way (the cablecard) being in place.


Primarily so they themselves can deploy integrated solutions that do not employ CableCards, thus saving themselves some money. I don't think the intent is to allow such solutions for 3rd party equipment, although who knows? They definitely want to eventually deploy a downloadable separable security solution for themselves. By law they will still have to support CableCards in 3rd party devices.



vstone said:


> but I can't make the leap to assuming that it would be so. Allowing access to the tru2way API outside of the Tivo tru2way sandbox makes no sense to me.


Yeah, for subscriber owned devices, I tend to agree. Again, one never knows, I suppose, however.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> I didn't assume anything whatsoever. I asked you if ZeoTiVo's assertion concerning your dislike of large corporations was correct. The answer is either "Yes", or "No". If the answer is "No", then no further comment is required. If the answer is, "Yes", then my follow-up question should be addressed.


In fact, you appear to be making all KINDS of assumptions here that don't seem to make any sense. Be that as it may, I've already answered the question.



lrhorer said:


> Well, it is a dangerous practice to tar an entire industry with a brusch based upon personal experience. That said, this is certainly true of the CATV companies with which I have had dealings.


- _"Dangerous"???_ I think NOT LOL!!!



lrhorer said:


> What I pointed out is that right now, at this very moment, you are paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service, whether you use it or not.


- What??? PLEASE explain to me how I am "paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service." PLEASE! Let's hear THIS one!



lrhorer said:


> No, not a far better picture, but a better picture in some cases. It's not the point, however. The point is, even if you throw your TV in the trash and never watch another program the rest of your life, you will still be forced to pay several thousand dollars a year for OTA programming. The amount some people pay in a single year for OTA programming could easily pay for several lifetime subscriptions to the most expensive services of the most expensive CATV company in the USA.


- Again, PLEASE let us hear your rationale for claiming that OTA is costing me - and everyone else, I assume - "several thousand dollars a year" for OTA. Your "logic" escapes me.



lrhorer said:


> Your Netflix account won't save you a single penny of that amount.
> 
> Netflix also won't allow you to keep several thousand different programs on hand: you've got to send them back. There are also lots of programs which will never be available from NetFlix. None of this is the point, however.


- And who says I - or anyone ELSE for that matter - wishes to "keep several thousand different programs on hand"??? I don't know about you, but I do not watch tv for a living.


----------



## billyjoebob99

SteveHC1 said:


> - What??? PLEASE explain to me how I am "paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service." PLEASE! Let's hear THIS one!
> 
> - Again, PLEASE let us hear your rationale for claiming that OTA is costing me - and everyone else, I assume - "several thousand dollars a year" for OTA. Your "logic" escapes me.


I believe he is talking about the tax dollars spent on PBS and the like and the ad dollars spent on everything else. While it is indirect we are all spending that money every time we buy a product or service advertised on OTA TV.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> ...right now, at this very moment, you are paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service, whether you use it or not.
> 
> ...even if you throw your TV in the trash and never watch another program the rest of your life, you will still be forced to pay several thousand dollars a year for OTA programming. The amount some people pay in a single year for OTA programming could easily pay for several lifetime subscriptions to the most expensive services of the most expensive CATV company in the USA.


Your lower figure seems high for a person or family of average income. Poor people pay no income taxes and often competition and advertising result in lowered prices.

But what's the point of comparing advertising costs and taxes to cable prices? Not having cable or TiVo service saves $$$ while watching OTA TV costs nothing over the one-time cost of a TV and, if necessary, a digital converter.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> In fact, you appear to be making all KINDS of assumptions here that don't seem to make any sense. Be that as it may, I've already answered the question.


still, you do admit to a bias against cable companies, which flavors your desire to see TiVo add QAM mapping. That much does not seem an assumption.


----------



## jccfin

atmuscarella, my work around has been to set up a manual reoccurring recording and just delete any shows that are repeats. That&#8217;s how I set up a season&#8217;s pass. Unfortunately, if the TV station changes the time slot I will have to manually change the time or I would miss the show.

Is that your work around also?

Also, I would recommend ignoring both Bicker and Irhorer. Bicker likes to do just that and Irhorer reminds me of that other Texan that the voters just sent back to Texas with his tail tucked. He also didn&#8217;t make much sense.


----------



## Da Goon

jccfin said:


> Also, I would recommend ignoring both Bicker and Irhorer. Bicker likes to do just that and Irhorer reminds me of that other Texan that the voters just sent back to Texas with his tail tucked. He also didnt make much sense.


hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I don't know why i even looked at this thread to begin with, but now I'm glad I did. Thanks.


----------



## fallingwater

I'm biased against paying more for a service than I need or want from it.

If TiVo offered manual mapping of unscrambled QAM channels it would provide an option which could actually lower a monthly cable bill while giving TiVo a selling point which might be more compelling than offering instant gratification at a price.

Notice the absence of prices on Domino's menu. Wonder how much revenue TiVo's Domino's connection actually brings in!  
http://www.dominos-now.com/menu.html


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> In fact, you appear to be making all KINDS of assumptions here that don't seem to make any sense.


As a scientist (before I became an engineer), I learned not to make any undeclared assumptions. That ZeoTiVo made an assertion concerning your motivation is a fact. His assertion may have rested upon some assumptions, I don't really know, since I haven't asked and I am not going to make an assumption to the effect.



SteveHC1 said:


> Be that as it may, I've already answered the question.


Yes, you did.



SteveHC1 said:


> - _"Dangerous"???_ I think NOT LOL!!!


Yes, dangerous. Not physically, of course, but personal experience and anecdotal evidence have a high probability of leading one to an incorrect conclusion, and in any large population (there are thousands of CATV franchises in the USA), significant local variations are not at all uncommon. Thus, even if every CATV company with which you have dealt is crappy and getting crappier, it does not necessarily mean the industry as a whole follows suit. Basing any wide sweeping statement upon your personal experience results in a significant danger that you may be wrong.



SteveHC1 said:


> - What??? PLEASE explain to me how I am "paying something between several hundred and several thousand dollars a month for OTA service." PLEASE! Let's hear THIS one!


I shouldn't have to explain this to you or anyone else, yet few people seem to bother to think about it, despite it being by a very wide margin the largest criminal (but unfortunately not illegal) enterprise on the planet.

The national television broadcasting networks rake in the better part of a trillion dollars a year. Just from where do you think that money comes? Thin air? On average, that's about $2000 per person per year, or about $5000 per family per year.

Do you buy groceries? Most families spend around $100 a week or so on groceries. Between $25 and $35 of that goes either directly or through an indirect path into the coffers of the networks.

Have you bought a new car in the last few years? Several thousand dollars of the cost to you went not to Detroit or the local dealer, but to NBC, ABC, CBS, and Fox. If you bought your car used, then the network's bite out of the apple was somewhat smaller, but still some amount of the total was tied up in advertising. Either way, the oil and gasoline you put into the car bear more in advertising costs than in tax tarrifs.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Again, PLEASE let us hear your rationale for claiming that OTA is costing me - and everyone else, I assume - "several thousand dollars a year" for OTA. Your "logic" escapes me.


The logic is simple, although what I am presenting here is necessarily oversimplified. Shut down the national networks, and the price of virtually every single item you purchase could be dropped by 30%, on average. It would save the citizens on the order of $600 billion dollars a year.

It makes me almost physically sick to think about it. More than half a trillion dollars a year, and what do they give us in return? Survivor. Gray's Anatomy.











SteveHC1 said:


> - And who says I - or anyone ELSE for that matter - wishes to "keep several thousand different programs on hand"??? I don't know about you, but I do not watch tv for a living.


I don't watch TV for a living, either. I have a couple of thousand books in my book library, as well, but I also don't spend every waking moment reading books. The intent of an extensive library of videos is not to watch TV continuously, but to have an excellent selection of programs from which to choose at any time. I have a number of friends with much larger DVD* collections than I have. The studios are selling millions of DVDs a year. Who do you think is buying them? Perhaps you don't buy DVDs, but millions of Americans do. While the average American does not own a video server, they are rapidly becoming more and more popular, and keeping videos on a server is all things considered much handier than individual DVDs. It's also much cheaper and generally more convenient to record the videos than to purchase the DVD.

* - by DVD, I mean any DVD-like media, including HD-DVD, Blu-ray, SVCD, etc.


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> Also, I would recommend ignoring both Bicker and Irhorer. Bicker likes to do just that and Irhorer reminds me of that other Texan that the voters just sent back to Texas with his tail tucked. He also didnt make much sense.


Don't *EVER* compare me to that lying moron! I'd rather be compared to a Panamanian pimp than George W. As to making sense, I am not responsible for any intellectual deficiencies you may suffer. My posts are all sensible, unless they reference personal preferences, in which case they don't need to make sense.


----------



## lrhorer

billyjoebob99 said:


> I believe he is talking about the tax dollars spent on PBS


I am not happy about that, but the situation with PBS is complex, and the actual money involved is trifling. At least they deliver a moderate amount of decent content, and their principle support is voluntary. That it still winds up coming out of my pocket I do not like, but to receive the content I would gladly cough up the coins. Such is not the case with network television.



billyjoebob99 said:


> and the like and the ad dollars spent on everything else. While it is indirect we are all spending that money every time we buy a product or service advertised on OTA TV.


The fact it is indirect makes it worse, from one perspective. Certainly it is only because it is indirect that they can force us all to pay. If they were coming to me directly for the cash, I would tell them to blow it out their keester, and I suspect almost every American would do the same. Only a complete moron would pay the kinds of money they extort from us for the bilious trash they produce.


----------



## lrhorer

fallingwater said:


> Your lower figure seems high for a person or family of average income. Poor people pay no income taxes


No, it's not. Income taxes have nothing to do with it. The average family purchases something on the order of $10,000 a year in products and services of various types, from groceries to home repair to computers and of course DVRs. Roughly $3000 of that amount is advertising, mostly on the national networks.



fallingwater said:


> and often competition and advertising result in lowered prices.


Competition may result in lower pricing, but not always. More to the point, this has nothing to do with competition. While Madison Avenue would have you believe differently, advertising essentially never results in lowered prices.



fallingwater said:


> But what's the point of comparing advertising costs and taxes to cable prices? Not having cable or TiVo service saves $$$ while watching OTA TV costs nothing over the one-time cost of a TV and, if necessary, a digital converter.


There are three points to the missive. One is that people are complaining very loudly about a comparatively minor issue while ignoring a major issue altogether. It's like a doctor treating a patient for an ingrown toenail while ignoring the fact he has lung cancer.

The second is such an attitude is the very reason we are allowing ourselves to be ripped off.

The third is we now find ourselves in fairly bad financial straits, with much of our industrial infrastructure failing. There are a number of contributing reasons for this, but one of the major ones is the inability of a business which produces something rather costly to provide and sells to a user to compete with businesses whose production costs are nearly insignificant and can force the general populace at large to pay for the product whether they use it or not.


----------



## lrhorer

fallingwater said:


> I'm biased against paying more for a service than I need or want from it.


The statement doesn't make much sense, but I follow what you mean... I think. You're saying you don't want to have to pay any more than necessary for the products you buy, I take it. Perhaps you are also saying you don't want to pay for products you don't particularly care to use. If so, see my posts above.

Of course no one wants to shell out money if they don't have to for some reason. The point here is there are more reasons to enforce CableCard useage than just enabling the viewing of encrypted videos, and circumventing the use of CableCards may have more consequences than just lowering costs to low end consumers.



fallingwater said:


> If TiVo offered manual mapping of unscrambled QAM channels it would provide an option which could actually lower a monthly cable bill


Only for a very small number of users. That's not the point, however.

A couple of years ago, I got fed up with the customer service and performance of Vonage as a phone provider. I looked around and found another provider: Sunrocket. They were considerably cheaper and had even more features than Vonage, so I went with them. After a year, my contract expired, so I bellied up to the bar and purchased another year of service, quite happy to be saving an extra $10 a month or so. Two months later, Sunrocket went bankrupt and shut down, taking my money with them. Far from saving me money, it cost me a great deal more for two months worth of service than Vonage would have charged me.

The moral of the story is going with a cheaper alternative may not always save you money in the long term. Allowing subscribers to not take advantage of the services offered by CableCards may very well result in a worse situation and more cash outlay down the road. I cannot prove this, and indeed it may not be true, being it's a rather crystal ball sort of thing. No matter what, though, it does represent a stumbling stone in the road of a seamless and ubiquitous delivery of separable security, whose end result should be a much greater range of CATV based services for those who wish to take advantage of them, and hopefully lower prices in the long run.


----------



## Koan

Why all the animosity in this thread to a feature many would like to see? I personally never use MRV or TTG and think QAM mapping is more integral to the basic function of a DVR. But what the hell, why can't we push for it all?


----------



## lrhorer

Koan said:


> Why all the animosity in this thread to a feature many would like to see?


Because it is possible implementing the feature could contribute to the demise of the entire industry. Look up the phrase "bread and circuses". Getting what one wants is not always a good thing. Replay TV was extremely popular because it was able to eliminate commercials automatically, and it is a frequently requested feature on the TiVo. Replay TV was sued out of existence because it delivered on this feature.



Koan said:


> I personally never use MRV or TTG


That's fine, neither do I, or at least not much. Mostly I use TTCB.



Koan said:


> and think QAM mapping is more integral to the basic function of a DVR.


Being integral to the operation of the DVR is not the point. There is a standard method by design intent of dealing with the issue already in place. Providing an additional work-around may be a very bad idea, self-centered and short-sighted desires notwithstanding.


----------



## slowbiscuit

lrhorer said:


> Because it is possible implementing the feature could contribute to the demise of the entire industry. Look up the phrase "bread and circuses". Getting what one wants is not always a good thing. Replay TV was extremely popular because it was able to eliminate commercials automatically, and it is a frequently requested feature on the TiVo. Replay TV was sued out of existence because it delivered on this feature.


LOL, demise of the industry??  
No one here opposes QAM mapping, it would be a useful feature, but apparently not worth Tivo's efforts.

ReplayTV (actually, Sonicblue) was also sued for providing an internet sharing feature for recorded programs, not just commercial skip. And ReplayTV wasn't 'sued out of existence' - later models were released (the 55xx series) by the company that bought out Sonicblue, and DirectTV now owns what's left of the company delivering service to existing units.


----------



## JWThiers

I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all. No subscription fees would mean less revenue, which would mean higher hardware costs to make up the difference, which could mean fewer units being sold which could lead to no more tivo. So yes something like that could cause the entire company to fail and some would argue that tivo is the industry.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> Your lower figure seems high for a person or family of average income. Poor people pay no income taxes and often competition and advertising result in lowered prices.
> 
> But what's the point of comparing advertising costs and taxes to cable prices? Not having cable or TiVo service saves $$$ while watching OTA TV costs nothing over the one-time cost of a TV and, if necessary, a digital converter.





lrhorer said:


> No, it's not. Income taxes have nothing to do with it. The average family purchases something on the order of $10,000 a year in products and services of various types, from groceries to home repair to computers and of course DVRs. Roughly $3000 of that amount is advertising, mostly on the national networks.
> 
> Competition may result in lower pricing, but not always. More to the point, this has nothing to do with competition. While Madison Avenue would have you believe differently, advertising essentially never results in lowered prices.
> 
> There are three points to the missive. One is that people are complaining very loudly about a comparatively minor issue while ignoring a major issue altogether. It's like a doctor treating a patient for an ingrown toenail while ignoring the fact he has lung cancer.
> 
> The second is such an attitude is the very reason we are allowing ourselves to be ripped off.
> 
> The third is we now find ourselves in fairly bad financial straits, with much of our industrial infrastructure failing. There are a number of contributing reasons for this, but one of the major ones is the inability of a business which produces something rather costly to provide and sells to a user to compete with businesses whose production costs are nearly insignificant and can force the general populace at large to pay for the product whether they use it or not.


An argument such as this can go on almost indefinitely.

At this point, without statistical references, let's just agree to disagree about both the numbers and the significance of specific issues which serve to frame our underlying philosophical differences.

You may be right, or not; but frankly the social cost of providing OTA TV is OT in this thread. Perhaps the best place is at the _Happy Hour_!


----------



## ZeoTiVo

slowbiscuit said:


> ReplayTV (actually, Sonicblue) was also sued for providing an internet sharing feature for recorded programs, not just commercial skip. And ReplayTV wasn't 'sued out of existence' - later models were released (the 55xx series) by the company that bought out Sonicblue, and DirectTV now owns what's left of the company delivering service to existing units.


off topic but replayTV is essentially "out of existence" now.
D&M Holdings will remain the operator of the existing service contracts for current subscribers for the foreseeable future while DIRECTV bought only the rights to the technology of replayTV. The replay on PC is abandoned and no new replay technology will ever see the light of day.

The demise of replay was indeed directly attributed to the fact they bet on the consumer by doing things the content providers did not like. The deep pockets of the content providers brought in lawyers that racked up legal costs on replay it could not afford and started the collapse of that company. TiVo well regards that lesson and works to be seen as part of the industry versus a disruptor of the industry.

I see no way TiVo could be sued over QAM mapping and doubt the cable industry would be all that upset if TiVo did map QAM channels. So this path in the debate seems to not be all that relevant.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

JWThiers said:


> I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all. No subscription fees would mean less revenue, which would mean higher hardware costs to make up the difference, which could mean fewer units being sold which could lead to no more tivo. So yes something like that could cause the entire company to fail and some would argue that tivo is the industry.


good point, many posts here about people wanting to just manually record without pay the sub fee. Any manual mapping by TiVo would have to be limited in scope.


----------



## vstone

JWThiers said:


> I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all. No subscription fees would mean less revenue, which would mean higher hardware costs to make up the difference, which could mean fewer units being sold which could lead to no more tivo. So yes something like that could cause the entire company to fail and some would argue that tivo is the industry.


Nope. Your Tivo won't record anything without a subscription.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> I'm biased against paying more for a service than I need or want from it.
> 
> If TiVo offered manual mapping of unscrambled QAM channels it would provide an option which could actually lower a monthly cable bill while giving TiVo a selling point which might be more compelling than offering instant gratification at a price.
> 
> Notice the absence of prices on Domino's menu. Wonder how much revenue TiVo's Domino's connection actually brings in!
> http://www.dominos-now.com/menu.html





lrhorer said:


> The statement doesn't make much sense, but I follow what you mean... I think. You're saying you don't want to have to pay any more than necessary for the products you buy, I take it. Perhaps you are also saying you don't want to pay for products you don't particularly care to use. If so, see my posts above.
> 
> Of course no one wants to shell out money if they don't have to for some reason. The point here is there are more reasons to enforce CableCard useage than just enabling the viewing of encrypted videos, and circumventing the use of CableCards may have more consequences than just lowering costs to low end consumers.
> 
> Only for a very small number of users. That's not the point, however.
> 
> A couple of years ago, I got fed up with the customer service and performance of Vonage as a phone provider. I looked around and found another provider: Sunrocket. They were considerably cheaper and had even more features than Vonage, so I went with them. After a year, my contract expired, so I bellied up to the bar and purchased another year of service, quite happy to be saving an extra $10 a month or so. Two months later, Sunrocket went bankrupt and shut down, taking my money with them. Far from saving me money, it cost me a great deal more for two months worth of service than Vonage would have charged me.
> 
> The moral of the story is going with a cheaper alternative may not always save you money in the long term. Allowing subscribers to not take advantage of the services offered by CableCards may very well result in a worse situation and more cash outlay down the road. I cannot prove this, and indeed it may not be true, being it's a rather crystal ball sort of thing. No matter what, though, it does represent a stumbling stone in the road of a seamless and ubiquitous delivery of separable security, whose end result should be a much greater range of CATV based services for those who wish to take advantage of them, and hopefully lower prices in the long run.


My reference to bias stemmed from ZeoTiVo's post 1211 but you got what I meant.

Can't prove it but I have a suspicion that TiVo's decision to ignore manual mapping of unscrambled QAM stems from a conscious corporate philosophy to 'get along' with associated business enterprises such as cable companies, much as they did regarding previous issues affecting TV advertisers.

If my suspicion is true, more power to E* and Moxi I guess. Cable customers who want to save on their bills but want a DVR can find old hi-def Sonys with TVGOS manual mapping on eBay routinely.

TiVo offers a feature set beyond what many DVR users need but omits other useful simple features. The pizza thing is a prime example of developing something totally unnecessary only because it could be developed.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> I see no way TiVo could be sued over QAM mapping and doubt the cable industry would be all that upset if TiVo did map QAM channels. So this path in the debate seems to not be all that relevant.


I still have suspicions regarding TiVo's corporate philosophy regarding what are essentially business associates whether or not being sued is an issue. TiVo doesn't believe in making waves!


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> good point, many posts here about people wanting to just manually record without pay the sub fee. Any manual mapping by TiVo would have to be limited in scope.


Huh? Using TiVo without a sub gets no channel line-up and can't record. What do you mean?


----------



## lew

lrhorer said:


> Do you buy groceries? Most families spend around $100 a week or so on groceries. Between $25 and $35 of that goes either directly or through an indirect path into the coffers of the networks.


Advertising is virtually non-existent for most fresh meats and fresh produce.. Many people save money by purchasing store brands. Does it make sense to buy name brand sugar or flour? I'm not even sure if your 30% figure is accurate for a customer that only purchases TV dinners, it's certainly not true for my purchases.

Many stores have store brands of items ranging from cold pills, vitamins, detergent even TV sets. Customers who want to save a few dollars can by items with greatly reduced "marketing" costs associated with their purchase. There is a brand of suntan lotion called "NO-AD". They attribute its lower price to their decision not to advertise.

Some items, such as DVRs probably benefit from ads. It exposes the product to potential customers that don't know about it.



lrhorer said:


> No, it's not. Income taxes have nothing to do with it. The average family purchases something on the order of $10,000 a year in products and services of various types, from groceries to home repair to computers and of course DVRs. Roughly $3000 of that amount is advertising, mostly on the national networks.


I suspect your 30% figure is greatly inflated. I wouldn't be surprised if it includes promotional discounts such as coupons and discounts passed on to consumers as part of the retailers weekly sale promotion.

I wouldn't be surprised if some items, soft drinks?, have high advertising costs.


----------



## kbaybob

I'm not so sure that TiVo is the problem in this whole QAM issue. Oceanic Time Warner in Honolulu absolutely refuses as a matter of policy to divulge the QAM channel numbers to their customers. The claim is that because those channel numbers change often, they are meaningless (in my experience NBC and another channel have changed just since August, while ABC and CBS have remained the same). It also appears that they do not provide PSIP mapping (what does that stand for, by the way?), as all the stations show up on random channels that have nothing to do with what the stations transmit on from their own transmitters. The only way to find relocated channels is to do a channel scan with the TiVo (or TV), activate all the scanned channels, and then manually view each one to see what is on and try to identify the station. A scan of Oceanic Time Warner's channels comes up with 347 QAM channels, of which only about 10 actually have programming. That means that potentially one has to individually tune to and view 347 channels just to find the 5 local stations that have HD program content. How is this TiVo's fault? I think it is the cableco.

Oceanic says its interpretation of the FCC rules is that it has to provide 'a' signal from the local TV stations, not that it has to provide ALL the signals. They then interpret this to mean that they provide the SD signal only. They also provide the HD signal in most cases (PBS being notably absent), but they make it very difficult to find on their QAM system. I think we should be writing the FCC and the local cable regulators to get the cable companies to adhere to the spirit of the law rather than their interpretation of the letter of the law, and we must ask Congress or the FCC to rewrite the regulations to require the cablecos to stabilize their QAM lineup and map the channels properly.


----------



## vstone

Must carry rules apply to a particular broadcast station's analog signal until they turn it off, then it applies to the digital signal. There were, and may still be, some HD stations that are not carried due to disagreements about compensation. However if the digital signal is carried, then it must be unencyrpted. The FCC has not ruled on carrying more than the primary digital signal.

The total lack of a PSIP signal is an interesting case. Some PSIP data for broadcast must be present on the cable system if it is in the received signal. But there is no requirement to supply such data when the signal is carried via fiber optic (ie not via OTA). The PSIP table is invoked as law by reference, but I'm not sure of the case where PSIP data is completely unpopulated. This is a big hole where the FCC hasn't enforced or clarified.


----------



## lew

vstone--I suspect a number of the larger cable systems get the broadcast channels via fiber optic cable and not via antenna. Further I'm not sure what kind of priority the FCC puts on enforcing PSIP rules.

I just checked my FiOS. I connected the cable directly to my TV set and did a scan. All of the channels that listed displayed PSIP type of data on the screen were blank. The stations were located on frequencies that had no data associated with them.


----------



## slowbiscuit

ZeoTiVo said:


> off topic but replayTV is essentially "out of existence" now.


But it wasn't as a direct result of the lawsuit, because as I said later models WERE released, without the auto commskip and internet sharing features (and I have two of them). 
Is it moribund now? Yes. But it wasn't in 2003 after DNNA purchased what was left of Sonicblue, and that's what I meant.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

slowbiscuit said:


> But it wasn't as a direct result of the lawsuit, because as I said later models WERE released, without the auto commskip and internet sharing features (and I have two of them).
> Is it moribund now? Yes. But it wasn't in 2003 after DNNA purchased what was left of Sonicblue, and that's what I meant.


Ok, but that is kind of like saying a fish still exists simply because the shark swallowed it without tearing it in half. 
If replayTV had left off the commercial skip and internet file sharing I think their business would have had a very different history. 
The lesson of replayTV is however very germane when talking of features Tivo should incorporate. TiVo needs to always keep in mind it is a small fish swimming in a big pond. It is a tough little fish and has learned to swim with sharks fairly well but it only takes one time caught near the mouth for it all to be downhill from there.


----------



## bicker

jccfin said:


> Also, I would recommend ignoring both Bicker and Irhorer.


In other words, this is how you feel:









Don't feel too bad, though: Many people don't want to see reality that contradicts how they want things to be.



fallingwater said:


> I'm biased against paying more for a service than I need or want from it.


That's a ludicrous perversion of the English language. You don't want to pay what suppliers are willing to sell for. The way to handle that is to do without.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> My reference to bias stemmed from ZeoTiVo's post 1211 but you got what I meant.
> 
> Can't prove it but I have a suspicion that TiVo's decision to ignore manual mapping of unscrambled QAM stems from a conscious corporate philosophy to 'get along' with associated business enterprises such as cable companies, much as they did regarding previous issues affecting TV advertisers.


 umm, then how do you explain TTG and TTCB, Amazon and streaming of Netflix? These are things that cable companies decidely do not want as they can get no revenue from them and can loose revenue. i give my money to Netflix versus use PPV or premium channels for instance. To say that some one feature meets your smell test while a whole stinking pile of stuff the cable companies do not want is sitting right there is just not logical.



> TiVo offers a feature set beyond what many DVR users need but omits other useful simple features. The pizza thing is a prime example of developing something totally unnecessary only because it could be developed.


umm, the "pizza thing" is figuring out how DVRs can be used to skip over traditional 30 sec. spots while still finding revenue from advertisers. No advertisers - no shows - nothing to broadcast. 
So to say it is totally unnecessary is to


bicker said:


>


----------



## jccfin

bicker said:


> In other words, this is how you feel:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't feel too bad, though: Many people don't want to see reality that contradicts how they want things to be.
> 
> That's a ludicrous perversion of the English language. You don't want to pay what suppliers are willing to sell for. The way to handle that is to do without.


As I said before, lets just agree that we disagree. As far as contradictions are concerned, you and Irhorer are the only people here speaking Doublespeak. Black becomes white and white becomes black. Irhorer posted something ealier about me having to pay for the free TVGOS service that I receive on my Sony TV even though my wallet speaks completely to the contrary. As far as I know, no money transfers between me and TV guide and yet for some strange reason I still get service? Humm..He then makes the same argument to Fallingwater about how OTA service is not free. OK, as Groucho Marx said, who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?

For you two, you seem to believe in the former and not the latter. That makes the blind monkey drawing ever so ironic.

BTW, you keep arguing that Tivo shouldnt have to implement manual mapping because the problem is that we dont want to pay for cablecards. That is only half correct because Tivo NEVER sold Tivo to *require* cablecards. Please show me evidence to the contrary and perhaps you then have some merit, otherwise, youre just like your blind monkey.


----------



## lew

jccfin said:


> That is only half correct because Tivo NEVER sold Tivo to *require* cablecards. Please show me evidence to the contrary and perhaps you then have some merit, otherwise, youre just like your blind monkey.


The wording in the website
http://www.tivo.com/setupandsupport...t_Guide_Data_for_Rebroadcast_HD_Channels.html

is pretty clear.

The wording on the box indicates a possible cable card requirement. I have some sympathy for the poster who called prior to purchasing his unit and was given wrong information. That person decided not to ask for a refund. Otherwise there is no basis to assume you won't need a cable card. Tivo never promised or promoted clear QAM mapping as a feature.


----------



## jccfin

lew said:


> The wording in the website
> http://www.tivo.com/setupandsupport...t_Guide_Data_for_Rebroadcast_HD_Channels.html
> 
> is pretty clear.
> 
> The wording on the box indicates a possible cable card requirement. I have some sympathy for the poster who called prior to purchasing his unit and was given wrong information. That person decided not to ask for a refund. Otherwise there is no basis to assume you won't need a cable card. Tivo never promised or promoted clear QAM mapping as a feature.


Yea, where were you when I purchased mine?

I looked and asked the salesperson about it but was told that it was not neccessary. I bought the refurb 3 seris on discount and only had a week or so to return it and by the time I got around to setting it up and using it, it was too late. Anyway, caveat emptor I suppose.


----------



## bicker

jccfin said:


> As I said before, lets just agree that we disagree.


You're free to stop responding to me anytime you'd wish. If you're looking to have a venue to make statements in support of your position, without those statements being subject to someone who disagrees with those statements expressing that disagreement, then perhaps you want to post your comments in a blog rather than a discussion thread. :up:



jccfin said:


> As far as contradictions are concerned, you and Irhorer are the only people here speaking Doublespeak.


Incorrect. We're not. We're making perfect sense, and you perhaps don't like that. That's okay... you don't have to like that people disagree with you, and express those disagreements with compelling arguments. Don't get so bent out of shape about it -- and don't make vacuous statements like your comment quoted above.



jccfin said:


> BTW, you keep arguing that Tivo shouldnt have to implement manual mapping because the problem is that we dont want to pay for cablecards.


You're lying again. I've been saying that TiVo has many other things of higher priority than this. That's what I've been saying. You've demonstrated, over and over again, that you're incapable of restating what I've argued without perverting it into something easier to argue against. You seem to rely on such intellectual dishonesty a lot. Stop it. Don't paraphrase what I've written. Quote me directly, or don't say anything at all -- or get ready for me to call you out again each time you lie about what I've argued.


----------



## SteveHC1

Boy, I'm gone maybe 24 hrs. and the discussion on this thread gets even WILDER! Guess that's what I like about this thread - seems to have more intelligent discussions and discussants than all the others on TiVo Community Forum put together. Anyway, I'll try to stay as on-topic as I can.

First, no need for anyone here to be nasty to others, demeaning, condescending, or to accuse ANYBODY of "lying" because they're NOT - I haven't seen ANYONE here "lie" about ANYTHING or ANYONE. We need to remember that forums and threads such as this one are digital, text-based communications media, the contents of which are EASILY misunderstood by us readers and writers because more often than not we are not as thorough in our written explanations here as we probably should be and would be in a "perfect world." In other words, the "lies" are most often simply one misunderstanding the other, secondarily simply differences of opinion. So let's cut each other some slack while enjoying the discourse folks and try not to take ourselves and each other QUITE so seriously! Waddaya say?

That said, some of which I'm about to write is simply observation, some of it is opinion, and some of it is demonstrable fact... OK?

I was a HUGE fan of cable companies and the community-based cooperatives (anyone here remember THOSE?) when they first arrived on the scene. Analog reception was HORRENDOUS in most of the country, and here came along a couple of ideas that resulted in our finally being able to get GREAT reception on the channels that we were otherwise hardly able to get in at all, AND the service was at a VERY reasonable cost especially considering the amount of cable lines and equipment that had to be laid and invested in. WONDERFUL! They even added HBO and ShowTime to their lineups - the first commercial-free channels (aside from PBS) that offered movies and later original scripted shows, paid for almost entirely by *voluntary* subscription fees additional to the basic cable fees.

But after a while some NOT-so-great things began to happen... cable companies began to merge, get bought out by conglomerates (eventually including some of the largest program providers themselves), and started to become overbearing monopolies adopting predatory practices. They first attacked the co-ops, driving them out of "the business." While adding on more and more subscribers, they allowed the quality and strength of their signals to deteriorate, while adding on more and more ADVERTISING-LADEN "channels" to their lineups ("SuperStation TBS" being among the first), then started jacking up their subscription fees DRAMATICALLY, and even insisted on being paid more for multiple tv hook-ups within a household - regardless of whether or not one added on an amplifier, etc. The situation got SO bad that state and local governments throughout the country had to develop "meatier" regulatory measures in the local franchise agreements in order to protect the population from ever-increasing BASIC cable fees. Cable companies reacted by insisting that they be allowed to charge EVERYONE for EVERYTHING, and resisted the "tier" concept. Ultimately a compromise was reached, wherein only the MOST "limited basic" grouping of channels would be so regulated (generally consisting of an area's local tv broadcasters, coupled with a requirement that local access channels be provided), but allowing the cable companies to do pretty much whatever they wanted with the rest of their offerings. A subscriber's restricted access to only the "tiers" and channels that they were paying for was initially achieved via the application of "filters," or "blocks" that were installed in a household's incoming line, but when people started to tamper with them arrests for theft of service were pursued and eventually the companies began "scrambling" their non-limited basic offerings centrally. FAIR ENOUGH.

As the sheer number of non-local, advertising-based "stations" (some originally broadcast, others "cable-only" "narrow-casters") on the companies' lineups began to rise astronomically, digital encryption became required and the cable companies FURTHER raised their rates, citing the increased number of channels (and royalty fees they had to pay some of those "stations") as justification (but also tagging on increased PROFIT margins as well) without soliciting input from their subscribers FIRST regarding whether or not they even WANTED all of these additional stations, most of which were simply providing an endless stream of syndicated reruns and old movies - and ALL of which were chopped up by an equally unending stream of COMMERCIALS. The situation got SO out of hand that many regulators began requiring companies to make at least SOME attempt to query their subscribers regarding what channels to add (and to delete) BEFORE making the changes (net additions) to their lineups - but the rate of increase of channels got SO great (as did the subscription fees, size of the monopolies and their growing profits) that the regulators eventually "gave up." Subscribers began to react by purchasing black and grey-market "converter boxes," leading the cable companies to deploy the more sophisticated digital converter boxes and cablecards, developed by multi-corporate consortiums, that we now see. Which brings me to our thread topic:

With the advent of originally cable-company inspired digital cable channels and later government-mandated digital broadcast standards, cable companies nation-wide have embarked on nefarious efforts to get as many still-regulated "basic tier" (and generally analog) subscribers to move to the relatively unregulated and higher-priced tiers as they possibly could, as fast as they could. This began when LOCAL broadcasters began offering digital, including HD, transmissions as per government mandate. The cable companies began offering these broadcast transmissions, but more often than not ONLY on un-publicized digital tuner frequencies - thus being able to claim that they're obeying the LETTER of the law - but in so doing they ALSO say "Hey - if you want us to tell you WHERE to tune in to these channels, Sorry! You'll have to rent a set-top box or CableCard. And oh, by the way - these are "digital" channels, so as per our advertising we think you'll ALSO need to pay more money for our new 'digital' tier... and if you want the HD 'versions' of the old analog or digital cable-only stations that you've been paying more for to begin with, you'll have to fork over even MORE money for our even NEWER 'HD' package!"

Now admittedly some cable companies are not QUITE as unscrupulous as others. But virtually ALL are guilty of DELIBERATELY making it as hard as humanly possible for their BASIC - note GOVERNMENT REGULATED AND "PROTECTED" tier - subscribers to receive their local broadcasters' clear QAM digital and HD transmissions as they possibly could. They are doing this by at least CLAIMING to frequently change their frequencies (in fact they RARELY actually do so because of the effort involved) and not offering ANY info on where these re-transmissions might be found on one's TUNER - with, of course, the hope and expectation that eventually most subscribers will just give up and give in to what *I* think ALMOST amounts to an extortion of sorts. *REMEMBER -* the cable companies _MAKE MONEY_ off of their set-top boxes and CableCards - as do the MANUFACTURERS of them! *NONE* of these companies make money off of the ATSC/NTSC "cable-ready" tuners that come built into virtually every TV set that's sold on the market these days - Not a DIME! Consequently, the cable companies and their equipment suppliers will do just about ANYTHING to render your set's tuner USELESS for anything but OTA reception (not coincidentally the ONE thing they CAN'T make money off of)! At any rate, the practices of cable companies regarding clear QAM re-transmissions of local broadcasters' digital and HD channels violates the INTENT of the law and relevant regulations. And THIS is what cable companies are - among other things - slowly being brought before courts and regulatory agencies over.

Enter TiVo. I FULLY understand why TIVO wishes to remain on the "good side" of cable companies. TiVo just got through taking cable and satellite companies to court over its desire to take in more revenue by being allowed by those companies to put TiVo software into those companies' set-top converter/dvr boxes and collecting appropriate royalty fees from it! TiVo now - understandably - WANTS those contracts with the cable and satellite companies. The greater the number of revenue streams for TiVo the better - at least for TiVo - right?

But the fact is that those of us insisting on the ability to manually re-map these clear QAM channels to pre-existing Tribune (and WHY does it _have_ to be TRIBUNE forever, by the way? There _are_ alternatives - THINK about it!) programming guide data are RIGHT to try to pressure TiVo into incorporating that feature into at _least_ the *TiVo-branded dvrs that we've purchased and are also paying subscriptions for.* What the hell did we fork over hundreds and hundreds of dollars for on the "genuine" TiVo brand when we could have simply gone with the cable companies' converter/dvr boxes, at a FRACTION of the costs of a TiVo-branded unit AND with a good chance that the MUCH cheaper cable company dvr units may very well now have TiVo software in them *ANYWAY?!!!* YES the problem is of the cable companies' creation in the first place, and YES we should be lobbying those companies to stick to not just the letter but the INTENT of the laws and regulations. But it is ALSO true that the cable companies are in truth MONOPOLIES, and fighting them means more often than not having to deal with GOVERNMENT agencies as well - a daunting challenge for even the most ambitious and persevering of us. It makes FAR more sense for us as consumers to do whatever we can to pressure *TIVO* to allow us to schedule Season Passes - a feature for which we are paying _dearly_ - on these clear QAM channels by manually re-mapping the Guide data to the (deliberately undocumented, and for all of the wrong reasons) frequencies we discover them to be re-transmitted on! Our ability to do so would IN NO WAY "circumvent" a cable company's right to collect what it rightfully charges for the programming that it provides. Quite the contrary - it would ensure that WE CONSUMERS get what we are already paying for - from both TiVo AND the cable companies. The ability to know what frequency (by _*law*_ un-encrypted) such channels are on would IN NO WAY curtail a cable company's ability to "survive" - it would simply give us the product that we are already being CHARGED for!

TiVo and Tribune's complicity in these shenanigans of the cable companies is OBVIOUS, and they even do nothing to even DENY let alone RECTIFY it. But it is _also_ true, unfortunately for us consumers, that this is their RIGHT as separate corporate entities. The only REALLY viable alternatives for most of us TiVo owner/subscribers - if we want to retain access to TiVo's POSITIVE features - at least in the short run are to either fork over yet MORE money to the cable companies than we already are, or ditch them altogether and stick with OTA (which digital/HD OTA transmission has made MUCH more practical) and Internet "reception" - both of which (in my opinion) TiVo increasingly excels at.

On the "off-topic of the day" - As far as the "hidden cost" of "free" OTA broadcasting - the fact of the matter is NOTHING IS "FREE" in this world, my friends, NOTHING. That "free" airline ticket you got with "free miles"? PAID for BY YOU every time you PURCHASE a ticket, RENT a car or BOOK a hotel room through your airline's website, PURCHASE a product via one of your airline's co-branded credit cards, etc. The "free" antibiotic that you might have received at your local supermarket's pharmacy counter? PAID FOR by YOU when you bought your GROCERIES at that same supermarket. That "free" product sample that you received in the mail without even asking for it? Well, you get the idea. The list goes on and on.

Yes, the cost of advertising is built into the cost of virtually ALL of the goods and services that we purchase day in and day out. Not to the extent of it being "30%" of the final cost to the consumer (with the one possible exception being soft drinks - but even then it's not that high - those companies' PROFIT MARGINS is what drives the consumer's cost... even a cup of COFFEE purchased at your local DINER has an UNBELIEVABLE profit margin) - product R & D and DISTRIBUTION costs are mostly what jacks up our prices so much more than the actual manufacturing costs for *most* products. But NOTHING is "free." On the positive side, it is the _advertising_ that, after all, allows us to even know of the _existence_ of the product that we may someday choose to "buy" - that is, if the advertising is successful at getting us to believe that we now "need" the product whose existence we may very well have not only been previously ignorant of, but the "need" for which if we _had_ known of its existence had previously "escaped" us!!! 

It _is_ true that advertising dollars are INCREASINGLY being siphoned off of BROADCAST television and radio, printed material, etc., and INTO you-know what - the INTERNET, along with motion picture and television show product placements and marketing tie-ins, etc. _*BIG*_ time. And yet our television programming - both broadcast _*AND*_ "cable-only" - is MORE laden with paid-for advertising than _EVER_ before - because the COST of that advertising has been substantially LOWERED by broadcasters and other audio/video content providers in their competition for those corporate advertising dollars. And here's MY beef - cable companies ADD to it all by charging us MORE and MORE to view MORE channels that offer programming that is ALREADY overly-laden with those paid-for commercials! So CABLE consumers are actually paying still MORE to watch programming that's ALREADY been financed by paid-for ADVERTISING!

And of course we all know that now even _TIVO's_ gotten into the act, by offering SCREEN SPACE and LINKS to still MORE advertising!

Especially with this deepening economic recession, I for one simply cannot justify in my budget the increasing costs incurred to ME by cable companies' increasingly self-imposed overhead and business-to-business contracts - let alone higher profit margins. So I'll stay with my plan to dump cable television altogether and stick with OTA and Internet-delivered video programing via my TiVo - until cable companies start offering more al-a-carte deals AND a better dvr product comes on the market that includes easy to use scheduling of programming on local broadcasters' clear QAM frequencies. And I'm not about to hold my breath for either. And neither are many, _many_ other TiVo subscribers, whose plans to do likewise are being increasingly aired on these and other forums.

'Nuff said!


----------



## lew

jccfin said:


> Yea, where were you when I purchased mine?
> 
> I looked and asked the salesperson about it but was told that it was not neccessary. I bought the refurb 3 seris on discount and only had a week or so to return it and by the time I got around to setting it up and using it, it was too late. Anyway, caveat emptor I suppose.


If it bothered me that much I would have either made the retailer take it back or tried to get tivo to "buy" it back. I'm assuming you found out the unit didn't do what you were told when you set it up. How long did you wait to set it up? Two weeks? It's crazy not to set up a refurbed unit during the return period.



bicker said:


> You're lying again. I've been saying that TiVo has many other things of higher priority than this. That's what I've been saying. You've demonstrated, over and over again, that you're incapable of restating what I've argued without perverting it into something easier to argue against. You seem to rely on such intellectual dishonesty a lot. Stop it. Don't paraphrase what I've written. Quote me directly, or don't say anything at all -- or get ready for me to call you out again each time you lie about what I've argued.


I'm the one who said *one of the reasons* QAM mapping is a low priority is because cable cards work. Saving a few customers a few dollars in cc rental fees isn't enough of a reason to move the priority up in a to do list.


----------



## bicker

We must all look the same, to jccfin, eh, lew?


----------



## vstone

The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels. I would love for my second Tivo S3 (w/o cablecards) to record local HD broadcasts via cable. However, when I see the wide range of ways that cable companies have implemented (or not implemented) PSIP tables, I don't see why they should break their butts providing a mapping capability that theorectically shouldn't be needed and wouldn't be needed if the cable companies would cooperate.

OTOH, it shouldn't have been hard for them to provide setups supporting those cable systems that did have virtual channel numbers assigned t unencrypted channels. Perhaps they could not get the cable companies to confirm that they wouldn't change virtual channel numbers. For the record, Time-Warner South Carolina actually had virtual channel numbers assigned to local HD broadcasts until FEB 07, when they disappeared. Their local and head end techs denied that any change had eaken place, as did the techs on my local Comcast system when some virtual channel numbers suddenly appeared on some channels, with 2 virtual channel numbers assigned to 2 actual different channels each. In this environment, who would Tivo go to to straighten out channel assignments?

I know that some of you want Tivo to take on the cable companies. It's like when your spouse wants to vacation in New England even though you've been there five times and you want to make your first visit to Yellowstone. Somebody will be unhappy either way. It may be eaiser to just do nothing.


----------



## lew

Thanks for a well written post. It seems clear why QAM mapping is such a low priority.

The only issue are the (very few) potential customers that are in a system that provides all channels "in the clear" and doesn't have any type of conditional access. Generally "private" cable systems in apartments, dorms etc. I doubt there are enough potential customers in this category.



vstone said:


> The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels. I would love for my second Tivo S3 (w/o cablecards) to record local HD broadcasts via cable. However, when I see the wide range of ways that cable companies have implemented (or not implemented) PSIP tables, I don't see why they should break their butts providing a mapping capability that theorectically shouldn't be needed and wouldn't be needed if the cable companies would cooperate.
> ................
> I know that some of you want Tivo to take on the cable companies. It's like when your spouse wants to vacation in New England even though you've been there five times and you want to make your first visit to Yellowstone. Somebody will be unhappy either way. It may be eaiser to just do nothing.


----------



## JWThiers

vstone said:


> The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels. I would love for my second Tivo S3 (w/o cablecards) to record local HD broadcasts via cable. However, when I see the wide range of ways that cable companies have implemented (or not implemented) PSIP tables, I don't see why they should break their butts providing a mapping capability that theorectically shouldn't be needed and wouldn't be needed if the cable companies would cooperate.


Is that the actual design requirements that are put down on paper when the drawings are put together or is it the design requirements that you wish they used to meet your wants/needs.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels. I would love for my second Tivo S3 (w/o cablecards) to record local HD broadcasts via cable. However, when I see the wide range of ways that cable companies have implemented (or not implemented) PSIP tables, I don't see why they should break their butts providing a mapping capability that theorectically shouldn't be needed and wouldn't be needed if the cable companies would cooperate.
> 
> OTOH, it shouldn't have been hard for them to provide setups supporting those cable systems that did have virtual channel numbers assigned t unencrypted channels. Perhaps they could not get the cable companies to confirm that they wouldn't change virtual channel numbers. For the record, Time-Warner South Carolina actually had virtual channel numbers assigned to local HD broadcasts until FEB 07, when they disappeared. Their local and head end techs denied that any change had eaken place, as did the techs on my local Comcast system when some virtual channel numbers suddenly appeared on some channels, with 2 virtual channel numbers assigned to 2 actual different channels each. In this environment, who would Tivo go to to straighten out channel assignments?
> 
> I know that some of you want Tivo to take on the cable companies. It's like when your spouse wants to vacation in New England even though you've been there five times and you want to make your first visit to Yellowstone. Somebody will be unhappy either way. It may be eaiser to just do nothing.


- But this is NOT what people in this thread have been asking for. I haven't seen ANYONE asking TiVo to "take on the cable companies" or even to "keep up" with the cable companies' channel/frequency changes. This thread's about asking TiVo to allow *US USERS* to do all of that - via manual clear QAM re-mapping capability. BIG difference between this and what you you were talking about in your post.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> Thanks for a well written post. It seems clear why QAM mapping is such a low priority.
> 
> The only issue are the (very few) potential customers that are in a system that provides all channels "in the clear" and doesn't have any type of conditional access. Generally "private" cable systems in apartments, dorms etc. I doubt there are enough potential customers in this category.


- Actually, there are MILLIONS of people who are in the basic cable/clear QAM with no cablecard or set top box situation. Whether or not they are currently TiVo owners/subscribers is entirely another matter. And I would like to think that TiVo would be trying to EXPAND its customer numbers - by selling more of their OWN dvr boxes rather than by sneaking their way into cable companies' dvr's - and here in the USA, not just overseas as their current focus seems to be.


----------



## lew

Either I'm not making my point clear or you're deliberately distorting my point to fit your own agenda .

*I'm not referring *to those subscribers who are only subscribing to basic cable and, absence a tivo requirement, wouldn't need cable cards. *Those customers have the option of renting a cable card.*

I'm referring to those few potential tivo customers with a private cable system (apartments) that don't use conditional access *for any channel for any customer.* Those customers don't have the option of renting a cable card and can't use S3. I doubt there are millions of people in that category.

You keep "attacking" Tribune data. I have a TivoHD and a Verizon DVR (which doesn't use Tribune). There is no comparison. The Tribune data is more detailed and more accurate.

There seem to be three groups of (potential) customers that want QAM mapping:
1) Customers that only subscribe to clear channels and want to save the expense of renting a cable card.
2) Customers that are (currently) receiving clear channels that aren't included in the tier of service they're paying for. A cable card ensures those customers no longer receive "extra" channels.
3) Customers who are in a 100% clear system (private cable) and aren't able to rent a cable card.

I don't think there are enough potential customers in the third category to motivate tivo.

Vstone gave the issues with automatic mapping (PSIP issues) and manual mapping (changing frequencies). People miss a show. Phone calls. Threads. Bad reviews. What's the upside? Some customers save a few dollars in cable card rental fees. A few customers aren't able to rent cable cards and can't use tivo.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Actually, there are MILLIONS of people who are in the basic cable/clear QAM with no cablecard or set top box situation. Whether or not they are currently TiVo owners/subscribers is entirely another matter. And I would like to think that TiVo would be trying to EXPAND its customer numbers - by selling more of their OWN dvr boxes rather than by sneaking their way into cable companies' dvr's - and here in the USA, not just overseas as their current focus seems to be.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> edited down to nice small companies turned into evil big cable companies. Ok - no love lost by me for cable companies.
> ----
> But virtually ALL are guilty of DELIBERATELY making it as hard as humanly possible for their BASIC - note GOVERNMENT REGULATED AND "PROTECTED" tier - subscribers to receive their local broadcasters' clear QAM digital and HD transmissions as they possibly could. They are doing this by at least CLAIMING to frequently change their frequencies (in fact they RARELY actually do so because of the effort involved) and not offering ANY info on where these re-transmissions might be found on one's TUNER -
> 
> At any rate, the practices of cable companies regarding clear QAM re-transmissions of local broadcasters' digital and HD channels violates the INTENT of the law and relevant regulations. And THIS is what cable companies are - among other things - slowly being brought before courts and regulatory agencies over.
> -------


not sure about any action before courts or regulatory agencies but this is simply what has been said since the beginning of the thread - ANY mapping of QAM is doomed to be invalidated at some point and break the season passes or wishlists applied to that mapped channel.


> Enter TiVo. I FULLY understand why TIVO wishes to remain on the "good side" of cable companies. TiVo just got through taking cable and satellite companies to court over its desire to take in more revenue by being allowed by those companies to put TiVo software into those companies' set-top converter/dvr boxes and collecting appropriate royalty fees from it!


 umm no. not factual at all. TiVo has been in court with DISH over DISH stealing the design of a TiVo DVR. That is all - no legal diuscussion of putting TiVo software on any box. TiVo won the infringement but DISH has managed to keep the results in court and a contempt hearing is next on the Docket. DISH is indeed a large evil company.


> But the fact is that those of us insisting on the ability to manually re-map these clear QAM channels to pre-existing Tribune (and WHY does it _have_ to be TRIBUNE forever, by the way? There _are_ alternatives - THINK about it!) programming guide data are RIGHT to try to pressure TiVo into incorporating that feature into at _least_ the *TiVo-branded dvrs that we've purchased and are also paying subscriptions for.* What the hell did we fork over hundreds and hundreds of dollars for on the "genuine" TiVo brand when we could have simply gone with the cable companies' converter/dvr boxes, at a FRACTION of the costs of a TiVo-branded unit


 ok - certainly you can ask for a feature and you can even demand that TiVo do it. However - despite some parsing of text on the box to the side - TiVo never said nor advertised/promised that QAM mapping would be done in any form. If you find the cable company DVR a better value than use that.



> AND with a good chance that the MUCH cheaper cable company dvr units may very well now have TiVo software in them *ANYWAY?!!!*


not really - Comcast rollout has slowed to non-existent and the other cable companies with deals have gone quiet on the whole thing. The court case ahd nothing to do with this - it is purely business deals and technical hurdles. Bottom line though - do not look for Tivo on a cable company DVR in 2009 and maybe beyond.


> edited down to cable companies evil and big Govt. not much better.
> 
> Our ability to do so would IN NO WAY "circumvent" a cable company's right to collect what it rightfully charges for the programming that it provides. Quite the contrary - it would ensure that WE CONSUMERS get what we are already paying for - from both TiVo AND the cable companies. The ability to know what frequency (by _*law*_ un-encrypted) such channels are on would IN NO WAY curtail a cable company's ability to "survive" - it would simply give us the product that we are already being CHARGED for!


TiVo does its ROI on adding the feature or not based on its revenues, not the cable company's revenues. You got the product you are being charged for - a TiVo DVR that needs cable cards to map digital channels. You yourself in the opening of your post pointed out exactly why TiVo will not get involved in mapping QAM. TiVo has no control over the fact that cable companies will make it hard to do so that cable companies can charge for the digital tier of service. Plain and simple. What is Tivo to do about that??


> TiVo and Tribune's complicity in these shenanigans of the cable companies is OBVIOUS,


 not in the least and here you flip over to totally bombastic without anything to support the speculation.


> and they even do nothing to even DENY let alone RECTIFY it. But it is _also_ true,


 have you stopped torturing small animals yet? Would you loudly deny such a question and lend any credence to someone asking that of you?

so switch to OTA already. I stopped reading at this point.


----------



## slowbiscuit

You should stop posting here as well. This thread is just one big circle, and has been for some time. I'm just as guilty and think it's best now to just abandon it to the archives because nothing's going to change either side and Tivo is not going to implement it.


----------



## lew

slowbiscuit said:


> You should stop posting here as well. This thread is just one big circle, and has been for some time. I'm just as guilty and think it's best now to just abandon it to the archives because nothing's going to change either side and Tivo is not going to implement it.


What's changed is introduction of the Moxi product. I hope some of the QAM mapping people give the Moxi product a try and let us know how it works (not just with QAM mapping).


----------



## ZeoTiVo

slowbiscuit said:


> You should stop posting here as well. This thread is just one big circle, and has been for some time. I'm just as guilty and think it's best now to just abandon it to the archives because nothing's going to change either side and Tivo is not going to implement it.


I can see exactly what you mean - but if someone wants to keep posting conspiracy theories then I may well reply and refute the whole thing.


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> I can see exactly what you mean - but if someone wants to keep posting conspiracy theories then I may well reply and refute the whole thing.


+1


----------



## JWThiers

Come on, someone must still need to learn what the Monguls taught the Chineese. When the horse dies, get off.


----------



## bicker

bicker said:


> You've demonstrated, over and over again, that you're incapable of restating what I've argued without perverting it into something easier to argue against. You seem to rely on such intellectual dishonesty a lot. Stop it. Don't paraphrase what I've written. Quote me directly, or don't say anything at all -- or get ready for me to call you out again each time you lie about what I've argued.





lew said:


> Either I'm not making my point clear or you're deliberately distorting my point to fit your own agenda .


Indeed. I noted the same thing, earlier. It seems that the folks who feel that TiVo is wrong to put this on the back-burner have so little confidence in their own perspective that they cannot help but engage in such disingenuous rhetoric.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> Advertising is virtually non-existent for most fresh meats and fresh produce..


There is a good chance the store itself advertises. The trucks used to haul the meats and produce bear advertising costs, as do much of the equipment to process and store the products. You are correct the actual percentage of advertising dollars varies from product to product.



lew said:


> Many people save money by purchasing store brands. Does it make sense to buy name brand sugar or flour? I'm not even sure if your 30% figure is accurate for a customer that only purchases TV dinners, it's certainly not true for my purchases.


The 30% number is an average, based upon reports by business analysts. Certainly generic and house brands bear lower advertising costs than "name brand" products, which os one reason they are less expensive. Even so, I genrally shop at either HEB or Wal-Mart, and both spend millions for advertising. Even their house brands and generics bear that surcharge.

The bottom line is, consumers are footing almost a $600 billion television advertising bill, regardless of how it is sliced and diced.



lew said:


> Some items, such as DVRs probably benefit from ads. It exposes the product to potential customers that don't know about it.
> Of course they do. That's not the point. What's more, I don't have a problem with directed advertising. Things like infomercials, advertising periodicals, etc., are fine. In this case the consumer of the ad and the consumer of the product are one in the same, and the consumer pays for the ad as a means of purchasing the product.
> 
> 
> 
> lew said:
> 
> 
> 
> I suspect your 30% figure is greatly inflated. I wouldn't be surprised if it includes promotional discounts such as coupons and discounts passed on to consumers as part of the retailers weekly sale promotion.
> 
> 
> 
> It is certainly an estimate, but not a wildly inflated one. There are approximately 300 million Americans, bearing the roughly $600 billion in TV ads, which comes up to $2000 a year per person, or roughly $5000 per family. Do you really feel the average American spends a great deal more than $6000 a year on goods and services, or the average family vastly more than $15,000 a year?
> 
> 
> 
> lew said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if some items, soft drinks?, have high advertising costs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some products, after removing profits and distribution costs, are almost 100% advertising, while your example of fresh produce is indeed at the low end of the spectrum. One could of course deliberately reduce the amount of personal ad spend by avoiding highly advertised items, but once again it is beside the point.
Click to expand...


----------



## lrhorer

Da Goon said:


> hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
> 
> I don't know why i even looked at this thread to begin with, but now I'm glad I did. Thanks.


Oh, I just noticed this. If you are going to attempt to insult me, you should at least bother to get my name right.


----------



## ciper

JWThiers said:


> I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all.


Well that should be possible with OTA right? Or analog cable. 
Having no guide data means no season passes or wishlists or recording only new episodes etc... turning it into a tapeless VCR which most people wouldnt pay so much money for.



ZeoTiVo said:


> good point, many posts here about people wanting to just manually record without pay the sub fee. Any manual mapping by TiVo would have to be limited in scope.


I'm sorry for using such a strong word but this is a lie. I cannot remember one person who said they wanted to use this as a way to circumvent TiVo's fees. 
The only similar discussion was that we wanted to avoid paying 15-40$ extra dollars a month to the cable company for channels we already receive.



stevehc1 said:


> Our ability to do so would IN NO WAY "circumvent" a cable company's right to collect what it rightfully charges for the programming that it provides. Quite the contrary - it would ensure that WE CONSUMERS get what we are already paying for - from both TiVo AND the cable companies. The ability to know what frequency (by law un-encrypted) such channels are on would IN NO WAY curtail a cable company's ability to "survive" - it would simply give us the product that we are already being CHARGED for!


You said that better than I have been able to.



lew said:


> I'm the one who said *one of the reasons* QAM mapping is a low priority is because cable cards work. Saving a few customers a few dollars in cc rental fees isn't enough of a reason to move the priority up in a to do list.


Except that in some cases (including mine) the monthly fee increase is not a few dollars. You have to sign up for digital starters, hd packages, additional outlets and all sorts of other billing codes which can be 30$ of additional charges to get the same channels you already receive.



lew said:


> Thanks for a well written post. It seems clear why QAM mapping is such a low priority.
> 
> The only issue are the (very few) potential customers that are in a system that provides all channels "in the clear" and doesn't have any type of conditional access. Generally "private" cable systems in apartments, dorms etc. I doubt there are enough potential customers in this category.


True but as you already pointed out it's not limited to those circumstances. When you consult someone for their home technology needs the questions in the area of home theater are almost always in this order
1. What display
2. What sound
3. What "TiVo" (meaning DVR). 
3a. Why do I have to pay extra charges to get those channels working if the two other TVs in the house get them?
Call it penny wise and pound foolish if you wish. Call them stupid consumers for not wanting to pay the 3-30$ extra. Whatever the title TiVo loses.
If the feature did generate more support calls I have a strong belief the additional subscriptions would more than cover the additional support headcount.


----------



## lrhorer

slowbiscuit said:


> LOL, demise of the industry??


Yep. Make no mistake about it, the 3rd party DVR industry is quite small compared to the CATV industry, and it's far from the most lucrative industry around. It won't require too much of a shove to push it off the edge. Several major players in the DVR industry have either gone belly up or had their operations shut down by their parent company. TiVo has yet to show a profit, after ten years in operation. Even with Microsoft's vast resources, UltimateTV went down the tubes.

Please read this thread. In particular pay attention to this post.

Note, the following is speculation, but not an unlikely scenario in the least:

1. After a significant time with very low CableCard useage, exacerbated by people employing clear QAM mapping, the Cable companies convince the FCC to eliminate the portion of the regs requiring them to support CableCards in 3rd party devices.

2. About 30 seconds later, the Cable companies quit providing CableCards. They might even shut off all CableCards in devices other than their own. They certainly will refuse to support them.

3. Already hanging on by a thread, the sudden and almost immediate drop in revenue will force all the remaining 3rd party DVR manufacturers out of business.

The result? Goodbye industry. Oh, yes, it is entirely possible the delivery of QAM mapping could be the straw which breaks the camel's back of the entire sector. Very possible, and not wildly improbable. 'Never underestimate the power of animosity from the giant CATV industry, especially on a small and struggling sector who depends greatly on the good graces of the CATV companies.



slowbiscuit said:


> No one here opposes QAM mapping, it would be a useful feature


I'm not sure how you failed to notice, but I do, based upon regulatory considerations.



slowbiscuit said:


> ReplayTV (actually, Sonicblue) was also sued for providing an internet sharing feature for recorded programs, not just commercial skip.


OK, so it was two features. The point is, providing a feature can have larger and farther reaching results than just placating users.



slowbiscuit said:


> And ReplayTV wasn't 'sued out of existence' - later models were released (the 55xx series) by the company that bought out Sonicblue, and DirectTV now owns what's left of the company delivering service to existing units.


How many ReplayTV units have been manufactured in the last 12 months?

I rest my case.


----------



## lrhorer

jccfin said:


> Irhorer


Please quit misspelling my name.



jccfin said:


> posted something ealier about me having to pay for the free TVGOS service that I receive on my Sony TV


If you truly believe you ever get anything free, then you are just plain, flat *STUPID*. Nothing is free, not even air and water, and outside of military hardware, OTA programming is just about the very most expensive thing to the consumer there is. As far as TVGOS is concerned, it also is far from free. You already paid for it, when you bought your TV. One can do the same thing with TiVo, by opting for a lifetime subscription, rather than a periodic one. Sony just didn't give you a choice. It doesn't mean it's free.



jccfin said:


> even though my wallet speaks completely to the contrary. As far as I know, no money transfers between me and TV guide and yet for some strange reason I still get service?


That's got to be one of the most moronic pieces of nonsense I have ever seen. I suppose you think garbage collection and street maintenance are free, too? The military has never shown up at your door, asking for a check, so I suppose you think the war in the Middle East is costing you nothing, as well?



jccfin said:


> Humm..He then makes the same argument to Fallingwater about how OTA service is not free. OK, as Groucho Marx said, who are you going to believe? Me or your own eyes?


I happen to have a great deal of respect and affection for Groucho, but he was not an economist. The fact you don't bother to even notice when you pay for things in no way changes the fact. Unless you walk everywhere, obtain power only from windmills and solar, drink from your own well, and eat only vegetables you grow and meat from animals you kill with a rock, then you are paying out the wazoo.


----------



## lrhorer

lew said:


> vstone--I suspect a number of the larger cable systems get the broadcast channels via fiber optic cable and not via antenna.


'Not just the larger ones. Almost all do. The fiber plant usually runs right past the broadcast stations, and dedicating an extra fiber to the TV stations costs almost nothing.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> Incorrect. We're not. We're making perfect sense, and you perhaps don't like that.


Indeed, you have never engaged in doublespeak that I recall. Rhetoric, perhaps, but doublespeak, never, and in this thread neither one that I have noticed. Furthermore, your posts are always clear and concise.



bicker said:


> You're lying again. I've been saying that TiVo has many other things of higher priority than this.


I think that's overly harsh. He's clearly filtering the posts in this thread through a fog of personal bias and ignorance, resulting ultimately in straw man arguments, but I don't believe he is intentionally prevaricating.



bicker said:


> You seem to rely on such intellectual dishonesty a lot. Stop it. Don't paraphrase what I've written. Quote me directly, or don't say anything at all


That's reasonable. Note, however, that aperson guilty of intellectual dishonesty may stop a hair short of being an out-and-out liar.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> Either I'm not making my point clear or you're deliberately distorting my point to fit your own agenda .
> 
> *I'm not referring *to those subscribers who are only subscribing to basic cable and, absence a tivo requirement, wouldn't need cable cards. *Those customers have the option of renting a cable card.*
> 
> I'm referring to those few potential tivo customers with a private cable system (apartments) that don't use conditional access *for any channel for any customer.* Those customers don't have the option of renting a cable card and can't use S3. I doubt there are millions of people in that category.
> 
> You keep "attacking" Tribune data. I have a TivoHD and a Verizon DVR (which doesn't use Tribune). There is no comparison. The Tribune data is more detailed and more accurate.
> 
> There seem to be three groups of (potential) customers that want QAM mapping:
> 1) Customers that only subscribe to clear channels and want to save the expense of renting a cable card.
> 2) Customers that are (currently) receiving clear channels that aren't included in the tier of service they're paying for. A cable card ensures those customers no longer receive "extra" channels.
> 3) Customers who are in a 100% clear system (private cable) and aren't able to rent a cable card.
> 
> I don't think there are enough potential customers in the third category to motivate tivo.
> 
> Vstone gave the issues with automatic mapping (PSIP issues) and manual mapping (changing frequencies). People miss a show. Phone calls. Threads. Bad reviews. What's the upside? Some customers save a few dollars in cable card rental fees. A few customers aren't able to rent cable cards and can't use tivo.


- I wasn't "deliberately distorting" your "point" to fit ANY agenda - I simply was not fully understanding what you were apparently trying to say - GET IT? It's helpful when you try to be more thorough in your explanations. No need to get "mad" about that!

I don't see where I've been "attacking" Tribune or its guide data AT ALL. I simply have a problem with TIVO being SO tied to it that when the guide data's not there a TiVo dvr becomes a pretty useless box.

Another point of mine - that I think I've made repeatedly - is that many cable companies in MANY markets do not just dole out cablecards for "free" or "just a few bucks" - they OFTEN insist - or at least try to insist - that one subscribe to a much higher-priced tier or service in order to get one. They want more money than the $15/month or so they get from "basic" subscribers! And I would hope that this is not a "revelation" to anyone on this thread!


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> ... If someone wants to keep posting conspiracy theories then I may well reply and refute the whole thing.


- Ain't no "conspiracy theory" man, just plain ol' corporate strategy. And TiVo needs to do a LOT of it to stay alive.


----------



## SteveHC1

slowbiscuit said:


> You should stop posting here as well. This thread is just one big circle, and has been for some time. I'm just as guilty and think it's best now to just abandon it to the archives because nothing's going to change either side and Tivo is not going to implement it.


- I'm not so sure about that. Apparently enough people *****ed and moaned to TiVo about the problems they've been having in trying to get their TiVo units to schedule MANUAL recordings of clear QAM channels with guide data absent that TiVo has fessed up to it and has decided to allocate resources to "fix" it.

Guess there are more people affected by clear QAM issues than some people here on this forum will care to admit...


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> They are doing this by at least CLAIMING to frequently change their frequencies (in fact they RARELY actually do so because of the effort involved)


For most headends there is virtually no effort involved. Indeed, SDV and VOD channels never have a fixed frequency, at all, and any channel employing what TWC calls "Start Over" will maintain it's main feed on one channel for a given node, but switch multiple duplicate feeds to many other frequencies on a moment by moment basis.



SteveHC1 said:


> *REMEMBER -* the cable companies _MAKE MONEY_ off of their set-top boxes and CableCards


Not so much. Of course it varies from franchise to franchise, but most CATV providers barely break even or even lose a small amount on STB rental. Even if the cost of providing an STB were not nearly as great or greater than the rental fee, it's still small potatoes. I pay $165 a month for CATV and broadband service, and I never purchase IPPV. Some people spend upwards of $200 a month on IPPV events. STB rental here is $4.95. Amortized over the roughly 18 month life of the STB, that only comes to $89, which barely covers the hardware alone, let alone maintenance. CableCards are $2.95, and although they probably have a longer shelf life and cost considerably less, it's still peanuts compared to their total revenue. Of course, some locales enjoy exorbitant fees for CableCards, STBs, and DVRs, but even in the worst case it is still small compared to the revenue for other services.



SteveHC1 said:


> - as do the MANUFACTURERS of them!


Hello? The mention of the manufacturer's fees weaken your argument considerably. Every dollar paid by the CATV company to their manufacturer is one dollar *less* in revenue. In fact, mostof the money charged for an STB goes to the manufacturer.



SteveHC1 said:


> TiVo just got through taking cable and satellite companies to court over its desire to take in more revenue by being allowed by those companies to put TiVo software into those companies' set-top converter/dvr boxes and collecting appropriate royalty fees from it!


No, they didn't, and they aren't. Indeed, they have no such right, and it is exceedingly unlikely they ever will. Their lawsuit with Dish / Echostar is over patent infringement.



SteveHC1 said:


> But the fact is that those of us insisting on the ability to manually re-map these clear QAM channels to pre-existing Tribune (and WHY does it _have_ to be TRIBUNE forever, by the way?


Tribune is the provider Tivo and dozens of others have chosen. It doesn't have to be, of course. TiVo could sign a contract with someone else. Your point escapes me.



SteveHC1 said:


> [/B] What the hell did we fork over hundreds and hundreds of dollars for on the "genuine" TiVo brand when we could have simply gone with the cable companies' converter/dvr boxes, at a FRACTION of the costs of a TiVo-branded unit


For a vastly superior DVR.



SteveHC1 said:


> YES the problem is of the cable companies' creation in the first place, and YES we should be lobbying those companies to stick to not just the letter but the INTENT of the laws and regulations.


If by "problem" you meant he QAM mapping issue, then no, it is not of cable companies' creation.



SteveHC1 said:


> It makes FAR more sense for us as consumers to do whatever we can to pressure *TIVO* to allow us to schedule Season Passes - a feature for which we are paying _dearly_ -


'Hardly dearly.



SteveHC1 said:


> on these clear QAM channels by manually re-mapping the Guide data to the (deliberately undocumented, and for all of the wrong reasons) frequencies we discover them to be re-transmitted on! Our ability to do so would IN NO WAY "circumvent" a cable company's right to collect what it rightfully charges for the programming that it provides.


No one said it would, but it is noty unlikely to have the ultimate result that the Tivo for which you paid so much and the Moxi for which others paid so much, etc. are turned into bricks. What then?



SteveHC1 said:


> TiVo and Tribune's complicity in these shenanigans of the cable companies is OBVIOUS


It may be obvious to a towering intellect such as yourself, but to we poor, intellectually challenged professional engineers who only have advanced degrees in science and engineering, there is nothing whatsoever obvious about it.



SteveHC1 said:


> On the "off-topic of the day" - As far as the "hidden cost" of "free" OTA broadcasting - the fact of the matter is NOTHING IS "FREE" in this world, my friends, NOTHING.


That's right but I don't want to watch network television, and I rarely ever do. I would be perfectly happy if the networks were completely shut down. I don't mind things not being free, but I vehemently resent being forced to pay for things I do not want and do not use. In case you have forgotten, our ancestors went to war over having to pay taxes without having a voice as to whether the taxes would be levied in the first place. Being forced to subsidize network television through surcharges on purchases are not technically a tax, but they are precisely the same thing in terms of impact to the consumer and why they are unacceptable.



SteveHC1 said:


> That "free" airline ticket you got with "free miles"?


'Never had any.



SteveHC1 said:


> The "free" antibiotic that you might have received at your local supermarket's pharmacy counter?


'Never gotten any.



SteveHC1 said:


> PAID FOR by YOU when you bought your GROCERIES at that same supermarket. That "free" product sample that you received in the mail without even asking for it? Well, you get the idea. The list goes on and on.





SteveHC1 said:


> Yes, the cost of advertising is built into the cost of virtually ALL of the goods and services that we purchase day in and day out. Not to the extent of it being "30%" of the final cost to the


Think again. We are being ripped off on a gigantic scale. People (including me, actually) groan about the recent bailout, but it's downright paltry compared to the amount we are gouged for advertising.

More than $600 billion a year.



SteveHC1 said:


> consumer (with the one possible exception being soft drinks - but even then it's not that high - those companies' PROFIT MARGINS is what drives the consumer's cost


Of course, but for many items, the manufacturer's profit margin is a tiny fraction of their ad budget. There are exceptions, but the bottom line is 300 million Americans are paying $600 billion dollars annually for TV advertising. This does not include radio, magazines, websites, and billboards.



SteveHC1 said:


> And here's MY beef - cable companies ADD to it all by charging us MORE and MORE to view MORE channels that offer programming that is ALREADY overly-laden with those paid-for commercials!


True, but the amount is tiny compared to the networks. 'About $80 billion a year versus $600 billion. That's a factor of seven and a half. What's more, a good little chunk of that $80 B goes to the purchase of necessary equipment and services. What do the networks do with the $600 B (other than pocket it)?

Lost. Desperate Housewives Days of our Lives

Give me a break.



SteveHC1 said:


> So CABLE consumers are actually paying still MORE to watch programming that's ALREADY been financed by paid-for ADVERTISING!


There are no commercials on the HBO channels, Showtime Channels, Starz Channels, The Movie Channel, HDNet, HDNet Movies, MGMHD, etc.



SteveHC1 said:


> So I'll stay with my plan to dump cable television altogether and stick with OTA and Internet-delivered video


So you'll save a dollar while not worrying about spending 50 by eliminating all the good stuff on the TV in favor of total crap. 'Remind me not to have you do my finances.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...ANY mapping of QAM is doomed to be invalidated at some point and break the season passes or wishlists applied to that mapped channel...
> ... - no legal diuscussion of putting TiVo software on any box.
> ...You yourself in the opening of your post pointed out exactly why TiVo will not get involved in mapping QAM. TiVo has no control over the fact that cable companies will make it hard to do so that cable companies can charge for the digital tier of service. Plain and simple. What is Tivo to do about that??
> ...not in the least and here you flip over to totally bombastic without anything to support the speculation.
> ...have you stopped torturing small animals yet?
> ...so switch to OTA already. I stopped reading at this point.


1) BULL. Seems to work FLAWLESSLY, at least with TV Guide (and other guide data providers) in sets, dvrs and pc-based systems that offer it.
2) I've read OTHERWISE.
3) What is TiVo to do about it? What is this thread SUPPOSED to be all about???
4) I said right up front that some of what I was saying was observation, some fact, and some opinion... what MORE do you want???
5) Why? Are my posts torturing you? If so, I'm sorry - didn't realize you were a "small animal" being "tortured" by them. My apologies.
6) I'll make the switch when I'm good and ready. In the meantime, I'll continue to support the original PURPOSE of this thread - which as I understand it was to try to push TiVo to start offering user-defined re-mapping of clear QAM channels to available Guide data.


----------



## JWThiers

ciper said:


> JWThiers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all.
> 
> 
> 
> Well that should be possible with OTA right? Or analog cable.
> Having no guide data means no season passes or wishlists or recording only new episodes etc... turning it into a tapeless VCR which most people wouldnt pay so much money for.
Click to expand...

Actually, No it shouldn't be possible to record without guide data.

Let that sink in for a second. As attractive that is for the customers, myself included, where exactly do you think tivo makes money? Actual profit? I'll give you a hint, it isn't on the hardware. If they make anything at all on hardware I'd be surprised. They make their money on the subscription fees. The subscription fees pays for the guide data and also helps subsidize the cost of the hardware and give them profit. If you could record OTA without guide data or analog cable, then why would people pay for a subscription? fewer subscriptions means less money in profit and less to subsidize the cost of hardware. which means higher equipment costs, which means fewer people buying tivo's. The only reason I bought a THD is because the hardware cost finally got low enough for me. You don't see tivo making the S3 anymore. Why? It was too expensive for most people to buy. Did they ever get below $800? most people aren't willing to pay more than a couple of hundred for a "tapeless VCR". Tivos whole business model is based on selling subscriptions to the data.

I'm not against the idea, but I understand how tivo is making money. And if Tivo doesn't make money tivo won't be in business.

Also having said that, It would have been nice to incorporate the ability to receive the channel map info for analog cable without cablecards. Or a better question is why do you have to subscribe to a digital tier to get a cable card from your cable company? I don't claim to understand exactly what the CC's do but my understanding is that they are the separable security the Cable companies are required to have. why not get the card and the cable company just authorize it for no digital cable. Tivo could send the guide data the cable company gets its card rental fee you could record you analog cable.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> Please read this thread. In particular pay attention to this post.


- Read the post, read the thread. So? People calling the cable companies scum buckets, posters complaining about and even cable companies admitting that cablecards are a PIA to the point of requiring truck rollouts most of the time, and people complaining about how the cable companies use the cablecards to get subscribers to cough up more bucks for their cable service. Sounded to me like a lot of what I've been trying to say.



lrhorer said:


> Note, the following is speculation, but not an unlikely scenario in the least:
> 
> 1. After a significant time with very low CableCard useage, exacerbated by... ...The result? Goodbye industry. Oh, yes, it is entirely possible the delivery of QAM mapping could be the straw which breaks the camel's back of the entire sector. Very possible, and not wildly improbable.


- Sorry. I just don't buy it (to say the least).


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> For most headends there is virtually no effort involved.


- I know, I was being sarcastic. My point was that in spite of TiVo and others *claiming* that clear QAM channels' frequencies are constantly being changed by the cable companies, my experience has been quite the contrary.



lrhorer said:


> Indeed, SDV and VOD channels never have a fixed frequency, at all, and any channel employing what TWC calls "Start Over" will maintain it's main feed on one channel for a given node, but switch multiple duplicate feeds to many other frequencies on a moment by moment basis.


- I know. AND, SDV and VOD do not exactly have world-renown reliability I've heard NOTHING but complaints from consumers about both.



lrhorer said:


> I pay $165 a month for CATV and broadband service, and I never purchase IPPV. Some people spend upwards of $200 a month on IPPV events.


- Whoa! I would *NEVER* pay that much for tv/Internet, let alone PPV!



lrhorer said:


> STB rental here is $4.95. Amortized over the roughly 18 month life of the STB, that only comes to $89, which barely covers the hardware alone, let alone maintenance.


- 18 months? I've never known ANYONE who needed to turn in their STB after such a short period of time!!! They wind up paying HUNDREDS for the damned thing!



lrhorer said:


> Hello? The mention of the manufacturer's fees weaken your argument considerably. Every dollar paid by the CATV company to their manufacturer is one dollar *less* in revenue. In fact, mostof the money charged for an STB goes to the manufacturer.


- If one were to believe the 18 month lifespan figure...



lrhorer said:


> Tribune is the provider Tivo and dozens of others have chosen. It doesn't have to be, of course. TiVo could sign a contract with someone else. Your point escapes me.


- It's that I've never heard of clear QAM channel re-mapping to TRIBUNE'S service, but I HAVE heard of and seen it in action with OTHER providers' guide data.



lrhorer said:


> If by "problem" you meant he QAM mapping issue, then no, it is not of cable companies' creation.


- Of COURSE it is! They are the ones who refuse to report the frequency assignments FCOL!!!



lrhorer said:


> No one said it would, but it is noty unlikely to have the ultimate result that the Tivo for which you paid so much and the Moxi for which others paid so much, etc. are turned into bricks.


- I don't buy that piece of conjecture for one minute.



lrhorer said:


> It may be obvious to a towering intellect such as yourself, but to we poor, intellectually challenged professional engineers who only have advanced degrees in science and engineering, there is nothing whatsoever obvious about it.


- That's because it has absolutely NOTHING to do with engineering and related "advanced degrees" and EVERYTHING to do with corporate STRATEGY.



lrhorer said:


> That's right but I don't want to watch network television, and I rarely ever do. I would be perfectly happy if the networks were completely shut down. I don't mind things not being free, but I vehemently resent being forced to pay for things I do not want and do not use. In case you have forgotten, our ancestors went to war over having to pay taxes without having a voice as to whether the taxes would be levied in the first place. Being forced to subsidize network television through surcharges on purchases are not technically a tax, but they are precisely the same thing in terms of impact to the consumer and why they are unacceptable.


- I fully understand your point of view. But many of us STILL can't justify paying ungodly amounts of money to cable companies for the "privilege" of viewing still MORE commercial-laden programming.



lrhorer said:


> We are being ripped off on a gigantic scale. People (including me, actually) groan about the recent bailout, but it's downright paltry compared to the amount we are gouged for advertising.


- Goes part and parcel with our living in a capitalist society that embraces free enterprise. Ain't ever gonna change. Don't get me wrong - I would LOVE to be able to pick and choose which commercial-free television stations (not just HBO or ShowTime and the like) I could receive from a cable company, and pay for only those which I choose to view! But that ALSO ain't ever gonna happen, at least not in MY lifetime!



lrhorer said:


> Lost. Desperate Housewives Days of our Lives


- LOL!!! I agree on those. But there ARE many other VERY good ones on the air right now.



lrhorer said:


> There are no commercials on the HBO channels, Showtime Channels, Starz Channels, The Movie Channel, HDNet, HDNet Movies, MGMHD, etc.


- Yes. But they all just CONSTANTLY show the same damned movies (and limited scripted tv shows) over, and over, and OVER again. For a LOT of extra bucks at that. Netflix (dvds), Amazon, Jaman, etc. serve me much better and at a MUCH less cost. And, by the way, I've found downloading of complete programs to be MUCH more reliable than "streaming" and a dvd's picture (esp. blu-ray) to be of MUCH higher quality than even anything coming through HBO-HD or whatever.



lrhorer said:


> So you'll save a dollar while not worrying about spending 50 by eliminating all the good stuff on the TV in favor of total crap. 'Remind me not to have you do my finances.


- I, and many others I'm sure, am selective enough that I just stick with the stuff truly worth viewing - on OTA, dvd, and via Internet downloads - and ignore the rest of the crap altogether. And without shelling out $100 or more per month to do it.


----------



## SteveHC1

JWThiers said:


> Also having said that, It would have been nice to incorporate the ability to receive the channel map info for analog cable without cablecards.


- But we CAN! When you do the initial TiVo set-up you can select your area's non-digital lineup, and the relevant guide data WILL be downloaded. What you WON'T get is the guide data for your local broadcasters' digital or HD broadcasts that are re-transmitted by the cable company to you.



JWThiers said:


> Or a better question is why do you have to subscribe to a digital tier to get a cable card from your cable company? I don't claim to understand exactly what the CC's do but my understanding is that they are the separable security the Cable companies are required to have. why not get the card and the cable company just authorize it for no digital cable.


- Under THOSE circumstances, a cablecard is not required.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> If you truly believe you ever get anything free, then you are just plain, flat *STUPID*.... That's got to be one of the most moronic pieces of nonsense I have ever seen.


C'MON, man! There's NO need for insults or name-calling here!!! Chill!!!


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> - I know. AND, SDV and VOD do not exactly have world-renown reliability I've heard NOTHING but complaints from consumers about both.


You use the word "I" about one and a half dozen times in the message concerning the average or typical viewer scenario. I have a news flash for you. You are neither the typical nor average CATV subscriber, yet you continually speak as if you were. You are also not a technical manager for a CATV system. Problems with SDV are minimal. Every implementation of VOD I know is quite clunky, but trouble calls are minimal comparatively speaking.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Whoa! I would *NEVER* pay that much for tv/Internet, let alone PPV!


As I keep trying to tell you, you are not the average CATV subscriber, your protests to the contrary notwithstanding. There are approximately 60 million CATV subscribers who cough up around $80 billion a year. That is an average of around $1300 or more per subscriber per year (not including internet access), or about $110. That is only an average, however, and many people pay far more, others substantially less. I personally have digital tier, HD tier, HBO, Starz, and RoadRunner internet, which is not an uncommon mix of services. HBO alone has over 40 million subscribers, which means something like 2 out of 3 CATV subscribers have to have CableCards right off the bat just to get HBO. Showtime has about half that many subs, but a good fraction of people who have Showtime also have HBO. I suspect the end result is about 5 out of 6 subscribers have one premium service or another. That means the number who don't have them is at most 1 in 6 or maybe 17%. I don't have hard data handy, but clearly TiVo owners are going to tend to be the more affluent section of the demographic, so I would be very surprised if basic-only subscribers represent more than 5% of all Series III class TiVo owners.



SteveHC1 said:


> - 18 months? I've never known ANYONE who needed to turn in their STB after such a short period of time!!! They wind up paying HUNDREDS for the damned thing!


Who you have known is irrelevant. Managing costs for converter repair was one of my responsibilities when I worked for the CATV company, and I can tell you the average lifetime was between 18 and 24 months, depending on the model. From fires, to theft, to vandalism, to component failure, to obsolescence, the life expectancy of an STB was just as I say. Rental equipment is not treated carefully by consumers, and the average lifespan of an entire model line was only 36 to 48 months. Resorting to the personal experiences of which you are so fond, TWC had to replace 1 DVR during the nine months I had it and replaced 5 STBs on 2 different outlets in 6 years here at my house, and I do take care of my rental equipment.



SteveHC1 said:


> - It's that I've never heard of clear QAM channel re-mapping to TRIBUNE'S service, but I HAVE heard of and seen it in action with OTHER providers' guide data.


It is irrelevant to the provider. If it can be mapped, it can be mapped.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Of COURSE it is! They are the ones who refuse to report the frequency assignments FCOL!!!


That is the tip of the iceberg, and is a result of the situation, not a cause thereof.



SteveHC1 said:


> - That's because it has absolutely NOTHING to do with engineering and related "advanced degrees" and EVERYTHING to do with corporate STRATEGY.


No, it has everything to do with being absolute and total nonsense. Other than the possibility I have outlined and support costs, there is no advantage to either Tribune or TiVo not to have channel mapping.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Goes part and parcel with our living in a capitalist society that embraces free enterprise.


It is neither capitalism nor free enterprise! Indeed, it is much closer to Communism than Capitalism. The linchpin of Capitalism and free enterprise is that any consumer who chooses not to obtain and make use of a product pays nothing for it. Correspondingly, any customer who wishes to obtain and make use of the product must pay for it. Network television does neither. Their putative product - television programming - isn't even what they sell. Instead, they sell advertising based upon how many people watch their programming. The cost then is passed on not ultimately to their clients, but to the public (through their clients, of course) irrespective of how little or how much use the end consumer makes of the putative product. 'Exceedingly Communistic. Read Mao's Little Red Book sometime. Large sections could be reprinted under the title Network Advertising in Ten Easy Steps.



SteveHC1 said:


> Ain't ever gonna change. Don't get me wrong - I would LOVE to be able to pick and choose which commercial-free television stations (not just HBO or ShowTime and the like) I could receive from a cable company, and pay for only those which I choose to view! But that ALSO ain't ever gonna happen, at least not in MY lifetime!


I would gladly settle for not having to pay for ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox. There are discussions in congress and the FCC about a la carte CATV programming.



SteveHC1 said:


> - LOL!!! I agree on those. But there ARE many other VERY good ones on the air right now.


No, there aren't. Many are vomitous. Most are mediocre, pandering to the lowest common denominator. A couple are half-way decent, but nothing spectacular. For $600 billion a year, every single program should put Shakespeare and Sophocles to shame.



SteveHC1 said:


> Yes. But they all just CONSTANTLY show the same damned movies (and limited scripted tv shows) over, and over, and OVER again.


No, they don't. You're level of subjective assessment is truly astounding. I selected a handful of movie titles at random as an example. Over the next 14 days each of these movies will be shown the following number of times:

01 Abbot & Costello Meet Frankenstein
01 Absence of Malice
01 The Abyss
02 Airplane
01 Aladdin
04 The CableGuy
01 Casablanca
03 The Land Before Time
02 The Last Starfighter
01 Sabrina
13 The Santa Clause III
02 War Games

Only two of the above are to be shown more than twice in a week, and one of those (The Santa Clause) is showing on four different channels. A single 24 hour channel has roughly 224 timeslots available in a two week period, which means that none of these are on more than 1.8% of a single channel's time. Divide that by something over 50 channels, and you have none of them being on more than 0.04% of the time. Limiting it to movies alone, there are several hundred different offerings in the 2 week period. I'm recording about 20 a fortnight, or 40 or so a month.



SteveHC1 said:


> For a LOT of extra bucks at that. Netflix (dvds), Amazon, Jaman, etc. serve me much better and at a MUCH less cost. And, by the way, I've found downloading of complete programs to be MUCH more reliable than "streaming" and a dvd's picture (esp. blu-ray) to be of MUCH higher quality than even anything coming through HBO-HD or whatever.


I just went to the NetFlix site and put in a dozen different titles. Only two were available, and neither of them on Blu-Ray. All the broadcast HD offerings blow DVDs away. A Blu-Ray offering I cannot get does not beat out a broadcast HD offering I can.



SteveHC1 said:


> - I, and many others I'm sure, am selective enough that I just stick with the stuff truly worth viewing - on OTA, dvd, and via Internet downloads


There is essentially nothing worth viewing OTA (other than PBS), except it being hacked to bits by censors, chopped up to run in a time allocation, and riddled with commercials. That, plus you just went on about the superior quality of Blu-Ray, then in the next breath talk about living with the quality from DVDs and internet offerings.


----------



## SteveHC1

Take a careful look at the following article from Nielsen Business Media, Inc.

Don't even TRY to tell me that TiVo ISN'T kissing cable's a*s.

And as far as ADVERTISING goes, get ready for a helluvalot more of it - VIA TiVo, and COMPLIMENTS of TiVo (but there ARE some positives to this. Sort of. Well, maybe...)

TiVo chief urges changes in TV advertising
Tom Rogers says innovation can alleviate crisis
By Kimberly Nordyke
Jan 28, 2009, 02:49 PM ET
Related
More NATPE coverage
LAS VEGAS -- TiVo CEO Tom Rogers presented the TV industry with a dire view of the next few years unless something is done to counteract the current advertising crisis, which he predicts is going to get worse.

Rogers, speaking Wednesday morning at NATPE's 2009 Market & Conference, admitted that TiVo has played a big role in the ad crisis by developing the technology that allows viewers to skip commercials but said his company is working on new methods for advertisers to reach consumer and urged others to do the same.

For example, TiVo research has shown that interactive advertising didn't initially catch on because it wasn't allowing for viewers to pause the program while getting more information about the product. TiVo's solution is to incorporate automatic pausing so the viewer doesn't miss any part of the program.

"The consumer remains in control, which is an absolute must in the world of consumption," Rogers said.

He noted the importance of "contextually based" advertising, whereby some real thought is put into what kind of ads would relate more to viewers watching a specific program. He compared this to Google inserting relevant ads into its articles.

Meanwhile, TiVo is in the midst of a patent dispute with Dish-EchoStar in which it has already collected $100 million. More money could be on the way, and the satellite TV company might be forced to either strike a licensing agreement with TiVo or disable many of its DVRs. A judge is set to consider such measures next month.

Rogers told THR after his NATPE address that Dish could be forced to disable 4 million of their DVRs, which would be "enormous." Once that litigation is resolved, TiVo plans to step up its effort to license the TiVo DVR brand to other cable TV providers. TiVo already has licensing and distribution agreements with Comcast, DirecTV and Cox.

"We'll be looking to do other distribution deals after the resolution," he said. Asked why the company is waiting until then, Rogers said, "Right now, we have a lot of development activity (that we're focusing our resources on), and there will be a natural momentum to get the top guys to understand our intellectual property post-litigation."

Asked how long those deals might take, Rogers said it's more about taking the time to ink the right pact rather than rushing into something.

"Speed is not an issue so much as making sure it's right," he said. "Once we strike a deal with a cable operator, their customers will have the opportunity to up grade their more generic DVRs to TiVo. And we want to make sure we deliver the best possible experience."

Rogers noted that there are 30 million DVRs in homes today, with that number expected to increase to 50 million-60 million in the next three years. Despite this, Rogers told THR, the industry has been slow to react to the advertising crisis and come up with new ways to reach consumers through DVRs for a few reasons.

"That's inherent in an industry with challenges," he said. "And too many people think all new media is in one bucket."

In other words, the focus may be put on reaching consumers via the more widely available video-on-demand services rather than TiVo, which is in fewer homes but more widely used, Rogers argued.

Moreover, "the people who buy and sell ad time are a world removed from the people who create advertising today," he added.

In his onstage remarks, Rogers said that traditional commercial advertising will not likely completely disappear as there will be viewers who choose not to sign up for DVR service. In addition, some programming is and will continue to be watched live for the most part, including sporting events. But the pricing will change, he said, and programmers will still have to find other ways to make up for the diminished revenue.

Other programming that seems to be "TiVo-proof," Rogers told THR, includes such major events as the Oscars. But even sports programming isn't completely immune to viewers fast-forwarding through commercials as some tend to start 15-20 minutes late and then catch up, he added.

Onstage, Rogers also touted the company's latest broadband-connected boxes, saying that 85% of TiVo's HD subscribers "immediately hook their TVs up to broadband. This is a whole new way for programmers to relate directly to consumers."


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> C'MON, man! There's NO need for insults or name-calling here!!! Chill!!!


Read my post again. I did not call anyone a name. I pointed out that anyone who actually believes the billions of dollars of network programming or millions of dollars of TV guide data comes to them free of charge is stupid. I did not accuse anyone of actually believing such utter nonsense, nor did I ascribe such a lack of intellectual ability to anyone directly. I sincerely hope the individual to whom I responded directly is not so sadly deficient , but instead just needed to wake up and smell the coffee, to use the vernacular.


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> It is certainly an estimate, but not a wildly inflated one. There are approximately 300 million Americans, bearing the roughly $600 billion in TV ads, which comes up to $2000 a year per person, or roughly $5000 per family. Do you really feel the average American spends a great deal more than $6000 a year on goods and services, or the average family vastly more than $15,000 a year?


However, there is no reason to think that burden is distributed in anything close to a proportional manner, i.e., "$2000 a year per person". The burden of advertising is almost surely disproportionately biased towards folks with more discretionary income. That doesn't mitigate that $600 billion burden, but it does make it clear that a relatively poor person doesn't necessarily have their own $2000 a year burden. (By the same token, those of us who buy more fun stuff, almost surely have a burden that is a lot more than $2000 a year.)


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> I think that's overly harsh. He's clearly filtering the posts in this thread through a fog of personal bias and ignorance, resulting ultimately in straw man arguments, but I don't believe he is intentionally prevaricating.


Okay I can grant that.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *bicker*
> The burden of advertising is almost surely disproportionately biased towards folks with more discretionary income.


On it's face this seems completely logical to me but I don't think my type of logic applies to the advertising world 

In my world of logic you would target advertising (and products) at the people with money. In the real world of advertising this isn't exactly true, they target advertising at people they believe will spend money regardless if they have it or not. First lots of advertising is going after non-discretionary income, second when it comes to TV advertising advertisers appear to not care about the 50+ group (which has the most discretionary income) and always want shows that draw the younger groups.

Thanks,


----------



## ciper

JWThiers said:


> Actually, No it shouldn't be possible to record without guide data.


You misunderstood the purpose of my post.

I was trying to demonstrate that clear QAM mapping should have no effect on not paying for TiVo service with the example being OTA broadcasts or analog cable being available without the need for a cable card.

I thought about it for a while and still don't understand how clear QAM mapping would have any effect on the person using the TiVo without TiVo service,,, since QAM mapping relies on the guide data you get with the TiVo service!



lrhorer said:


> That is an average of around $1300 or more per subscriber per year (not including internet access), or about $110. That is only an average, however, and many people pay far more, others substantially less.


I think you are proving my point. 110 a month is exactly how much extended basic plus cable modem costs in a majority of the country. It also happens to be about the price of the Cable/Internet/Phone packages most larger cable companies are pushing.

At 110 a month for cable+internet adding a cable card would increase you bill an average of 13$ per month since you would have to get the cable card (say 3$) and the HD lineup added to it (say 10$).

Again the average Joe will say "Why do I have to pay 156$ extra dollars a year to get channels I already see? I already payed for the TiVo hardware and I am also already paying a monthly fee so how can I justify this seemingly unneeded additional charge?"


----------



## bicker

atmuscarella said:


> On it's face this seems completely logical to me but I don't think my type of logic applies to the advertising world  In my world of logic you would target advertising (and products) at the people with money. In the real world of advertising this isn't exactly true, they target advertising at people they believe will spend money regardless if they have it or not. First lots of advertising is going after non-discretionary income, second when it comes to TV advertising advertisers appear to not care about the 50+ group (which has the most discretionary income) and always want shows that draw the younger groups.


I think what you're noting is that advertisers avoid certain groups of folks with discretionary income, specifically those less likely (for whatever reason) to make purchases based on watching commercials. So it is *not* a matter of advertisers *avoiding* disproportionately targeting those with discretionary income, but rather *is* a matter of advertisers *intentionally* exacerbating that bias towards towards those with discretionary income, who are more likely to make purchasing decisions based on advertising.


----------



## JWThiers

SteveHC1 said:


> JWThiers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Or a better question is why do you have to subscribe to a digital tier to get a cable card from your cable company? I don't claim to understand exactly what the CC's do but my understanding is that they are the separable security the Cable companies are required to have. why not get the card and the cable company just authorize it for no digital cable.
> 
> 
> 
> - Under THOSE circumstances, a cablecard is not required.
Click to expand...

Except that You can't get guide data. If you could get the card without the Digital Tier wouldn't that fix the problem?

The way I was understanding the argument is that people want to get don't want to get cablecards because in order to get them they had to get a higher cost digital tier in addition to the cable card fee.


----------



## bicker

Yet some folks have noted that there are ways to do so (by paying the additional digital outlet fee, typically around $8, in addition to the CableCARD fee).


----------



## ciper

JWThiers said:


> Except that You can't get guide data. If you could get the card without the Digital Tier wouldn't that fix the problem?


Yes except all of the configuration is done through the billing system which then feeds the system that applies maps to the cable card. Most systems work in a way that if you didn't have the digital tier you couldn't get the HD tier and without the HD tier you wouldn't get the locals.

In other words, a cable card that has doesn't have the maps applied will actually disable even the clear QAM channels.



JWThiers said:


> The way I was understanding the argument is that people want to get don't want to get cablecards because in order to get them they had to get a higher cost digital tier in addition to the cable card fee.


That is part of it. There are also people who already have the digital tier but don't want to pay for the extra outlet, the HD tier, the card rental etc..


----------



## JWThiers

ciper said:


> You misunderstood the purpose of my post.
> 
> I was trying to demonstrate that clear QAM mapping should have no effect on not paying for TiVo service with the example being OTA broadcasts or analog cable being available without the need for a cable card.
> 
> I thought about it for a while and still don't understand how clear QAM mapping would have any effect on the person using the TiVo without TiVo service,,, since QAM mapping relies on the guide data you get with the TiVo service!


If thats the case I don't think you understood what you replied to. see bolded.


ciper said:


> JWThiers said:
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't read the entire thread so I could be WAYYYYY off base, but it could be that if people had the ability to manually map there channels as some people suggest, *then some thrifty people might want to opt out of getting guide data directly from tivo and not subscribe at all.*
> 
> 
> 
> Well that should be possible with OTA right? Or analog cable.
> Having no guide data means no season passes or wishlists or recording only new episodes etc... turning it into a tapeless VCR which most people wouldnt pay so much money for.
Click to expand...

You said we should be able to do that, to record using QAM and NO TIVO SERVICE. Basically manual record Channel/date/time/duration like a tapeless VCR. NO that should not be the case, Tivo makes its money off the service not the hardware. Should you be able to get guide data if you are only using QAM and TIVO service, Thats debatable, but no guide service, no recording, noy unless you want to pay more for the hardware to pay for the actual cost of the hardware and lost revenue from the service. Say a THD for $800 - $1000 or more.


----------



## ciper

JWThiers said:


> If thats the case I don't think you understood what you replied to. see bolded.
> .


Ok I see the disconnect now.

Right now you can manually *scan* for clear QAM channels and even setup manual recordings on them. What you were worried about is already possible. In fact this feature is how many of our fellow forum members are dealing with the issue (minus not paying for service). There was even a bug introduced in V11 of the software that screwed up these recurring recordings. That is not what the thread is about.

The thread is about wanting to map guide data (that is already being payed for) to channels (which are already being paid for). No theft or trickery.


----------



## lew

ciper said:


> I'm sorry for using such a strong word but this is a lie. I cannot remember one person who said they wanted to use this as a way to circumvent TiVo's fees.


I'm not the poster who said or even though people wanted to use QAM mapping as a way to circumvent Tivo's fees but at least one poster wants to be able to use the tivo without Tribune guide data. Is complaining about the expense of Tribune guide data. Talks about free TVGOS data that's available.

Although not posted it's not a reach to think some posters may be looking for a way to avoid paying tivo.


----------



## ciper

lew said:


> I'm not the poster who said or even though people wanted to use QAM mapping as a way to circumvent Tivo's fees but at least one poster wants to be able to use the tivo without Tribune guide data. Is complaining about the expense of Tribune guide data. Talks about free TVGOS data that's available.
> 
> Although not posted it's not a reach to think some posters may be looking for a way to avoid paying tivo.


I had been following the train of thought and don't think the two items weren't directly related in that way.

One point was that free TVGOS data combined with clear QAM mapping enabled his device to function properly with no needs for rescans. 
Another point was actually more of a question as to why TiVo the company would only use Tribune and no one else with the secondary notion that TVGOS makes manual mapping easy compared to Tribune.

We can ask him directly but I'm fairly sure using his TiVo unit without service was never the idea.

Edit: I did a search in this thread for the term "TVGOS" and read the newest posts. There is a clear delineation in dates so it's easy to narrow the important replies down. 
Most are from Fallingwater. I can't see where using a TiVo without service was the idea in any of those replies.
I believe it was just a misunderstanding.

fallingwater : If you want to know more about the technical details of the clear QAM mapping hack check over on the deal data base. A few people have been using it successfully without the need for cable cards or reapplying the hack because of frequency changes.

Now that I think about it, the people who are using the hack for this long have basically proved the TiVo is capable of doing it in a stable way and the support is already included in the OS. All thats needed is a new menu screen to configure it.


----------



## vstone

JWThiers said:


> Is that the actual design requirements that are put down on paper when the drawings are put together or is it the design requirements that you wish they used to meet your wants/needs.


My point is that Tivo designed for several certain situations, none of which really matches mine or many others.

I presume that Tivo S3 is designed to work with cablecards.

I presume that Tivo S3 is designed to work w/o cablecards as long as PSIP tables are properly populated (based on its ability to recognize QAM virtual channel data, when provided) and could provide mapping were it available (or if it matches the published cable lineup).

I presume tat Tivo S3 is designed to work with OTA digital broadcasts.

I presume that Tivo is designed to work with OTA analog and unencrypted cable analog.

I do not presume that Tivo is or is not designed to provide QAM mapping, although if I had to guess, I'd guess that QAM mapping wasn't part of the original design. I doubt that they consider it cost effective, but they may have prepared it by now, pending reasonable cable company support. For instance if the cable company gets channel 7.1 OTA (vs. via fiber optic), my reading of CFR says they should map it to 7.1. Tivo may want to remap it to 212 to match the cable company published lineup.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer - All I can say is - Oy Vey!
You argue simply for argument's sake. But that's Ok- it's your right in this free world of ours (other than the communist/socialist world of network television, of course ;-)


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - But this is NOT what people in this thread have been asking for. I haven't seen ANYONE asking TiVo to "take on the cable companies" or even to "keep up" with the cable companies' channel/frequency changes. This thread's about asking TiVo to allow *US USERS* to do all of that - via manual clear QAM re-mapping capability. BIG difference between this and what you you were talking about in your post.


I argue that Tivo doesn't stop you from doing so, which is a lot different from doing it for you. For them to tackle this issue, along with the customer support issues that result from trying to figure out what's going wrong on a particular customer's Tivo, is unreasonable with the current level of support from cable companies. We've maintained this thread alive for well over a year debating QAM mapping from both technical and customer viewpoints. Imagine trying to train CSR's about this stuff that we can't agree on.


----------



## SteveHC1

lrhorer said:


> Read my post again. I did not call anyone a name. I pointed out that anyone who actually believes the billions of dollars of network programming or millions of dollars of TV guide data comes to them free of charge is stupid. I did not accuse anyone of actually believing such utter nonsense, nor did I ascribe such a lack of intellectual ability to anyone directly. I sincerely hope the individual to whom I responded directly is not so sadly deficient , but instead just needed to wake up and smell the coffee, to use the vernacular.


I read your post and understood it exceedingly clearly. You called HIM "STUPID," and that IS name-calling, as well as childish. No need for it here - or anywhere else for that matter.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - I'm not so sure about that. Apparently enough people *****ed and moaned to TiVo about the problems they've been having in trying to get their TiVo units to schedule MANUAL recordings of clear QAM channels with guide data absent that TiVo has fessed up to it and has decided to allocate resources to "fix" it.
> ...


Perhaps because its a relatively easy to code and test.


----------



## SteveHC1

JWThiers said:


> Except that You can't get guide data. If you could get the card without the Digital Tier wouldn't that fix the problem?
> 
> The way I was understanding the argument is that people want to get don't want to get cablecards because in order to get them they had to get a higher cost digital tier in addition to the cable card fee.


You can ALWAYS get some set of Guide data on TiVo, no matter WHAT your actual source(s) of programming is/are - which set of data you get depends on what you "told" TiVo in your initial set-up routine. You just can't get guide data to match up with cable companies' clear QAM frequency/channel re-assignments of local broadcasters' digital/HD transmissions.


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> Ok I see the disconnect now.
> 
> Right now you can manually *scan* for clear QAM channels and even setup manual recordings on them. What you were worried about is already possible. In fact this feature is how many of our fellow forum members are dealing with the issue (minus not paying for service). There was even a bug introduced in V11 of the software that screwed up these recurring recordings. That is not what the thread is about.
> 
> The thread is about wanting to map guide data (that is already being payed for) to channels (which are already being paid for). No theft or trickery.


- THANK YOU!!! I was starting to get very dizzy... ;-)


----------



## vstone

lrhorer said:


> ...
> That's right but I don't want to watch network television, and I rarely ever do. I would be perfectly happy if the networks were completely shut down. I don't mind things not being free, but I vehemently resent being forced to pay for things I do not want and do not use. In case you have forgotten, our ancestors went to war over having to pay taxes without having a voice as to whether the taxes would be levied in the first place. Being forced to subsidize network television through surcharges on purchases are not technically a tax, but they are precisely the same thing in terms of impact to the consumer and why they are unacceptable.
> ...


Yes the same kind of surcharge that you pay for maintaining the gas pump where you buy your gas, or the heating system of the store wher you buy your underwear.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> I'm not the poster who said or even though people wanted to use QAM mapping as a way to circumvent Tivo's fees but at least one poster wants to be able to use the tivo without Tribune guide data. Is complaining about the expense of Tribune guide data. Talks about free TVGOS data that's available.
> 
> Although not posted it's not a reach to think some posters may be looking for a way to avoid paying tivo.


- I haven't seen anyone here saying the wanted to be able to use TiVo without guide data at ALL. And I haven't heard anyone mention anything about the "cost" of Tribune's data service either. They ALL charge *something*.

Someone did mention that TVGOS is offered intv sets without a subscription fee attached to it, and someone else responded by saying that is because the cost is built into the sets. BOTH are true, and NO ONE has stated or even implied that they are looking to get something for nothing or to rip off ANYONE.


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> fallingwater : If you want to know more about the technical details of the clear QAM mapping hack check over on the deal data base. A few people have been using it successfully without the need for cable cards or reapplying the hack because of frequency changes.
> 
> Now that I think about it, the people who are using the hack for this long have basically proved the TiVo is capable of doing it in a stable way and the support is already included in the OS. All thats needed is a new menu screen to configure it.


- EXACTLY!!!


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> I argue that Tivo doesn't stop you from doing so...


- But TiVo DOES stop us from doing so (unless you want to bother with hacking it).



vstone said:


> For them to tackle this issue, along with the customer support issues that result from trying to figure out what's going wrong on a particular customer's Tivo, is unreasonable with the current level of support from cable companies. We've maintained this thread alive for well over a year debating QAM mapping from both technical and customer viewpoints. Imagine trying to train CSR's about this stuff that we can't agree on.


Mine - and others' - point on this is that if other manufacturers, and their customers, have not experienced such difficulties then why should we believe that TiVo and ITS subscribers would???


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> I understand your point. It's just that I've never heard anyone having such problems with TVGOS remapping capability, so I'm not so sure that it's logical to assume that TIVO'S subscribers or CSR's would either - REGARDLESS of the guide's data source.


I have seen QAM channels change, through not in a remapping situation. I can't imagine a Tivo CSR having to discuss the situation. I am not opposed to an unsupported feature (this was discussed early on, but not much recently) like the 30 second skip, but doubt Tivo wants to spend money on an unsupported feature.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - But TiVo DOES stop us from doing so (unless you want to bother with hacking it).
> ...


 My car stops me from having a seven speed transmission like the Mercedes.

How dare they?

HOW DARE THEY?!


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *lrhorer*
> That's right but I don't want to watch network television, and I rarely ever do. I would be perfectly happy if the networks were completely shut down. I don't mind things not being free, but I vehemently resent being forced to pay for things I do not want and do not use. In case you have forgotten, our ancestors went to war over having to pay taxes without having a voice as to whether the taxes would be levied in the first place. Being forced to subsidize network television through surcharges on purchases are not technically a tax, but they are precisely the same thing in terms of impact to the consumer and why they are unacceptable.


There is so much wrong with this statement - no one is making you pay for anything other than the products you purchase. You statement insinuates that if there were no marketing cost (advertising) involved you would be paying less for the product. I find that amusing - I guess all the companies in the world should just layoff their marketing departments just make what they are making and sell it somewhere. Everyone will just automatically know the product exists and where to buy it - right :down:.

Just in case you missed it companies advertise because it increases profits - this includes companies that advertise on TV. If they didn't advertise profits would go down - to compensate either they would charge more for their products or more likely just go out of business.

Thanks,


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> - EXACTLY!!!


did you not say that cable companies would move QAM frequencies if they felt the need to make them harder to use, so the cable company can sell more digital tier? I happen to agree with that in general.

so If TiVo made it an official feature to manually map the QAM channels, what is to prevent cable companies from moving frequencies to mess with those mappings?

Given the above possibilities, then TiVo would see a huge risk in the area of users seeing the mapping function - using it and then after a few months the recordings stop happening correctly. For a consumer electronic appliance, having the possibility of a massive recording failure is never a good thing. For a company like TiVo that is fighting to add subscribers versus cable company DVRs that look like just a small line item on the cable bill such a risk is magnified. When you take in the fact that the cable company DVRs would all continue recording the shows just fine (since they map like a cable card TiVo would) then the risk is simply unacceptable.

It is not the function of manual mapping that is the hurdle for TiVo. The few that are hacking and the few Moxi boxes and other niche products that do manual mapping are not enough to make the cable companies go through the hassle of moving frequencies. Perhaps even the cable companies do not see enough lost revenue due to manual mapping even if offical on a TiVo to worry about it.
Still TiVo would be at the mercy of the cable companies in either an automatic mapping or manual mapping scenario and the cable companies already have enough power over TiVo inc. as it is. Why would TiVo go looking for more hassle?

PS - I would love to just map the digital tier I get from the cable company and not hassle with getting the cable cards installed correctly. I have no desire for premium channels and have not bought the big HDTV yet. I would completely benefit from some mapping process adn would understand myself that if recordings have a hassle then I need to go and remap the channel. I, like you, am not the average TiVo user though. TiVo has a large enough customer base though, that the average viewer is a large part and they would not even know what the acronym QAM was about. Oh, anda warning that using this function may result in missed recordings - is not really a good warning to put on the screen.


----------



## JWThiers

atmuscarella said:


> There is so much wrong with this statement - no one is making you pay for anything other than the products you purchase. You statement insinuates that if there were no marketing cost (advertising) involved you would be paying less for the product. I find that amusing - I guess all the companies in the world should just layoff their marketing departments just make what they are making and sell it somewhere. Everyone will just automatically know the product exists and where to buy it - right :down:.
> 
> Just in case you missed it companies advertise because it increases profits - this includes companies that advertise on TV. If they didn't advertise profits would go down - to compensate either they would charge more for their products or more likely just go out of business.
> 
> Thanks,


Profits go up with advertising but so do costs. For example, take a look at the pharmaceutical industry. Historically the prices of prescription drugs in the US and Canada stayed at about the same levels (Canada prices were lower but the always stayed relatively the same) for many years until the US changed television advertising laws and started to allow them to advertise on TV (in the mid/late 80's?) since that time the prices of drugs in the US has skyrocketed and the prices of drugs in Canada have moved along at a steady pace. The only explanation for such a sharp departure from historic norms over a 1 year period is advertising prescription drugs directly to the consumer. The change in drug pricing was sudden and sharp and the only change that could explain that sudden of a change was the advertising cost. so apparently at least in this case the the cost of the product actually went up dramatically because of advertising.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *JWThiers*
> The change in drug pricing was sudden and sharp and the only change that could explain that sudden of a change was the advertising cost. so apparently at least in this case the the cost of the product actually went up dramatically because of advertising.


The price of a product is not set by costs - the seller sets the price based on what the market will pay. The purpose of marketing is to allow the manufacture/seller to increase volume and/or price both of which should lead to increased profits. Generally speaking investors demand a certain profit level or they remove their capital which forces companies to seek higher profit levels. I have no desire to defend drug companies but effective marketing/advertising has allowed many of them to both increase sales and increase prices, leading to the increase profitability their stock holders were demanding.

Thanks,


----------



## JWThiers

I certainly hope you wouldn't defend those leaches, I was just giving an example where not advertising also can keep prices down. 

Manufacturers know down to the tenths of a cent how much it costs to make a product even long term costs like warranty or replacement work are considered. Advertising is part of that cost equation. Advertising costs are built into everything we use. Whether we are aware of the costs or not. EVEN so called free things like OTA TV. I Know you don't think that the local ABC just hires all of its employees pays all the bills, including licensing fees from money that magically appears under a money tree, it does get money from advertisers?

Just like you implied to Irhorer too little advertising won't keep prices down and profits up (paraphrased), Too much advertising won't either. you were made it sound (to me anyway) as if it would.


----------



## lew

The difference is subtle but I don't think the drug costs went up due to the cost of the advertising but rather the advertising (in some cases wrongly) allowed the drug companies to raise prices, or keep prices high, by implying the drugs are better then lower cost alternative drugs.

Many people don't think Lipitor is better (for most patients) then less expensive drugs such as Zocor. Likewise many people don't think Nexium is any better then less expensive drugs such as Prilosec. The drug companies are able to charge a price premium far in excess of the cost of the ads.

I agree with your conclusion. I see little or no benefit in letting the drug companies market directly to consumers.



JWThiers said:


> Profits go up with advertising but so do costs. For example, take a look at the pharmaceutical industry. Historically the prices of prescription drugs in the US and Canada stayed at about the same levels (Canada prices were lower but the always stayed relatively the same) for many years until the US changed television advertising laws and started to allow them to advertise on TV (in the mid/late 80's?) since that time the prices of drugs in the US has skyrocketed and the prices of drugs in Canada have moved along at a steady pace. The only explanation for such a sharp departure from historic norms over a 1 year period is advertising prescription drugs directly to the consumer. The change in drug pricing was sudden and sharp and the only change that could explain that sudden of a change was the advertising cost. so apparently at least in this case the the cost of the product actually went up dramatically because of advertising.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *JWThiers*
> Just like you implied to Irhorer too little advertising won't keep prices down and profits up (paraphrased), Too much advertising won't either. you were made it sound (to me anyway) as if it would.


I actually make no claim on knowing how much or what type of marketing is profitable for anyone's business - my insinuation was that marketing departs however do have a very good idea and that companies don't advertise on TV to bring us TV but to maximize their profits.



> Originally Posted by *JWThiers*
> I Know you don't think that the local ABC just hires all of its employees pays all the bills, including licensing fees from money that magically appears under a money tree, it does get money from advertisers?


Ya I would like one of those money trees  -

Actually I think Marketing departments look at TV just like they look at a road side bill board - it's just a platform to deliver their add/message. I also think that top TV executives look at TV exactly the same way - as a platform to deliver advertisements.

Hopefully TiVo will not go completely in the same direction and still consider "us" as costumers.

Thanks,


----------



## candewish

There is very little informed opinion or speculation about the impact of the DTV switchover on the primary issues of this thread. It seems to me that the switchover will have a major effect, sooner or later.


----------



## lew

candewish said:


> There is very little informed opinion or speculation about the impact of the DTV switchover on the primary issues of this thread. It seems to me that the switchover will have a major effect, sooner or later.


Why? All tivo S3s can tune analog and digital stations. Many (most?) of the S3 customers have HD TVs and are already getting their programming via cable or digital OTA. *No need to speculate, there will be virtually no impact on S3 customers.* I guess some customers might need to do a re-scan and might need to re-aim an antenna.

The only thing that might change is owners of existing S2 and S1 tivos might see the advantage of purchasing a new tivo.


----------



## vstone

The only impact of the DTV transition will be indirect effects from the disappearance of analog cable channels. Assume i get the basic cable tier (broadcast basic plus cnbc, hallmark, et al). As cable channels go digital (not necessarily HD) and their analog equivalents disappear, the tier structure may change. 

Consider the game show network (I've nver watched). Presumably almost all of its library is SD video. No resaon to go HD in the near future.

TCM on the other hand could go HD in a heartbeat. Turner networks rewired for HD two years back. Their new graphics are letterbox and probably HD. they probably have only to flip a switch to go HD. Almost all major film libraries are being rescanned for HD. Any recently mastered major studio DVD (whether or not the movie is recent0 say "mastered in HD."


----------



## JWThiers

atmuscarella said:


> Ya I would like one of those money trees  -


I planted one just the other day. Anyone who wants one just send send me a pm and I'll give you instructions how to grow your own too and also free of charge 5 seeds. Just send $19.95 to cover shipping and handling and I'll gladdly do this for my friends reading this post.

legal note: Limited time offer, the author makes no warranty or guarantee as to whether or not the plant will actually grow and bear fruit. If anyone actually believes this offer, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use the internet unsupervised and deserve what you get.


----------



## lew

JWThiers said:


> I planted one just the other day. Anyone who wants one just send send me a pm and I'll give you instructions how to grow your own too and also free of charge 5 seeds. Just send $19.95 to cover shipping and handling and I'll gladdly do this for my friends reading this post.
> 
> legal note: Limited time offer, the author makes no warranty or guarantee as to whether or not the plant will actually grow and bear fruit. If anyone actually believes this offer, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use the internet unsupervised and deserve what you get.


Wrong disclaimer. Correct disclaimer

Full refund of purchase price if not satisfied, shipping and handling is non-refundable.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> did you not say that cable companies would move QAM frequencies if they felt the need to make them harder to use, so the cable company can sell more digital tier? I happen to agree with that in general.


- No, I I didn't. Interesting idea. But I've never really seen most cable companies to be particularly motivated to do ANYTHING in particular ;-) It's easier for them to accomplish their goal in this regard by simply not publishing their (at least local) clear QAM data. The easiest path of least resistance seems to be their motto, at least in my eyes.

As far as the rest - re remapping, etc. - I think you again present some interesting ideas. But there are too many hypotheticals in them for me to be able to say that any of them would ever come to pass as you suggest. Then again who knows...



ZeoTiVo said:


> PS - I would love to just map the digital tier I get from the cable company and not hassle with getting the cable cards installed correctly. I have no desire for premium channels and have not bought the big HDTV yet. I would completely benefit from some mapping process adn would understand myself that if recordings have a hassle then I need to go and remap the channel. I, like you, am not the average TiVo user though. TiVo has a large enough customer base though, that the average viewer is a large part and they would not even know what the acronym QAM was about. Oh, anda warning that using this function may result in missed recordings - is not really a good warning to put on the screen.


- I agree with you 100% on all counts. Also, I never realized the extent to which TiVo is trying to expand its market overseas until just recently.This effort I''m SURE will make it less and less likely that TiVo will be interested in producing a more user-configurable product. I'm beginning to think that it will be yet awhile longer before someone is willing to mass-market a more feature-rich - and user-configurable - dvr-based appliance; in the meantime many of us may have to begin taking a serious look at pc-based HDTV recording systems... and THOSE *are* looking better and better all the time - they're slowly but surely becoming more reliable and easier to set up. And when I look at the cost of a MOXI unit, or the TOTAL costs of TiVo, the pc-based systems are also starting to look more affordable than they used to.

But I can't believe you haven't sprung for the larger-screen LCD (or plasma) HD TV yet! Go for it - you will NOT regret it! Prices have REALLY come down tremendously, and appliance retailers are really hungry for sales so it's a really good time to shop!


----------



## SteveHC1

JWThiers said:


> I planted one just the other day. Anyone who wants one just send send me a pm and I'll give you instructions how to grow your own too and also free of charge 5 seeds. Just send $19.95 to cover shipping and handling and I'll gladdly do this for my friends reading this post.
> 
> legal note: Limited time offer, the author makes no warranty or guarantee as to whether or not the plant will actually grow and bear fruit. If anyone actually believes this offer, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use the internet unsupervised and deserve what you get.


- So how much do you suppose it would cost you to produce an infomercial and get it on the air every night at 12? GO FOR IT!!! Heck, I'm TIRED of hearing about "colon health" already! "To start cleaning out your colon, start cleaning out your wallet!" - But need the money tree to do it, right?


----------



## lrhorer

atmuscarella said:


> There is so much wrong with this statement


Not really, but understanding why requires a more penetrating analysis. A surface analysis will not uncover the deeper relationships.



atmuscarella said:


> - no one is making you pay for anything other than the products you purchase.


Of course they are! The products I purchase, whether essential or not, all bear a surcharge to cover the cost of supporting the national networks to the tune of $600 billion dollars a year. You can claim all year long we aren't paying for it, but the simple, plain fact is we are.



atmuscarella said:


> You statement insinuates that if there were no marketing cost (advertising) involved you would be paying less for the product.


Not necessarily. Certainly I never said that. I don't mind paying more for a product that does not support thieves than for an identical one which does. That said, $600 billion is a huge amount of money.



atmuscarella said:


> I find that amusing - I guess all the companies in the world should just layoff their marketing departments just make what they are making and sell it somewhere.


For commodity and essential items this is in fact the case. I don't think many people need an advertisement to tell them where they can buy a car or a can of beans. I certainly did not find out about TiVos through any form of advertising, nor did I purchase my house because it was advertised.



atmuscarella said:


> Everyone will just automatically know the product exists and where to buy it - right :down:.


Virtually none of the ads on television tell you where to buy the product. The most popular ads on TV right now are arguably the Mac computer ads. Not one of them says, "Go to the Apple Store other computer retailer to purchase one." You also are completely ignoring a part of what I said. I clearly stated I am not opposed to direct marketing. Purchasing ads in the yellow pages, putting up a commercial website, buying ads in buyer's magazines, infomercials etc., are all perfectly acceptable (and economical, I might add) means of advertisement. A person seeks those venues specifically for the purpose of purchasing an item, and pays an obvious surcharge for the privilege, either up front or buried in the cost of purchase. When a company spends millions on a venue having nothing to do with the products it sells, then the average couch potato, oblivious of the realities of finance, consumes the incidental product and thinks, as people in this very thread have demonstrated, they getting something free.



atmuscarella said:


> Just in case you missed it companies advertise because it increases profits - this includes companies that advertise on TV.


Oh, gee whiz. I didn't know that. I thought they spent $600 billion just for the fun of it. 

What you seem to be missing is they have no right to increase profits through market manipulation. Capitalism demands they increase profits only through an increase in market size free of internal manipulation, or by producing a superior product, or by reducing costs. In a free market the latter will eventually result in lower costs to consumers as the competition will follow suit and lower their prices, or through price reductions due to increased supply (which is actually saying the same thing).



atmuscarella said:


> If they didn't advertise profits would go down - to compensate either they would charge more for their products or more likely just go out of business.


Like many statements, that one is overly simplistic, and untrue globally. It is true in a free market a reduction in advertising by one vendor will result in lower revenues - *not necessarily lower profits* - for that vendor. The reverse is also true. At this point one must separate out commodity and essential items from "gadgets" and frivolous items as well as unique items. The former are not generally speaking purchased in any greater quantity society-wide with advertising. No one eats twice as many groceries or burns through twice as many batteries because of advertising. Essentially the only effect of advertising with these sorts of goods is to increase the market share of one vendor at the expense of others. Yes, it is still true advertising will increase revenue for any given vendor, but if every vendor suddenly stops advertising, it won't have any great impact on the revenues of any of the vendors. Of course, the moment one vendor starts advertising and thus starts seeing an increase in revenue, the rest all follow suit, and the results of anyone not advertising in a market saturated with advertising can be disastrous. The net effect, however, is that the ad dollars taken as a whole are completely wasted. The best thing that could happen for the producers of such goods would be for all advertising to be completely outlawed. I'm not suggesting we should do this, but it would result in soaring profits for the sector.

Frivolous and unique items (also known as "vertical market items") are by definition not free market items, so free market pressures don't apply in the same way, and market analysis becomes far more complex and difficult. Some such items rely nearly 100% upon advertising. Others don't employ advertising at all, except perhaps in trade publications.

By the way, you also seem to be confusing revenue and profit. Oddly, so do a lot of supposedly expert businessmen. In any case, the two are not the same. In 2002, our business sector suffered an unprecedented market collapse. Almost everyone in our sector went bankrupt, in large measure because their business models were all based on revenue. Until that time, we were considered "boring", because our business model was based on EBITDA, not revenue. Like everyone else, our revenues plummeted. Yet despite the horrible state of the market and our massive loss of customers, our profits increased. The reasons are a lot more complex than I care to cover here, but it is a fact.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> However, there is no reason to think that burden is distributed in anything close to a proportional manner, i.e., "$2000 a year per person".


No, of course not. It's just an average.


----------



## lrhorer

SteveHC1 said:


> I read your post and understood it exceedingly clearly. You called HIM "STUPID," and that IS name-calling, as well as childish. No need for it here - or anywhere else for that matter.


No, I didn't. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. I said (emphasis added):



lrhorer said:


> *IF* you truly believe you ever get anything free, then you are just plain, flat *STUPID*.


Note the qualifier, and the fact it is a true statement in general. The statement only applies to him if he truly believes such nonsense, which I actually doubt. Rather, I believe he just hasn't stopped to think. I never said the statement actually did apply to him.

By the way, feel free to call me stupid whenever I do something stupid. It happens from time to time.


----------



## lrhorer

JWThiers said:


> Just like you implied to Irhorer too little advertising


Please stop mis-spelling my name. It's LRhorer, not IRhorer.



JWThiers said:


> won't keep prices down and profits up (paraphrased), Too much advertising won't either. you were made it sound (to me anyway) as if it would.


One of the problems is there is no feedback mechanism in place as there is in a free market. Since the vendors simply pass the costs of advertising on to the consumer, and the consumer has no means to respond directly to exorbitant costs for a program, there is nothing to prevent the vendor from spending unnecessarily large amounts on advertising. To put it another way, the amount the network charges the vendor has nothing to do with how popular the vendor's product is, but how popular the program - which has absolutely nothing to do with the product - is.


----------



## lrhorer

vstone said:


> Yes the same kind of surcharge that you pay for maintaining the gas pump where you buy your gas, or the heating system of the store wher you buy your underwear.


No, not the same kind. Those are surcharges related directly to the delivery of the items in question. What does Desperate Housewives have to do with the production and delivery of mouthwash? If the gas pump did not exist, I could not get gas. Cancelling Desperate Housewives won't prevent me from buying mouthwash. I buy my underwear online. (Besides, stores here so rarely use a heater it's hardly worth mentioning. Most stores run their air conditioners almost every day of the year.)

Once again, I never said *some* advertising is not desirable, and perhaps sometimes necessary. If the yearly spend were $600 million, I wouldn't say anything about it. We Americans seem to think advertising is necessary to get things done, and usually it is not. The recent election is an example. More than a billion dollars was spent on the campaigns, and it was all completely unnecessary. We still would have elected a president even if not a single cent had been spent. In Britain, candidates are strictly limited to how much they can spend on a campaign. If I recall, I think a candidate for Prime Minister is disqualified if he spends more than 50,000 Euros, or some such.


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> Please stop mis-spelling my name. It's LRhorer, not IRhorer.


I apologize profusely, but it is an understandable mistake, if you don't look closely an uppercase I looks a lot like a lowercase l


----------



## JWThiers

lrhorer said:


> One of the problems is there is no feedback mechanism in place as there is in a free market. Since the vendors simply pass the costs of advertising on to the consumer, and the consumer has no means to respond directly to exorbitant costs for a program, there is nothing to prevent the vendor from spending unnecessarily large amounts on advertising. To put it another way, the amount the network charges the vendor has nothing to do with how popular the vendor's product is, but how popular the program - which has absolutely nothing to do with the product - is.


Exactly
+1
bingo...


----------



## JWThiers

JWThiers said:


> I planted one just the other day. Anyone who wants one just send send me a pm and I'll give you instructions how to grow your own too and also free of charge 5 seeds. Just send $19.95 to cover shipping and handling and I'll gladdly do this for my friends reading this post.
> 
> legal note: Limited time offer, the author makes no warranty or guarantee as to whether or not the plant will actually grow and bear fruit. If anyone actually believes this offer, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use the internet unsupervised and deserve what you get.


On advise from legal counsel (Thanks lew) I have been advised to modify my legal note as follows:

legal note: Limited time offer, the author makes no warranty or guarantee as to whether or not the plant will actually grow and bear fruit. If anyone actually believes this offer, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use the internet unsupervised and deserve what you get. Full refund of purchase price if not satisfied, shipping and handling is non-refundable.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lrhorer said:


> One of the problems is there is no feedback mechanism in place as there is in a free market. Since the vendors simply pass the costs of advertising on to the consumer, and the consumer has no means to respond directly to exorbitant costs for a program, there is nothing to prevent the vendor from spending unnecessarily large amounts on advertising. To put it another way, the amount the network charges the vendor has nothing to do with how popular the vendor's product is, but how popular the program - which has absolutely nothing to do with the product - is.


the commercial advertsing time on TV is a commodity as well. Of course they price it by how popular the show is. The device that throttles how much a mouthwash company might spend on advertising is determined by the free market. They could buy every spot for the superbowl but if that made them price the mouthwash at 1$ more per bottle then the next brand, then those commercials had better induce people to pay that much more. Likely the outcome would be perhaps a spike in sales after the superbowl followed by a decline in sales as people found the product to not be worth that extra dollar.

So the free market does throttle how much is spent on advertising. It simply does not stop stupid excesses before they happen, but stops them afterwards as the too high an expense on advertising brings the company down.

In short the free market does not prevent stupid(as we have seen of late) it merely adjusts stupid out over time. To say however that advertising costs go unchecked is just not looking at the whole picture or only looking at a snapshot in time.


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> Of course they are! The products I purchase, whether essential or not, all bear a surcharge to cover the cost of supporting the national networks to the tune of $600 billion dollars a year. You can claim all year long we aren't paying for it, but the simple, plain fact is we are.


He didn't dispute that you're paying it, but rather only that you're forced. And with respect to many things, you bear the full responsibility: No one is forcing you to buy (for example) a TiVo, so the cost of advertising built into the price does not qualify for the condemnation you are trying to assign. (The portion of the price of food, by comparison, does qualify.)



lrhorer said:


> I don't mind paying more for a product that does not support thieves than for an identical one which does.


That's non-sequitur. There is no theft going on. You've introduced an irrelevancy which undercuts the point you're trying to make, by tainting it with an emotionally-laden misdirection.



lrhorer said:


> A person seeks those venues specifically for the purpose of purchasing an item, and pays an obvious surcharge for the privilege, either up front or buried in the cost of purchase.


There is no difference. Choosing to purchase something which is advertised in the yellow pages is no different from choosing to purchase something which is advertised on television.



lrhorer said:


> What you seem to be missing is they have no right to increase profits through market manipulation.


Of course, but there is no market manipulation inherent in what you're discussing. Again, you've introduced an emotionally-laden misdirection that scuttles the credibility of the point you're trying to make.

You should stick to facts; that might support your points better.



lrhorer said:


> Capitalism demands they increase profits only through an increase in market size free of internal manipulation, or by producing a superior product, or by reducing costs.


Sez hu?

Capitalism also supports increasing profits by increasing the price paid by increasing perceived value. You choose to call this market manipulation, but you're simply wrong/inaccurate/misdirecting/etc. It is a valid, viable, proper means of enhancing profit.


----------



## RoyK

bicker said:


> ...
> 
> There is no difference. Choosing to purchase something which is advertised in the yellow pages is no different from choosing to purchase something which is advertised on television...


Oh, there is a tremendous difference. Ads in the yellow pages don't constantly parade in front of your face when you look up a phone number. Most people don't even see them unless they are specifically looking for a product or service. TV ads, on the other hand, influence purchasing through imprinting brands on the mind through constant repetition.


----------



## slowbiscuit

SteveHC1 said:


> I'm beginning to think that it will be yet awhile longer before someone is willing to mass-market a more feature-rich - and user-configurable - dvr-based appliance; in the meantime many of us may have to begin taking a serious look at pc-based HDTV recording systems... and THOSE *are* looking better and better all the time - they're slowly but surely becoming more reliable and easier to set up. And when I look at the cost of a MOXI unit, or the TOTAL costs of TiVo, the pc-based systems are also starting to look more affordable than they used to.


The only problem with that is if you want full cable content, you have to buy an overpriced prebuilt Vista Digital Cable PC for Cablecards. You can't roll your own and you'll pay $250+ extra PER TUNER, because ATI is the only vendor making the tuners (IIRC).

On the other hand, if all you want is clear QAM, there's no need to have a Tivo because there are plenty of decent HTPC choices available. I have a Myth box that I use for recording clear channels and also for a video server/player. I could build a dual-tuner HD OTA/QAM PC now for around $400.


----------



## JWThiers

slowbiscuit said:


> The only problem with that is if you want full cable content, you have to buy an overpriced prebuilt Vista Digital Cable PC for Cablecards. You can't roll your own and you'll pay $250+ extra PER TUNER, because ATI is the only vendor making the tuners (IIRC).


Way wrong. A quick look over at newegg shows you can pick up internal cards from Haugpauge, Avermedia, Asus, MSI, ATI, Leadtek, DViCo and VisionTek with prices ranging from $40 - $140


----------



## billyjoebob99

JWThiers said:


> Way wrong. A quick look over at newegg shows you can pick up internal cards from Haugpauge, Avermedia, Asus, MSI, ATI, Leadtek, DViCo and VisionTek with prices ranging from $40 - $140


I think he is referring to Cable Card capable tuners for PCs. The market there is much more restrictive and pricy. The cards you mention are capable of analog, OTA digital, and QAM.


----------



## JWThiers

Ooops, you could be right.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *lrhorer*
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *atmuscarella*
> - no one is making you pay for anything other than the products you purchase.
> 
> 
> 
> Of course they are! The products I purchase, whether essential or not, all bear a surcharge to cover the cost of supporting the national networks to the tune of $600 billion dollars a year. You can claim all year long we aren't paying for it, but the simple, plain fact is we are.
Click to expand...

When I purchase a good or service I am paying for that good or service. Once the vendor has received my payment for the good or service that money is no longer mine it belongs to the vendor. What the vendor does with their money is their business. I don't go around telling the roofer I hired a few years back that I paid for his vacation - I paid him to roof my house - he used his own money to pay for the vacation - even if it came from funds he received to roof my house.

If you are going to say their is a marketing surcharge, you might just as well say their is a material surcharge, a transportation surcharge, a profit surcharge, a labor surcharge, a CEO bonus surcharge, or a what ever surcharge. Whats the point?



> Originally Posted by *lrhorer*
> You also are completely ignoring a part of what I said. I clearly stated I am not opposed to direct marketing. Purchasing ads in the yellow pages, putting up a commercial website, buying ads in buyer's magazines, infomercials etc., are all perfectly acceptable (and economical, I might add) means of advertisement.


I understand that not all marketing decisions end up being correct/profitable, however I do believe that all marketing has the intention of maximizing profits (yes profits not revenue). I am not sure what you are insinuating but it sounds like you think they are wrong for using TV as a marketing tool. Again I am not sure if you are saying it is fundamentally (morally) wrong or just financially a bad decision.



> Originally Posted by *lrhorer*
> When a company spends millions on a venue having nothing to do with the products it sells, then the average couch potato, oblivious of the realities of finance, consumes the incidental product and thinks, as people in this very thread have demonstrated, they getting something free.


I may agree that the fact that people don't understand the purpose of TV and the commercial transaction that is taking place is unfortunate, I also don't see it as anything I am going to get worked up over.

For those who are uncertain what the purpose of "free" add support TV is, it goes like this:


Marketing departments are paying TV producers to deliver adds to your eyes and ears.
TV producers are "paying" you to watch those adds by providing entertainment and news programs that you want to watch in between the adds.
or:
Marketers receive your eyes and ears. 
You receive entertainment and news programs
TV producers receive profits

Thanks,


----------



## vstone

lrhorer said:


> No, not the same kind. Those are surcharges related directly to the delivery of the items in question. What does Desperate Housewives have to do with the production and delivery of mouthwash? If the gas pump did not exist, I could not get gas. Cancelling Desperate Housewives won't prevent me from buying mouthwash. I buy my underwear online. (Besides, stores here so rarely use a heater it's hardly worth mentioning. Most stores run their air conditioners almost every day of the year.)
> 
> Once again, I never said *some* advertising is not desirable, and perhaps sometimes necessary. If the yearly spend were $600 million, I wouldn't say anything about it. We Americans seem to think advertising is necessary to get things done, and usually it is not. The recent election is an example. More than a billion dollars was spent on the campaigns, and it was all completely unnecessary. We still would have elected a president even if not a single cent had been spent. In Britain, candidates are strictly limited to how much they can spend on a campaign. If I recall, I think a candidate for Prime Minister is disqualified if he spends more than 50,000 Euros, or some such.


 Commercials are "surcharges related directly to the delivery of the items in question." Commercials are what made broadcast TV viable 50 yeras ago. That was an extention of ads that made newspapers and Magazines affordable to the masses. Premium commercial free Tv didn't show up until the 70's. Even today HBO has commercials for other HBO programs. The only difference between OTA and most cable netwoeks is the transmission medium. If you only watch premium TV, you do not represent the majority of cable customers. If cable only carried HBO, et al, then HBO would cost much more.


----------



## bicker

RoyK said:


> Oh, there is a tremendous difference. Ads in the yellow pages don't constantly parade in front of your face when you look up a phone number.


Your remark is non-sequitur, with regard to what we're actually discussing, i.e., the impact of the cost of advertising on the price you pay for goods and services.


----------



## RoyK

bicker said:


> Your remark is non-sequitur, with regard to what we're actually discussing, i.e., the impact of the cost of advertising on the price you pay for goods and services.


What we are actually discussing is QAM mapping. The whole discussion of the impact of the cost of advertising is non-sequitur.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> If replayTV had left off the commercial skip and internet file sharing I think their business would have had a very different history.


Possibly, but not a sure thing by any means.

_Commercial Advance_ actually doesn't work very well all too often. What's especially annoying is that oftentimes _CA_ doesn't work at first but then when something interesting inadvertantly appears a viewer can't return to it because at that spot _CA_ then works perfectly every time. Turning _CA_ on or off only affects future recordings, not completed ones.

While ReplayTV's overall concept was good, in practice it doesn't function nearly as slick(ly) as TiVo. While RTV's 30 sec. skip is accurate, FF & RW is always imprecise and overcompensates in the wrong direction.

ReplayTV wasn't developed as well as it should have and likely would have failed regardless of its legal hassles. Unless a seller is a program provider DVR service is almost impossible to profit from unless it offers 'more than a DVR'.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> I'm biased against paying more for a service than I need or want from it.





bicker said:


> That's a ludicrous perversion of the English language. You don't want to pay what suppliers are willing to sell for. The way to handle that is to do without.


Actually, it's just sloppy syntax (chosen because of Zeo's post #1211)! Doing without is certainly reasonable! But then CableTV precedes DVR service and a simple DVR which channel maps beats a highly specialized more expensive one with pizza.



> Many people don't want to see reality that contradicts how they want things to be.


You routinely restate the obvious in the most contentious manner.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, then how do you explain TTG and TTCB, Amazon and streaming of Netflix? These are things that cable companies decidely do not want as they can get no revenue from them and can loose revenue. i give my money to Netflix versus use PPV or premium channels for instance. To say that some one feature meets your smell test while a whole stinking pile of stuff the cable companies do not want is sitting right there is just not logical.


Good points! Hope you're right.

TiVo should reconsider providing a simple procedure whereby users can channel map unscrambled QAM.



> umm, the "pizza thing" is figuring out how DVRs can be used to skip over traditional 30 sec. spots while still finding revenue from advertisers. No advertisers - no shows - nothing to broadcast.
> So to say it is totally unnecessary is to











Reality is that TiVo is merely substituting one ad for another, and succeeds in turning something ridiculously simple (a phone call to the pizza joint) into a seemingly (broadband only) technological wonder! It all becomes clear though when it gets stupidly simple once again with 'cash at the door'!
http://ebm.mkmail.tivo.com/c/tag/hBJdmIIAtz1FXB7beKfBbCuksIh/doc.html


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels. I would love for my second Tivo S3 (w/o cablecards) to record local HD broadcasts via cable. However, when I see the wide range of ways that cable companies have implemented (or not implemented) PSIP tables, I don't see why they should break their butts providing a mapping capability that theorectically shouldn't be needed and wouldn't be needed if the cable companies would cooperate.
> 
> OTOH, it shouldn't have been hard for them to provide setups supporting those cable systems that did have virtual channel numbers assigned t unencrypted channels. Perhaps they could not get the cable companies to confirm that they wouldn't change virtual channel numbers. For the record, Time-Warner South Carolina actually had virtual channel numbers assigned to local HD broadcasts until FEB 07, when they disappeared. Their local and head end techs denied that any change had eaken place, as did the techs on my local Comcast system when some virtual channel numbers suddenly appeared on some channels, with 2 virtual channel numbers assigned to 2 actual different channels each. In this environment, who would Tivo go to to straighten out channel assignments?
> 
> I know that some of you want Tivo to take on the cable companies. It's like when your spouse wants to vacation in New England even though you've been there five times and you want to make your first visit to Yellowstone. Somebody will be unhappy either way. It may be eaiser to just do nothing.


TVGOS doesn't require PSIP data for manual channel mapping. Users enter sub-channel info.

(The following description may be in error, but on-the-fly I believe that TiVo ignores an actual unscrambled channel number whenever PSIP data is provided while TVGOS allows a user to enter either the PSIP sub-channel or the actual unscrambled sub-channel number when PSIP data is present. I'll recheck that statement if I'm challenged.)


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> *I'm not referring *to those subscribers who are only subscribing to basic cable and, absence a tivo requirement, wouldn't need cable cards. *Those customers have the option of renting a cable card.*...
> 
> What's the upside? Some customers save a few dollars in cable card rental fees...


Saving a few bucks a month and avoiding CableCARD hassles is a GOOD thing! Better than not paying for TiVo service at all! Times are tuff!


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> What's changed is introduction of the Moxi product. I hope some of the QAM mapping people give the Moxi product a try and let us know how it works (not just with QAM mapping).


Problem with Moxi (besides Digeo's reliability) is that it's relatively expensive while HDTiVo + $13 mo. is relatively cheap! That's why saving an additional $5.20 (in my location) is important!

If I can get Moxi to answer me I'll buy one and report on it. At this time Moxi, no matter how good it might be, isn't major competition.


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> I had been following the train of thought and don't think the two items weren't directly related in that way.
> 
> One point was that free TVGOS data combined with clear QAM mapping enabled his device to function properly with no needs for rescans.
> Another point was actually more of a question as to why TiVo the company would only use Tribune and no one else with the secondary notion that TVGOS makes manual mapping easy compared to Tribune.
> 
> We can ask him directly but I'm fairly sure using his TiVo unit without service was never the idea.
> 
> Edit: I did a search in this thread for the term "TVGOS" and read the newest posts. There is a clear delineation in dates so it's easy to narrow the important replies down.
> Most are from Fallingwater. I can't see where using a TiVo without service was the idea in any of those replies.
> I believe it was just a misunderstanding.
> 
> fallingwater : If you want to know more about the technical details of the clear QAM mapping hack check over on the deal data base. A few people have been using it successfully without the need for cable cards or reapplying the hack because of frequency changes.
> 
> Now that I think about it, the people who are using the hack for this long have basically proved the TiVo is capable of doing it in a stable way and the support is already included in the OS. All thats needed is a new menu screen to configure it.


Do you have a link for the hack site? It's probably way more complicated than I'd want to deal with but should be an interesting read.

As far as using TiVo without Guide data, that's not a real option for HDTiVo.

OTOH, an S1 or S2 used with a cable DTA could be used that way for standard-def. I'm still testing an unsubbed S2 that records manually and hasn't communicated with TiVo for a year, before its Lifetime Service was transferred by a TiVo promo.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> Please stop mis-spelling my name. It's LRhorer, not IRhorer.


I didn't realize that until now!


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> If you truly believe you ever get anything free, then you are just plain, flat *STUPID*. Nothing is free, not even air and water, and outside of military hardware, OTA programming is just about the very most expensive thing to the consumer there is. As far as TVGOS is concerned, it also is far from free. You already paid for it, when you bought your TV. One can do the same thing with TiVo, by opting for a lifetime subscription, rather than a periodic one. Sony just didn't give you a choice. It doesn't mean it's free.
> 
> That's got to be one of the most moronic pieces of nonsense I have ever seen. I suppose you think garbage collection and street maintenance are free, too? The military has never shown up at your door, asking for a check, so I suppose you think the war in the Middle East is costing you nothing, as well?
> 
> I happen to have a great deal of respect and affection for Groucho, but he was not an economist. The fact you don't bother to even notice when you pay for things in no way changes the fact. Unless you walk everywhere, obtain power only from windmills and solar, drink from your own well, and eat only vegetables you grow and meat from animals you kill with a rock, then you are paying out the wazoo.


Air and wind are free. Otherwise, the issue is additional cost rather than free of cost. But practically speaking it's tilting at windmills!
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/tilting-at-windmills.html


----------



## ciper

fallingwater said:


> Do you have a link for the hack site? It's probably way more complicated than I'd want to deal with but should be an interesting read.


There was one person selling the service on this forum but the DIY method is over on the "deal data base" in the "series 3 support forum" and you'll want the thread started by tivo4mevo.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> ...I don't want to watch network television, and I rarely ever do. I would be perfectly happy if the networks were completely shut down. I don't mind things not being free, but I vehemently resent being forced to pay for things I do not want and do not use. In case you have forgotten, our ancestors went to war over having to pay taxes without having a voice as to whether the taxes would be levied in the first place. Being forced to subsidize network television through surcharges on purchases are not technically a tax, but they are precisely the same thing in terms of impact to the consumer and why they are unacceptable.


Chased all those Tories into Canada, by gum! Just one toke over the line to Paradise!

But life's tough and then you die!


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> I have a news flash for you. You are neither the typical nor average CATV subscriber...


Nor are you!



> It is neither capitalism nor free enterprise! Indeed, it is much closer to Communism than Capitalism. The linchpin of Capitalism and free enterprise is that any consumer who chooses not to obtain and make use of a product pays nothing for it. Correspondingly, any customer who wishes to obtain and make use of the product must pay for it. Network television does neither. Their putative product - television programming - isn't even what they sell. Instead, they sell advertising based upon how many people watch their programming. The cost then is passed on not ultimately to their clients, but to the public (through their clients, of course) irrespective of how little or how much use the end consumer makes of the putative product. 'Exceedingly Communistic. Read Mao's Little Red Book sometime. Large sections could be reprinted under the title Network Advertising in Ten Easy Steps.


What a revoltin' development!



> I would gladly settle for not having to pay for ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox....
> 
> Many are vomitous. Most are mediocre, pandering to the lowest common denominator. A couple are half-way decent, but nothing spectacular. For $600 billion a year, every single program should put Shakespeare and Sophocles to shame.
> 
> There is essentially nothing worth viewing OTA (other than PBS), except it being hacked to bits by censors, chopped up to run in a time allocation, and riddled with commercials.


That's your opinion. Feel free to have it. But it's yours, nothing more. Just wish you weren't so long winded in most of your posts. But that's your right!


----------



## bicker

RoyK said:


> What we are actually discussing is QAM mapping. The whole discussion of the impact of the cost of advertising is non-sequitur.


Then why did you reply to a message regarding the cost of advertising?

You cannot have it both ways.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> You routinely restate the obvious in the most contentious manner.





fallingwater said:


> Reality is that TiVo is merely substituting one ad for another, and succeeds in turning something ridiculously simple (a phone call to the pizza joint) into a seemingly (broadband only) technological wonder! ...


And so you decided to restate the obvious in the most contentious manner.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> And so you decided to restate the obvious in the most contentious manner.


I'm sometimes guilty yet far from your level.


----------



## RoyK

bicker said:


> Then why did you reply to a message regarding the cost of advertising?
> 
> You cannot have it both ways.


Following is all the comment the above deserves.


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> There was one person selling the service on this forum but the DIY method is over on the "deal data base" in the "series 3 support forum" and you'll want the thread started by tivo4mevo.


Thanks! Way too heavy for me, though. (Is there a TiVo Forums rule about not posting links to other Forums?)

Right now I've swapped out the HDTiVo for a Sony DVR to check out channel mapping. TVGOS is free ('of extra cost') and easy to use.

I can't accept the rationale of Forum posters who defend TiVo's inaction, but everyone has a different take on what they want from TV gadgets. I just wanna' watch TV.


----------



## bicker

It amazes me how a couple of you manage to rationalize things in your own minds...


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> It amazes me how a couple of you manage to rationalize things in your own minds...


Most people do not intentionally post irrationally. Those who do not agree with your ideas have the exact same thought towards you.



fallingwater said:


> Thanks! Way too heavy for me, though. (Is there a TiVo Forums rule about not posting links to other Forums?)


You'll find that most of the hacks were developed by people who use the other forum. There is a love hate relationship between the hackers and TiVo.

Nearly all of the new features TiVo adds to the units are actually copying a pre existing hack. We do free development for them and they get to add it to the next revision of hardware with a fancy graphic over the top 

TivoCommunity is more of the mainstream, do as your told and lick TiVo's butt forum LOL


----------



## JWThiers

fallingwater said:


> (Is there a TiVo Forums rule about not posting links to other Forums?)


If you click on "Quicklinks" on the navigation bar and click "Forum Rules" item 2 says


> No links to any website that discusses anything that is not permitted on this forum.


So if you link to what is often refered to as "The Other Site", "DDB", or "Deal Data Base" you get this

http://www.************.com


----------



## wannaB

How about an unsuppoted feature to allow mapping of QAM channels? Please?

What I can't understand is why some folks that do not want or need this spend so much time telling me I shouldn't want or need it.

How about an unsuppoted feature to allow mapping of QAM channels? Please?


----------



## fallingwater

How about a supported feature that simply enables a user to enter whatever channel number s/he wants in the EPG, in the digital XX-XX format, in place of the automatically mapped one and tunes TiVo to that channel? 

In my location actual Comcast digital channels range from 79-1 through 121-??, consisting of unscrambled, scrambled, and audio only. There are around a hundred unscrambled video channels, both standard and hi-def, but most people wouldn't need to map all of them.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> It amazes me how a couple of you manage to rationalize things in your own minds...


Things can be negative and irrational too...

http://www.mathsisfun.com/binary-decimal-hexadecimal-converter.html

Even come in colors...

http://www.mathsisfun.com/hexadecimal-decimal-colors.html


----------



## vstone

wannaB said:


> How about an unsuppoted feature to allow mapping of QAM channels? Please?
> 
> What I can't understand is why some folks that do not want or need this spend so much time telling me I shouldn't want or need it.
> 
> How about an unsuppoted feature to allow mapping of QAM channels? Please?


Nobody is saying you shouldn't want it. I want it. The fact that some of us want it does not necessarily translate into Tivo spending money on an unsupported feature. Somebody out there probably wants to change the color scheme. If somebody offered to apy a programmer for a few months to write and test the code, Tivo might consider it, as long as it did not impede their strategic goals.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> (Sony) DHG-HDD500...eBay prices range...to $600.





fallingwater said:


> There's an eBay _Buy It Now_ listing for a DHG-HDD500 for $500 + $30 shipping right now. Search eBay for:
> 
> *Sony 500GB DVR No monthly fee-uses CableCard
> DHG-HDD500,not the DHG-HDD250 -2x the Hard Drive Space!*
> 
> Somebody bid the reserve price of $350 last night so _Buy It Now_ is gone with three days to go. There are three DHG-HDD500's on eBay right now.)


Sony DVR prices on eBay are falling now after the holidays. $500 was a fair offering price. The listing closed at $511 after _Buy It Now_ disappeared!


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> What's changed is introduction of the Moxi product. I hope some of the QAM mapping people give the Moxi product a try and let us know how it works (not just with QAM mapping).





fallingwater said:


> Problem with Moxi (besides Digeo's reliability) is that it's relatively expensive while HDTiVo + $13 mo. is relatively cheap! That's why saving an additional $5.20 (in my location) is important!
> 
> If I can get Moxi to answer me I'll buy one and report on it. At this time Moxi, no matter how good it might be, isn't major competition.


http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7006054#post7006054

I just tried to contact Digeo again:

_*Hi; 
I'm considering buying a Moxi DVR but have questions prior to doing so. What is the best way to contact you regarding questions about Moxi? How do you provide customer support for Moxi owners?
Thanks for any info.*_

And again the message did not go through!

Hard to see how Digeo expects to sell a pricey product like Moxi without an easy way for customers to contact them:
http://www.digeo.com/culture_contact.jsp


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> Nobody is saying you shouldn't want it. I want it. The fact that some of us want it does not necessarily translate into Tivo spending money on an unsupported feature. Somebody out there probably wants to change the color scheme. If somebody offered to apy a programmer for a few months to write and test the code, Tivo might consider it, as long as it did not impede their strategic goals.


A FSI too!

Omit Suggestions, programs subject to deletion at any time and Deleted Programs, when calculating percentage of available HDD space.

Click on the photo to the left of External Hard Drive in the link below! So simple a wannabe hi-falutin' competitor with a color scheme can do it! http://moxi.com/moxi/experience_features.jsp


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> Nobody is saying you shouldn't want it. I want it. The fact that some of us want it does not necessarily translate into Tivo spending money on an unsupported feature.


I totally agree. That's really the whole issue in a nutshell.


----------



## wannaB

bicker said:


> I totally agree. That's really the whole issue in a nutshell.


I guess in a nutshell I see it as something they could do pretty easily and not support and you see it as an expensive option to offer.

I'll admit right up front I'm a little slow, so explain it to me like I'm a six year old. Based on your assumption I shouldn't request this feature?


----------



## bicker

No one has ever said that. You can and should request whatever you want. Just don't expect to get it.


----------



## slowbiscuit

fallingwater said:


> I just tried to contact Digeo again:
> And again the message did not go through!
> 
> Hard to see how Digeo expects to sell a pricey product like Moxi without an easy way for customers to contact them:
> http://www.digeo.com/culture_contact.jsp


Send a PM to davezatz here asking him to forward it to his Digeo contact, he talked to them at CES. I think it would be great if you got one and could provide a nice comparative review with Tivo here (or on a website). Haven't seen anyone reviewing a Moxi yet.
Dave's website is www.zatznotfunny.com, and his talk with Digeo was posted here.


----------



## fallingwater

I could take extraordinary measures but shouldn't have to. Digeo carries the burden of providing potential buyers a way of communicating with it.

I'm neither rich nor poor and don't really need Moxi. I'd like to get one to evaluate, but unless it's slicker'n snot, return it within 30 days. Without its promised analog tuning dongle Moxi is a nonstarter for me.

Digeo's Moxi website offers an overproduced vision of Moxi that hints at ephemera if it's not backed with a simple method of communicating with the company.

(Digeo's website below isn't even connecting right now!)

http://www.digeo.com/tech.jsp

http://moxi.com/moxi/discover_moxi_hd.jsp


----------



## jrm01

They both connect for me.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> You'll find that most of the hacks were developed by people who use the other forum. There is a love hate relationship between the hackers and TiVo.
> 
> Nearly all of the new features TiVo adds to the units are actually copying a pre existing hack. We do free development for them and they get to add it to the next revision of hardware with a fancy graphic over the top


 that was true in the early days maybe, but no more. Indeed even TiVoToGo was not a direct copy as that would mean it ran fast, did the muxing of audio and video on the PC, that the user gets to deal with the codec fun for, and would have turned encrypting the file while recording it off. Your rationalizations stem from thinking TiVo can just throw hacks into the code, along with a graphic or two and release it without a care to supporting it or the business environment that TiVo must exist in. The hacking community is great and there are some very supportive people doing work there, but at the end of the day TiVo inc. simply can not use the same latitude a hacker would. TiVo inc. has far greater constraints on what they can add in.



> TivoCommunity is more of the mainstream, do as your told and lick TiVo's butt forum LOL


and really stupid one liners like this just show your bias and disregard for rational debate. If you truly feel this way then why bother posting here???

PS - the disgusting twist of the typical metaphor just further diminishes anything you could actually contribute here if you chose to overcome your bias.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> If somebody offered to pay a programmer for a few months to write and test the code, Tivo might consider it, as long as it did not impede their strategic goals.


No. The cost of programming it is just one component of the overall cost. For QAM manual mapping or color changes, it would be the smallest part of the cost.

The other costs of support line time and resources spent covering the feature are a big factor and continue over time.

Even if they made it a semi secret unsupported feature there is also the cost of the fallout of people saying the TiVo did not record a bunch of scheduled shows when the mapping changes. Add in that cable company DVRs would have recorded just fine despite the mapping change and you have a PR nightmare that is unwinnable since the bottom line is that a set of TiVo DVRs did in fact not record some shows it was scheduled to record and that will linger far longer than any of the reasonable explanations.

I have a TiVo HD without cable cards. I would make immediate use of the feature if they put it out there and would expect that 99% of my recordings would be fine. The above in no way says I am against or do not want this feature. The above is no need by me to leap to TiVo inc.'s defense. It is simply adding some reality to a conversation in this forum about a feature under discussion.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...
> Even if they made it a semi secret unsupported feature there is also the cost of the fallout of people saying the TiVo did not record a bunch of scheduled shows when the mapping changes.
> ...


And Tivo could say "told you so"


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> No. The cost of programming it is just one component of the overall cost. For QAM manual mapping or color changes, it would be the smallest part of the cost.
> 
> The other costs of support line time and resources spent covering the feature are a big factor and continue over time.
> 
> Even if they made it a semi secret unsupported feature there is also the cost of the fallout of people saying the TiVo did not record a bunch of scheduled shows when the mapping changes. Add in that cable company DVRs would have recorded just fine despite the mapping change and you have a PR nightmare that is unwinnable since the bottom line is that a set of TiVo DVRs did in fact not record some shows it was scheduled to record and that will linger far longer than any of the reasonable explanations.
> 
> I have a TiVo HD without cable cards. I would make immediate use of the feature if they put it out there and would expect that 99% of my recordings would be fine. The above in no way says I am against or do not want this feature. The above is no need by me to leap to TiVo inc.'s defense. It is simply adding some reality to a conversation in this forum about a feature under discussion.


GREAT POST.:up: The 30 second skip "unsupported feature" doesn't really have a down side.



vstone said:


> And Tivo could say "told you so"


The tivo customer will be telling his friends his tivo unit didn't record a show but cable supplied DVR did. Tivo won't have an opportunity to respond to all the potential customers that get misleading information. Tivo will have to have CSR representatives field the phone calls.


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> And Tivo could say "told you so"


And I wonder how TiVo's critics in this thread would *actually* respond to that, *as opposed to *how they claim, now, that they'd respond.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> And I wonder how TiVo's critics in this thread would *actually* respond to that, *as opposed to *how they claim, now, that they'd respond.


Not really relevent. It's possible the handful of QAM mapper fans in this thread wouldn't bother tivo if their show didn't record *but a different group of customers* wouldn't be as understanding.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> And Tivo could say "told you so"


TiVo could reply to the PR nightmare with

"We told you that the DVR shipped in such a way that shows would very likely not record all the time but only if you used this unsupported feature ??????????????????????????????????"

yah, that message would resonate for a long time, but just the first part.

think of it this way
TiVo very likely feels they made it clear you would need a cable card to record digital channels - somehow that message was not clear enough for a subset of customers and is causing TiVo some PR problem.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> The 30 second skip "unsupported feature" doesn't really have a down side.


'Skip to beginning or end' is then no longer an option of course. Some users might find that a downside.

---

It really doesn't matter what posters on this and other advocacy threads post. Decisions regarding supported or offered features are TiVo's alone to make.

Posters who want QAM mapping or a FSI, for that matter, should continue to post just to keep such issues simmering. An effective strategy would be to pointedly ignore the few regular posters who repeatedly reply with practical sounding but completely unsupported (by TiVo) arguments. Unless or until an official TiVo guy posts about QAM mapping or FSI or anything else, pro/con Forum arguments don't matter nearly as much as raw exposure of such concepts.

---

OT but related:

It's heartening that I finally confirmed how to control Comcast's DTA from TiVo's S2 after repeated attempts and four pages of posts in the Coffee House's 'unboxing' thread:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7037357#post7037357

The next DTA control issue is to prove whether S2DT can or can't control a DTA (despite TiVo's assertion that it can't.) If S2DT actually can it would retain dual tuner functionality while maintaining TiVo's ease and convenience of operation while incurring NO additional monthly cable fee at all.

S2 may be TiVo's most effective product for maintaining company revenues during these recessionary times by making it easy to lower users' cable bills while still enjoying TiVo. S2's are relatively cheap and don't require pricey hi-def displays or huge HDD's to enjoy TiVo enhanced TV.


----------



## jrm01

fallingwater said:


> The next DTA control issue is to prove whether S2DT can or can't control a DTA (despite TiVo's assertion that it can't.) If S2DT actually can it would retain dual tuner functionality while maintaining TiVo's ease and convenience of operation while incurring NO additional monthly cable fee at all.


Where does TiVo assert that the DTA won't work with the S2DT. They only say that you will lose dual tuner functionality if you use it. That statement is based on the fact that the DTA only outputs RF and therefore will tie up the RF input on TiVo, eliminating the possibility of a serperate RF input for analog and dual tuning.


----------



## lew

Posters who are looking for features not currently offered by tivo should use the suggest a feature section on tivo's website. Those people should also consider writing tivo a letter. It's a reach to think the number of posts on a thread on an internet discussion board will have any impact on tivo's decision.
Simmering does little (I suspect nothing) to change tivo's decision but may create unrealistic expectations from people reading the thread.

TivoPony said something like QAM mapping affects a small number of customers and is low on the list. You can do a search if you want the exact quote.



fallingwater said:


> It really doesn't matter what posters on this and other advocacy threads post. Decisions regarding supported or offered features are TiVo's alone to make.
> 
> Posters who want QAM mapping or a FSI, for that matter, should continue to post just to keep such issues simmering. An effective strategy would be to pointedly ignore the few regular posters who repeatedly reply with practical sounding but completely unsupported (by TiVo) arguments. Unless or until an official TiVo guy posts about QAM mapping or FSI or anything else, pro/con Forum arguments don't matter nearly as much as raw exposure of such concepts.
> 
> ---
> 
> OT but related:
> 
> It's heartening that I finally confirmed how to control Comcast's DTA from TiVo's S2 after repeated attempts and four pages of posts in the Coffee House's 'unboxing' thread:
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7037357#post7037357
> 
> The next DTA control issue is to prove whether S2DT can or can't control a DTA (despite TiVo's assertion that it can't.) If S2DT actually can it would retain dual tuner functionality while maintaining TiVo's ease and convenience of operation while incurring NO additional monthly cable fee at all.
> 
> S2 may be TiVo's most effective product for maintaining company revenues during these recessionary times by making it easy to lower users' cable bills while still enjoying TiVo. S2's are relatively cheap and don't require pricey hi-def displays or huge HDD's to enjoy TiVo enhanced TV.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Not really relevent.


Not relevant to TiVo, I'll grant you, but relevant nonetheless. 



lew said:


> It's possible the handful of QAM mapper fans in this thread wouldn't bother tivo if their show didn't record *but a different group of customers* wouldn't be as understanding.


I suppose it is a valid question, just which of the two groups would be more unreasonable than the other. Personally, I think the Average Joe would take services at face-value, to the extent that they are aware of the limitations. So, for example, if the UI used to enable or modify the configuration for the hidden feature had UAC-like nag prompts, warning the user that they are taking full responsibility for failures of the device due to mismatches between the mappings they entered and whatever changes might be applied to the effective mappings by their service provider without their knowledge, then I think a good number of Average Joes would see a failed recording and take a significant amount of personal responsibility.

I think TiVo could also help themselves by showing, on the UI for every recording recorded using a manual mapping, the legend, "Warning! Manual Mapping! User is responsible!". 

However, this doesn't really mitigate the risk from this feature at all, because I still contend that Average Joes wouldn't care much about this feature, so most of the dissatisfaction (and therefore most of the costs associated with supporting this feature) would emanate from folks who are TiVo enthusiasts, specifically, like the proponents of this feature on this thread.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Posters who are looking for features not currently offered by tivo should use the suggest a feature section on tivo's website. Those people should also consider writing tivo a letter. It's a reach to think the number of posts on a thread on an internet discussion board will have any impact on tivo's decision.
> Simmering does little (I suspect nothing) to change tivo's decision but may create unrealistic expectations from people reading the thread.
> 
> TivoPony said something like QAM mapping affects a small number of customers and is low on the list. You can do a search if you want the exact quote.


Maybe; maybe not. If a TiVo guy actually posted on the practicality of proposals like QAM mapping or FSI from TiVo's POV it would be the end of a lot of this. I'll let you provide TiVoPony's quote before commenting further.

Absent that, it's emotionally more satisfying to stir up a simmering pot instead of following officially sanctioned, oh-so-proper but usually completely ineffective procedures. YMMV!


----------



## JWThiers

fallingwater said:


> Maybe; maybe not. If a TiVo guy actually posted on the practicality of proposals like QAM mapping or FSI from TiVo's POV it would be the end of a lot of this. I'll let you provide TiVoPony's quote before commenting further.
> 
> Absent that, it's emotionally more satisfying to stir up a simmering pot instead of following officially sanctioned, oh-so-proper but usually completely ineffective procedures. YMMV!


I'm not lew but FWIW



TiVoPony said:


> I'm sorry you feel we've become more secretive, having been here from day one I'd argue that's not the case. Our product roadmap has never been public, as we've had to explain here on the forum many times over the years (yes, prior to 2004). Even back when Replay was our only competitor we were careful about how and when information was shared...there's nothing like giving a competitor free information on what you're doing. I will agree that there was a period, about four years ago, where we had a string of unfortunate leaks regarding new features. Those were not planned, sanctioned, or in any way helpful to us, trust me. You shouldn't take a lack of leaks as a change in policy though...we didn't intend to have the leaks to begin with!
> 
> There have never been release notes regarding bug fixes in the past either. It's possible that we're not any more secretive today than you remember us being.
> 
> Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.
> 
> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).
> 
> I assume by 'digital setup support for S2' you're referring to the ATSC converter boxes just coming onto the market in advance of next February's cut over for antenna signals (cable is not affected). That's being worked on, but I don't have a date or support plans to share yet.
> 
> We're also pretty open here, myself, Jerry, and Stephen, about engaging with customers who have issues, helping to identify what can be done, soliciting help (and beta testers), etc. There aren't many companies that allow employees to participate on open forums the way that TiVo does.
> 
> We do our best. But I have to acknowledge that no matter how much time we spend here, there will always be one more post to answer. If we can help, and provide information, we always will. Just don't ask for our product roadmap.
> 
> Cheers,
> Pony


----------



## fallingwater

jrm01 said:


> Where does TiVo assert that the DTA won't work with the S2DT. They only say that you will lose dual tuner functionality if you use it. That statement is based on the fact that the DTA only outputs RF and therefore will tie up the RF input on TiVo, eliminating the possibility of a serperate RF input for analog and dual tuning.


You're right!
http://www.tivo.com/setupandsupport...tal_cable_and_the_Series2_Dual_Tuner_DVR.html

*WARNING: Insist on receiving a 2-way digital cable box. Your cable provider may offer you a Digital Adapter (DTA), but the Digital Adapter does not allow dual tuning on the Series2 DT DVR.*

However, if S2DT can control a DTA then TiVo's tech support page is wrong. I tested Toshiba's TiVo DVD recorder using its line input in conjunction with a VCR used as a demodulator. The setup works fine as long as Pace's IR extender is used to receive TiVo's IR signals. (I don't know why. The IR receiver in the DTA works fine with the DTA remote and is actually quite sensitive.)

Used with a VCR (or other) demodulator, S2DT will retain dual tuner functionality!


----------



## lew

Bicker--Mrs. Bicker will blame tivo, not you, if her show is missed due to QAM frequencies changing. Many people have a friend, relative or other "geek" set up their stuff. Those people are also going to blame tivo if a show is missed. I guess tivo could go overboard with the warning. Something like Do you feel lucky? every time a person setups up a recording based on QAM mapping. Of course those people would also blame tivo for selling a product that is so unreliable as to require those kinds of warnings.

Some cable systems are taking advantage of "loopholes" and are encrypting all digital HD channles (even OTA). Some cable systems are taking advantage of "loopholes" and aren't properly handling PSIP data.

Sounds to me like QAM mapping is a feature that belongs low on the list.


----------



## jrm01

Technically the support page is wrong. You can get the dual-tuner capability with an intermiadary VCR (although I think that it is acting as a demodulator, not modulator). I just think that TiVo doesn't want to suggest this solution due to its complexity and difficulty of setting up. Too many support issues.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> An effective strategy would be to pointedly ignore the few regular posters who repeatedly reply with practical sounding but completely unsupported (by TiVo) arguments. Unless or until an official TiVo guy posts about QAM mapping or FSI or anything else, pro/con Forum arguments don't matter nearly as much as raw exposure of such concepts.


hmm.. I had started out with the ROI "practical sounding" argument that there were simply too few users who wanted QAM mapping. Being shouted down as not having any real evidence, I moved on to the other arguments such as ongoing support costs since cable companies could mess with it whenever they wanted, etc..

seems like the original "practical sounding" arguments were more or less on target.

so keep QAM simmering but surely now you can concede that you do so in the face of practical reality.


----------



## fallingwater

JWThiers said:


> I'm not lew but FWIW


Thanks, JW!

Appears as if Pony didn't completely shut the door, eh? (Except, practically speaking, for an 'M' card compatible S3.)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876



ciper said:


> I tend to agree with the general idea the original poster has. There was a time when Tivo wasn't so secretive about bugfixes and new features. Now we not only have to guess when the next software release will be but also if it even addresses the specific bug in mind.
> 
> There are also features that a significant portion of the community has asked for which are ignored. For example QAM mapping, true M-Card support on the S3, digital set top box support on the S2, free space indicator etc...


*I'm sorry you feel we've become more secretive, having been here from day one I'd argue that's not the case. Our product roadmap has never been public, as we've had to explain here on the forum many times over the years (yes, prior to 2004). Even back when Replay was our only competitor we were careful about how and when information was shared...there's nothing like giving a competitor free information on what you're doing. I will agree that there was a period, about four years ago, where we had a string of unfortunate leaks regarding new features. Those were not planned, sanctioned, or in any way helpful to us, trust me. You shouldn't take a lack of leaks as a change in policy though...we didn't intend to have the leaks to begin with! 

There have never been release notes regarding bug fixes in the past either. It's possible that we're not any more secretive today than you remember us being.

Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.

Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).

I assume by 'digital setup support for S2' you're referring to the ATSC converter boxes just coming onto the market in advance of next February's cut over for antenna signals (cable is not affected). That's being worked on, but I don't have a date or support plans to share yet.

We're also pretty open here, myself, Jerry, and Stephen, about engaging with customers who have issues, helping to identify what can be done, soliciting help (and beta testers), etc. There aren't many companies that allow employees to participate on open forums the way that TiVo does.

We do our best. But I have to acknowledge that no matter how much time we spend here, there will always be one more post to answer. If we can help, and provide information, we always will. Just don't ask for our product roadmap. 

Cheers,
Pony
__________________
Director of Product Marketing
TiVo Inc. *


----------



## fallingwater

jrm01 said:


> Technically the support page is wrong. You can get the dual-tuner capability with an intermediary VCR (although I think that it is acting as a demodulator, not modulator). I just think that TiVo doesn't want to suggest this solution due to its complexity and difficulty of setting up. Too many support issues.


You're right about demodulator.

Maybe 'VCR' is the doity woid heah! It's actually an easy solution.

TiVo often exhibits an almost schizophrenic aura when providing for users' needs about technical issues ranging from simplistic to arcane.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> hmm.. I had started out with the ROI "practical sounding" argument that there were simply too few users who wanted QAM mapping. Being shouted down as not having any real evidence, I moved on to the other arguments such as ongoing support costs since cable companies could mess with it whenever they wanted, etc..
> 
> seems like the original "practical sounding" arguments were more or less on target.
> 
> so keep QAM simmering but surely now you can concede that you do so in the face of practical reality.


Whatever works!

I like digitally supplied TVGOS's QAM mapping solution. Totally a function of user input, not PSIP data. I wouldn't be surprised if Moxi also is employing that approach.

The latest eBay listing for Sony's DHG-HDD500 (500GB) DVR closed under $500.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> Whatever works!
> 
> I like digitally supplied TVGOS's QAM mapping solution. Totally a function of user input, not PSIP data. I wouldn't be surprised if Moxi also is employing that approach.
> 
> The latest eBay listing for Sony's DHG-HDD500 (500GB) DVR closed under $500.


True - like I have said in other areas - turning off a TiVo DVR and going to something different while TiVo knows why you went to something else - is the number one best way to move something up the priority list.

if it was me and I wanted to get the QAM stuff without using a cable card - I would probably;y get an HDHomeRun and hook it to a windows MCE unit that I have already. heck with PyTiVo I could even serve it back to my TiVo to wtach on any TV.  As it is, once my other Tivo HD shows up I am putting cable cards in the downstairs one. 500$ for a so-so DVR that can manually map or 200$ for some kludged mapping solution/4$ a month for cards = 50 months till I break even. I have the basic digital tier for free as part of triple play.


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> Bicker--Mrs. Bicker will blame tivo, not you, if her show is missed due to QAM frequencies changing.
> ...


I would argue that in some families the spouse would get the blame regardless and in other families the cable company would get the blame regardless. The latter case assumes that the purely theoretical mistakes by some spouse (not bicker, of course) might be at fault, but he might tell his better half that it was the cable's fault. I would also argue that the spouse might just not want to deal with resultant unpleasantness of Mrs. Bicker or any other better half regardless.


----------



## candewish

Am I right in assuming that tivo 3/HD/XL owners are currently able
to receive clear QAM HD of their local channels on their tivos?

I get basic cable primarily to get a good signal and struggled
with choosing between tivo and moxi for a DVR, believing that
I could manually record the clear QAM HD signal of local
stations that I now receive from Comcast in the Miami area. All
three of my HD sets are able to receive those signals, but
the cable tuner in my tivo HD does not pick up an HD signal for
CBS or ABC. Is this a common problem or did I just get a tivo
with a bad cable DTV tuner?

I have made channel scans several times, and tivo always fails to detect 
the channels CBS and ABC use. My software version is up-to-date.
According to my TVs, the signal strength of the CBS and ABC
digital channels are equal to those of NBC, FOX, CW and a couple of
other clear QAM signals that my tivo is able to pick up.


----------



## RoyK

My TiVoHD will NOT pick up any of my local's clear QAM cable signals. BOTH of my HD TVs (a 4 year old sony and a new el-cheapo) pick up all of them just fine.

Edit: The refurb TiVoHD that I received because of the gray screen issue (didn't help - sent it back) wouldn't receive the local clear QAM channels either. And yes - I checked every single channel that the channel scan reported. Got lots of others (ESPNHD for example) but none of the locals.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer

candewish said:


> Am I right in assuming that tivo 3/HD/XL owners are currently able
> to receive clear QAM HD of their local channels on their tivos?


I have two Series 3 setup. One has 2 cable cards, the other, no cards.
The no-card box gets 2-2 (pbs) 4-1 (cbs) 5-1 (abc) 7-1 (nbc) 7-2 (another channel called "This", it's a movie channel, very strange), 25-1, (local fox) and 44-2,3,4 a few more PBS stations. They are HD and very clear. They just don't show guide info so a pain to try to record.


----------



## vstone

Yes, but its highly dependent on your cable system's proper setup. My S3 finds about 20 channel "0"'s, up from 6 originally. They just started paying attention to clear QAM reception, mostly because I've been bugging them about it for so long. But we still have both ABC-HD and CBS-HD on channel 1-1. What's a Tivo to do? They did just move the second channel on 1-2 to 7-2, so we're making progress.

As an added bonus: my cable system is a Scientific Atlanta Comcast system. Comcast systems are about 80&#37; Motorola and Motorola systems have a feature called Channel One (which is where I think they go for On Demand, etc.). Channel One isn't available on SA systems. If I go to Channel; One, I get ABC-HD.


----------



## candewish

The initial post in this thread states -

*******************
US cable service includes digital HD network programming as part of "basic cable" service by FCC mandate. The cable companies are required to pass this programming unencrypted, which means it does not require a cablecard to receive these network HD channels. The Tivo HD and S3 have the ability to discover and tune these channels without the need for a cablecard.
********************

The basic premise of this thread is that tivo has "the ability to
discover and tune these channels without need for a cablecard" -
and THAT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is all kinds of speculation as to why tivo does not support
clear QAM with guide data - conspiracy with cable companies; cable
companies continually reassigning channel numbers; complexity
of remapping features like 'season pass' due to changes in
channel mapping; disgruntled customers who missed recording
a program blaming it on tivo; etc, etc.

But the reality is that tivo does not, and can not, reliably
receive the same clear QAM signals that the QAM tuners in moxi,
PC cards, and practically all HDTVs are able to reliably receive. They
don't support clear QAM tuning, not because they have chosen
not to, they don't support it because they CAN'T!!!!!

I asked to exchange my new tivo HD because it doesn't pickup
major local clear QAM channels, and tivo customer support refused -
"WE DO NOT SUPPORT CLEAR QAM RECEPTION, PERIOD. NOT BECAUSE
WE DON'T WANT TO, BUT BECAUSE OUR TUNER CAN'T RELIABLY RECEIVE IT".

If you are a non-tivo owner and believe from reading this thread
that tivo has "the ability to discover and tune these channels
without need for a cablecard" - YOU ARE MISTAKEN!

CAVEAT EMPTOR


----------



## ZeoTiVo

candewish said:


> I asked to exchange my new tivo HD because it doesn't pickup
> major local clear QAM channels, and tivo customer support refused -
> "WE DO NOT SUPPORT CLEAR QAM RECEPTION, PERIOD. NOT BECAUSE
> WE DON'T WANT TO, BUT BECAUSE OUR TUNER CAN'T RELIABLY RECEIVE IT".


was this the word for word statement from a CSR. Have you used a Moxi and seen that it picks up more than a TiVo?
even at that, indeed the design of the Moxi and a TV would be different in that they will show all channels with a signal on it while TiVo may ignore some. Also you need to do guided setup in a specific way to have it find all the QAM channels - basically you answer yes to "plan on using cable cards"

so if you have some sources and facts to back up the stuff you post that would be very helpful to others.


----------



## markens

candewish said:


> If you are a non-tivo owner and believe from reading this thread
> that tivo has "the ability to discover and tune these channels
> without need for a cablecard" - YOU ARE MISTAKEN!


My S3 reliably finds, tunes, and allows me to schedule manual recordings on all the clear-QAM channels present on my cable system. And always has. So a blanket statement saying it never works is as wrong as one saying that it always works.

I suspect the quoted TiVo CSR was talking about the problem of reliably "mapping" clear-QAM channels to their carrying frequency, rather than the reliability of tuning the QAM channels once found. After all, even with cable cards the tuner must be able to then reliably _tune_ the channel!


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Bicker--Mrs. Bicker will blame tivo, not you


No she won't. She's a *reasonable* person. :up:


----------



## bicker

Just reading this thread, something comes to mind: Whenever CSR/customer discussions are related online, we're basically learning only one side of the story. We're not hearing the CSR explain their side; we're hearing only the customer's perception of what was said. Just based on conversations I've overheard, or listened in on when working as an auditor, I would not doubt that half of the time, what we're hearing about CSR/customer discussions is completely inaccurate.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

bicker said:


> I've overheard, or listened in on when working as an auditor, I would not doubt that half of the time, what we're hearing about CSR/customer discussions is completely inaccurate.


heck, just watch the early auditions of American Idol

Judge "We're sorry, this competition is just not for you"
auditionee "They told me I sucked"


----------



## vstone

The Tivo does have the ability to tune to clear QAM channels with properly populated PSIP virtual channel info. It does not have the ability to reliably find and tune to them in the absence of this data, although many other digital cable tuners do OK in this regard. Recall that there weren't too many available digital cable tuners available when the Tivo was designed. It may have been based on the DirecTV Tivo software, which I'm sure assumes that the virtual channel info is always there. Tivo likely assumed that the PSIP data would be there, and when it wasn't, just punted. Didn't want to go back and rewrite software. Doesn't want to add mapping, perhaps at least not until PSIP virtual channel data show up.


----------



## candewish

ZeoTiVo said:


> was this the word for word statement from a CSR. Have you used a Moxi and seen that it picks up more than a TiVo?
> even at that, indeed the design of the Moxi and a TV would be different in that they will show all channels with a signal on it while TiVo may ignore some. Also you need to do guided setup in a specific way to have it find all the QAM channels - basically you answer yes to "plan on using cable cards"
> 
> so if you have some sources and facts to back up the stuff you post that would be very helpful to others.


*******************
The CSR stated many times and in many ways that tivo does not support
clear QAM reception because it can not reliably do so.
I have no experience with moxi - I am only repeating the claims of others
including other posters to this thread.

All of my HDTVs (and those of other posters on this tread) do more than
"show all channels with a signal". They show the strength of those signals
and they tune to those channels and show beautiful HD reception. Why
does tivo miss some/all of these channels?

Would you please explain to others on this thread how "to do a guided setup
in a specific way to have [tivo] find all the QAM channels." That would
be very much appreciated.


----------



## vstone

It can find all of them, it just doesn't know what to do with them after it finds them if it isn't told by the PSIP tables.

Additionally, the PSIP tables' virtual channel data may be populated properly, but with numbers that don't necessarily make sense and do not correlate the published cable channel list.

I can now (as of about a month ago) get my FOX channel at virtual channel 1-2. It would make more sense at 8-1 (the OTA virtual channel number), but would make me most happy at 214 (the published channel #) because the guide data is available for cable channel 214. In the absense of a published clear QAM channel lineup, Tivo can not obtain an official channel line up with guide data, However, using channel 214 would make it unnecessary to create another channel lineup (although they could easily create a clear QAM lineup in this scenario).

And, just to make everyone happy, many or most networks currently have some cable channels carried as unencrypted HD channels. These channels correspond to channels on the analog extended basic package, not the analog basic package. In many places the extended package is/was blocked for basic tier customers by a frequency filter out at the pole. This filter must be removed to get the frequencies for the expanded basic package OR to get the local HD channels. It is not necessary to have the local HD channels on these high frequencies, but bthat is probably where they are on most systems to prevent colliding with the remainibg analog basic tier.When analog transmitters go off, the must carry rules start applying to the digital (in this case HD) channels and therefore access must be provided to these channels for basic tier users. At some future date the cable channels may be encrypted, eneding a free ride for these basic tiier users.


----------



## slowbiscuit

vstone said:


> I can now (as of about a month ago) get my FOX channel at virtual channel 1-2. It would make more sense at 8-1 (the OTA virtual channel number), but would make me most happy at 214 (the published channel #) because the guide data is available for cable channel 214. In the absense of a published clear QAM channel lineup, Tivo can not obtain an official channel line up with guide data, However, using channel 214 would make it unnecessary to create another channel lineup (although they could easily create a clear QAM lineup in this scenario).


This is an interesting question - can TV's with clear QAM tuners actually tune channels like '214' or '803'? I've not seen (or heard) of them mapped that way with PSIP data on clear QAM channels, and I wonder if it's because most tuners cannot go that high, even though it's just a virtual channel number.

I agree that it would make the most sense to just PSIP the channels to whatever is on the cable box, but I think they don't because they want to match the OTA designations (or the PSIP is already passed to them by the channel provider and they just remap it to the cable frequency assignment).

After the big Comcast digital migration, it will be way past time for the FCC to step in and take a look at this if the providers (cable or channel) don't want to make it right. There are more and more digital TVs being sold with clear QAM tuners.


----------



## vstone

A vacation house has a a circa 2006 Westinghouse with really crappy software. It could tune the local OTA stations on cable with numbers like 801, 805, etc until FEB 07 (long story here), so the answer is yes.

I think most digital tuners have at least 5 display digits so they can tune to channel numbers like 102-14. I expect they could at least handle numbers through 9999.

If the cable company receives the PSIP data (required for OTA broadcasts, not required for fiber optic delivery) they are required to use the virtual channel numbers in the signals (e.g., 8-1).

I had a Samsung digital tuner that would tune clear QAM, but this capability wasn't listed on the box or in the manual. IMHO, much of the clear QAM capability in TV sets is probably there only because its built into the chip sets they use for OTA reception.

I agree that the FCC, and therefore Congress, has ignored this issue. Whether on purpose or not, I can't say.


----------



## lew

A few of the posters in this thread think the cable companies want to make life difficult for people who want to use tivo.

Do I understand that if a cable system gets the OTA stations via fiber optic cable as opposed to an antenna then the cable system is under no obligation to supply PSIP data? Do many of the cable systems get the broadcast stations via fiber optic?

Do I understand that if a cable system carries the analog version of a broadcast station it is under no legal obligation to also carry the digital HD in the clear? That if the system goes to all digital the cable system has the option of only carrying the SD digital version of a station in the clear?



vstone said:


> A vacation house has a a circa 2006 Westinghouse with really crappy software. It could tune the local OTA stations on cable with numbers like 801, 805, etc until FEB 07 (long story here), so the answer is yes.
> 
> I think most digital tuners have at least 5 display digits so they can tune to channel numbers like 102-14. I expect they could at least handle numbers through 9999.
> 
> If the cable company receives the PSIP data (required for OTA broadcasts, not required for fiber optic delivery) they are required to use the virtual channel numbers in the signals (e.g., 8-1).
> 
> I had a Samsung digital tuner that would tune clear QAM, but this capability wasn't listed on the box or in the manual. IMHO, much of the clear QAM capability in TV sets is probably there only because its built into the chip sets they use for OTA reception.
> 
> I agree that the FCC, and therefore Congress, has ignored this issue. Whether on purpose or not, I can't say.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lew said:


> A few of the posters in this thread think the cable companies want to make life difficult for people who want to use tivo.


my view is they could if they did want to and TiVo sees that as an unacceptable risk given the small number of subscribers who want the manual mapping


----------



## vstone

The cable system is required to pass on certain PSIP data where it is supplied. This data is required to be in the OTA broadcasts. I know of no requirement for signals delivered by fiber optic to contain any PSIP data. However, if it does, then the cable system is required to pass appropriate data. Unfortunately, some cable plant techs do not know anything about this until you yell and scream, It's possible that my Comcast system did not even have the equipment to generate the proper data until recently. Somebody else here stated a few weeks back that they thought that most stations on most systems were connected with fiber optic. In our system, most or all are. Our cable system now even gets digital feeds of the analog broadcasts.

Must carry rules apply to analog channels and will apply to digital channels who have shut down their analog transmitter (theoretically about two weeks from today). Carriage of most digital OTA signals is by agreement between the respective stations and cable companies. Currently, a digital signal is not required by federal law to be carried (except for the very few stations who have already shut down their analog transmitters). However any broadcast digital signal carried must be unencrypted. This simplifies must-carry requirements, but is good enough for this discussion.

I think that clear QAM is very low on cable companies priority list, assuming that its there at all. It will bring them no money and will likely lose them some money. There is no ROI. They won't do a d*** thing until forced to. Both local and head-end techs have convinced me that they have never even heard of PSIP, much less been trained on it. Clearly the local & 800 number CSR's are way over their head in any discusion at this level, as likely are their supervisors.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> The cable system is required to pass on certain PSIP data where it is supplied.


a major issue is that the FCC has shown no inclination to enforce any requirements. no idea if the new regime plans to be any different in that regard


----------



## ciper

I'm surprised that ZeoTivo has finally seen the light and agrees with me

From http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7041553#post7041553



ZeoTiVo said:


> The history is important here. I think many standalone series 2 DVRs were sold because you could hook them right up to analog cable and record away. In my case to get a cable company DVR 4 years ago my cable bill would have gone up 35$ a month as I would have to switch to digital tier. 500$ for a lifetime series 2/35$ = 14 months and I break even. It was a no brainer then.


It still would be a no brainer. Many more THD would be sold if you could hook them right up to cable and record away. QAM mapping with lifetime service and the price of the THD hardware would also break even at some point. :up:


----------



## lew

It's a shame a few posters see the need to distort and twist the meaning of posts in order to try to support their position.

Everyone would be in favor of tivo's working with clear QAM stations if it could be done with a magic wand. No cost to tivo and 100% reliable.

ZeoTivo, and others, are giving the issues with reliable recordings of of clear QAM channels, without using cable cards.

History includes tivo working well. Missed programs are the rare exception not the rule.



ciper said:


> I'm surprised that ZeoTivo has finally seen the light and agrees with me
> 
> From http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7041553#post7041553
> 
> It still would be a no brainer. Many more THD would be sold if you could hook them right up to cable and record away. QAM mapping with lifetime service and the price of the THD hardware would also break even at some point. :up:


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> It's a shame a few posters see the need to distort and twist the meaning of posts in order to try to support their position.


Amen. It is unfortunately a very common, and craven, tactic of rhetoric is to argue against something easier to argue against, instead of arguing against what was actually said/posted.


----------



## ciper

The three previous posts (including mine) make the meme "The internet is serious business" come to mind. Not everyone is "playing hardball" when posting in this forum.

Bicker and Lew : You should reread post 1411 with the idea that comic intent was implied. I thought it was funny that he essentially used the same reasoning for increased sales of S2 units that I tried to use for loss of sales for not supporting clear QAM. Not everyone has such nefarious thoughts!


----------



## SteveHC1

candewish said:


> Am I right in assuming that tivo 3/HD/XL owners are currently able
> to receive clear QAM HD of their local channels on their tivos?
> 
> I get basic cable primarily to get a good signal and struggled
> with choosing between tivo and moxi for a DVR, believing that
> I could manually record the clear QAM HD signal of local
> stations that I now receive from Comcast in the Miami area. All
> three of my HD sets are able to receive those signals, but
> the cable tuner in my tivo HD does not pick up an HD signal for
> CBS or ABC. Is this a common problem or did I just get a tivo
> with a bad cable DTV tuner?
> 
> I have made channel scans several times, and tivo always fails to detect
> the channels CBS and ABC use. My software version is up-to-date.
> According to my TVs, the signal strength of the CBS and ABC
> digital channels are equal to those of NBC, FOX, CW and a couple of
> other clear QAM signals that my tivo is able to pick up.


If when you did your initial TiVo set-up you indicated that you receive "digital" cable - whether or not you actually have cable cards but especially if you do NOT and said you'd get them "later" - your TiVo should indeed receive your local CBS and ABC clear QAM digital and HD transmissions. You might have to "hunt around" for them, as they are not necessarily on or "near" the main (i.e. analog VHS) channel frequencies. For example, here on he southwest Florida coast Comcast up until a day or 2 ago had CBS HD on 205-108 even though CBS analog was on 5; a day or 2 ago it moved CBS HD onto 5-6, apparently in prep. for WINK TV's dropping the analog transmission.


----------



## SteveHC1

RoyK said:


> My TiVoHD will NOT pick up any of my local's clear QAM cable signals. BOTH of my HD TVs (a 4 year old sony and a new el-cheapo) pick up all of them just fine.
> 
> Edit: The refurb TiVoHD that I received because of the gray screen issue (didn't help - sent it back) wouldn't receive the local clear QAM channels either. And yes - I checked every single channel that the channel scan reported. Got lots of others (ESPNHD for example) but none of the locals.


- See my above note to CANDEWISH. If you are not using cablecards or a set-top box with your TiVo you MUST run your TiVo setup and indicate that you get your local cable's DIGITAL tier (and indicate that you'll get the CableCards "later" - otherwise your TiVo will only download your company's lkocal NON-digital channels and your TiVo's tuner will not scan for all of those channels that you are paying for and would otherwise receive).

Unfortunately, TiVo's documentation of this stuff is (obviously) VERY deficient and I can't help but wonder as to WHY this is so as I cannot think of even one reason to "justify" it.


----------



## SteveHC1

candewish said:


> The initial post in this thread states -
> 
> *******************
> US cable service includes digital HD network programming as part of "basic cable" service by FCC mandate. The cable companies are required to pass this programming unencrypted, which means it does not require a cablecard to receive these network HD channels. The Tivo HD and S3 have the ability to discover and tune these channels without the need for a cablecard.
> ********************
> 
> The basic premise of this thread is that tivo has "the ability to
> discover and tune these channels without need for a cablecard" -
> and THAT IS NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> There is all kinds of speculation as to why tivo does not support
> clear QAM with guide data - conspiracy with cable companies; cable
> companies continually reassigning channel numbers; complexity
> of remapping features like 'season pass' due to changes in
> channel mapping; disgruntled customers who missed recording
> a program blaming it on tivo; etc, etc.
> 
> But the reality is that tivo does not, and can not, reliably
> receive the same clear QAM signals that the QAM tuners in moxi,
> PC cards, and practically all HDTVs are able to reliably receive. They
> don't support clear QAM tuning, not because they have chosen
> not to, they don't support it because they CAN'T!!!!!
> 
> I asked to exchange my new tivo HD because it doesn't pickup
> major local clear QAM channels, and tivo customer support refused -
> "WE DO NOT SUPPORT CLEAR QAM RECEPTION, PERIOD. NOT BECAUSE
> WE DON'T WANT TO, BUT BECAUSE OUR TUNER CAN'T RELIABLY RECEIVE IT".
> 
> If you are a non-tivo owner and believe from reading this thread
> that tivo has "the ability to discover and tune these channels
> without need for a cablecard" - YOU ARE MISTAKEN!
> 
> CAVEAT EMPTOR


- I am sorry to have to disagree with you, but the fact of the matter is that the TiVo HD units DO indeed receive all clear QAM channels, they just don't receive the program guide data for all of them and thus can't do Season Pass and other scheduled recordings that are based on guide data so you have to do the "manual recording" bit with them. From what I've recently been told, TiVo programmers are trying to clean up the relevant parts of the software so that we won't have to fiddle so much to get them in, like the manner in which I have described over in the Coffee House forum on this website.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> It can find all of them, it just doesn't know what to do with them after it finds them if it isn't told by the PSIP tables.
> 
> Additionally, the PSIP tables' virtual channel data may be populated properly, but with numbers that don't necessarily make sense and do not correlate the published cable channel list.
> 
> I can now (as of about a month ago) get my FOX channel at virtual channel 1-2. It would make more sense at 8-1 (the OTA virtual channel number), but would make me most happy at 214 (the published channel #) because the guide data is available for cable channel 214. In the absense of a published clear QAM channel lineup, Tivo can not obtain an official channel line up with guide data, However, using channel 214 would make it unnecessary to create another channel lineup (although they could easily create a clear QAM lineup in this scenario).
> 
> And, just to make everyone happy, many or most networks currently have some cable channels carried as unencrypted HD channels. These channels correspond to channels on the analog extended basic package, not the analog basic package. In many places the extended package is/was blocked for basic tier customers by a frequency filter out at the pole. This filter must be removed to get the frequencies for the expanded basic package OR to get the local HD channels. It is not necessary to have the local HD channels on these high frequencies, but bthat is probably where they are on most systems to prevent colliding with the remainibg analog basic tier.When analog transmitters go off, the must carry rules start applying to the digital (in this case HD) channels and therefore access must be provided to these channels for basic tier users. At some future date the cable channels may be encrypted, eneding a free ride for these basic tiier users.


- CORRECT. Judging from my local Comcast franchise's recent activity, I would venture a GUESS and say that cable companies - at least the larger ones - are finally starting to move the HD and digital "sub-channels's" frequencies to virtual channels closer to the original analog ones, in prep. for the dropping of the analog broadcasts and thus freeing up the "higher" ones for future use. Again, just a guess on my part.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> Just reading this thread, something comes to mind: Whenever CSR/customer discussions are related online, we're basically learning only one side of the story. We're not hearing the CSR explain their side; we're hearing only the customer's perception of what was said. Just based on conversations I've overheard, or listened in on when working as an auditor, I would not doubt that half of the time, what we're hearing about CSR/customer discussions is completely inaccurate.


You might be right. But I must say that many times when I've spoken with CSR's they've at first "played dumb" but then when I told them what I'd discovered about the TiVo feature in question they would THEN admit that I was correct.

I suspect this is all related to company policy and CSR training. But woe to the TiVo subscriber who does not have the time or "head" to really "fiddle" with their TiVo or read every single sentence in the manual and online FAQ's etc.!

Hopefully manny of these issues and problems will self-resolve once the analog broadcasts are terminated and the cable companies finish moving the local digital and HD broadcasts to lower "channel" numbers. HOPEFULLY.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> A vacation house has a a circa 2006 Westinghouse with really crappy software. It could tune the local OTA stations on cable with numbers like 801, 805, etc until FEB 07 (long story here), so the answer is yes.
> 
> I think most digital tuners have at least 5 display digits so they can tune to channel numbers like 102-14. I expect they could at least handle numbers through 9999.
> 
> If the cable company receives the PSIP data (required for OTA broadcasts, not required for fiber optic delivery) they are required to use the virtual channel numbers in the signals (e.g., 8-1). ON
> 
> I had a Samsung digital tuner that would tune clear QAM, but this capability wasn't listed on the box or in the manual. IMHO, much of the clear QAM capability in TV sets is probably there only because its built into the chip sets they use for OTA reception.
> 
> I agree that the FCC, and therefore Congress, has ignored this issue. Whether on purpose or not, I can't say.


- As far as whether or not a TV with a digital tuner could "tune" in to CABLE channel 81 or 805 or whatever - depends on how old the set is (many of the earliest one were only designed to go up to 70 or so as no one knew that they'd eventually make it up into the hundreds!) AND exactly what is ON that "channel" - if it's an ENCRYPTED program - like, say, HBO, then no, you wouldn't be able to get it in. But if it was, say CBS HD (presumably a local, UN-encrypted transmission) AND EITHERyour TV's tuner went up that "high" - or, more likely, the ACTUAL frequency and "channel assignment was much lower (usually in the one- or two-hundreds, or lower) then yes, you'd get it in.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - CORRECT. Judging from my local Comcast franchise's recent activity, I would venture a GUESS and say that cable companies - at least the larger ones - are finally starting to move the HD and digital "sub-channels's" frequencies to virtual channels closer to the original analog ones, in prep. for the dropping of the analog broadcasts and thus freeing up the "higher" ones for future use. Again, just a guess on my part.


The central VA Comcast system just started populating the PSIP tables, although poorly and incompletely, but the area head end tech informs me that they are installing new software and should be done by this Friday. OTOH, they've only made one change since they told me this Friday before last. I've stirred the pot enough in the last month or so that the head end techs were calling the Comcast engineers about this stuff. I'd like to say I'm partly responsible for this sudden p=burst of activity, but it may just be coincidence. Is your system SA or Motorola? We're SA.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> A few of the posters in this thread think the cable companies want to make life difficult for people who want to use tivo.
> 
> Do I understand that if a cable system gets the OTA stations via fiber optic cable as opposed to an antenna then the cable system is under no obligation to supply PSIP data? Do many of the cable systems get the broadcast stations via fiber optic?
> 
> Do I understand that if a cable system carries the analog version of a broadcast station it is under no legal obligation to also carry the digital HD in the clear? That if the system goes to all digital the cable system has the option of only carrying the SD digital version of a station in the clear?


- SO far, what I've discovered is that many stations that had been broadcasting analog are now also broadcasting in HD ONLY - thus the cable company will HAVE to retransmit it but whether they will continue to do so in true HD widescreen or just digitial standard def (say, with letterboxing or in a "panel" mode) for basic tier subscribers I have no idea, nor do I really know exactly in what format the "law" requires. It'll certainly be interesting to see what they do with stations that are *currently* broadcasting in analog, digital standard def. and HD simultaneously!


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> ...I think that clear QAM is very low on cable companies priority list, assuming that its there at all. It will bring them no money and will likely lose them some money. There is no ROI. They won't do a d*** thing until forced to. Both local and head-end techs have convinced me that they have never even heard of PSIP, much less been trained on it. Clearly the local & 800 number CSR's are way over their head in any discusion at this level, as likely are their supervisors.


I'll bet that once analog is dropped completely the ball game will change quite dramatically in this regard. We'll see... let's hope that Congress doesn't mess things up any more than they already are...


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> The three previous posts (including mine) make the meme "The internet is serious business" come to mind. Not everyone is "playing hardball" when posting in this forum.
> 
> Bicker and Lew : You should reread post 1411 with the idea that comic intent was implied. I thought it was funny that he essentially used the same reasoning for increased sales of S2 units that I tried to use for loss of sales for not supporting clear QAM. Not everyone has such nefarious thoughts!


sorry, but you implied something that was not even close to the intent of that post in the other thread.

I was saying that in the good old analog days TiVo made sales because you could just hook up and go. I then went on to say in the parts you did not quote that the features added since such as MRV/TTG and Netflix helped me stay in the TiVo fold since otherwise I would just get a cable company DVR if all any DVR offered was dual tuners and HD.

Reliable recordings without my having to keep an eye on all my channel mappings was a given. If the FCC showed an inclination to enforce PSIP data then indeed TiVo could sell a DVR that just hooked up and got any clear QAM channel. Even given that - how long before the cable companies encrypted every channel they legally could which is most of them.

Bottom line - cable companies are not going to give digital away unless it is to sell other features like VOIP.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> a major issue is that the FCC has shown no inclination to enforce any requirements. no idea if the new regime plans to be any different in that regard


- To ME it's looked like the FCC has been SO preoccupied with the analofg-to-digital transition, and with working out the details for assignment and/or auctioning of the freed-up frequencies, that they simply haven't had the time to deal with clear QAM and related basic cable tier issues yet and so has been relying on the states' A.G.s to monitor the situation. If so, that should begin to change soon enough.


----------



## SteveHC1

ciper said:


> I'm surprised that ZeoTivo has finally seen the light and agrees with me
> 
> From http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7041553#post7041553
> 
> It still would be a no brainer. Many more THD would be sold if you could hook them right up to cable and record away. QAM mapping with lifetime service and the price of the THD hardware would also break even at some point. :up:


- I agree with you 100%. It would make TiVo the #1 dvr player REGARDLESS of what the cable companies did or didn't do, did or didn't offer from other dvr manufacturers. MOXI is *already* beginning to make some inroads in this regard, being offered by some cable companies as a selectable-by-consumer alternative to the "standard" Scientific Atlanta and Motorola dvrs, while TiVo is apparently in most instances being limited to stripped-down software provision in cable company-provided dvr's (at least as far as I can tell).

Regardless of the price of its hardware, I think the sooner TiVo offers more programmable AND broadband download features ("streaming" has too much cheap competition in my view) for its subscription fee (on top of the standard cable company fees) the better off the company will be in the long run. Satellite appears to be a much tougher nut to crack in terms of hardware issues.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> The central VA Comcast system just started populating the PSIP tables, although poorly and incompletely, but the area head end tech informs me that they are installing new software and should be done by this Friday. OTOH, they've only made one change since they told me this Friday before last. I've stirred the pot enough in the last month or so that the head end techs were calling the Comcast engineers about this stuff. I'd like to say I'm partly responsible for this sudden p=burst of activity, but it may just be coincidence. Is your system SA or Motorola? We're SA.


- The local Comcast over here offers the SA hardware - which I'll have none of. Their dvr's "ok" given what you pay for it (next to nothing), but I really like TiVo HD's OTA, broadband and networking capabilities so I'm sticking with TiVo until I go with a PC-based system that delivers to the TVs. I really like Live365, and a pc-based system will be able to handle that as well as television - even simultaneously, and even with VOIP, if my home network's and Comcast's speed will be fast enough (and I think they will).


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> - I agree with you 100%. It would make TiVo the #1 dvr player REGARDLESS of what the cable companies did or didn't do, did or didn't offer from other dvr manufacturers. MOXI is *already* beginning to make some inroads in this regard, being offered by some cable companies as a selectable-by-consumer alternative to the "standard" Scientific Atlanta and Motorola dvrs, while TiVo is apparently in most instances being limited to stripped-down software provision in cable company-provided dvr's (at least as far as I can tell).


umm - Diego tried to sell Moxi to cable companies only to begin with. That kind of fizzled so now they have a new unit that they just started selling as a standalone. That one has the QAM mapping and I am still looking for a hands on user review of that one.

When TiVo makes a deal with cable companies then that company gets to make the specs on what features. The MOxi was not so stripped down because it did not have as many features.

A standalone TiVo with cable cards lacks only PPV/VOD and SDV channels. SDV is being dealt with on series 3 and the in the works series 4 will include PPV/VOD and not need a dongle for SDV. All the other features will work as TiVo decides without cable company say so, conspiracies aside.


----------



## TVDave2

My TiVo HD with lifetime broke for a month. I was using basic analog cable with an over the air antenna to catch local digital HD channels. I wasn't able to get all the local channels, but it the few I could made me happy enough.

From a discussion in another thread, I found out that I could get another TiVo HD and transfer the subscription, which I finally did. I got my TiVo HD back up and running, but in the month that I didn't have my TiVo HD, I found four things happen.

1. I live in Hawaii and we made the digital switch on 1/15/2009. Over TWO weeks ago. Apparently, the digital channels the stations were broadcasting on changed frequencies when this happened. TiVo's guide data wasn't matched up to the new frequencies, so the guide data is there, but they don't match the channels. Just like QAM channels, you can tune to the over-the-air digital channels, but you get no guide data. As of yesterday, TiVo says it'll be another week before they get this fixed. Last time I called about a guide problem, they gave me the same 5 days spiel, but didn't do anything at all. As of right now, the entire state of Hawaii has no guide data for any of their over the air channels.

2. Elgato EyeTV has vastly improved because they now use TV Guide for their guide data. Before they used the free, but unreliable TitanTV. All the network channels are sent via unencrypted QAM over cable, so using this, I don't need any antenna. In addition, Elgato EyeTV lets you do PIP, have two Windows side-by-side, stream shows to your iPhone, and export to various formats.

3. Windows 7 Beta 1 was released. It supports QAM mapping and groups TV shows now just like TiVo--only BETTER! Sharing videos with other computers on my network is as simple as sharing the Recorded TV folder. I just put a Hauppauge HVR-2250 in, and with the remote it comes with, it's a much more responsive, enjoyable, and capable experience than TiVo HD. Dual digital, dual analog tuner on a half-height PCI-Express card.

4. Cranky Geeks and DL.TV are no longer available for download to TiVo! I didn't intently watch these shows, but they were great to have playing in the background while you were doing boring tasks. Need a PC or Mac now to watch them.

Now that I'm able to get full HD on my local channels via QAM mapping on both the Mac and PC, I don't know what I'm going to do with my TiVo HD, which I now look at as inferior to both of them. Both my Mac and Windows 7 have remotes, which makes them easy to use. Both are more responsive than TiVo after button presses.

TiVo does need to get QAM mapping working, or people are going to be looking elsewhere for their DVRs. With HDMI on many PC's and all TV's sold today, and VGA inputs on most TVs, it's never been easier to hook a cheap PC up to a TV.

What makes me more adamant about this is that they're not only not supporting QAM, but when an update occurs, it takes them 3 weeks (2 weeks so far, told another 4 days) to map the channels correctly again. If we had channel mapping, we could fix the problem ourselves and not deal with TiVo's claimed 5-7 day wait for channel lineup fixes.

Before I saw the TiVo as a box that enabled me to watch TV how I wanted to watch it. Now I see it as much more confining and less fun and less easy to use than other solutions. Adding QAM would be one great step in that direction of playing catch-up.

Also, my brand-new-replacement TiVo HD has just as I was typing this, rebooted itself for the second time in a few days (that I have seen) for no apparent reason. It possibly could have done it more while I've been using Windows 7 Media Center. My first TiVo HD lasted only a little longer than a year. Others seem to be saying similar things. I wonder if TiVo HD is the Xbox 360 of the DVR world.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm - Diego tried to sell Moxi to cable companies only to begin with. That kind of fizzled so now they have a new unit that they just started selling as a standalone. That one has the QAM mapping and I am still looking for a hands on user review of that one.
> 
> When TiVo makes a deal with cable companies then that company gets to make the specs on what features. The MOxi was not so stripped down because it did not have as many features.
> 
> A standalone TiVo with cable cards lacks only PPV/VOD and SDV channels. SDV is being dealt with on series 3 and the in the works series 4 will include PPV/VOD and not need a dongle for SDV. All the other features will work as TiVo decides without cable company say so, conspiracies aside.


- Glad to hear it! It'll be interesting to see how they wind up actually implementing it.


----------



## SteveHC1

TVDave2 said:


> My TiVo HD with lifetime broke for a month. I was using basic analog cable with an over the air antenna to catch local digital HD channels. I wasn't able to get all the local channels, but it the few I could made me happy enough.
> 
> From a discussion in another thread, I found out that I could get another TiVo HD and transfer the subscription, which I finally did. I got my TiVo HD back up and running, but in the month that I didn't have my TiVo HD, I found four things happen.
> 
> 1. I live in Hawaii and we made the digital switch on 1/15/2009. Over TWO weeks ago. Apparently, the digital channels the stations were broadcasting on changed frequencies when this happened. TiVo's guide data wasn't matched up to the new frequencies, so the guide data is there, but they don't match the channels. Just like QAM channels, you can tune to the over-the-air digital channels, but you get no guide data. As of yesterday, TiVo says it'll be another week before they get this fixed. Last time I called about a guide problem, they gave me the same 5 days spiel, but didn't do anything at all. As of right now, the entire state of Hawaii has no guide data for any of their over the air channels.
> 
> 2. Elgato EyeTV has vastly improved because they now use TV Guide for their guide data. Before they used the free, but unreliable TitanTV. All the network channels are sent via unencrypted QAM over cable, so using this, I don't need any antenna. In addition, Elgato EyeTV lets you do PIP, have two Windows side-by-side, stream shows to your iPhone, and export to various formats.
> 
> 3. Windows 7 Beta 1 was released. It supports QAM mapping and groups TV shows now just like TiVo--only BETTER! Sharing videos with other computers on my network is as simple as sharing the Recorded TV folder. I just put a Hauppauge HVR-2250 in, and with the remote it comes with, it's a much more responsive, enjoyable, and capable experience than TiVo HD. Dual digital, dual analog tuner on a half-height PCI-Express card.
> 
> 4. Cranky Geeks and DL.TV are no longer available for download to TiVo! I didn't intently watch these shows, but they were great to have playing in the background while you were doing boring tasks. Need a PC or Mac now to watch them.
> 
> Now that I'm able to get full HD on my local channels via QAM mapping on both the Mac and PC, I don't know what I'm going to do with my TiVo HD, which I now look at as inferior to both of them. Both my Mac and Windows 7 have remotes, which makes them easy to use. Both are more responsive than TiVo after button presses.
> 
> TiVo does need to get QAM mapping working, or people are going to be looking elsewhere for their DVRs. With HDMI on many PC's and all TV's sold today, and VGA inputs on most TVs, it's never been easier to hook a cheap PC up to a TV.
> 
> What makes me more adamant about this is that they're not only not supporting QAM, but when an update occurs, it takes them 3 weeks (2 weeks so far, told another 4 days) to map the channels correctly again. If we had channel mapping, we could fix the problem ourselves and not deal with TiVo's claimed 5-7 day wait for channel lineup fixes.
> 
> Before I saw the TiVo as a box that enabled me to watch TV how I wanted to watch it. Now I see it as much more confining and less fun and less easy to use than other solutions. Adding QAM would be one great step in that direction of playing catch-up.
> 
> Also, my brand-new-replacement TiVo HD has just as I was typing this, rebooted itself for the second time in a few days (that I have seen) for no apparent reason. It possibly could have done it more while I've been using Windows 7 Media Center. My first TiVo HD lasted only a little longer than a year. Others seem to be saying similar things. I wonder if TiVo HD is the Xbox 360 of the DVR world.


- Being a Mac afficionado myself, I'll probably - ultimately - wind up with an Mac/Elgato-based system as well.

As you have so well pointed out, there are SO many other products using the much-more-flexible TV Guide-based clear QAM mapping system without any problems whatsoever that I know of (including even consumer tv set manufacturers themselves), that it seems more than a bit ludicrous for TiVo to claim that it couldn't do the same with its products, regardless of whether they were to stick with Tribune or switch program guide data service providers.

In terms of the CSR-related customer support concerns that TiVo reportedly has over consumer-programmable Clear QAM guide data re-mapping, I think the answer may lay in the documentation of its use. Whereas TiVo seems to be *so* concerned about "dumbing down" its user manuals etc. to be so simple that a monkey could use it (as long as he/she didn't need clear QAM mapping ;-) , the tv manufacturers that use the TV Guide system go into tremendous detail over how to use its features, including consumer-defined clear QAM mapping to its guide data. My Hitachi plasma's User Manual devotes about HALF of its pages just to the TV Guide system ALONE - seriously! And this is just a TV SET!!! I would imagine that doing so must help to cut down on consumer support calls QUITE a bit. Maybe if TiVo provided FULL documentation - along with the appropriate disclaimers - in its products' user manuals, features such as clear QAM mapping to guide data could be implemented without substantially increasing the workload of its C.S. staff???


----------



## ciper

SteveHC1 said:


> In terms of the CSR-related customer support concerns that TiVo reportedly has over consumer-programmable Clear QAM guide data re-mapping, I think the answer may lay in the documentation of its use. Whereas TiVo seems to be *so* concerned about "dumbing down" its user manuals etc. to be so simple that a monkey could use it (as long as he/she didn't need clear QAM mapping ;-) , the tv manufacturers that use the TV Guide system go into tremendous detail over how to use its features, including consumer-defined clear QAM mapping to its guide data. My Hitachi plasma's User Manual devotes about HALF of its pages just to the TV Guide system ALONE - seriously! And this is just a TV SET!!! I would imagine that doing so must help to cut down on consumer support calls QUITE a bit. Maybe if TiVo provided FULL documentation - along with the appropriate disclaimers - in its products' user manuals, features such as clear QAM mapping to guide data could be implemented without substantially increasing the workload of its C.S. staff???


The reason I have seen posted most in this thread for TiVo not taking the time to implement QAM mapping is that it only effects a small number of users.

The documentation could remain dumbed down for the majority of users and for those few who need QAM mapping a normal looking document could be created with similar layout to the one for your TV.



TVDave2 said:


> Before I saw the TiVo as a box that enabled me to watch TV how I wanted to watch it. Now I see it as much more confining and less fun and less easy to use than other solutions. Adding QAM would be one great step in that direction of playing catch-up.


Thank you for taking the time to post this information. I hope others reading this thread will take the time to read your entire reply.


----------



## RoyK

SteveHC1 said:


> - See my above note to CANDEWISH. If you are not using cablecards or a set-top box with your TiVo you MUST run your TiVo setup and indicate that you get your local cable's DIGITAL tier (and indicate that you'll get the CableCards "later" - otherwise your TiVo will only download your company's lkocal NON-digital channels and your TiVo's tuner will not scan for all of those channels that you are paying for and would otherwise receive).
> 
> Unfortunately, TiVo's documentation of this stuff is (obviously) VERY deficient and I can't help but wonder as to WHY this is so as I cannot think of even one reason to "justify" it.


Lets see if I understand you correctly.

I've pulled the cablecard from my TiVoHD because my box constantly gray screens when I try use it. TiVo has acknowledged that this is a problem and are "working on it". But that's a story for another topic that already exists. I could just have easily decided not to get cablecards in the first place. For whatever reason I want to use my TiVoHD without cablecards.

In order to receive the channels which TiVo knows that the FCC requires be made available by my cable company without cablecards I must declare during setup that I intend to get cablecards at some future date?

Then after TiVo loads the listings for all the channels I don't get because I don't actually have cablecards I need to do a channel scan which adds all the channels I really do get?

Then I need to go into the channels menu and deselect all the channels I don't get because I don't have cablecards after I go through every one of the channels to see which are really working? And then I should see the clear QAM channels?

OK - I'll try it. But if you are correct it isn't the documentation that is deficient here - its the implementation.

=======================
Edit: That did work. After going through all those contortions the clear QAM locals do show up in the grid guide right below their OTA equivalents, show the station names exactly the same as they are listed for the Cablecard equivalents and "to be announced" for the programming.

Zap2it (tribune media services) shows the correct programming for the channels with those call letters.

So I can watch them and set up manual recordings for them (I assume) but can't use them for SPs etc. That really really sucks.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> The three previous posts (including mine) make the meme "The internet is serious business" come to mind. Not everyone is "playing hardball" when posting in this forum.


So you're basically saying that when reading your contributions we should keep in mind that you aren't really being serious. Okay, I can live with that... please allow us to point that out whenever you say something we disagree with.



ciper said:


> Bicker and Lew : You should reread post 1411 with the idea that comic intent was implied.


Welcome to online discussions with vBulletin software. Please note that when you create a reply, there is a catalog of smilies to choose from with which you can indicate that your comments aren't serious.       Please let us know if you need further assistance participating in a manner such that people actually understand what you're attempting to say.


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> - To ME it's looked like the FCC has been SO preoccupied with the analofg-to-digital transition, and with working out the details for assignment and/or auctioning of the freed-up frequencies, that they simply haven't had the time to deal with clear QAM and related basic cable tier issues yet


On the contrary, the FCC has spend an extraordinarily large amount of time working to make it more difficult for service providers to do business, citing MSOs, fining MSOs, etc. Instead of fostering competition, the FCC has been doing its level best to stifle it.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> So you're basically saying that when reading your contributions we should keep in mind that you aren't really being serious. Okay, I can live with that... please allow us to point that out whenever you say something we disagree with.


My post was seriously meant as a comedic entry which was directly related to the topic.
It shows that in the past being able to just plug in and record was a benefit which helped sell more TiVo units and I still think my post was funny even as I type this.


----------



## bicker

Don't worry... many of us find you funny.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - SO far, what I've discovered is that many stations that had been broadcasting analog are now also broadcasting in HD ONLY - thus the cable company will HAVE to retransmit it but whether they will continue to do so in true HD widescreen or just digitial standard def (say, with letterboxing or in a "panel" mode) for basic tier subscribers I have no idea, nor do I really know exactly in what format the "law" requires. It'll certainly be interesting to see what they do with stations that are *currently* broadcasting in analog, digital standard def. and HD simultaneously!


Our broadcasters are actually supplying their HD signal and a digital SD signal to cable. The FCC has directed cable companies to support analog TV thry FEB 2012. I suspect that at some point in time the broadcasters will turn off theur SD picture to save a little money and just let the cable companies display them as letterbox.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> I'll bet that once analog is dropped completely the ball game will change quite dramatically in this regard. We'll see... let's hope that Congress doesn't mess things up any more than they already are...


For cable that won't happen until 2012, but I think cbale will actually figure this out before it becomes a widespread issue.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - To ME it's looked like the FCC has been SO preoccupied with the analofg-to-digital transition, and with working out the details for assignment and/or auctioning of the freed-up frequencies, that they simply haven't had the time to deal with clear QAM and related basic cable tier issues yet and so has been relying on the states' A.G.s to monitor the situation. If so, that should begin to change soon enough.


They've had the time. It's their job. They just haven't cared. If they wanted to hand this of to AG's, they should have told them and us. How many here think the AG's know anything about this thing called "clear QAM." I sent a complaint about something to the FCC in JAN 08. They finally responsed in SEP, saying "Go tell the FTC."


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - I agree with you 100%. It would make TiVo the #1 dvr player REGARDLESS of what the cable companies did or didn't do, did or didn't offer from other dvr manufacturers. MOXI is *already* beginning to make some inroads in this regard, being offered by some cable companies as a selectable-by-consumer alternative to the "standard" Scientific Atlanta and Motorola dvrs, while TiVo is apparently in most instances being limited to stripped-down software provision in cable company-provided dvr's (at least as far as I can tell).
> 
> Regardless of the price of its hardware, I think the sooner TiVo offers more programmable AND broadband download features ("streaming" has too much cheap competition in my view) for its subscription fee (on top of the standard cable company fees) the better off the company will be in the long run. Satellite appears to be a much tougher nut to crack in terms of hardware issues.


How many plug and play S1/S2 Tivo were sold to folks with the basic cable tier and how many to the expanded cable tier? Once cable figures this clear QAM stuff out, they will likley encrypt ESPNHD, AMCHD, et al. The analog filter on the pole system can theoretically still be done for digital, but I don't think the cable compoanies want to go that route.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> My Hitachi plasma's User Manual devotes about HALF of its pages just to the TV Guide system ALONE - seriously! And this is just a TV SET!!! I would imagine that doing so must help to cut down on consumer support calls QUITE a bit. Maybe if TiVo provided FULL documentation - along with the appropriate disclaimers - in its products' user manuals, features such as clear QAM mapping to guide data could be implemented without substantially increasing the workload of its C.S. staff???


again - TiVo is recording shows based on guide data. The TV is just showing them - if the guide data is off - not that big a problem for the TV .

do we know how well the other DVRs based on this work? Do they reliably record first run only? Do they record a show just once in 28 days or do you egt first run and then all the repeats of that episode etc..
What happens if the cable company decides to encrypt more channels?

now if they do reliable recording then comes the big question - if this is so important to consumers, why are they not buying lots of the other setups?


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> My post was seriously meant as a comedic entry which was directly related to the topic.
> It shows that in the past being able to just plug in and record was a benefit which helped sell more TiVo units and I still think my post was funny even as I type this.


I did not catch that it was meant solely as funny at first either.
I had no big problem with it as it simply took my comments out of context some. It was fair game, and indeed explaining the difference is a very fair question.


----------



## lew

Cablevision and FiOS is offered in my area. Currently FiOS isn't properly handling PSIP. Cablevision seems to require a cable box (or CC) to receive any HD channel. Looks like only the analog version of broadcast channels is being broadcast "in the clear". I wouldn't put it past Cablevision to try to take advantage of "loopholes" and only carry SD digital stations in the clear.

I don't think it's honest for Cablevision to claim they don't charge extra for HD stations when you can't receive them without paying extra for a STB (or CC).

This thread is giving me a greater appreciation of the issues inherent in supporting a non-cable card solution for QAM channels.


----------



## Saxion

lew said:


> Looks like only the analog version of broadcast channels is being broadcast "in the clear".


Respectfully, I highly doubt that. In the last year, I've only heard of one small, municipal MSO that was still encrypting their local network HD. (I fired off the requisite letters on behalf of the affected customer, but regrettably didn't follow up to see if they had complied, so they could still be doing this). But not Cablevision. Can you tell us your location, and the evidence you've collected for this?


----------



## vstone

Saxion said:


> Respectfully, I highly doubt that. In the last year, I've only heard of one small, municipal MSO that was still encrypting their local network HD. (I fired off the requisite letters on behalf of the affected customer, but regrettably didn't follow up to see if they had complied, so they could still be doing this). But not Cablevision. Can you tell us your location, and the evidence you've collected for this?


The Time Warner South Carolina system encrypted theirs between FEB 07 and MAY 07, and only relented when I made a big stink. Other TWC Scientific Atlanta systems may still be doing this. They never even admitted that they made a change to the cable system.


----------



## bicker

And at least for another two weeks, that's legal.


----------



## lew

Saxion said:


> Respectfully, I highly doubt that. In the last year, I've only heard of one small, municipal MSO that was still encrypting their local network HD. (I fired off the requisite letters on behalf of the affected customer, but regrettably didn't follow up to see if they had complied, so they could still be doing this). But not Cablevision. Can you tell us your location, and the evidence you've collected for this?


At a superbowl party. Extra TV set in the kitchen was tuned to NBC-SD. The set was a HD LCD. I asked why they didn't have NBC HD. I was told you need a HD cable box to get HD stations. I tried an auto channel scan and relatively small number of analog stations were identified. I didn't have time to go through all the menus on the TV set and see if there was some obscure setting that was set to select only analog stations.

Cablevisions website says you either need a cable box or a TV set with a cable card to receive HD stations. Do a search for anything related to broadcast channels, HD or digital. The site consistently maintains you need a STB or a TV set with a cable card. You get that answer if you search for broadcast channels HD.

According to previous posters a cable system is within the law if they only offer analog versions of broadcast channels in the clear.

edited to add
It's not even clear if cable systems will have to offer HD channels in the clear after the switchover. Some posters think offering a SD digital channel might comply with requirements.


----------



## aindik

lew said:


> Cablevisions website says you either need a cable box or a TV set with a cable card to receive HD stations. Do a search for anything related to broadcast channels, HD or digital. The site consistently maintains you need a STB or a TV set with a cable card. You get that answer if you search for broadcast channels HD.


I watched last year's Super Bowl (Giants-Partiots) on Long Island on an HDTV hooked up to Cablevision without a box, tuned to WNYW-DT with its QAM tuner. A year ago, they were in the clear. And it showed up as 5-1.



lew said:


> According to previous posters a cable system is within the law if they only offer analog versions of broadcast channels in the clear.
> 
> edited to add
> It's not even clear if cable systems will have to offer HD channels in the clear after the switchover. Some posters think offering a SD digital channel might comply with requirements.


There are two requirements. The first is "must carry." They have to carry the locals, if the locals demand carriage. This can be satisfied by carriage of the analog SD version, and maybe by carriage of the SD digital version after the switchover.

But the second is that _if_ they carry any OTA channel (IIRC, the rules do not say "analog" or "digital," only "broadcast station" which I would think means either one), a) they have to carry them in the lowest priced tier, and b) the entire lowest priced tier may not be encrypted.

So, they don't have to carry the HD locals. But, if they do, they can't encrypt them. (Unless they get a waiver from the FCC where they have to prove that theft of signal is a problem in their market, significant enough to justify encrypting everything).


----------



## lew

aindik said:


> But the second is that _if_ they carry any OTA channel (IIRC, the rules do not say "analog" or "digital," only "broadcast station" which I would think means either one), a) they have to carry them in the lowest priced tier, and b) the entire lowest priced tier may not be encrypted.
> 
> So, they don't have to carry the HD locals. But, if they do, they can't encrypt them. (Unless they get a waiver from the FCC where they have to prove that theft of signal is a problem in their market, significant enough to justify encrypting everything).


The question is if the lowest priced tier could be analog only, with no HD stations.

Again there may have been some setting I didn't see that limited the scan to analog only stations but Cablevision does claim customers need a STB or cable card for any digital programming.


----------



## vstone

Just to clarify the "must carry" rules that some of us have been discussing.

1) A broadcast station may choose "must carry" status, in which case the cable system must carry it unencrypted on the basic tier (often called "lifeline" or "broadcast basic"). This currently applies to analog transmissions.

2) A broadcaster may opt out of must carry and requirement payment or whatver. In this case the cable system must work out an agreement with the station before it can carry it.

In that broadcast channels often ask for something like "put me on channnel 6," I suspect the real situation is between the two options.

I know very little about must carry, so those knowledgable on the subject should chime in with corrections (as if I could stop you!).

Cable companies often do what they like, legally or not. Central VA Comcast gave us PBS from the wrong market for a long time. They also started to carry the local NBC-HD, then pulled it when the staion wanted money. This was resolved shortly after Comcast took over (former Adelphia system).


----------



## aindik

lew said:


> The question is if the lowest priced tier could be analog only, with no HD stations.


If the rule is interpreted as written, it can't be. It needs to include all broadcast stations.

47 C.F.R. § 76.630


> (a) Cable system operators shall not scramble or otherwise encrypt
> signals carried on the basic service tier.


http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr76.630.htm

47 C.F.R. § 76.901


> (a) Basic service. The basic service tier shall, at a minimum, include all signals of domestic television broadcast stations provided to any subscriber (except a signal secondarily transmitted by satellite carrier beyond the local service area of such station, regardless of how such signal is ultimately received by the cable system) any public, educational, and governmental programming required by the franchise to be carried on the basic tier, and any additional video programming signals a service added to the basic tier by the cable operator.


http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr76.901.htm


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> The question is if the lowest priced tier could be analog only, with no HD stations.
> 
> Again there may have been some setting I didn't see that limited the scan to analog only stations but Cablevision does claim customers need a STB or cable card for any digital programming.


 Local broadcast stations, if carried, must be carried unencrypted, automatically qualifying them technically for the basic tier.

For the record, CFR variously uses the phrases "unencrypted," "in the clear," and "unscrambled." Federal law at its finest!

Most HDTV sets that I have used (not a very big sample) allow for separate analog and digital scan, although the interface usually isn't that clear. I have a Westinghouse (long story - don't go there) at a vacation house that requires you to press a button to go from analog channels to digital channels. Atrocious design!


----------



## slowbiscuit

aindik said:


> If the rule is interpreted as written, it can't be. It needs to include all broadcast stations.


It might need to include all stations, but IMO it's not been made clear whether must carry means they have to carry *all* signals of that station, regardless of what the regs might say. Some cable providers do not provide the HD signals in the clear, just the SD ones. And even if they did, wouldn't they be trapped out for basic subs since they're usually on a QAM channel > 80?

And my provider, Comcast, does not provide the HD feed of our local PBS station in any form, just the SD one. I don't know why, it could be because WPBA doesn't send them that feed. Or they just don't want to carry it because of channel space limitations.


----------



## Saxion

vstone said:


> The Time Warner South Carolina system encrypted theirs between FEB 07 and MAY 07, and only relented when I made a big stink.


Excellent job! It's vigilence like that which keeps cable companies in compliance with the law. As has been referenced above: *all *domestic television broadcast signals provided to any subscriber must be in the most basic tier of service & unencrypted. It's the law.


bicker said:


> And at least for another two weeks, that's legal.


What on earth are you talking about.


----------



## aindik

slowbiscuit said:


> It might need to include all stations, but IMO it's not been made clear whether must carry means they have to carry *all* signals of that station, regardless of what the regs might say. Some cable providers do not provide the HD signals in the clear, just the SD ones. And even if they did, wouldn't they be trapped out for basic subs since they're usually on a QAM channel > 80?
> 
> And my provider, Comcast, does not provide the HD feed of our local PBS station in any form, just the SD one. I don't know why, it could be because WPBA doesn't send them that feed. Or they just don't want to carry it because of channel space limitations.


I didn't mean that they have to carry all the broadcast stations. They don't. Only those that demand carriage (and I'm not sure what the rules are on whether a broadcaster can demand carriage of multi-streams of digital channels).

The basic tier has to include all broadcast stations that the provider does carry. IOW (as I said above), they are not required to carry it. But if they do carry it, they have to put it in the basic tier, and it has to be unencrypted.


----------



## ciper

I want to point out that repeating manual recordings by time are still being broken at times with the error "This program will not be recorded because it is no longer in the program guide" 
TiVo is aware of the issue.



bicker said:


> Don't worry... many of us find you funny.


Mission accomplished!


----------



## bicker

Saxion said:


> What on earth are you talking about.


Reality, rather than wishful thinking.

I submit that anyone who thinks they know better regarding this volunteers themselves to make their opinion reality for the folks who are not experiencing that reality today.

In other words: Put up or shut up.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm - Diego tried to sell Moxi to cable companies only to begin with. That kind of fizzled so now they have a new unit that they just started selling as a standalone. That one has the QAM mapping and I am still looking for a hands on user review of that one.
> 
> When TiVo makes a deal with cable companies then that company gets to make the specs on what features. The MOxi was not so stripped down because it did not have as many features.
> 
> A standalone TiVo with cable cards lacks only PPV/VOD and SDV channels. SDV is being dealt with on series 3 and the in the works series 4 will include PPV/VOD and not need a dongle for SDV. All the other features will work as TiVo decides without cable company say so, conspiracies aside.


I never said that the cable co's dictate to TiVo, just that TiVo at times seems to want to suck up to them in their effort to get into the cable co's box(es) (no sexual innuendo intended ;-)


----------



## SteveHC1

RoyK said:


> Lets see if I understand you correctly...
> ...OK - I'll try it. But if you are correct it isn't the documentation that is deficient here - its the implementation...
> ...So I can watch them and set up manual recordings for them (I assume) but can't use them for SPs etc. That really really sucks.


- Exactly!


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> On the contrary, the FCC has spend an extraordinarily large amount of time working to make it more difficult for service providers to do business, citing MSOs, fining MSOs, etc. Instead of fostering competition, the FCC has been doing its level best to stifle it.


- During the BUSH administration? _Really???_


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> ...The FCC has directed cable companies to support analog TV thry FEB 2012.


- I know, and I HOPE that simply translates into the cable co's merely having to let their set-top boxes do a digital-to-analog conversion!!! As much as I dislike the companies' business practices, I hope the feds aren't requiring them to actually SEND an analog signal feed down the lines in *addition* to the digital!


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> Mission accomplished!





SteveHC1 said:


> - During the BUSH administration? _Really???_


hey - no politics in the forum


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> They've had the time. It's their job. They just haven't cared. If they wanted to hand this of to AG's, they should have told them and us. How many here think the AG's know anything about this thing called "clear QAM." I sent a complaint about something to the FCC in JAN 08. They finally responsed in SEP, saying "Go tell the FTC."


- Now _that_ sounds like a Bush type of guy!


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> Once cable figures this clear QAM stuff out, they will likley encrypt ESPNHD, AMCHD, et al. The analog filter on the pole system can theoretically still be done for digital, but I don't think the cable compoanies want to go that route.


- They're already doing the encryption in my neck of the woods.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...if this is so important to consumers, why are they not buying lots of the other setups?


Because the cable co's have pretty much controlled the home dvr distribution market through their set-top box arrangements. Consequently TiVo, MOXI, pc software and hardware suppliers, etc. pretty much have remained niche players, at least in the US.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> Cablevision and FiOS is offered in my area. Currently FiOS isn't properly handling PSIP. Cablevision seems to require a cable box (or CC) to receive any HD channel. Looks like only the analog version of broadcast channels is being broadcast "in the clear". I wouldn't put it past Cablevision to try to take advantage of "loopholes" and only carry SD digital stations in the clear.
> 
> I don't think it's honest for Cablevision to claim they don't charge extra for HD stations when you can't receive them without paying extra for a STB (or CC).
> 
> This thread is giving me a greater appreciation of the issues inherent in supporting a non-cable card solution for QAM channels.


When I lived in Conn. Cablevision was known as being among the *worst* cable co's around for the money, and their signal was *always* going dead on customers.


----------



## SteveHC1

aindik said:


> I watched last year's Super Bowl (Giants-Partiots) on Long Island on an HDTV hooked up to Cablevision without a box, tuned to WNYW-DT with its QAM tuner. A year ago, they were in the clear. And it showed up as 5-1.


- As I'm sure you know, it can differ within a given company from market to market.


----------



## akash2008

IMO they go to great lengths to obfuscate the channel lineups. I never knew I was entitled to receive the HD networks until I did a channel scan and further research in these forums. The only thing I found on comcast's website


----------



## bicker

SteveHC1 said:


> - During the BUSH administration? _Really???_


Indeed. Republicans would look over at Kevin Martin and wonder what he was thinking.


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - I know, and I HOPE that simply translates into the cable co's merely having to let their set-top boxes do a digital-to-analog conversion!!! As much as I dislike the companies' business practices, I hope the feds aren't requiring them to actually SEND an analog signal feed down the lines in *addition* to the digital!


The cable companies get to choose: they can send analog or require you to rent a box.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> Because the cable co's have pretty much controlled the home dvr distribution market through their set-top box arrangements. Consequently TiVo, MOXI, pc software and hardware suppliers, etc. pretty much have remained niche players, at least in the US.


umm, we were talking about boxes that can map the clear QAM channels and thus eliminate the need for a set top box or anything else. Why have those not sold in large quantities? Why does TiVo see QAM mapping as not having enough of a customer desire to include it?


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, we were talking about boxes that can map the clear QAM channels and thus eliminate the need for a set top box or anything else.
> ...


umm, we were talking about a box that eliminates the need for a box?


----------



## aindik

SteveHC1 said:


> - I know, and I HOPE that simply translates into the cable co's merely having to let their set-top boxes do a digital-to-analog conversion!!! As much as I dislike the companies' business practices, I hope the feds aren't requiring them to actually SEND an analog signal feed down the lines in *addition* to the digital!


They are required to send analog signals of the locals if their system sends any analog signals at all. If their system only sends digital signals (IOW, they have made a total conversion to digital), they are not required to send analog locals. I'm not sure if they are required to send SD digital locals or not.


----------



## aindik

vstone said:


> umm, we were talking about a box that eliminates the need for a box?


We're talking about a box you can buy that eliminates the need for a box you have to rent.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...
> Why does TiVo see QAM mapping as not having enough of a customer desire to include it?


 Why wouldn't they? I'll go out on a limb and say that they just don't see much of a market for a $300 box that only gets local broadcast stations (i.e., basic tier) via cable when many or most customers outside metro centers can get these channels OTA. My basic tier includes PBS, CBS x2, NBC x2, ABC, FOX, CSPAN x2 , GOV/ED Access, 1 local channel of dubious quality, 2 local cable channels of dubious quality.How many people want a $300 box so they can watch City Council or CSpan. Not a huge market.


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, we were talking about boxes that can map the clear QAM channels and thus eliminate the need for a set top box or anything else. Why have those not sold in large quantities? Why does TiVo see QAM mapping as not having enough of a customer desire to include it?





vstone said:


> umm, we were talking about a box that eliminates the need for a box?





aindik said:


> We're talking about a box you can buy that eliminates the need for a box you have to rent.


The only QAM external tuner/boxes I've seen cost around $150 (amazon.com) Cable companies seem to be using boxes like the Motorola DCT700 and some low end Pace boxes. That gives customers not only clear stations but any encrypted channel they subscribe to and might provide access to PPV VoD. Those boxes use the same mapping they use for their full featured STBs. In other words there is no guarantee a tivo without a cable card will reliably handle changes in frequencies.

Cable companies may have to "work around" cable card requirements for STBs.


----------



## vstone

Neither cable boxes nor CableCards use the PSIP tables used by clear QAM tuners to identify channels. They have separate "out of band" data streams.

The commercially available clear QAM tuners that I've seen also tune OTA. They are expensive because of low volume.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> umm, we were talking about a box that eliminates the need for a box?


we are talking about a box that records more than analog without needing a cable box or cable cards - eg. Clear QAM mapping


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lew said:


> The only QAM external tuner/boxes I've seen cost around $150 (amazon.com) Cable companies seem to be using boxes like the Motorola DCT700 and some low end Pace boxes. That gives customers not only clear stations but any encrypted channel they subscribe to and might provide access to PPV VoD. Those boxes use the same mapping they use for their full featured STBs. In other words there is no guarantee a tivo without a cable card will reliably handle changes in frequencies.
> 
> Cable companies may have to "work around" cable card requirements for STBs.


it was the items in the below post i was referring to in asking why they have not gained significant sales if Clear QAM recording was important to many people.



SteveHC1 said:


> - Being a Mac afficionado myself, I'll probably - ultimately - wind up with an Mac/Elgato-based system as well.
> 
> As you have so well pointed out, there are SO many other products using the much-more-flexible TV Guide-based clear QAM mapping system without any problems whatsoever that I know of (including even consumer tv set manufacturers themselves), that it seems more than a bit ludicrous for TiVo to claim that it couldn't do the same with its products, regardless of whether they were to stick with Tribune or switch program guide data service providers.
> 
> In terms of the CSR-related customer support concerns that TiVo reportedly has over consumer-programmable Clear QAM guide data re-mapping, I think the answer may lay in the documentation of its use. Whereas TiVo seems to be *so* concerned about "dumbing down" its user manuals etc. to be so simple that a monkey could use it (as long as he/she didn't need clear QAM mapping ;-) , the tv manufacturers that use the TV Guide system go into tremendous detail over how to use its features, including consumer-defined clear QAM mapping to its guide data. My Hitachi plasma's User Manual devotes about HALF of its pages just to the TV Guide system ALONE - seriously! And this is just a TV SET!!! I would imagine that doing so must help to cut down on consumer support calls QUITE a bit. Maybe if TiVo provided FULL documentation - along with the appropriate disclaimers - in its products' user manuals, features such as clear QAM mapping to guide data could be implemented without substantially increasing the workload of its C.S. staff???


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> it was the items in the below post i was referring to in asking why they have not gained significant sales if Clear QAM recording was important to many people.


Sorry but the post you quoted doesn't make sense to me. The fact that the TV set mfg needs to go into that much detail suggests there are issues. It's one thing to have to scan a bunch of channels to find your local abc station, as a result of a change. It's another thing to miss Lost (substitute your favorite TV show) because tivo didn't know about the change.

It makes little sense for tivo to release a feature that benefits few customers and is likely to result in missed recordings. I agree with vstone. We have to assume non-broadcast stations will wind up being encrypted. We're looking at customers that can't get their stations OTA, who are willing to pay a premium price for tivo but unwilling to pay to rent a cable card. It might make more sense for tivo/customers to go after cable systems that are charging too much for cc.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lew said:


> Sorry but the post you quoted doesn't make sense to me. The fact that the TV set mfg needs to go into that much detail suggests there are issues. It's one thing to have to scan a bunch of channels to find your local abc station, as a result of a change. It's another thing to miss Lost (substitute your favorite TV show) because tivo didn't know about the change.


Lew that is what I am saying and then it was pointed out by SteveHC1 that there were products that do map QAM. So i asked why they were not selling in large numbers. Your cross posting as if I was saying the opposite has overly confused things. i am not flip flopping around, and would clearly state I had changed my opinion if I had.

If you want to quote the original SteveHC1 post and give that opinion then it would be clearer. There is a small arrow in a blue box beside the name of each quote and that will take you directly to the post you wish to question or rebut.


----------



## vstone

Perhaps if Tivo were starting from scratch, they would include mapping. Assuming this is true does not mean thatn they should go back and do it now, even though other platforms do it and as happy as that would make us few that want it.


----------



## lew

ZeoTiVo said:


> Lew that is what I am saying and then it was pointed out by SteveHC1 that there were products that do map QAM. So i asked why they were not selling in large numbers. Your cross posting as if I was saying the opposite has overly confused things. i am not flip flopping around, and would clearly state I had changed my opinion if I had.
> 
> If you want to quote the original SteveHC1 post and give that opinion then it would be clearer. There is a small arrow in a blue box beside the name of each quote and that will take you directly to the post you wish to question or rebut.


You quoted StevenHC1 in response to one of my posts, I thought you were somehow agreeing with him. I guess you were doing it to explain something.

The confusion: I'm not going to figure out who was saying what but posters seem to be confusing the basic cable box systems give/rent when they go 100% digital with the OTA digital boxes that can be bought for around $50 (they don't do QAM) with the the kind of QAM mapping some tv sets do.

Some posters think this is some conspiracy/collusion between tivo and the cable companies. That doesn't make any sense. If true cable systems could change their frequencies enough to disrupt recordings.


----------



## Saxion

ZeoTiVo said:


> umm, we were talking about boxes that can map the clear QAM channels and thus eliminate the need for a set top box or anything else. Why have those not sold in large quantities?


Pretty much every HDTV has a built-in Clear QAM tuner (even those without CableCARDs slots). Those are certainly "large quantities". Why would HDTV manufacturers do this, if there wasn't a market for people who want to watch TV that way?


----------



## Saxion

ZeoTiVo said:


> Why does TiVo see QAM mapping as not having enough of a customer desire to include it?


I honestly don't know why or even if they really believe that. But all evidence points to the opposite: ubiquity of Clear QAM tuners; Clear QAM support in all competitive DVR boxes; Clear QAM support in all PC-based DVR-like products; sizable interest in local-broadcast-only DVR usage*; large percentage of households who geographically cannot use OTA to receive all their channels; etc.

Fact is, Clear QAM is a completely legitimate, nearly universally available, FCC-enforced way for people to watch their local HD channels. TiVo seems to be completely alone in not servicing that market, and a battery of other companies and products have made the opposite decision. Why?

*It's the reason the DTVPal DVR exists, and the reason OTA support exists in the S3.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> We're looking at customers that can't get their stations OTA, who are willing to pay a premium price for tivo but unwilling to pay to rent a cable card.


Customers who were willing to pay premium before current tough economic times may now see a need to cut back to fewer cable channels and a cable DVR and let TiVo go.

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Saxion said:


> Fact is, Clear QAM is a completely legitimate, nearly universally available, FCC-enforced way for people to watch their local HD channels.


Ok TVs sell as that is just a basic part of the whole video equation. I have no idea what the breakdown on TV with digital tuners versus those without is. I can see what many would call digital tuners (QAM is just an ignored tech spec to many) would be a tipping point to go with one TV versus another or just on the check list of features - but that is more in the category of can I hook the cable straight up to it and watch some TV.

I am specifically asking why more people have not bought into the QAM capable devices that can *record* as that is the real comparison to TiVo.


----------



## atmuscarella

> Originally Posted by *ZeoTiVo*
> I have no idea what the breakdown on TV with digital tuners versus those without is.


100% of new TVs have at least a digital OTA tuner because without the digital tuner it technically isn't a TV and has to be sold as a monitor . Actually at this point in time I also believe most new TVs come with combo ATSC/QAM digital tuners.

Thanks,


----------



## vstone

I think Clear QAM is in TV sets because its part of the chip sets. Samsung sells an OTA ATSC box. Although not advertized on the box, or even in the owner's manual, it also does clear QAM tuning. If I were a manf., I would think "the FCC is sure to look at this some day."


----------



## ZeoTiVo

My new TiVo HD just came in 

So I hooked it up to cable (I have the first free tier of digital) and said I have cable cards, and it just showed me the screen to insert them, never gave me a hard time about not having them.
It asked if I had Time Warner but did not ask me about digital or not? After it was done only my analog channels were visible.
Did the channel scan and all it found was the QAM for the basic channels under 14. No real HD on yet - news and such that while in HD really still use SD type cameras save for the set.

Then I had a lot of channels in the 90-x and up range but all gray screen so I assume encrypted.

anyway this is going in place of a DT that is working just fine, and I will run this a while without cable cards just to make sure it works, so no super hurry to get this setup.
I can play around with it a while if anyone has any ideas on something they want me to try.


----------



## lew

Saxion said:


> I honestly don't know why or even if they really believe that. But all evidence points to the opposite: ubiquity of Clear QAM tuners; Clear QAM support in all competitive DVR boxes; Clear QAM support in all PC-based DVR-like products; sizable interest in local-broadcast-only DVR usage*; large percentage of households who geographically cannot use OTA to receive all their channels; etc.
> 
> Fact is, Clear QAM is a completely legitimate, nearly universally available, FCC-enforced way for people to watch their local HD channels. TiVo seems to be completely alone in not servicing that market, and a battery of other companies and products have made the opposite decision. Why?
> 
> *It's the reason the DTVPal DVR exists, and the reason OTA support exists in the S3.


There must be some reasons why DTVPAL doesn't handle QAM. I doubt QAM capable tuners would have added any significant cost to the unit. I wouldn't even be shocked to find out the chipset supported QAM but that feature is turned off.



fallingwater said:


> Customers who were willing to pay premium before current tough economic times may now see a need to cut back to fewer cable channels and a cable DVR and let TiVo go.


I agree. Tivo is a premiumn priced product and customers on a monthly plan may consider dropping service.


----------



## Saxion

ZeoTiVo said:


> I am specifically asking why more people have not bought into the QAM capable devices that can *record* as that is the real comparison to TiVo.


DTVPal is a very hot item right now; it is a DVR that _only records OTA HD_. Clearly, there is interest in recording only those channels. Whether the delivery mechanism is Clear QAM or OTA is immaterial; the desire is the same. A market for one implies a market for the other.


----------



## Saxion

lew said:


> There must be some reasons why DTVPAL doesn't handle QAM.


Because it was developed by DISH Network, who have no interest in supporting cable. Nonetheless, it is a product meeting a need (that being to have DVR capability for local broadcast HD).


----------



## lew

Saxion said:


> DTVPal is a very hot item right now; it is a DVR that _only records OTA HD_. Clearly, there is interest in recording only those channels. Whether the delivery mechanism is Clear QAM or OTA is immaterial; the desire is the same. *A market for one implies a market for the other*.


The TivoHD also records OTA HD as well as analog cable and digital cable (with cable cards).

A corollary to your post, unwillingness by one to handle QAM mapping implies an issue with the process.


----------



## lew

Saxion said:


> DTVPal is a very hot item right now; it is a DVR that _only records OTA HD_. Clearly, there is interest in recording only those channels. Whether the delivery mechanism is Clear QAM or OTA is immaterial; the desire is the same. *A market for one implies a market for the other*.


The TivoHD also records OTA HD as well as analog cable and digital cable (with cable cards).

A corollary to your post, unwillingness by one to handle QAM mapping implies an issue with the process.


----------



## ciper

Saxion said:


> Pretty much every HDTV has a built-in Clear QAM tuner (even those without CableCARDs slots). Those are certainly "large quantities". Why would HDTV manufacturers do this, if there wasn't a market for people who want to watch TV that way?





Saxion said:


> ubiquity of Clear QAM tuners; Clear QAM support in all competitive DVR boxes; Clear QAM support in all PC-based DVR-like products; sizable interest in local-broadcast-only DVR usage


I dare anyone reading this to find a TV with an ATSC tuner which doesn't also support QAM. I've tried to find one and so far have failed. The only non QAM HDTVs I can find are those which have no ATSC tuner and instead use component inputs for HD.



Saxion said:


> Fact is, Clear QAM is a completely legitimate, nearly universally available, FCC-enforced way for people to watch their local HD channels. TiVo seems to be completely alone in not servicing that market, and a battery of other companies and products have made the opposite decision. Why?


I am not sure anyone can argue against that. The few ATSC but non QAM devices I know of are designed for OTA only or are satellite receviers.



Saxion said:


> Because it was developed by DISH Network, who have no interest in supporting cable. Nonetheless, it is a product meeting a need (that being to have DVR capability for local broadcast HD).


Lets find the specs of this unit. Then we can find the data sheets for its individual chips and determine if QAM tuning is physically possible but has been disabled in firmware.


----------



## Saxion

lew said:


> The TivoHD also records OTA HD as well as analog cable and digital cable (with cable cards).


Yes, there is a viable market for all of those. Clear QAM as well. It's "TV Your Way!" (old TiVo slogan)


lew said:


> A corollary to your post, unwillingness by one to handle QAM mapping implies an issue with the process.


Fair enough; there is no doubt that Clear QAM is not as straightforward as OTA. But that doesn't diminish the desire; it's a technical hurdle. One that hasn't stopped many, many products from supporting Clear QAM.


----------



## andyf

Here's the Win7 (not native) solution. Maybe a little too complex for a TiVo user? From www.engadgethd.com.










Of course, this is just a UI, there probably alot of work behind the scenes to do to get the data matched up.

Is this what we're talking about here?


----------



## ciper

andyf said:


> Is this what we're talking about here?


Yep. Matching the channel name stored in the guide database to the one that was detected in a channel scan.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> My new TiVo HD just came in
> 
> So I hooked it up to cable (I have the first free tier of digital) and said I have cable cards, and it just showed me the screen to insert them, never gave me a hard time about not having them.
> It asked if I had Time Warner but did not ask me about digital or not? After it was done only my analog channels were visible.
> Did the channel scan and all it found was the QAM for the basic channels under 14. No real HD on yet - news and such that while in HD really still use SD type cameras save for the set.
> 
> Then I had a lot of channels in the 90-x and up range but all gray screen so I assume encrypted.
> 
> anyway this is going in place of a DT that is working just fine, and I will run this a while without cable cards just to make sure it works, so no super hurry to get this setup.
> I can play around with it a while if anyone has any ideas on something they want me to try.


If you in fact do NOT (yet) have the cablecard(s) then what you should do is re-run the initial setup routine but indicate that you do NOT have the cablecard(s) yet but that you WILL in the future (that is one of the options that the program presents you with), NOT that you (already) have the cards. It SHOULD make a difference in the channel scan and related memory storage.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> There must be some reasons why DTVPAL doesn't handle QAM. I doubt QAM capable tuners would have added any significant cost to the unit. I wouldn't even be shocked to find out the chipset supported QAM but that feature is turned off.
> 
> I agree. Tivo is a premiumn priced product and customers on a monthly plan may consider dropping service.


- If the DTVPal that you're referring to is the one that I know of (by "Dish Network"), I would imagine that it - even the dvr model - doesn't do QAM because it's not intended for use with cable really; its primary purpose is for use in OTA setups and it was designed specifically with that in mind.


----------



## SteveHC1

andyf said:


> Here's the Win7 (not native) solution. Maybe a little too complex for a TiVo user? From www.engadgethd.com.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, this is just a UI, there probably alot of work behind the scenes to do to get the data matched up.
> 
> Is this what we're talking about here?


- As was said, Yep! And in the majority of consumer devices that support it, the most common implementation is the TV Guide-branded guide program, which is designed for the mass market and thus is much more consumer friendly than Win7. Thanks for the print-out; hopefully people can now see that we're not talking about "rocket science" here or something that is in any way difficult to achieve.


----------



## ciper

SteveHC1 said:


> hopefully people can now see that we're not talking about "rocket science" here or something that is in any way difficult to achieve.


The problem now is that those who post negatively in this thread will say -



> _We never said it was hard to implement. The problem is that the frequencies will change over nine thousand times per day and all your recordings will be missed. Every missed recording will generate a support call to TiVo which will bankrupt the company within two weeks. We want to preserve the idea that TiVo does everything perfectly so if there is a slight chance that a new feature may fail more than one time it shouldn't be deployed. Besides only seven people in the entire country have clear QAM channels and only two of those own a TiVoHD. Be happy that you live in America where you have a choice to use an obviously inferior device with QAM support because a majority of the world doesn't live in America. On top of the technical aspects clear QAM mapping would be theft. If you don't pay the extra fee to the cable company to record Late Night with Conan O'Brien they too will go out of business in two weeks. You gotta pay to play and judging by your comments you are obviously on welfare. You must want the cable company and TiVo to both fail. How dare you try to take my TV away from me! I HATE YOUR UGLY FACE AND YOU ARE STUPID._


----------



## bicker

This bears repeating:


TiVoPony said:


> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support *do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers*. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features* against others* ...


----------



## JWThiers

ciper said:


> The problem now is that those who post negatively in this thread will say -
> 
> We never said it was hard to implement. ... You must want the cable company and TiVo to both fail. How dare you try to take my TV away from me! I HATE YOUR UGLY FACE AND YOU ARE STUPID.


No one ever said that they hate your ugly face?

Sorry when a shot like that comes open you gotta take the shot.

Seriously, I think the problem is actually some of what you sarcastically said, mainly when people miss a recording because of a frequency change they will be calling tivo and blaming tivo instead of the person who entered the QAM mapping. I think they would rather have a solid product rather than risk dissatisfied customers.


----------



## vstone

Well, if the PSIP table is not properly populated, there won't be any list of channels. My TV sets shows me both ABC-HD and CBS-HD as channel 1-1, both identified as the ABC channels.

The list shown has the cartoon/TCM channel ???

Where are the broadcast channels that we're all taking sbout (maybe already configured?)? The other channels are really superfluous to this discussion as they are or will be encrypted.

Also keep in mind that good ole Microsoft doesn't really provide customer support!!!


----------



## bmgoodman

andyf said:


> Here's the Win7 (not native) solution. Maybe a little too complex for a TiVo user? From www.engadgethd.com.


Possibly, but if this interface could be exposed by an applet running on a PC, it could be "officially unsupported". I think this could be enough for me to buy one or more extra Tivos.


----------



## lew

SteveHC1 said:


> - If the DTVPal that you're referring to is the one that I know of (by "Dish Network"), I would imagine that it - even the dvr model - doesn't do QAM because it's not intended for use with cable really; its primary purpose is for use in OTA setups and it was designed specifically with that in mind.


and the tivo was designed to work with cable cards. What's the difference?

Adding a QAM tuner would have added very little to the mfg cost of the unit.

Two possibilities: QAM mapping isn't reliable enough or Echostar is using some of the same boards as they use in their non DVR tuners. Tuners that are eligible for the $40 coupon can't offer QAM.


----------



## lew

JWThiers said:


> Seriously, I think the problem is actually some of what you sarcastically said, mainly when people miss a recording because of a frequency change they will be calling tivo and blaming tivo instead of the person who entered the QAM mapping. I think they would rather have a solid product rather than risk dissatisfied customers.


+1 It's not rocket science. Tivo doesn't want to produce a feature that will result in missed recordings. The question isn't if but rather how often.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

JWThiers said:


> No one ever said that they hate your ugly face?
> 
> Sorry when a shot like that comes open you gotta take the shot.


 hmm, I would have gone with
"It would be stupid to think your ugly face is the reason we hate you" 


> when people miss a recording because of a frequency change they will be calling tivo and blaming tivo instead of the person who entered the QAM mapping. I think they would rather have a solid product rather than risk dissatisfied customers.


add in that the cable company DVR would not miss the recording and the dissatisfaction goes up.


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> +1 It's not rocket science. Tivo doesn't want to produce a feature that will result in missed recordings. The question isn't if but rather how often.


Exactly, the Tivo's whole purpose (until S4 anyway) is to record. A Tivo product that doesn't do that is, ummmm, what's the technical term - oh, yeah - "broken."


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

ZeoTiVo said:


> now if they do reliable recording then comes the big question - if this is so important to consumers, why are they not buying lots of the other setups?


People don't know any better. They're told they need a STB or at least cable cards. How many companies even mention QAM channels in any of their literature or on their websites? Mine sure doesn't. It's virtually entirely undocumented. And they get to rent out more devices people don't necessarily need because of it.

The reality is that this is a cable/satellite/tivo market. The lack of big sales of other devices isn't pure proof of no interest, when they don't know the option exists in the first place.

Tivo's lack of initiative enables the ignorance. If Tivo supported proper manual QAM mapping, other devices would probably sell a bit better too, because Tivo is the only leader in this space that could educate customers. Not Moxi or these other small fry tuners, and certainly cable companies won't when it's in their best interests not to.


----------



## lew

BigJimOutlaw said:


> Tivo's lack of initiative enables the ignorance. If Tivo supported proper manual QAM mapping, other devices would probably sell a bit better too, because Tivo is the only leader in this space that could educate customers. Not Moxi or these other small fry tuners, and certainly cable companies won't when it's in their best interests not to.


Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards.* The system works. Handles clear channels and encrypted channels. Automatically takes care of frequency changes. Automatically makes sure you continue to be able record stations you pay for, if/when the cable company starts to encrypt channels that were formerly in the clear.

Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


----------



## RoyK

lew said:


> Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards.* The system works. Handles clear channels and encrypted channels. Automatically takes care of frequency changes. Automatically makes sure you continue to be able record stations you pay for, if/when the cable company starts to encrypt channels that were formerly in the clear.


The system has NOT worked on my TiVoHD ( or any other customer of Jetbroadband ) since the V11 upgrade. Worked fine before that.


lew said:


> Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


The only certainties are death, taxes, and ads on TiVo. If companies waited for certainty before doing things then nothing would ever be done.


----------



## fallingwater

SteveHC1 said:


> -If the DTVPal that you're referring to is the one that I know of (by "Dish Network"), I would imagine that it - even the dvr model - doesn't do QAM because it's not intended for use with cable really; its primary purpose is for use in OTA setups and it was designed specifically with that in mind.





lew said:


> and the tivo was designed to work with cable cards. What's the difference?
> 
> Adding a QAM tuner would have added very little to the mfg cost of the unit.
> 
> Two possibilities: QAM mapping isn't reliable enough or Echostar is using some of the same boards as they use in their non DVR tuners. Tuners that are eligible for the $40 coupon can't offer QAM.


One one hand, Echostar has shown no interest in making cable DVRs which would offer direct competition for E*'s satellite services and reduce revenue.

On the other, TiVo has shown no interest in offering manual QAM mapping which could enable users to avoid CableCARDS and thus reduce cable bills.

E* and TiVo policies are different but not equivalent.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards.* The system works. Handles clear channels and encrypted channels. Automatically takes care of frequency changes. Automatically makes sure you continue to be able record stations you pay for, if/when the cable company starts to encrypt channels that were formerly in the clear.


And costs more. CableCARDs are an option for TiVo users to consider.



> Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


Offering manual QAM mapping 'makes sense' when it would be a user option; would require no further involvement from TiVo, as is the case with TVGOS and Moxi, and could generate sales opportunities.

You're certainly entitled to an opinion of what 'makes sense' but it's an opinion, nothing more nothing less, as mine is. TiVo will ultimately do whatever it decides 'makes sense'.


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards.* The system works. Handles clear channels and encrypted channels. Automatically takes care of frequency changes. Automatically makes sure you continue to be able record stations you pay for, if/when the cable company starts to encrypt channels that were formerly in the clear.
> 
> Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


The first sentence is true.

The second sentence is true.

The two sentences don't belong together,

Tivo handles automatic QAM mapping (but not manual) if the PSIP tables are properly populated. They do not at this time provide guide data because even if the cable companies properly populated the PSIP tables (which many or most do not), they do not publish the PSIP channel mapping (unless it happens to coincide with their regular published channel lineup).

The channel mapping provided via CableCards has nothing to do with PSIP tables. I don't think that encrypted channels are even required to be listed in the PSIP tables.

This thread is about manual mapping and exists because cable companies don't usually properly populate PSIP tables and don't publish clear QAM channel lineups at all (with or without PSIP data) to allow the S3/HD/XL to operate as designed.

Edit:
After thinking about this offline, I think that the CableCard mapping probably does qualiy as QAM mapping as much as vis PSIP tables. However, as discussed in his post, lew used in a different way than I have been thinking of.

Tivo can do automatic mapping via CableCard or via PSIP tables. The former is now well supported bu cable companies, the latter is not and requires both data and published channel lists.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

lew said:


> Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards.* The system works. Handles clear channels and encrypted channels. Automatically takes care of frequency changes. Automatically makes sure you continue to be able record stations you pay for, if/when the cable company starts to encrypt channels that were formerly in the clear.


Except I said manual mapping quite deliberately.



> Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


That's what 'makes sense' to you. This is the broken record argument. People that do so can be given proper warnings that they do it at their own risk. If the market for this is allegedly so small, then with proper warnings and education, there's no proof that changed assignments would be thrown at Tivo's feet in any significant degree any moreso than they already are for any other regular lineup changes that happen all the time.

Or, if you do have proof that this would raise all kinds of hell that's disproportionate to its customer size, by all means share it. This thread is loaded with guesses, assumptions and theoretical what-if's. So I'd love to see some actual, solid evidence that can definitively resolve the discussion.


----------



## bicker

TiVoPony's message definitively resolves the discussion. Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you, but it does definitively resolve the discussion.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

The only thing Pony's comment resolved was the priority they lent the feature at that point in time. It speaks nothing of the guessing, assumptions, and what-ifs submitted to this thread. Much less answer the question or definitively resolve the discussion.


----------



## dplaflamme

lew said:


> Tivo *properly handles QAM mapping. The necessary information is communicated from the cable company to the tivo via cable cards. The system works. *


Not for those of us whose cable systems (an apartment complex, in my case) don't distribute cable cards.



lew said:


> Manual mapping would only make sense if tivo knew, with certainty, that the cable system would never change the frequency assignments.


No, _automatic_ mapping would only make sense if Tivo could make that assumption. _Manual_ mapping would be a "your gun, your foot," tool for power users who assume responsibility for their own actions.

Then again, power users have never been TiVo's target market.


----------



## vstone

BigJimOutlaw said:


> ...
> If the market for this is allegedly so small, then with proper warnings and education, there's no proof that changed assignments would be thrown at Tivo's feet in any significant degree any moreso than they already are for any other regular lineup changes that happen all the time.
> ...


There's no proof that it wouldn't either. The potential for Tivo to get a reputation, however undeserved, for not performing correctly its very reason for being is probably enough to just say no until cable systems settle down.


----------



## bicker

BigJimOutlaw said:


> The only thing Pony's comment resolved was the priority they lent the feature at that point in time. It speaks nothing of the guessing, assumptions, and what-ifs submitted to this thread. Much less answer the question or definitively resolve the discussion.


What part of, "Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you..." did you fail to understand? 

Pony's message is the only one relevant to what a TiVo owner can come to reasonably expect regarding this issue. Everything else is just.....


----------



## RoyK

bicker said:


> TiVoPony's message definitively resolves the discussion. Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you, but it does definitively resolve the discussion.


TiVoPony's message definitively resolves that TiVo doesn't give a high priority to manual QAM mapping. The rest of it is a marketeer's attempt to make that decision palatable.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

vstone said:


> There's no proof that it wouldn't either. The potential for Tivo to get a reputation, however undeserved, for not performing correctly its very reason for being is probably enough to just say no until cable systems settle down.


The cable card picture was a complete mess at first too, certainly in my area as well, until Tivo finally woke them up and helped get things on the right track.

Someone needs to take an initiative, and unfortunately cable companies will never be the champion of QAM channel education. This one is going to once again require Tivo and its customers.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

bicker said:


> What part of, "Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you..." did you fail to understand?


That's cute. I like that. Lending others so much leeway in answering questions that they don't even have to actually answer them. Yet, somehow, they're answered! And it's definitive! That's awesome.

But you don't get to decide if Pony's priority list is the definitive answer to this discussion, or to my questions. That will be Tivo's job alone.



> Pony's message is the only one relevant to what a TiVo owner can come to reasonably expect regarding this issue. Everything else is just.....


So until Pony or someone else at Tivo answers the unanswered questions with actual answers and facts... and not guesses, assumptions and theoretical what-if's, it's not a resolved discussion.


----------



## bicker

RoyK said:


> TiVoPony's message definitively resolves that TiVo doesn't give a high priority to manual QAM mapping. The rest of it is a marketeer's attempt to make that decision palatable.


And everyone who still owns a TiVo evidently, by their actions or inactions, found it sufficiently "palatable".



BigJimOutlaw said:


> But you don't get to decide if Pony's priority list is the definitive answer to this discussion, or to my questions. That will be Tivo's job alone.


Oh *I* get that, and the fact that he actually works for them, and you don't... well... I guess we know which perspective hold's sway for TiVo.



BigJimOutlaw said:


> So until Pony or someone else at Tivo answers the unanswered questions with actual answers and facts... and not guesses, assumptions and theoretical what-if's, it's not a resolved discussion.


No. It is a resolved discussion. Going back to what I said earlier, about "Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you," what is evident is that some people will insist on beating this dead horse until magically their personal preference becomes the law at TiVo.


----------



## RoyK

bicker said:


> And everyone who still owns a TiVo evidently, by their actions or inactions, found it sufficiently "palatable"...


The ongoing discussion here proves that statement ridiculous.


----------



## bicker

RoyK said:


> The ongoing discussion here proves that statement ridiculous.


Talk is cheap, Roy. You should know that.


----------



## vstone

BigJimOutlaw said:


> The cable card picture was a complete mess at first too, certainly in my area as well, until Tivo finally woke them up and helped get things on the right track.
> 
> Someone needs to take an initiative, and unfortunately cable companies will never be the champion of QAM channel education. This one is going to once again require Tivo and its customers.


Actually, Tivo sent out instructions for installing cablecards to the mojoe cable comapnies a month or so before the S3 was released. I know these didn't filter their way down to our local office. (They were also in the box, so I had one anyway).


----------



## lew

dplaflamme said:


> Not for those of us whose cable systems (an apartment complex, in my case) don't distribute cable cards.


I agree but tivo (pony) has said there aren't enough potential customers (I assume in your situation).


> No, _automatic_ mapping would only make sense if Tivo could make that assumption. _Manual_ mapping would be a "your gun, your foot," tool for power users who assume responsibility for their own actions.
> 
> Then again, power users have never been TiVo's target market.


Tivo has always made it somewhat easy for "power users" to upgrade capacity of their units. Series 1 and some Series 2 units were relativley easy to add new features via hacking. Power users can still hack and modify their units. Power users can do a variety of things with TTG.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

bicker said:


> Oh *I* get that, and the fact that he actually works for them, and you don't... well... I guess we know which perspective hold's sway for TiVo.
> 
> No. It is a resolved discussion. Going back to what I said earlier, about "Not necessarily the way you may like, nor with the details you'd like to have provided to you," what is evident is that some people will insist on beating this dead horse until magically their personal preference becomes the law at TiVo.


That's cool. So when you get that job at Tivo, you can speak for them too. You could even refer to Pony's post at that point and have some credibility in doing so. Until then, I asked questions that Pony's post doesn't answer. Others also made claims that Tivo never claimed. So when Tivo ever decides to answer the unanswered questions, then we'll see what's resolved.

As for beating a dead horse, you've make it clear you're willing to fan the flame as much as anybody else. So who here can really talk?


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

vstone said:


> Actually, Tivo sent out instructions for installing cablecards to the mojoe cable comapnies a month or so before the S3 was released. I know these didn't filter their way down to our local office. (They were also in the box, so I had one anyway).


That is true, but it doesn't mean it wasn't a complete mess all the same.  Tivo can once again step up and take initiative if they so choose to.


----------



## lew

vstone said:


> After thinking about this offline, I think that the CableCard mapping probably does qualiy as QAM mapping as much as vis PSIP tables. However, as discussed in his post, lew used in a different way than I have been thinking of.


Exactly, most of the posters have the option of mapping their channels via cable cards. Posters are looking for an alternative *that is less reliable* but is less expensive.

Repharse the question, Should tivo come up with an unsupported feature that is less reliable. A system that will result in lost recordings. A system that will generate complaints. Just so some people will save a few dollars. Sounds like more downside the upside.

Now if tivo could verify that a given cable system doesn't change their basic channels it might make some sense.


----------



## bicker

BigJimOutlaw said:


> So ...


... *IF* ...​


BigJimOutlaw said:


> ... Tivo ever decides to answer the unanswered questions, then we'll see ....


Fixed your post.

Even with my correction, that still smacks of you expecting a company to provide you proprietary information on demand. I'd hate to be you; you've got to be continually disappointed with things.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> ... *IF* ...​Fixed your post.
> 
> Even with my correction, that still smacks of you expecting a company to provide you proprietary information on demand. I'd hate to be you; you've got to be continually disappointed with things.


Even if tivo releases some kind of manual QAM mapping I doubt we'll know if it's the result of consumer requests (no not the length of threads on TCF) or tivo is convinced frequencies for basic cable (broadcast) channels aren't being changed that often. I guess we can put two plus two together if tivo releases some kind of QAM "solution" after the FCC releases a rule regarding PSIP or how often a cable company can move frequencies.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

bicker said:


> I'd hate to be you; you've got to be continually disappointed with things.


Another assumption to add to the thread.  Perhaps Pony's post answers that one somehow as well.


----------



## Saxion

bicker said:


> TiVoPony's message definitively resolves the discussion.


Not at all. I have great respect for TiVoPony, and he is always very careful with his words; all he is saying here is that Clear QAM doesn't affect a large number of _current _TiVo subscribers. But of course, when people discover TiVo's lack of Clear QAM guide support, they generally either don't buy one, return it, or sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable. So of course Pony's statement would be true.

What Pony didn't address is how many _potential _customers are affected by lack of Clear QAM (and how many current customers were forced to sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable against their will, which they can't know).


----------



## bicker

Saxion said:


> What Pony didn't address is how many _potential _customers are affected by lack of Clear QAM ...


[SARCASM]Because, of course, a market manager for a company wouldn't care about potential customers.[/SARCASM]


----------



## lew

Bicker--I don't know how to do this as a poll but it might be interesting to say something like would you use clear QAM mapping if you'd miss (1,2 4, 6...shows a month) and your monthly savings from not paying for cable cards/additional outlet fees is ($2,$3,$4,$8...) That's really the question--how many shows will you miss and how much would you save. 

Maybe tivo should devote some resources to "go after" cable systems that charge an excessive amount for cable cards.


----------



## bicker

Polls don't accurately determine whether people really care about something or not. Money seems to be the only way to gauge that. Follow the money.

I think your suggestion is a good one: It may be a far more productive, and less risk-prone use of resources, for TiVo to try to convince service providers to do a better job with CableCARDs. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they're already doing that, at least informally.


----------



## JoeTaxpayer

lew said:


> Bicker--I don't know how to do this as a poll but it might be interesting to say something like


As a two TiVo owner (S3) , the second one would cost me $8.45/mo to put two cards in. It's rare that I wand to record 3 or 4 HD shows at once, so I've started to use the QAM tuning on that rare occasion, but I'm not going to pay for ful;l up service. I'd like the guide to work for it.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> (Unscrambled QAM mapping) is a resolved discussion.


Yup, just like Lifetime Service wuz!



> ...some people will insist on beating this dead horse until magically their personal preference becomes the law at TiVo.


Giddy Yap!


----------



## ciper

vstone said:


> There's no proof that it wouldn't either. The potential for Tivo to get a reputation, however undeserved, for not performing correctly its very reason for being is probably enough to just say no until cable systems settle down.


Except TiVo already has this reputation. They have implemented far more troublesome features.

Shoot, most cable companies now have an excuse to blame TiVo for every problem - they are well aware of the grey/black screen issue after the V11 update. Now *any* issue with the word TiVo in the sentence is automatically the fault of the software upgrade 

edit: hehe http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=418384 loving the thread title



lew said:


> Exactly, most of the posters have the option of mapping their channels via cable cards. Posters are looking for an alternative *that is less reliable* but is less expensive.
> 
> Repharse the question, Should tivo come up with an unsupported feature that is less reliable. A system that will result in lost recordings. A system that will generate complaints. Just so some people will save a few dollars. Sounds like more downside the upside.


You cannot say it's automatically less reliable in all markets.

I strongly feel it is NOT less reliable and I have evidence to support it. I have had a cablecard issue about once every 80 days since using them. I know some of the support people by name and a few even remember me because of these and other issues relating to the cable card. I know in that time the frequencies have not changed for the HD locals (unsure about the others which don't matter in this conversation).



Saxion said:


> Not at all. I have great respect for TiVoPony, and he is always very careful with his words; all he is saying here is that Clear QAM doesn't affect a large number of _current _TiVo subscribers. But of course, when people discover TiVo's lack of Clear QAM guide support, they generally either don't buy one, return it, or sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable. So of course Pony's statement would be true.
> 
> What Pony didn't address is how many _potential _customers are affected by lack of Clear QAM (and how many current customers were forced to sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable against their will, which they can't know).


*Exfarkingactly* [email protected]#%^%
I tried to say it earlier but was shot down. As a part time home technology consultant for many well to do people (who have plenty of money to spend) don't buy the TiVo because it won't work right with the channels that five other devices in the house can.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

lew said:


> Bicker--I don't know how to do this as a poll but it might be interesting to say something like would you use clear QAM mapping if you'd miss (1,2 4, 6...shows a month) and your monthly savings from not paying for cable cards/additional outlet fees is ($2,$3,$4,$8...) That's really the question--how many shows will you miss and how much would you save.
> 
> Maybe tivo should devote some resources to "go after" cable systems that charge an excessive amount for cable cards.


I'll answer the would-be poll this way:

I would save at least $16/month if Tivo offered this feature (not counting the truck roll, activation fee, and the upfront $25/each security deposit for the cards.) That $16 comes from the nominal $6 for the 2 cards, plus $10/month for the "basic" HD service (comprised only of channels I already receive via QAM.)

At the rate my QAM channels change (1-2x a year), I'll gladly "suffer the consequences" of any lost recordings. I could likely watch them online for free anyway on Hulu or the station's website for the following several days/weeks/months. But so far in the last 2 years I haven't missed any shows because I caught the changes long before a show was missed. Channel changes primarily happen during the networks' "off season" (summer) so I've been well in the clear there... Yeah, I don't record much summer network programming.

As for bicker's "follow the money". I agree. If they don't have manual mapping by the end of my contract, I won't stay. Paying a full service fee for part-time manual recordings is not in my long term interest.

Whether I'm just one of the "lucky few" or not, I don't know. But I'm a good candidate and case for manual QAM mapping.


----------



## ciper

BigJimOutlaw said:


> I would save at least $16/month if Tivo offered this feature (not counting the truck roll, activation fee, and the upfront $25/each security deposit for the cards.) That $16 comes from the nominal $6 for the 2 cards, plus $10/month for the "basic" HD service (comprised only of channels I already receive via QAM.)


So in the first month you would pay at least 100$ to get guide data on the eight HD channels you already receive, and an additional 176$ more for the year (11*16).

What are you waiting for? 276$ for a year of guide data on the free local QAM channels should be a drop in the bucket for a rich guy like you.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

LOL. Exactly. I believe we get 11 channels on my basic HD package, so guide data would average out to "only" an extra $25 or so per channel for the year. 

In all seriousness, if it were really just $6 for cards, I wouldn't care. But actual costs and fees don't make it attractive when all it takes is a software update to link channels to guide data.


----------



## vstone

BigJimOutlaw said:


> LOL. Exactly. I believe we get 11 channels on my basic HD package, so guide data would average out to "only" an extra $25 or so per channel for the year.
> 
> In all seriousness, if it were really just $6 for cards, I wouldn't care. But actual costs and fees don't make it remotely attractive, when all it takes is a software update to link channels to guide data.


Well, AllRighty then. No software needs to be written, just a download. Well the spring update is coming soon to an IP address near you! Cheers!


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

vstone said:


> Well, AllRighty then. No software needs to be written, just a download. Well the spring update is coming soon to an IP address near you! Cheers!


You lost me... By "software update" I meant writing the code to do it.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> ...most of the posters have the option of mapping their channels via cable cards. Posters are looking for an alternative *that is less reliable* but is less expensive.
> 
> Rephrase the question, Should tivo come up with an unsupported feature that is less reliable. A system that will result in lost recordings. A system that will generate complaints. Just so some people will save a few dollars. Sounds like more downside the upside.
> 
> Now if tivo could verify that a given cable system doesn't change their basic channels it might make some sense.


It indeed may be more costly for TiVo to upgrade its software enabling users to manually map QAM channels than to ignore the issue. But it may not.

What's being requested is an alternative to, not a replacement for CableCARDS. IMHO, QAM mapping should be a supported feature which TiVo calls attention to by advertising that HDTiVo can be used with or without CableCARDS. A TiVo user's choice!

From personal experience I've found that TVGOS enables users to manually map QAM channels easily.

Saxion's post #1539 makes sense, especially considering the current downturn in the economy: 
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7052004#post7052004

_...I have great respect for TiVoPony, and he is always very careful with his words; all he is saying here is that Clear QAM doesn't affect a large number of current TiVo subscribers. But of course, when people discover TiVo's lack of Clear QAM guide support, they generally either don't buy one, return it, or sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable. So of course Pony's statement would be true.

What Pony didn't address is how many potential customers are affected by lack of Clear QAM (and how many current customers were forced to sign up for CableCARDs/digital cable against their will, which they can't know)._


----------



## bicker

As I said in that thread, the implication that Pony doesn't care about potential customers is outrageously inane. Saxion is grasping at straws, probably in frustration at being unable to gain access to proprietary information.


----------



## ciper

fallingwater said:


> QAM mapping should be a supported feature which TiVo calls attention to by advertising that HDTiVo can be used with or without CableCARDS. A TiVo user's choice!


I like the way you put it.

Either pay a premium and trust the cable company to handle any changes
or
Use the box as is and provide your own support.

It's like many great applications (*especially open source*) in that the program is free but you have to pay for the support contract if you want it.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> ...
> IMHO, QAM mapping should be a supported feature which TiVo calls attention to by advertising that HDTiVo can be used with or without CableCARDS. A TiVo user's choice!
> ...


Sales Reps at Best Buy, Circuit City (RIP), etc never understood CableCards. Expecting them to understand this is just not reasonable.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> As I said in that thread...


Pony cares. And runs fast too! However his job is to sell. Pony undoubtedly has input but he doesn't determine the programs needed to finish first. TiVo's Board determines marketing strategies.

S3's M card issue was dealt with by a cheaper workaround, for example, and Lifetime Service was resurrected from the dead.

But whatever will be, will be. So back to the regularly scheduled program: 





http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876
_*...Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list...

Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers...

We do our best. But I have to acknowledge that no matter how much time we spend here, there will always be one more post to answer. If we can help, and provide information, we always will. Just don't ask for our product roadmap.

Cheers,
Pony
__________________
Director of Product Marketing
TiVo Inc. *_


----------



## slowbiscuit

BigJimOutlaw said:


> This thread is loaded with guesses, assumptions and theoretical what-if's. So I'd love to see some actual, solid evidence that can definitively resolve the discussion.


You're going to be waiting a *long* time for that, bud. Just look at the longevity of this thread and the endless circular arguments within, none of which resolve anything - the status quo remains and no further explanation is being given, nor is any expected (by me).


----------



## slowbiscuit

ciper said:


> As a part time home technology consultant for many well to do people (who have plenty of money to spend) don't buy the TiVo because it won't work right with the channels that five other devices in the house can.


That statement makes no sense. Your rich clients can easily get all the channels on Tivo with Cablecard(s) unless they are on one of the rare cable systems that don't use them.


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> Sales Reps at Best Buy, Circuit City (RIP), etc never understood CableCards. Expecting them to understand (manual QAM mapping) is just not reasonable.


Nor should they be expected to!

Using CableCARDS is a user option. Manually mapping unscrambled QAM would be another user option.

TiVo already includes a write-up sheet regarding activating and using CableCARDS. A similiar write-up would cover channel mapping, making it clear that a user needs to enter a digital channel number ascertained from watching a program and substituting that number for the one in TiVo's EPG program description list. It's not rocket science and doesn't require PSIP data.

Sony provides three links under *Manuals* on its product page for the DVR. The *FAQs: Digital Cable Ready Reference* links to an overview of CableCARDS 
http://esupport.sony.com/US/perl/model-documents.pl?mdl=DHGHDD500&LOC=3

Here are Sony's brief instructions from page 75 of the PDF file of the Sony DVR's *Operation Manual*:

*CHANGE SYSTEM SETTINGS

This option allows you to change or update the current settings of: ZIP or postal code, cable or antenna setup and recording device.
1. Highlight SETUP in the Service Bar.
2. Scroll down and highlight "Change system settings" then press SELECT.
3. Follow the on screen instructions.

CHANGE CHANNEL DISPLAY

This option allows you to edit channel information that appears in LISTINGS. The changes you make are: re-order the position of the channel, change the tune channel number, and switch a Channel "On" to always be displayed, "Off" to never display or "Auto-Hide" to display only when program information is available.
1. Once the "Change Channel Display" is highlighted in the SETUP service, press SELECT.
2. Highlight a channel then press MENU to display Option menu.
3. Make the changes using SELECT scroll bar and ↑/↓ buttons.
4. Highlight "done" and press SELECT. Press SELECT again to exit the menu.*


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Bicker--I don't know how to do this as a poll but it might be interesting to say something like would you use clear QAM mapping if you'd miss (1,2 4, 6...shows a month) and your monthly savings from not paying for cable cards/additional outlet fees is ($2,$3,$4,$8...) That's really the question--how many shows will you miss and how much would you save.
> 
> Maybe tivo should devote some resources to "go after" cable systems that charge an excessive amount for cable cards.


Why would TiVo want to spend resources nagging cable companies? It'd be like pushing on a noodle.

Manual QAM channel mapping is being proposed as a user option, not requirement. Users who opted for manual QAM mapping who then decided that it didn't pass their cost/benefit/hassle analysis would be free at any time to call the Cable Co. for CableCARDS. Or vice-versa!


----------



## jrm01

vstone said:


> Sales Reps at Best Buy, Circuit City (RIP), etc never understood CableCards. Expecting them to understand this is just not reasonable.


While your statement may apply to the majority of the reps, it is not universal. I am a sales rep at BB. When I find out some one is buying an HD TV for the kitchen, bathroom or some other location where they don't want a cablebox I always give them a demonstration on how to setup the TV for the clear-QAM and even give them a written list of the channels that they should be getting.

At least 95% of them are amazed that these channels are available to them without a box.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

jrm01 said:


> At least 95% of them are amazed that these channels are available to them without a box.


until they get encrypted like Time Warner does.
I just tried to look at clear QAM on my new TiVo HD. Just the lower 14 channels in digital - that gives me some HD but nothing an OTA antenna does not already do and with MUCH better looking HD. All the other basic digital tier stuff is encrypted. QAM mapping would be a bust for me.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> Why would TiVo want to spend resources nagging cable companies? It'd be like pushing on a noodle.
> 
> Manual QAM channel mapping is being proposed as a user option, not requirement. Users who opted for manual QAM mapping who then decided that it didn't pass their cost/benefit/hassle analysis would be free at any time to call the Cable Co. for CableCARDS. Or vice-versa!


Work with cable companies having technical difficulties and "go after" (negotiate/complain to FCC) if the cable company is charging more then is appropriate for cable cards.

I know what you're asking for. Tivo gets to decide if they want to release an option that will result in missed recording (the question isn't if but how often). Tivo gets to decide how missed recording will affect tivo's reputation for a reliable product.

Going back to the original title of the thread *people who want mapping should write to tivo.*


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Work with cable companies having technical difficulties and "go after" (negotiate/complain to FCC) if the cable company is charging more then is appropriate for cable cards.


Working with cable companies' techs, if not too costly, might produce positive results. Nagging or ragging on cable companies to the FCC doesn't fit TiVo's carefully calculated style of getting along with their business associates.



> I know what you're asking for. Tivo gets to decide if they want to release an option that will result in missed recording (the question isn't if but how often). Tivo gets to decide how missed recording will affect tivo's reputation for a reliable product.


Actually that's true in part (however I disagree with your assessment of manually mapped QAM's reliability vs. CC reliability.) In any case it's TiVo's call, not ours!



> Going back to the original title of the thread *people who want mapping should write to tivo.*


That too, but by all means kick the shinola around here too! (You're a much more conservative TiVo fan than I, lew.)

BTW, there's a new thread at the Coffee House linking to a TiVo New Features Survey:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=418492
http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> until they get encrypted like Time Warner does.
> I just tried to look at clear QAM on my new TiVo HD. Just the lower 14 channels in digital - that gives me some HD but nothing an OTA antenna does not already do and with MUCH better looking HD. All the other basic digital tier stuff is encrypted. QAM mapping would be a bust for me.


I'm fortunate in having about 75 unscrambled QAM Extended Basic channels plus many more audio only subchannels. Wonder how Comcast will handle scrambling when using a DTA?

OTA here is a different story. If OTA TV was the only evidence available we'd be in Canada. Seattle, behind the mountains, might as well be in a different country. There are two local stations broadcasting digital simulcasts which are virtually Canadian with regard to their advertisers. Three Canadian stations now transmit digitally including CBC and can be picked up with an indoor antenna. Eight are available in analog.

Canada has almost three years until their digital cutover. Canadian commercial stations offer American programs at different times and a station typically shows programs from more than one network, sometimes before they air on American stations.
http://members.shaw.ca/nwbroadcasters/


----------



## vstone

Atually my point should have been that dales reps often are not trained and are not self training. You probably are self trained and I salute you.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> what is evident is that some people will insist on beating this dead horse until magically their personal preference becomes the law at TiVo.


Okay, I'm confused. Are we beating a dead horse or are we tilting at windmills? Or is it both? Didn't you just post a picture of Don Quixote and a windmill?


----------



## bicker

Wait wait. I'll throw as many cliches as this as necessary.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

bicker said:


> Wait wait. I'll throw as many cliches as this as necessary.


----------



## fallingwater




----------



## ciper

slowbiscuit said:


> That statement makes no sense. Your rich clients can easily get all the channels on Tivo with Cablecard(s) unless they are on one of the rare cable systems that don't use them.


I think you missed the rest of this thread. Did you see the reply where adding the cable card increases the cable bill in the first year by over 270$? Its common for that increase to be more like 600$ per year. In some areas you have to sign up for digital extended basic before you can get the HD tier.

Let me make it clear. This is an example of a low cost area -
25$ Install fee
3.95$ a month for 1 card
10$ a month for the standard HD channels
Thats ~190$ in the first year... to get channels that are already available to the other devices. I'd personally rather spend that extra 200$ on something else, perhaps to upgrade the space of the TiVo 

The previously mentioned clients didn't get rich by spending money foolishly.



ZeoTiVo said:


> until they get encrypted like Time Warner does.
> I just tried to look at clear QAM on my new TiVo HD. Just the lower 14 channels in digital - that gives me some HD but nothing an OTA antenna does not already do and with MUCH better looking HD. All the other basic digital tier stuff is encrypted. QAM mapping would be a bust for me.


That's only you. Adding an antenna is a non option for some (apartments or condos for example). Many people are happy just to get the locals in HD.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> I think you missed the rest of this thread. Did you see the reply where adding the cable card increases the cable bill in the first year by over 270$? Its common for that increase to be more like 600$ per year. In some areas you have to sign up for digital extended basic before you can get the HD tier.
> 
> Let me make it clear. This is an example of a low cost area -
> 25$ Install fee
> 3.95$ a month for 1 card
> 10$ a month for the standard HD channels
> Thats ~190$ in the first year... to get channels that are already available to the other devices. I'd personally rather spend that extra 200$ on something else, perhaps to upgrade the space of the TiVo
> 
> The previously mentioned clients didn't get rich by spending money foolishly.
> 
> That's only you. Adding an antenna is a non option for some (apartments or condos for example). Many people are happy just to get the locals in HD.


hmmm, under the heading of thats just me - I looked up my area and they charge 3.50 a month for the card adn some where between 25 to 30 on the truck roll to install. Glad I don't live in a low cost area


----------



## RealityCheck

fallingwater said:


> S3's M card issue was dealt with by a cheaper workaround, for example, and Lifetime Service was resurrected from the dead.


There's a workaround to utilize an M-Card in a TiVo S3 in M-Mode?


----------



## ciper

ZeoTiVo said:


> hmmm, under the heading of thats just me - I looked up my area and they charge 3.50 a month for the card adn some where between 25 to 30 on the truck roll to install. Glad I don't live in a low cost area


You forgot to add which map would need to be added for the HD locals to show up. It is rare to be able to order a cable card with lifeline (14 channels) or basic (30 channels) in areas where the system is not 100% digital. Even if you were able to the HD locals are not included and a separate "Digital Starter" tier must be added.

Lets say that you can get a cable card with lifeline cable - that's still 67$ the first year (42$ continuous) for guide data on ten channels per device.



fallingwater said:


> S3's M card issue was dealt with by a cheaper workaround





RealityCheck said:


> There's a workaround to utilize an M-Card in a TiVo S3 in M-Mode?


That's not what he said. The cheaper word around is the TiVo HD (or XL) which replaced the S3.


----------



## lrhorer

ciper said:


> I think you missed the rest of this thread. Did you see the reply where adding the cable card increases the cable bill in the first year by over 270$?


That argument is specious. Not everyone's experience will be what you are suggesting. My cable bill went down by almost $30 a month when I went wth a TiVo with CableCards. I already had a CableCard for my TV, and I was able to eliminate the charges for the DVR and a pair of STBs.



ciper said:


> Its common for that increase to be more like 600$ per year. In some areas you have to sign up for digital extended basic before you can get the HD tier.


While this is not the service tier I get, if one spends the money for a premium HD DVR and a high quality HD monitor, I rather fail to see the point of not having at least this level of service. I did not upgrade when I got my first S3 TiVo. I already had HD tier and premium services. I certainly could wish them less expensive, but without HDNET, HDNET Movies, MGMHD, USAHD, SCIFIHD, Discovery HD, HD Theater, Starz HD, and HBOHD, there would be nothing to watch other than PBSHD.


----------



## lrhorer

ZeoTiVo said:


> hmmm, under the heading of thats just me - I looked up my area and they charge 3.50 a month for the card adn some where between 25 to 30 on the truck roll to install. Glad I don't live in a low cost area


$2.95 each here. Unfortunately, I have 2 S3 TiVos and only 1 TiVo HD. Truck rolls are no longer required: the subscriber may pick up a CableCard at one specified service center, and 2 of my 3 installs were free even with the truck roll.

I'm not in a low cost area, either.


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> That argument is specious. My cable bill went down by almost $30 a month when I went wth a TiVo with CableCards.


Yes: specious is a good, more polite than necessary, word for what ciper has been trying to peddle.

I paid $18 for the truck roll in 2006, and am paying $0 for the first CableCARD and $1.50 per month for the second.



lrhorer said:


> While this is not my service, if one spends the money for a premium HD DVR and a high quality HD monitor, I rather fail to see the point of not having at least this level of service.


Good point: The people who actually represent the views of the town people live in are the one who you have to convince that the prices the service provider is charging are too high. If they're fine with those charges, and won't bring your concerns to the service provider, then you have to come to grips with the fact that your desires are considered unreasonable. That means you adjust your expectations -- not expect the world to conform itself to you wishes.


----------



## ciper

lrhorer said:


> That argument is specious. Not everyone's experience will be what you are suggesting.


Specious or not it was still accurate and not an unusual circumstance.



lrhorer said:


> While this is not the service tier I get, if one spends the money for a premium HD DVR and a high quality HD monitor,


Really? That's your counter argument?

1. On Saturday 02/07/09 I installed a THD and it is connected to a standard definition television. This is not an odd occurance
2. The TiVO HD can easily be purchased for 600$ with lifetime service. That is far from premium. It can be purchased for 200-300 regularly with monthly service. The S3 can be considered premium but the TiVo HD?!
3. The TiVo HD (and hdxl) are the only devices from TiVo which handle QAM and ATSC directly. I believe the Series Two is a dead platform so the purchase of a TiVo HD has no requirement/expectation of premium programming or large HD displays.

At that location the lowest level of service I could get with HD channels and a cable card was either
72$ per month for 6 months which then goes up to $101 month (includes cable modem)
$34 per month for six months which goes up to 64.

Lifeline with cable card was not an option even though it should only cost 17$. I think you can do the math here but that's 47$ a month increase

The original install charges were 84$ and I was able to bargain down to 50$

The first cable card did not work. I spent about an hour with the cable guy trying to fix it, then waited a half hour to see if it would just work before staying on the phone with support for another 25 minutes. The cable card was bad. Luckily I was able to visit the local Comcast office and social engineer two cable cards from them and the first one worked (after waiting on hold for 15 minutes). I still have to drive back to the Comcast office to drop off the other card.

Do you think any of this is a lie? I'd be glad to do whatever it takes to prove it to you. Hell if you are in the area I offer to bring you to the house so you can ask the family yourself. I'm serious. It is less than 8 miles from TiVo headquarters.



bicker said:


> I paid $18 for the truck roll in 2006, and am paying $0 for the first CableCARD and $1.50 per month for the second.


Is that not specious as well? The currant average charge for a truck roll is 25-30 and cable card lease rates are commonly mentioned in other threads at 3-6$. There is a special email address created by Comcast to be used by fellow forum members in order to remove the charge for the first cable card which should be evidence that it's an ongoing problem even when you aren't supposed to be charged.


----------



## slowbiscuit

No, he's not far from the norm. Comcast charges $17.xx for the truck roll and the M-card is included in the additional outlet charge here in the ATL, just like their website says. You pay $5.99 a month for each digital outlet, whether it's an STB or a CC (sucks, but it is what it is). For the first outlet, the card is included in the digital service price.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

I think everyone is touching on a part of the truth here...

Many Tivo HD/S3 owners have one because they are using the digital tier and cable cards.

Some use TiVo because it saves them money they do not have to send to cable company in order to "qualify" for a DVR. These folks are not wanting the digital tier, indeed that is exactly why I got an S2 TiVo back 4 years ago. I always said that digital '"tier" was just paying the cable company extra to send you the signal like they should have all along. 
With analog S2 of course there was no issue, you saw the analog channels you paid for and even some premiums had analog channels. Now enter the age of digital tuners and the fact you could see the unencrypted digital channels. there is a distinct group of people that *would like* to record those channels without having to pay for digital tier. I am one of them so I get that desire.

SteveHC1 and others post about evil TiVo/cable cabal. It is not evil though, just business. If TiVo added in QAM mapping then how would it advertise that feature? 
Hey! No need to pay the cable company more - just map these channels! 
That would work short term to bump up sales, most are reasonably sure about that. (how much is something we do not have data for) Now here is the business aspect, no evil secret handshakes, just business - Cable will, of course, not like that. They will react to protect their profit interest. They will push back at TiVo where they can and it serves cable's overall interests and, more easily, simply thwart the mapping by moving frequencies and let TiVo take the heat for missed recordings.
Now a young and lean TiVo might just have gone there and enjoyed the attention such a fight might bring. Indeed TiVo did that with open access security and cable cards. TiVo had some success in that area and is now part of the group having influence on tru2way. Also the Tuning adapter came about without a prolonged fight. Now TiVo business interests more align with cable business interests. So MOXI is the new young and lean kid and QAM mapping gets to be their "fight the good fight". More power to them.

So, since TiVo long term business interests would be harmed if they really pushed the QAM mapping as a feature they are left with the alternative others propose here. Next bit of the truth - TiVo could fairly easily add QAM mapping as an optional feature. Heck I am sure they could throw in a backdoor code to enable it to boot. That would suppress any bad PR some as most would just use the DVR as is and not even know/care about QAM.
Of course others have touched on a bit of the truth here, in that TiVo still needs to spend development money to make it so, needs to work with tribune on guide data issues that would arise new from the mapping, still needs to add support costs - if only to have the CSR know to figure out if the back door had been opened and thus the source of the callers issues. They would still likely catch some flak from cable companies as well.

This leads to TiVoPony's bit of the truth that, in the business reality, only a small group of customers would avail themselves of a feature TiVo could not really tout and it has just not been worth the resources to add that feature versus other, more marketable features..


----------



## fallingwater

RealityCheck said:


> There's a workaround to utilize an M-Card in a TiVo S3 in M-Mode?


Not exactly. The workaround from TiVo was to replace S3 with HD XL, a far cheaper solution retaining all features a non-nitpicking buyer could want in a far less elegant case.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> $2.95 each (for CableCARDS) here. Unfortunately, I have 2 S3 TiVos and only 1 TiVo HD. Truck rolls are no longer required: the subscriber may pick up a CableCard at one specified service center, and 2 of my 3 installs were free even with the truck roll.
> 
> I'm not in a low cost area, either.


Here the first CableCARD in a device is free; a second $1.79 mo. An account with more than one digital STB or one device with a CableCARD, whether standard or hi-def, pays $5.20 mo. for each digital 'outlet' except the first. Truck roll installs are no longer required; instead CC's can be picked up in person and installed with a phone call.

Two 'digital lite' DTA STBs are provided at no extra 'outlet' cost if an account has at least Extended Basic Service and additional DTA's are cheap; $2. mo. Standard-def picture quality from a DTA is the same as is available from the coax output from a digital STB, close to composite in quality. S-video is not available from a standard STB; VOD is not available from a DTA.

I pay additional for one digital outlet and a second CC on an S3; totalling 6.99, which may go up soon. I use another S3 plus several hi-def Sony DVRs without CC's in the four rooms with TV, plus a couple of DTAs. One HDTiVo is no longer used. I've got three hi-def flatscreens and an old CRT but pay Comcast for only two digital outlets. One room uses both Comcast's standard-def STB along with a hi-def Sony DVR for sources.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> If TiVo added in QAM mapping then how would it advertise that feature?
> Hey! No need to pay the cable company more - just map these channels!


Not exactly. More like:

*HDTivo is compatible with CableCARDS. Channel numbers can also be entered manually by users not employing CableCARDS. ** * TiVo is not responsible for missed recordings due to incorrect channel information displayed in its EPG whether derived from CableCARDS or user entries.



> That would work short term to bump up sales, most are reasonably sure about that. (how much is something we do not have data for) Now here is the business aspect, no evil secret handshakes, just business - Cable will, of course, not like that. They will react to protect their profit interest.


TiVo's internet links have already been brought up as competition for cable interests but that hasn't stopped TiVo from developing them.



> They will push back at TiVo where they can and it serves cable's overall interests and, more easily, simply thwart the mapping by moving frequencies and let TiVo take the heat for missed recordings.
> Now a young and lean TiVo might just have gone there and enjoyed the attention such a fight might bring. Indeed TiVo did that with open access security and cable cards. TiVo had some success in that area and is now part of the group having influence on tru2way. Also the Tuning adapter came about without a prolonged fight. Now TiVo business interests more align with cable business interests. So MOXI is the new young and lean kid and QAM mapping gets to be their "fight the good fight". More power to them.
> 
> So, since TiVo long term business interests would be harmed if they really pushed the QAM mapping as a feature they are left with the alternative others propose here. Next bit of the truth - TiVo could fairly easily add QAM mapping as an optional feature. Heck I am sure they could throw in a backdoor code to enable it to boot. That would suppress any bad PR some as most would just use the DVR as is and not even know/care about QAM.
> Of course others have touched on a bit of the truth here, in that TiVo still needs to spend development money to make it so, needs to work with tribune on guide data issues that would arise new from the mapping, still needs to add support costs - if only to have the CSR know to figure out if the back door had been opened and thus the source of the callers issues. They would still likely catch some flak from cable companies as well.
> 
> This leads to TiVoPony's bit of the truth that, in the business reality, only a small group of customers would avail themselves of a feature TiVo could not really tout and it has just not been worth the resources to add that feature versus other, more marketable features..


Moxi at this point isn't viable competition. It's so 'lean' it may just fade away. Digeo's fanciful Moxi website is misleading, the company can't easily be contacted, and its standalone DVR product is almost invisible to all but the most motivated potential customers.

Adding manual channel mapping as a 'backdoor' feature, IMHO, would be a waste of resources.

Your arguments are plausible sounding but essentially complete supposition.

(Almost?) everyone here has stated that they aren't opposed to manual channel mapping, just don't give it high priority; yet many posters post suppositions attacking it. Why?

Why this need apologize for or defend TiVo? TiVo will deal with manual channel mapping, the development of S4, pretty GUIs, or any other DVR or 'more than DVR' features just fine!


----------



## slowbiscuit

fallingwater said:


> Why this need apologize for or defend TiVo? TiVo will deal with manual channel mapping, the development of S4, pretty GUIs, or any other DVR or 'more than DVR' features just fine!


Because some folks are just fanboys - don't matter what you say, they're going to defend the company.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> (Almost?) everyone here has stated that they aren't opposed to manual channel mapping, just don't give it high priority; yet many posters post suppositions attacking it. Why?
> 
> Why this need apologize for or defend TiVo? TiVo will deal with manual channel mapping, the development of S4, pretty GUIs, or any other DVR or 'more than DVR' features just fine!


so you missed the part where i said I would like to map channels. That I fell in the group that feels no need to pay more for digital tier. I lucked unto digital as part of triple play -which I did want - so I get cable cards and will use them in one TiVo HD and not in the other, that one having OTA.

now will you please quote me where I apologized for or defended TiVo? Everything I said is just TiVo inc's part of the truth and stated for other reader's benefit.

Ironic how your bias clouds your reading of my post as biased.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

slowbiscuit said:


> Because some folks are just fanboys - don't matter what you say, they're going to defend the company.


and use of the word fanboy shows your bias.

There is a big difference in posting why someone thinks TiVo is not doing something and say going over to deal database site and wondering why people there are posting about how to make it work or else saying that MOXI sucks or something like that.


----------



## vstone

Central VA Comcast (SA equipment) started repopulating the PSIP tables around noon today, so now they line up as 7-1, 10-1, etc. At least one head end tech did not know that this was happening, paralleling my experience with TWC-SC (SA equipment) in the spring of 07. If these things are run out of Comcast main engineering center, than others system may also be in the process of being populated/repopulated. In the best of all worlds, Comcast could start publishing clear QAM channel lineups, resulting in mappings becomong available from tivo.


----------



## lew

vstone said:


> Central VA Comcast (SA equipment) started repopulating the PSIP tables around noon today, so now they line up as 7-1, 10-1, etc. At least one head end tech did not know that this was happening, paralleling my experience with TWC-SC (SA equipment) in the spring of 07. If these things are run out of Comcast main engineering center, than others system may also be in the process of being populated/repopulated. In the best of all worlds, Comcast could start publishing clear QAM channel lineups, resulting in mappings becomong available from tivo.


Do you think posters in this thread would be happy if tivo limited clear QAM guide data to those cable systems that provide clear QAM channel lineups to Tribune.


----------



## DJRobX

> I just tried to look at clear QAM on my new TiVo HD. Just the lower 14 channels in digital - that gives me some HD but nothing an OTA antenna does not already do and with MUCH better looking HD. All the other basic digital tier stuff is encrypted. QAM mapping would be a bust for me.


There's a lot of us that can't get OTA, so having basic networks available in HD is via QAM is a very big deal. Vista + TV pack can do clearQAM. The user interface for channel mapping is a bit cumbersome but not complicated. HD HomeRun has an TV lineup server thing that almost completely does the mapping for you. If Jafa can do it why not TiVo? I understood why this feature was missing years ago when S3 came out. Now, not so much. It does sort of support them so I don't even buy into the whole "it would be too confusing or unreliable" excuse.

Seems to me TiVo is just too lazy to finish what they started.



> Do you think posters in this thread would be happy if tivo limited clear QAM guide data to those cable systems that provide clear QAM channel lineups to Tribune


Sure - most of what's available on ClearQAM is OTA anyway.


----------



## bicker




----------



## lessd

bicker said:


>


+1
That it!! the TiVo people like to sleep and the hell with QAM maping


----------



## ciper

I wish I could embed.

Straight from 2004 is the PICARD SONG - http://picard.ytmnd.com/










If only the THD didn't require a prom mod. If not the script that does QAM mapping would be improved by a large number of our fellow forum members. It could be turned into a TiVo Web Plus add on so we could configure the mapping from our browser.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


>


+1



> Seems to me TiVo is just too lazy to finish what they started.


Some posters don't have anything intelligent to add.



> only the THD didn't require a prom mod. If not the script that does QAM mapping would be improved by a large number of our fellow forum members. It could be turned into a TiVo Web Plus add on so we could configure the mapping from our browser.


If more people from the dark side map QAM we might get an idea as to how often the frequencies change and how often clear stations change to being encrypted.

I think you can use the mapping on a stock unit, as long as the setup script is run from a hacked unit, with the drive then being re-installed in the stock unit.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> ...TiVo will deal with manual channel mapping, the development of S4, pretty GUIs, or any other DVR or 'more than DVR' features just fine!





slowbiscuit said:


> ...some folks are just fanboys - don't matter what you say, they're going to defend the company.


My comment above defends the company. But I'm a fanman!


----------



## ZeoTiVo

DJRobX said:


> Vista + TV pack can do clearQAM. The user interface for channel mapping is a bit cumbersome but not complicated. HD HomeRun has an TV lineup server thing that almost completely does the mapping for you.


 Wow, those must be flying off the store shelves then.


> Seems to me TiVo is just too lazy to finish what they started.


seems to me some posters are too lazy to have read more of the thread they post in


----------



## vstone

lew said:


> Do you think posters in this thread would be happy if tivo limited clear QAM guide data to those cable systems that provide clear QAM channel lineups to Tribune.


Some would.

More to the point, if all cable systems did this, we wouldn't need this thread at all! Maybe the FCC will open their eyes.

I'm sorry that the increasing potential for resolving this issue apparently brings you no hope.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> More to the point, if all cable systems did this, we wouldn't need this thread at all! Maybe the FCC will open their eyes.
> 
> I'm sorry that the increasing potential for resolving this issue apparently brings you no hope.


I would hope that the FCC would indeed enforce the standards already in place and resolve the issue - That would be a win for consumers and for consumer electronic companies and even for open source communities.

I would hope that the FCC dropped the temporary waiver on DBS companies and made them provide separable security so TiVo could build a sat. standalone box as well or even better one box that could work on all again.

I would hope that the current administration and Legislature are focused on far more important issues right now.

I would hope that the FCC gets the digital transition squared away so they can then focus on these issues.

See - I have plenty of Hope.


----------



## vstone

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...
> I would hope that the FCC gets the digital transition squared away so they can then focus on these issues.
> ...


I would too, but I refuse to believe that either is taking up much of their time. For those if us watching this, it's only a case of why haven't you even looked at this in the past few years when the technology appeared. Don't they look at anything in real time? Do they not believe in preventive medicine? Do they actually want cable compamies to do end arounds of cable law? Given the Bush admin., the answer to the latter was orobably yes.


----------



## JWThiers

fallingwater said:


> My comment above defends the company. But I'm a fanman!


Is that like a cabin boy becoming a cabin MAN


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> I think everyone is touching on a part of the truth here...
> 
> Many Tivo HD/S3 owners have one because they are using the digital tier and cable cards.
> 
> Some use TiVo because it saves them money they do not have to send to cable company in order to "qualify" for a DVR. These folks are not wanting the digital tier, indeed that is exactly why I got an S2 TiVo back 4 years ago. I always said that digital '"tier" was just paying the cable company extra to send you the signal like they should have all along.
> With analog S2 of course there was no issue, you saw the analog channels you paid for and even some premiums had analog channels. Now enter the age of digital tuners and the fact you could see the unencrypted digital channels. there is a distinct group of people that *would like* to record those channels without having to pay for digital tier. I am one of them so I get that desire.
> 
> SteveHC1 and others post about evil TiVo/cable cabal. It is not evil though, just business. If TiVo added in QAM mapping then how would it advertise that feature?
> Hey! No need to pay the cable company more - just map these channels!
> That would work short term to bump up sales, most are reasonably sure about that. (how much is something we do not have data for) Now here is the business aspect, no evil secret handshakes, just business - Cable will, of course, not like that. They will react to protect their profit interest. They will push back at TiVo where they can and it serves cable's overall interests and, more easily, simply thwart the mapping by moving frequencies and let TiVo take the heat for missed recordings.
> Now a young and lean TiVo might just have gone there and enjoyed the attention such a fight might bring. Indeed TiVo did that with open access security and cable cards. TiVo had some success in that area and is now part of the group having influence on tru2way. Also the Tuning adapter came about without a prolonged fight. Now TiVo business interests more align with cable business interests. So MOXI is the new young and lean kid and QAM mapping gets to be their "fight the good fight". More power to them.
> 
> So, since TiVo long term business interests would be harmed if they really pushed the QAM mapping as a feature they are left with the alternative others propose here. Next bit of the truth - TiVo could fairly easily add QAM mapping as an optional feature. Heck I am sure they could throw in a backdoor code to enable it to boot. That would suppress any bad PR some as most would just use the DVR as is and not even know/care about QAM.
> Of course others have touched on a bit of the truth here, in that TiVo still needs to spend development money to make it so, needs to work with tribune on guide data issues that would arise new from the mapping, still needs to add support costs - if only to have the CSR know to figure out if the back door had been opened and thus the source of the callers issues. They would still likely catch some flak from cable companies as well.
> 
> This leads to TiVoPony's bit of the truth that, in the business reality, only a small group of customers would avail themselves of a feature TiVo could not really tout and it has just not been worth the resources to add that feature versus other, more marketable features..





fallingwater said:


> Moxi at this point isn't viable competition. It's so 'lean' it may just fade away. Digeo's fanciful Moxi website is misleading, the company can't easily be contacted, and its standalone DVR product is almost invisible to all but the most motivated potential customers.
> 
> Adding manual channel mapping as a 'backdoor' feature, IMHO, would be a waste of resources.
> 
> Your arguments are plausible sounding but essentially complete supposition.
> 
> (Almost?) everyone here has stated that they aren't opposed to manual channel mapping, just don't give it high priority; yet many posters post suppositions attacking it. Why?
> 
> Why this need apologize for or defend TiVo? TiVo will deal with manual channel mapping, the development of S4, pretty GUIs, or any other DVR or 'more than DVR' features just fine!





ZeoTiVo said:


> so you missed the part where i said I would like to map channels. That I fell in the group that feels no need to pay more for digital tier. I lucked unto digital as part of triple play -which I did want - so I get cable cards and will use them in one TiVo HD and not in the other, that one having OTA.
> 
> now will you please quote me where I apologized for or defended TiVo? Everything I said is just TiVo inc's part of the truth and stated for other reader's benefit.
> 
> Ironic how your bias clouds your reading of my post as biased.


Sure I'm biased! You think you're not?

Your post on QAM mapping is as I posted, 'plausible sounding but essentially complete supposition'. The truth as you post it is a compilation of your opinions. I've underlined examples. Your opinions aren't necessarily false, just opinions. I agree with some and disagree with some.

Just to make it perfectly clear, there is a change of focus between the beginning and the rest of the post which contains the comment highlighted in red. The beginning replies specifically to your post while the remainder is a general observation about posts in this thread and others.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> and use of the word fanboy shows your bias...


...and you're TiVo's totally adorkable #1 man!


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Do you think posters in this thread would be happy if tivo limited clear QAM guide data to those cable systems that provide clear QAM channel lineups to Tribune.


Why? It would be much less of a hassle to provide Tribune guide data unchanged and allow users to enter subsitute channel-subchannel numbers as appropriate.

Here, actual QAM channels range from 79-1 through 121-XX, many are scrambled, many not. All ten channel 79 subchannels are unscrambled 480i: hi-def simulcasts of many are on higher channels:

79-1 = analog ch. 2 (NW Cable News)
79-2 = analog ch. 3 KWPX (ION)
79-3 = analog ch. 4 KOMO (ABC)
79-4 = analog ch. 5 KING (NBC)
79-5 = analog ch. 6 KONG
79-6 = analog ch. 27 CBUT (CBC; OTA 2)
79-7 = analog ch. 9 KCTS (PBS)
79-8 = analog ch. 22 KMYQ (MYNET)
79-9 = analog ch. 11 KSTW (CW)
79-10 = 'secret' OTA 28 KBTC (Tacoma PBS channel unavailable with a CableCARD)


----------



## Jazhuis

bicker said:


> what is evident is that some people will insist on beating this dead horse until magically their personal preference becomes the law at TiVo.


Yes, I will cheerfully continue to request a feature that I desire on my device. Will TiVo acquiesce and prioritize my desire enough to put the feature in? That is their decision. It certainly doesn't keep me from asking repeatedly. Then again, I also acknowledge that they may not do what I ask. If it's a deal-breaker for me, then that's also my decision.


----------



## bicker

Super! ::up::


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> Sure I'm biased! You think you're not?
> 
> Your post on QAM mapping is as I posted, 'plausible sounding but essentially complete supposition'. The truth as you post it is a compilation of your opinions. I've underlined examples. Your opinions aren't necessarily false, just opinions. I agree with some and disagree with some.


 Ok - fair enough
the part about how cable would react is indeed supposition
though the part about TiVo seeing the Clear QAM audience as too small is based on the post from TiVoPony and thus not supposition.


> Just to make it perfectly clear, there is a change of focus between the beginning and the rest of the post which contains the comment highlighted in red. The beginning replies specifically to your post while the remainder is a general observation about posts in this thread and others.


ok, bear in mind I had left this thread pretty much alone to do its letter writing campaign until some tin foil hats appeared, though not on your head.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> ...and you're TiVo's totally adorkable #1 man!


Well I don't get paid so very liable to swing my bias to a better offer if it comes along.


----------



## ciper

lew said:


> If more people from the dark side map QAM we might get an idea as to how often the frequencies change and how often clear stations change to being encrypted.


It's true. So far I know of only 4-5 people that have mapped channels and so far there haven't been any changes but that is too small of a sample



lew said:


> I think you can use the mapping on a stock unit, as long as the setup script is run from a hacked unit, with the drive then being re-installed in the stock unit.


That is right but its a LOT of work. You basically have to install that drive in a unit with a hacked prom then hack it, run the script, and unhack it before reinstalling it to the original unit.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> Why? It would be much less of a hassle to provide Tribune guide data unchanged and allow users to enter subsitute channel-subchannel numbers as appropriate.


Tivo's reputation will suffer if a unit misses recordings but cable DVRs don't. I don't care what kind of disclaimers tivo uses. Ask a neighbor if you can come over and watch Lost, because your tivo missed it. Are you going to tell your neighbor it's your fault because you used an unsupported (unreliable) feature. Probably not and at least one potential tivo customer think the unit is unreliable.

My suggestion might accommodate customers of small, private cable systems (apartment buildings).


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> ...its a LOT of work. You basically have to install that drive in a unit with a hacked prom then hack it, run the script, and unhack it before reinstalling it to the original unit.


For anyone who can hack it this link may be useful:

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21661


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Tivo's reputation will suffer if a unit misses recordings but cable DVRs don't. I don't care what kind of disclaimers tivo uses. Ask a neighbor if you can come over and watch Lost, because your tivo missed it. Are you going to tell your neighbor it's your fault because you used an unsupported (unreliable) feature. Probably not and at least one potential tivo customer think the unit is unreliable.
> 
> My suggestion might accommodate customers of small, private cable systems (apartment buildings).


It would be a total waste of TiVo's resources to support unscrambled QAM channel mapping without advertising that besides being compatible with CableCARDs HDTiVo can also be used without them. There are plenty of threads in S3/HDTivo Forum illustrating the pitfalls of CableCARDS. Unscrambled QAM mapping is just another option. Here's Sony's (partial) listing of its hi-def DVR's features: 
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...51&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038349

*Free TV Guide On Screen Interactive Programming Guide*
Sony includes a built-in subscription free electronic program guide that displays shows and channel lineups that are customized to the viewer's location. A full week's worth of rolling listings are delivered via TV broadcasts, so there's no fees and no special connection required. 1

*CableCARD*
A CableCARD Unit can be used to receive encrypted digital cable programming from many cable TV service providers. Contact your retailer or cable TV service provider for information about the availability of CableCARDs and possible additional fees.

Free TV Guide On Screen interactive program guide 1
CableCARD Technology
Unencrypted digital cable (Clear QAM)
Digital over-the-air
Analog over-the-air
Analog cable

---
OT, but interesting:

The most notable thing about TVGOS is that it's an EPG product any video component manufacturer can contract for which works without requiring an internet or phone connection. It's not perfect or as sophisticated as TiVo, but the latest digital version of TVGOS has a display much easier to setup and customize than earlier versions.

Numerical order has been the traditional method of arranging channel lineups but for some reason TVGOS has always displayed channels alphabetically. The rumor is that, as Fox and Gemstar are corporately related, alphabetical listings placed Fox stations on the EPG's first screen. Now, with digital's complicated numerical soup, alphabetical listings make more sense!

Another problematical aspect of TVGOS is that a component must be 'off' to receive EPG info, as it must tune to the data channel. Sony provides a user adjustable automatic off option. When TVGOS is employed in a dual tuner device such as E*'s DTVPal, that problem goes away.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> It would be a total waste of TiVo's resources to support unscrambled QAM channel mapping without advertising that besides being compatible with CableCARDs HDTiVo can also be used without them. There are plenty of threads in S3/HDTivo Forum illustrating the pitfalls of CableCARDS. Unscrambled QAM mapping is just another option. Here's Sony's (partial) listing of its hi-def DVR's features:
> http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...51&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038349
> 
> Another problematical aspect of TVGOS is that a component must be 'off' to receive EPG info, as it must tune to the data channel. Sony provides a user adjustable automatic off option. When TVGOS is employed in a dual tuner device such as E*'s DTVPal, that problem goes away.


Didn't SONY exit the DVR market? I'm not sure I'd look at the SONY as a way to do it "right".

Sorry but I don't see tivo even offering QAM mapping, let alone promoting it, unless it's reliable. That means either cable companies don't change the frequencies of clear channels or they correctly pass PSIP information (and assuming tivo can use that information).


----------



## fallingwater

Nobody, TiVo included, has yet made a profit just from DVR service. 

Don't look at Sony, rather at TVGOS. It's reliable, at least as far as manual QAM mapping is concerned. Actually, TVGOS on the Sony DVR appears quite stable in its own right now that there's a local CBS digital host.

You're exaggerating a theoretical problem. Sometimes a few actual QAM channels do change but, in my location, a core group of QAM channels have never changed. Any user who lives where a cable company is unusually 'shifty' wouldn't have to rely on manual QAM mapping. In all cases, users would have the option of CableCARDS, manual QAM mapping, or manually recording unmapped QAM.

I see no advantage for requiring that PSIP data, an additional virtual layer of channel numbers, be used to manually map QAM. (However, PSIP data could theoretically form the basis for an as yet unrealized system of non-CableCARD based automatic mapping of unscrambled QAM.) Currently TiVo and Sony's DVR will tune to a station by using either a PSIP virtual channel number or an actual QAM channel number entered by a user.

---

These are increasingly difficult economic times. Many people are cutting back on non-essentials such as cable service and TiVo subs. I don't know if TiVo will choose to provide manual QAM mapping as a way of helping to lower the cost of home entertaininment. I hope they do.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> Don't look at Sony, rather at TVGOS. It's reliable, at least as far as manual QAM mapping is concerned. Actually, TVGOS on the Sony DVR appears quite stable in its own right now that there's a local CBS digital host.


 and now you propose to make the recording ability of TiVo even more unreliable by switching guide data in use? Or are you just proposing that Tivo take on more expense by adding TVGOS just for QAM mapping? That would be a fun meeting at TiVo to suggest any of that.


> You're exaggerating a theoretical problem. Sometimes a few actual QAM channels do change but, in my location, a core group of QAM channels have never changed. Any user who lives where a cable company is unusually 'shifty' wouldn't have to rely on manual QAM mapping. In all cases, users would have the option of CableCARDS, manual QAM mapping, or manually recording unmapped QAM.


 Oooh, so now you have to find a special forum just so you can understand what the hell the side of the box is talking about.



> These are increasingly difficult economic times. Many people are cutting back on non-essentials such as cable service and TiVo subs.


and for Tivo to take on an additional feature with dubious return on investment in such times would just not be very business smart.


----------



## lew

You're the one who brought up Sony. I followed *your link* and discovered Sony is no longer manufacturing a DVR product. I guess tivo has a better handle on the market.

How can you call it a theoretical problem when you acknowledge your system changes QAM channels? *You acknowledge it's a real issue*. Your system may not change basic channels (often) but other systems may. Although you may be willing to accept the risk of missed recordings but tivo may not be willing to release a feature that is inherently unreliable.

PP makes a point, no reason for tivo to pay a dime to add TVGOS.

You're looking at a customer that wants to drop a cable card fee but is willing to keep paying a fee to tivo. Any customer that can get their TV OTA would just drop cable. You're looking at customers that can't get TV OTA, are only looking for basic channels but are willing to pay for tivo service.

I'll accept Tivopony's explanation, not enough customers to implment the feature.



fallingwater said:


> Don't look at Sony, rather at TVGOS. It's reliable, at least as far as manual QAM mapping is concerned. Actually, TVGOS on the Sony DVR appears quite stable in its own right now that there's a local CBS digital host.
> 
> You're exaggerating a theoretical problem. Sometimes a few actual QAM channels do change but, in my location, a core group of QAM channels have never changed. Any user who lives where a cable company is unusually 'shifty' wouldn't have to rely on manual QAM mapping. In all cases, users would have the option of CableCARDS, manual QAM mapping, or manually recording unmapped QAM.
> 
> I see no advantage for requiring that PSIP data, an additional virtual layer of channel numbers, be used to manually map QAM. (However, PSIP data could theoretically form the basis for an as yet unrealized system of non-CableCARD based automatic mapping of unscrambled QAM.) Currently TiVo and Sony's DVR will tune to a station by using either a PSIP virtual channel number or an actual QAM channel number entered by a user.
> 
> ---These are increasingly difficult economic times. Many people are cutting back on non-essentials such as cable service and TiVo subs. I don't know if TiVo will choose to provide manual QAM mapping as a way of helping to lower the cost of home entertaininment. I hope they do.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> and now you propose to make the recording ability of TiVo even more unreliable by switching guide data in use? Or are you just proposing that Tivo take on more expense by adding TVGOS just for QAM mapping? That would be a fun meeting at TiVo to suggest any of that.
> Oooh, so now you have to find a special forum just so you can understand what the hell the side of the box is talking about.
> 
> and for Tivo to take on an additional feature with dubious return on investment in such times would just not be very business smart.


You use the word 'even' with 'more unreliable' in describing TiVo. Certainly not a phrase I'd chose. TiVo is very reliable although not perfect. There's no need for TiVo to change its Tribune based EPG data at all except for allowing users to input substitute channel numbers to fit local circumstances. 
http://www.tvdata.com/ipgdata.html

The sentence highlighted in red is intended to be silly sarcasm although TiVo Forums do get into topics just as arcane. (In reality there ARE Forums which (almost) endlessly discuss digital issues now that we're transitioning through the biggest change in broadcast standards since NTSC's color standards were re-adapted in 1953.)
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=414223
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=1093923
http://www.ntsc-tv.com/ntsc-main-01.htm#Principles

TiVo's Board has the business acumen to select which new features offer the greatest marketing potential in these changing and difficult times. Reviewing the latest versions of TVGOS for configuration options is informative and I'd be surprised if TiVo hasn't already done so. Long before digital transition became a factor TVGOS allowed users to input substitute analog channel numbers (and re-arrange the channel order) to fit local circumstances.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> You're the one who brought up Sony. I followed *your link* and discovered Sony is no longer manufacturing a DVR product. I guess tivo has a better handle on the market.
> 
> How can you call it a theoretical problem when you acknowledge your system changes QAM channels? *You acknowledge it's a real issue*. Your system may not change basic channels (often) but other systems may. Although you may be willing to accept the risk of missed recordings but tivo may not be willing to release a feature that is inherently unreliable.
> 
> PP makes a point, no reason for tivo to pay a dime to add TVGOS.
> 
> You're looking at a customer that wants to drop a cable card fee but is willing to keep paying a fee to tivo. Any customer that can get their TV OTA would just drop cable. You're looking at customers that can't get TV OTA, are only looking for basic channels but are willing to pay for tivo service.
> 
> I'll accept Tivopony's explanation, not enough customers to implment the feature.


Regarding DVRs I'll concede that TiVo has a better handle on the product than Sony. But even TiVo hasn't yet been able to make a profit.

Macrovision's TVGOS is by far the most widely available EPG, supplying more products and users than any program supplier or DVR maker:
http://www.macrovision.com/support/9391_9458.htm

_According to Gemstar, more than 25 million households have TVGOS devices. Many, probably most, of these devices obtain their data from a signal embedded in the local analog PBS stations broadcast. While an updated version of TVGOS which can use data from digital stations was released in 2006, most of the installed devices are analog-only.

The Gemstar TVGOS guide system was, and is, used in many TVs, VCRs, DVD recorders, and even DVRs. The Sony CableCARD DVRs, the DHG-HDD250 and DHG-HDD500, rely on TVGOS for not only their guide data, but also to set their clocks._
http://www.gizmolovers.com/tag/tvgos/

Cutting back on cable service without eliminating it is a viable way for viewers to lower monthly fees. Extended Basic Cable offers a fair selection of programming in addition to OTA hi-def simulcasts and can be received by many HDTiVo users without a CableCARD. Problem is that TiVo convenience is crippled without a CableCARD. It doesn't have to be. But it would be a user's choice whether to use CableCARDS, record manually without EPG data, or map channels manually.

I'm not proposing that TiVo adapt or license TVGOS, just allow users to input subsititute channel numbers in its own EPG supplied from Tribune data. (But doesn't TiVo already pay royalties to Macrovision/Gemstar for the EPG concept?) 
http://ipgeek.blogspot.com/2007/12/macrovision-acquires-gemstar-more.html
http://ipgeek.blogspot.com/2008/01/gemstar-epg-patent-strategy-sue-first.html


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> You use the word 'even' with 'more unreliable' in describing TiVo. Certainly not a phrase I'd chose.


 yes, I was unclear - I was thinking in realtion to the unreliability inherent in mapping QAM channels - not current TiVo functionality which has 5 9s for me.


> The sentence highlighted in red is intended to be silly sarcasm although TiVo Forums do get into topics just as arcane.


 actaully it was sarcasm mixed in with the serious though of someone reading on the side of the box how it can do cable cards or clear QAM or OTA, etc.. 
and needing to go look up QAM.

It sounds to me like TiVo has not dug much at all into how to do QAM mapping *because they do not perceive a big enough market to spend time and resources on it*


----------



## ciper

ZeoTiVo said:


> *because they do not perceive a big enough market to spend time and resources on it*


Which I strongly believe is in error. I cannot say what the problem is but maybe the method of research must was flawed or the data outdated. I feel this feature is one thing that could convince people to buy a TiVo in tough economic times. Requiring cable cards is often the straw that breaks the camels back. Its one more hassle, one more truck roll, one more time you have to be home from work, one more stranger in the house, etc...

Check this thread out for some fun times http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=418739


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> Which I strongly believe is in error.


No matter how strong your belief is, it does not excuse the pig-headed manner in which you regard the perspective of the people who run the company and disagree with you about this.



ciper said:


> I cannot say what the problem is but maybe the method of research must was flawed or the data outdated.


Reveal *your *method of research, so we can go on for pages and pages about how flawed and outdated the basis for your belief is. Please give us more of an opportunity to disparage your side of this issue, as you have disparaged TiVo's.


----------



## lew

ciper said:


> I feel this feature is one thing that could convince people to buy a TiVo in tough economic times. Requiring cable cards is often the straw that breaks the camels back. Its one more hassle, one more truck roll, one more time you have to be home from work, one more stranger in the house, etc...
> 
> Check this thread out for some fun times http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=418739


You mention tough economic times. TivoHD is a $250 purchase and has a subscription price of around $13/month. I don't have access to tivo's research but I'll speculate people looking to cut their expenses aren't going to be purchasing a tivo.

Don't you have a hacked tivo? Why don't you do the QAM mapping hack and let us know how many times your system changes their frequencies. Obviously one person, one cable system isn't definitive it might be interesting.



bicker said:


> No matter how strong your belief is, it does not excuse the pig-headed manner in which you regard the perspective of the people who run the company and disagree with you about this.
> 
> Reveal *your *method of research, so we can go on for pages and pages about how flawed and outdated the basis for your belief is. Please give us more of an opportunity to disparage your side of this issue, as you have disparaged TiVo's.


+1 
Posters point to the mapping that was available with the Sony DVR, but Sony got out of the market. They point to Moxi but then have issues with Moxi. One poster wants to order a Moxi, only after confirming a 30 day return policy. Poster said he doubts he'll keep the unit but wants to "evaluate" the unit. Doesn't sound like a customer a company wants.


----------



## candewish

Where does TiVo say that it provides clear QAM reception?
The fact that some TiVo owners are able to receive some, or
all, of the clear QAM channels transmitted by their cable
company, on their TiVos, does not make it a fact for all
TiVo owners.

Two TiVo CSRs have told me that TiVo makes no claim about
clear QAM reception because they can't make that claim.
Some contributors to this thread have suggested that clear
QAM channels are not found on channel scans because some
PSIP or other data is missing from the channel. Another
poster suggested that channel scans may be performed
incorrectly. One contributor (SteveHC1) has said that to
get all of the QAM channels one needs to repeat guided setup
and state that the cable card will be installed later. That
apparently worked for RoyK. But when I follow those
instructions on my TiVo (twice), I get a channel list of the
published virtual channel numbers of Miami Comcast including
unscrambled local HD broadcasts - 431,432,433,434, and 440
for ABC,NBC,CBC,FOX, and PBS. If one attempts to select any
of those channel numbers, of course, TiVo informs you that a
cable card is required. And if I follow up with a cable
scan I always get the same analog and QAM channels. No
matter what I select at guided setup, and follow up by
repeated the channel scans at various times of the day (with
the 'add channels' option), TiVo invariably finds and lists-

112-213 FOX HD
117-440 PBS HD
118-432 NBC HD
along with a very large number of scrambled QAM channels and
several other clear QAM channels (mostly SD but a couple
of other HD channels), but my TiVo never finds
111-433 CBS HD (local 4)
118-431 ABC HD (local 10)
channels that are always found on scans by my HDTVs.

I noticed one other oddity in advancing through the virtual
channel list populated by the TiVo connection - if the
virtual channel number was near a clear QAM channel number,
TiVo would tune to that QAM channel, which obviously was
unrelated to Comcast's published channel identification.
And at least one of those fluke coincidence channels was NOT
found on the regular channel scan!

So how does this fit together in one non-expert mind?

1) Whether by chance or design, whether through electronic
deficiencies or computer algorithms, TiVo DOES NOT, and
perhaps CAN NOT, reliably detect readily available clear QAM
channels by channel scans.

2) If TiVo doesn't find the channels, it cannot map PSIP info
to them.

3) If TiVo claimed that it supported clear QAM channels, whether
by their mapping, or by customer mapping, is irrelevant
if they CAN NOT find the channels.

4) Hence TiVo does not even claim clear QAM reception without
cable cards.

So what does the cable card do? It tells TiVo where (the QAM
channel number) to tune, and given that info, TiVo can reliably
tune to it, even though it does not find/list it on scan.

Unless TiVo can write and download software to perform
channel scans that will reliably find and list clear QAM
channels, this thread may be a waste of time - you can't
map to what you can't find. Bummer.

I bought my first TiVo HD with the expectation that I could
manually record the local broadcast HD channels by clear
QAM cable reception. I can't. I will not be buying the
second TiVo HD I had planned.


----------



## fallingwater

ciper said:


> I feel (QAM mapping) is one thing that could convince people to buy a TiVo in tough economic times. Requiring cable cards is often the straw that breaks the camels back. Its one more hassle, one more truck roll, one more time you have to be home from work, one more stranger in the house, etc...
> 
> Check this thread out for some fun times http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=418739





lew said:


> You mention tough economic times. TivoHD is a $250 purchase and has a subscription price of around $13/month. I don't have access to tivo's research but I'll speculate people looking to cut their expenses aren't going to be purchasing a tivo.
> 
> Don't you have a hacked tivo? Why don't you do the QAM mapping hack and let us know how many times your system changes their frequencies. Obviously one person, one cable system isn't definitive it might be interesting.
> ...
> Posters point to the mapping that was available with the Sony DVR, but Sony got out of the market. They point to Moxi but then have issues with Moxi. One poster wants to order a Moxi, only after confirming a 30 day return policy. Poster said he doubts he'll keep the unit but wants to "evaluate" the unit. Doesn't sound like a customer a company wants.





ZeoTiVo said:


> ...current TiVo functionality...has 5 9s for me.
> 
> ...actaully...sarcasm (was) mixed in with the serious though(t) of someone reading on the side of the box how it can do cable cards or clear QAM or OTA, etc..
> and needing to go look up QAM.
> 
> It sounds to me like TiVo has not dug much at all into how to do QAM mapping *because they do not perceive a big enough market to spend time and resources on it*





fallingwater said:


> Regarding DVRs I'll concede that TiVo has a better handle on the product than Sony. But even TiVo hasn't yet been able to make a profit.
> 
> Macrovision's TVGOS is by far the most widely available EPG, supplying more products and users than any program supplier or DVR maker...
> 
> Cutting back on cable service without eliminating it is a viable way for viewers to lower monthly fees. Extended Basic Cable offers a fair selection of programming in addition to OTA hi-def simulcasts and can be received by many HDTiVo users without a CableCARD. Problem is that TiVo convenience is crippled without a CableCARD. It doesn't have to be. But it would be a user's choice whether to use CableCARDS, record manually without EPG data, or map channels manually.
> 
> I'm not proposing that TiVo adapt or license TVGOS, just allow users to input subsititute channel numbers in its own EPG supplied from Tribune data.


IMHO, Sony lists its DVR features in a manner unlikely to have lowered sales. A partial listing of features from http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...51&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=11038349

**CableCARD Technology*
A CableCARD Unit can be used to receive encrypted digital cable programming from many cable TV service providers. Contact your retailer or cable TV service provider for information about the availability of CableCARDs and possible additional fees.
**Unencrypted digital cable (Clear QAM)
*Digital over-the-air
*Analog over-the-air
*Analog cable
*Free TV Guide On Screen interactive program guide1
*User selectable Chapter Marks with thumbnails
*Up to 30, 60 or 90 minute live TV pause time
*Adjustable Replay and Advance functions
*12 fast forward, rewind and slow speed settings*
Available Speeds
Fast Forward: 3x, 9x, 30x, 90x
Rewind: 3x, 9x, 30x, 90x
Slow Motion Speeds: 1/2, 1/3, 1/4, 1/8

IMHO, Sony discontinued its excellent hi-def nothing-more-than DVR because DVRs are by nature difficult to profit from without some kind of external tie-in such as cable/satellite service or internet generated revenues. It's been rumored that one DVR service provider has even resorted to selling pizzas through its service and still hasn't turned a profit! 

Sony was responsible for including CableCARD compatibility in its DVR product while TVGOS has included manual channel mapping before digital conversion became an issue. TVGOS's user channel mapping enables two functions; channel number substitution (the nitty-gritty) and user configurable channel order. Re-ordering a channel list is more complicated and time consuming than merely substituting channel numbers. *Re-ordering TiVo's EPG is not necessary for TiVo to offer manual channel mapping.*

HDTiVo users already pay for TiVo Service. Giving them an option to lower the level of cable service and get rid of CableCARD generated 'Additional Outlet Fees' would be a better option for TiVo than their having to sell HDTiVo's to make ends meet. As the link in ciper's post aptly illustrates CableCARDs present their own set of TiVo reliability issues.

Wonder if Digeo has sold 1000 Moxi standalone DVR's yet. IMHO, standalone Moxi may not be viable over the long term in these difficult times. Here's an article about Digeo's EPG settlement with Macrovision/Gemstar: 
http://www.gbpatent.com/news/ecom94.htm

In summing up for now; IMHO some of the arguments raised by TiVo fanmen would be demeaning to prospective TiVo users if TiVo, Inc. used them. Offering the capability to 'watch TV your way' is not enhanced by forcing users to employ non-TiVo CC devices for TiVo's convenience. CC's *must* be used for cable to access premium services but are merely an option for assigning channel numbers.

Users are smart enough to deal with options and, if using an option causes problems, are perfectly capable of selecting a different option. Right now there are two options for scheduling recordings on HDTiVo. IMHO, adding a third would be good for TiVo and its current and prospective users. But ultimately it's TiVo's decision!


----------



## bmgoodman

Perhaps it is finally time to end this "campaign". I may be tired of tilting at windmills. Tivo has said they have other priorities, and I believe them; 77000+ views of this thread has not changed anything. I'm voting with my wallet and my mouth now. I'm not buying an extra TivoHD because I am not willing to pay an additional outlet charge plus an extra cable card plus a Tivo monthly fee. The former two items would cost me over $10 extra each month. I'm also warning people who ask me about buying a Tivo that they may be in for some headaches getting the cable card working. In fairness, I tell them once they do get it working, they'll probably be well pleased.

Anyway, I'm going to stop reading this thread now until someone tells me that hell has frozen over and Tivo is supporting QAM-mapping (or something similar).

Good luck in the continuing discussion, which is now old enough to be left alone unsupervised.


----------



## SteveHC1

candewish said:


> Where does TiVo say that it provides clear QAM reception?
> The fact that some TiVo owners are able to receive some, or
> all, of the clear QAM channels transmitted by their cable
> company, on their TiVos, does not make it a fact for all
> TiVo owners...
> ...I bought my first TiVo HD with the expectation that I could
> manually record the local broadcast HD channels by clear
> QAM cable reception. I can't. I will not be buying the
> second TiVo HD I had planned.


- Sorry you couldn't get your TiVo to scan your local clear QAM (I *assume* they are in fact *CLEAR* QAM) broadcast channels; you are the only person I've encountered so far who's had such difficulty. Wish I could help more. Good example though of how this lack of official supporrt on TiVo's part creates problems for at least some subscribers.


----------



## SteveHC1

bmgoodman said:


> Perhaps it is finally time to end this "campaign". I may be tired of tilting at windmills. Tivo has said they have other priorities, and I believe them; 77000+ views of this thread has not changed anything. I'm voting with my wallet and my mouth now. I'm not buying an extra TivoHD because I am not willing to pay an additional outlet charge plus an extra cable card plus a Tivo monthly fee. The former two items would cost me over $10 extra each month. I'm also warning people who ask me about buying a Tivo that they may be in for some headaches getting the cable card working. In fairness, I tell them once they do get it working, they'll probably be well pleased.
> 
> Anyway, I'm going to stop reading this thread now until someone tells me that hell has frozen over and Tivo is supporting QAM-mapping (or something similar).
> 
> Good luck in the continuing discussion, which is now old enough to be left alone unsupervised.


- Hey I don't blame you. FWIW, I understand LaCie's about to introduce its own HD DVR here in the States soon; it's already out in Europe and reportedly fully supports OTA AND CLEAR QAM.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

SteveHC1 said:


> - Hey I don't blame you. FWIW, I understand LaCie's about to introduce its own HD DVR here in the States soon; it's already out in Europe and reportedly fully supports OTA AND CLEAR QAM.


Looks good for someone just wanting to do OTA or clear QAM - but with no cable card option then it really just looks like an expensive option to the HDhomeRun.

from http://www.gadgetreview.com/2009/02/lacie-launches-dvr-lacinema-black-max.html


> Its basically a NAS storage device with a proprietary UI that can connect to your HDTV (HDMI and component) and output a 1080p signal. Much like may of todays DVR, you can record shows and rewind live TV. The LaCinema Black MAX comes standard with either a 500GB or 1TB hard drive, but Lacie is quick to point out that this capacity can be expanded courtesy of its USB 2.0 inputs. Yes, there is an EPG (electronic programming guide), although Im not sure of the source, and the Blackmax will require an HD tuner of some sort to get up and running. The Blackmax can even upscale your home movies (or any other video content) and pull movies, music and photos over WiFi or Ethernet from networked computers.
> 
> Expansys-usa currently sells the Lacie Blackmax with a 1TB drive for $650, but makes no mention of an actual ship date. Lacie on the other hand, sells the 500GB version for 479,00 ($617 US) and is presumably shipping now.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> Looks good for someone just wanting to do OTA or clear QAM - but with no cable card option then it really just looks like an expensive option to the HDhomeRun.
> 
> from http://www.gadgetreview.com/2009/02/lacie-launches-dvr-lacinema-black-max.html


http://www.expansys-usa.com/d.aspx?i=178502

Damn! Unscrambled Cable along with OTA and large storage capacity sounded worth looking at but as a PAL, it won't be!

* TV Tuner : PAL / NTSC*


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Posters point to...Moxi but then have issues with Moxi. One poster wants to order a Moxi, only after confirming a 30 day return policy. Poster said he doubts he'll keep the unit but wants to "evaluate" the unit. Doesn't sound like a customer a company wants.


TiVo has no problem with offering exactly that policy! It seeks such a customer.

Digeo has no stated return policy and no track record; its Moxi website is overhyped with customer support only available after purchase. Digeo is unusually difficult to contact, especially for a company with a new product. To be fair, Amazon, the listed retail source for Moxi, does offer a 30 day money back return policy, but I bet you can't return the one from the Amazon Marketplace seller offering 50 bucks off, and I assume no sales tax, unless it's defective:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=hp_navbox_lnret_pol?nodeId=15015711
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001GQ8MT8/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&seller=
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B001GQ8MT8/ref=dp_olp_new?ie=UTF8&condition=new
https://moxi.com/moxi/discover_moxi_hd.jsp
https://moxi.com/moxi/support_technical.jsp

A major potential problem is that Moxi's website alludes to the availability of an analog tuning dongle for Moxi but doesn't say when. Without an analog tuner Moxi is less flexible than a cable hi-def DVR (considering VOD), and for me would be a non-starter.


----------



## candewish

SteveHC1 said:


> - Sorry you couldn't get your TiVo to scan your local clear QAM (I *assume* they are in fact *CLEAR* QAM) broadcast channels; you are the only person I've encountered so far who's had such difficulty. Wish I could help more. Good example though of how this lack of official supporrt on TiVo's part creates problems for at least some subscribers.


I was grateful for your suggestion, even if it didn't work. My cable
connection is 'analog' - no cable box. When I select any QAM channel
on my HDTVs that I know/suspect is encrypted, after a few seconds
a message "weak signal or scrambled channel" displays on the screen.
If I select any of the SD or HD DTV channels of local broadcasters,
I immediately get a picture. I assume that means they are 'clear
channel QAM', because I don't think my TV would be able to decode
them if there were any encryption. My suspicion/pessimism/cynicism
is that my experience is not at all unique. Maybe most others with
similar TiVo difficulties are not such persistent whiners. What I
find puzzling is that TiVo refuses to even claim they provide
clear QAM reception without cable cards, yet provide a manual
recording function. How else would anyone use that function? Maybe
if they lost their TiVo service connection for a while they would
need to manually record. How often does that happen? I think
that it is still a possiblity that the problem is due to a defect in
my TiVo HD, but Tivo refuses to provide me an exchange to rule
out that possibilty because "TiVo does not support clear QAM reception".


----------



## vstone

SteveHC1 said:


> - Sorry you couldn't get your TiVo to scan your local clear QAM (I *assume* they are in fact *CLEAR* QAM) broadcast channels; you are the only person I've encountered so far who's had such difficulty. Wish I could help more. Good example though of how this lack of official supporrt on TiVo's part creates problems for at least some subscribers.


Until last month, all clear QAM channels showed up as channel "0" on my S3, making them unuseable for either viewing or recording. TV sets' tuners fall back to using QAM frequencies. The S3 was not designed to do that. It was designed to provide guide data in conjunction with a channel lineup. It was not designed to bypass one of its primary features.


----------



## fallingwater

SteveHC1 said:


> ...Good example though of how this lack of official support on TiVo's part creates problems for at least some subscribers.


This series of posts caused me to re-check how S3 deals with direct entry of QAM channel numbers.

Unfortunately, I experienced (almost?) every possible combination depending on the unscrambled QAM channel number entered, from direct tuning of a channel number not shown in the EPG to nothing to reverting to OTA channel 2.

I now understand why unscrambled QAM mapping isn't a simple option for TiVo to implement. TiVo has a uniquely disciplined system not tamed by directly entering a QAM channel number. Too bad.

The co-owner of the house which I share pays the cable bill including CC's on one S3. I'll store the other S3 as back-up, replace it with a Sony hi-def DVR and loan my HDTiVo to a friend who can use it. I'll continue to use the two Toshiba S2 DVD recorders with TiVo Basic and an S2DT with a DTA. All my subbed TiVos have Lifetime Service so TiVo won't lose a dime. 

C'mon, old horse, get up. Hopefully you're not dead yet and won't continue to be beaten.


----------



## mattack

bmgoodman said:


> I'm voting with my wallet and my mouth now. I'm not buying an extra TivoHD because I am not willing to pay an additional outlet charge plus an extra cable card plus a Tivo monthly fee. The former two items would cost me over $10 extra each month.


You should SEND Tivo a LETTER (physical paper letter) telling them this. Otherwise, they have no idea that you are _not_ buying something because of a lack of functionality.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> This series of posts caused me to re-check how S3 deals with direct entry of QAM channel numbers.
> 
> Unfortunately, I experienced (almost?) every possible combination depending on the unscrambled QAM channel number entered, from direct tuning of a channel number not shown in the EPG to nothing to reverting to OTA channel 2.
> 
> I now understand why unscrambled QAM mapping isn't a simple option for TiVo to implement. TiVo has a uniquely disciplined system not tamed by directly entering a QAM channel number. Too bad.





vstone said:


> ...TV sets' tuners fall back to using QAM frequencies. The S3 was not designed to do that. It was designed to provide guide data in conjunction with a channel lineup. It was not designed to bypass one of its primary features.


As post #1621 states it's TiVo's decision, not TiVo Forum posters', how best to deal with CableCARD issues. This post is an update, not a further call for action. But unless shown technical specifics supporting vstone's conclusion above I emphatically disagee and also disagree with the conclusion I reached.

I just re-scanned S3's channel lineup and verified the results. In an earlier post (below), also replying to vstone, I stated that I believed TiVo ignored actual unscrambled QAM numbers whenever PSIP virtual channel data was present. The results of the rescan have re-confirmed that opinion.

Whenever a PSIP virtual number is avaliable for tuning a channel the actual number is ignored by TiVo. Whenever there's no PSIP virtual number TiVo tunes to the actual number. Any QAM number entered to tune TiVo needs to be the specific number used by TiVo and nothing else. Some tuners accept both virtual and actual channel numbers; TiVo accepts only one or the other!

That's how TiVo works! It's design employs nothing more and nothing less when used without a CableCARD.



vstone said:


> The S3 and HD were designed to replace the cable STB with a superior product. It was not designed to be just an enhanced digital tuner that worked with a cable box. It was designed to be used in a system that had PSIP tables properly populated for unencrypted digital channels...
> 
> OTOH, it shouldn't have been hard for them to provide setups supporting those cable systems that did have virtual channel numbers assigned t(o) unencrypted channels. Perhaps they could not get the cable companies to confirm that they wouldn't change virtual channel numbers...In this environment, who would Tivo go to to straighten out channel assignments?
> 
> ...Somebody will be unhappy either way. It may be eaiser to just do nothing.





fallingwater said:


> ...(The following description may be in error, but on-the-fly I believe that TiVo ignores an actual unscrambled channel number whenever PSIP data is provided while TVGOS allows a user to enter either the PSIP sub-channel or the actual unscrambled sub-channel number when PSIP data is present. I'll recheck that statement if I'm challenged.)


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> ...
> Whenever a PSIP virtual number is avaliable for tuning a channel the actual number is ignored by TiVo. Whenever there's no PSIP virtual number TiVo tunes to the actual number. Any QAM number entered to tune TiVo needs to be the specific number used by TiVo and nothing else. Some tuners accept both virtual and actual channel numbers; TiVo accepts only one or the other!
> ...


Your experience successfuly refutes most of my assertions. I had never seen an actual freq, but lots of channel "0"'s. In retrospect, since the head end techs express ignorance at PSIP tables, its possibly that the tables were there, but populated with "0"'s.

What remains to be known is how much of this is do to purposeful actual design and how much is just an artifact of performance by the software and/or the chips sets used.


----------



## Jazhuis

fallingwater said:


> This series of posts caused me to re-check how S3 deals with direct entry of QAM channel numbers.
> 
> Unfortunately, I experienced (almost?) every possible combination depending on the unscrambled QAM channel number entered, from direct tuning of a channel number not shown in the EPG to nothing to reverting to OTA channel 2.


That's...odd? My S3 handles QAM channels directly with no issues...in fact, one of the recent updates (two updates ago?) allowed me to enter 3-digit subchannels (i.e. "79-101"), when previously it only allowed for 2-digit subchannels (i.e. "79-10"). It even handles my local CO's bizarre penchant for remapping the all local HD channels to virtual channel 1-1, it just doesn't map the guide data for any of it (of course).


----------



## candewish

fallingwater said:


> In an earlier post (below), also replying to vstone, I stated that I believed TiVo ignored actual unscrambled QAM numbers whenever PSIP virtual channel data was present. The results of the rescan have re-confirmed that opinion.
> 
> Whenever a PSIP virtual number is avaliable for tuning a channel the actual number is ignored by TiVo. Whenever there's no PSIP virtual number TiVo tunes to the actual number. Any QAM number entered to tune TiVo needs to be the specific number used by TiVo and nothing else. Some tuners accept both virtual and actual channel numbers; TiVo accepts only one or the other!
> 
> That's how TiVo works! It's design employs nothing more and nothing less when used without a CableCARD.


Thanks for your insights. Is the following interpretation of what you
are explaining correct - When TiVo does a channel scan and determines
that a signal associated with a particular QAM channel has a virtual
number in its PSIP, it ignores listing that QAM channel because it expects
to find that channel via the cable card? And it does this even though
in setup you have stated that you don't use cable cards?

How do you discover the virtual channel mapping in the signal's PSIP?
Does your HDTV's tuner/software extract and display that info to you?


----------



## fallingwater

Jazhuis said:


> My S3 handles QAM channels directly with no issues...in fact, one of the recent updates (two updates ago?) allowed me to enter 3-digit subchannels (i.e. "79-101"), when previously it only allowed for 2-digit subchannels (i.e. "79-10"). It even handles my local CO's bizarre penchant for remapping the all local HD channels to virtual channel 1-1, it just doesn't map the guide data for any of it (of course).


Are any stations in S3's EPG shown with virtual (PSIP derived) channel numbers? QAM virtual channel numbers look the same as digital OTA channel numbers.

Examples:

OTA Ch. 5 is analog, displayed in S3's EPG with program data; its hi-def equivalent is Ch. 5-1, also with program data.

An S3 using CableCARDs also displays standard-def QAM Ch. 5 with EPG data. In my area, the hi-def equivalent is Ch. 105 also with program data.

An S3 without CableCARDS displays analog cable Ch. 5 with EPG data and OTA analog Ch. 5 with EPG data. In my area, Ch. 5's QAM standard-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 79-4, without EPG data, and the hi-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 5-1 without EPG data. (The actual hi-def equivalent is Ch. 85-2.)



candewish said:


> Thanks for your insights. Is the following interpretation of what you
> are explaining correct - When TiVo does a channel scan and determines
> that a signal associated with a particular QAM channel has a virtual
> number in its PSIP, it ignores listing that QAM channel because it expects
> to find that channel via the cable card? And it does this even though
> in setup you have stated that you don't use cable cards?
> 
> How do you discover the virtual channel mapping in the signal's PSIP?
> Does your HDTV's tuner/software extract and display that info to you?


I'm ignorant of how TiVo accesses PSIP virtual channel data, only that it now does. Awhile ago it didn't. TVGOS received from CBS digital hosts has begun to display PSIP virtual channel numbers and will tune a channel using either the virtual or the actual number. When a virtual number is displayed TiVo will tune using the virtual number only.

Entering an actual channel number when a virtual channel number is displayed causes TiVo to react in different ways. On a few rare occasions in the past it tuned to the actual channel but very unpredictably. (Possibly using stale scan data??) Almost always it reverts to the nearest actual channel or sometimes OTA channel displayed in the EPG, and then displays a grey screen.

In my area actual QAM channels go from 79-1 through 121-XX. S3 scanned 429 channels during its recent re-scan. Some are scrambled, some aren't. Some are audio only services often ranging into three digits after the dash. When S3/HDTiVo is used with CableCARDS actual channel numbers aren't displayed, and different virtual channel numbers are displayed, derived from CableCARD channel mapping.


----------



## vstone

My 26" Panny HDTV in my BR (circa summer 2008) found the PSIP virtual channel numbers as soon as they were populated with something other than 0's, although I happened to be checking on it about the time they populated them. The non-OTA non-encrypted channels still apparently have 0's, as they still are accessed via the freq info and the Tivo can't find them as anything but channel 0.

My S3 found the PSIP virtual channel #'s all by itself as soon as they were populated with something other than 0's.

This is what I believe based on fallingwater's experience.


----------



## vstone

For TVGOS fans, the following quote from a post by a PBS station employee:

"Also, with our analog signal going away, we will no longer support Gemstar/Macrovision TVGOS. There is some limited information that can be found here: http://www.macrovision.com/dtv/10053..._id=rightPromo
"


----------



## lew

vstone said:


> For TVGOS fans, the following quote from a post by a PBS station employee:
> 
> "Also, with our analog signal going away, we will no longer support Gemstar/Macrovision TVGOS. There is some limited information that can be found here: http://www.macrovision.com/dtv/10053..._id=rightPromo
> "


Many areas, TVGOS is available through your local CBS digital station. I don't think the older TVGOS equiped devices can use the digital version of TVGOS.


----------



## bicker

I read (and so I would consider this nothing more than rumor) that some service providers are taking digital TVGOS off CBS and reconstituting it as analog TVGOS for their subscribers. Does that make _any_ sense?


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> I read (and so I would consider this nothing more than rumor) that some service providers are taking digital TVGOS off CBS and reconstituting it as analog TVGOS for their subscribers. Does that make _any_ sense?


Cable providers want customers using their STB. Those boxes use the cable companies EPG. It doesn't make sense to think very many providers will spend any money doing what you suggest. My answer would be different if Marcovision was willing to pay the cable companies. My answer would also be different if Macrovision was going to require reconstituting the digital TVGOS off CBS, and putting it on CBS analog, as a condition for licensing the EPG format.

Sony is no longer selling recorders.


----------



## fallingwater

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=15792364#post15792364
The DTVPal has a special mode, called the "TVGOS mode"...in this mode, the Pal can convert and pass through a specifically tailored set of TVGOS data that is received digitally and then passes through to a TVGOS unit that requires one of the older forms of TVGOS data IN ANALOG FORM. Until the last few days, the specific form of TVGOS data that is needed for this pass-through was not being broadcast!

This has apparently now changed, at least in some areas of the country. In this special (TVGOS) mode, the Pal - after supplying the TVGOS data to the unit that requires - then just serves as a slave (a front-end) to that unit...e.g., an analog DVD recorder or even to a digital high-def recorder that still requires the TVGOS data in analog form. That unit can then tune the Pal to a station that it selects, and even records (in the case of a DVD or hard-drive recorder).

At least 3 people in different areas of the country have, since yesterday, reported success in using the Pal in this mode, which is completely different from the normal mode, where the Pal is a simple digital-to-analog converter that has nothing to do with the TVGOS data (except that, where a digital station is broadcasting the ordinary TVGOS data, the Pal will pick up its time signal from the PSIP time of that station).

http://www.dishnetwork.com/dtvpal/
DTVPal+ purchase info. DVRs are sold out!

http://www.spiffspace.com/TVGOS_Training_Manual.pdf
The user guide for the most recent versions of TVGOS received from analog sources. Digital versions from CBS digital hosts operate in a similiar fashion but appear to support many more channel listings than the analog versions do. Excerpts:

Not all available CATV channels will be included in the TVGOS listings. The TVGOS system can only support 120 channels. In cases where there are more available channels than the TVGOS capability, some channels will not be available for program listings. Gemstar  TV Guide provides listings for the most popular channels based on viewership. Channels with lower viewership will not be included at the risk of removing channels with higher viewerships. Gemstar  TV Guide will reevaluate channels and at times will remove and add channels to the list of available channels for any given market.

NOTE: As part of the agreement that Gemstar  TV Guide has with the Host stations to include the TVGOS data in the broadcast signal, the Host channel receives top billing in the program list. Therefore, for reference purposes, you can determine the Host channel since it is the top most channel in the default program list.

Change Channel Display
The channels that have program listings provided for in the listing grid can be altered, as can the order in which they are displayed. Channels can be added to or removed from the listing grid or rearranged by using the Change channel display option under the SETUP tab of the Service Bar.
To Change Channel Display Options:
1. Enter the Change channel display option
2. Use the ↑/↓ buttons to highlight the channel to change and press
ENTER.
3. To include or remove from the program listings, select either on
or off in the channel option.1, 2
4. To change the channel number for the selection, enter the correct
channel number in the tune channel option.3
5. To change the display position (where it appears in the list),
change the position option.

NOTE 1: While there may be hundreds of channels that are available for program listings, only 120 may be active. Removing a channel from the listing grid does not remove the channel from the TVs Channel Map. Therefore, the channel will still be active and tuned to when scanning or surfing through channels outside of the Guide mode.

NOTE 2: In cases where there are both NTSC (analog) and ATSC (digital) for broadcast stations, it is tempting to remove the NTSC version from the listing grid and leave only the ATSC version. This action can have undesired effects, since the TVGOS could lose the Host channel. Sine the TVGOS data is only transmitted in the NTSC signal, the Host channel is an analog broadcast. We suggest that if a user wishes to remove the NTSC version of a possible Host channel, they instead move the channel to the bottom of the listing grid. This will result in the analog listing not normally seen but, the TVGOS data transmission will not be interrupted.

NOTE 3: When the TV is connected to Basic Cable TV (without a Cable Box or CableCARD), the QAM Tuner of the TV may receive some un-scrambled digital cable channels. These channels will not be listed by their virtual channel number assignment (for example, 512) but, will be on their actual cable channel (such as 118-4). However, if a program listing for the
channel is available in the TVGOS system, the channel will initially be assigned to the virtual channel number (channel number that would be displayed with a Cable Box or with a CableCARD). In order to include these channels in the listings grid, the actual channel number will need to be reassigned to the listing.


----------



## candewish

fallingwater said:


> An S3 without CableCARDS displays analog cable Ch. 5 with EPG data and OTA analog Ch. 5 with EPG data. In my area, Ch. 5's QAM standard-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 79-4, without EPG data, and the hi-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 5-1 without EPG data. (The actual hi-def equivalent is Ch. 85-2.)
> 
> .... When a virtual number is displayed TiVo will tune using the virtual number only.
> 
> Entering an actual channel number when a virtual channel number is displayed causes TiVo to react in different ways. On a few rare occasions in the past it tuned to the actual channel but very unpredictably. (Possibly using stale scan data??) Almost always it reverts to the nearest actual channel or sometimes OTA channel displayed in the EPG, and then displays a grey screen. [End quote]
> 
> The behavior of your S3 is very similar to my TiVo HD with Miami
> Comcast without cable card. (My QAM channel numbers begin
> at lower numbers, e.g. 19-xxx, and total channels picked up on
> a scan are 413 or so.) If I try to tune to QAM channel 118-431
> (ABC HD found on HDTV but not by TiVo), I get either a blank screen
> or a wrap around to analog channel 2, but if an attempt is made
> to tune to QAM 111-213 (CBS HD found by HDTV but not by TiVo),
> only a blank screen appears.
> 
> Question - do the numbers you refer to as virtual QAM numbers
> (e.g. DTV 5-1 for analog channel 5) show up as 5.1 (or 5-1) in your S3
> channel list when it is cable only (no antenna)? Are you ever able
> to tune to some channel that does not appear in your channel list?
> 
> (We have so many different kinds of channel numbers now corresponding
> to OTA broadcast channels that it is very confusing - analog channel#,
> DTV SD QAM channel#, DTV HD QAM channel#, virtual QAM
> channel#s, cable-company virtual channel#s, and physical channel#s!)
> 
> Thanks again for your and vstone's info.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> An S3 without CableCARDS displays analog cable Ch. 5 with EPG data and OTA analog Ch. 5 with EPG data. In my area, Ch. 5's QAM standard-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 79-4, without EPG data, and the hi-def equivalent is displayed as Ch. 5-1 without EPG data. (The actual hi-def equivalent is Ch. 85-2.)
> 
> .... When a virtual number is displayed TiVo will tune using the virtual number only.
> 
> Entering an actual channel number when a virtual channel number is displayed causes TiVo to react in different ways. On a few rare occasions in the past it tuned to the actual channel but very unpredictably. (Possibly using stale scan data??) Almost always it reverts to the nearest actual channel or sometimes OTA channel displayed in the EPG, and then displays a grey screen.





> *Question - do the numbers you refer to as virtual QAM numbers
> (e.g. DTV 5-1 for analog channel 5) show up as 5.1 (or 5-1) in your S3 channel list when it is cable only (no antenna)?*


Yes.



> *Are you ever able to tune to some channel that does not appear in your channel list?*


As stated above, on a few occasions in the past before the latest rescan, I could.


----------



## Jazhuis

fallingwater said:


> Are any stations in S3's EPG shown with virtual (PSIP derived) channel numbers? QAM virtual channel numbers look the same as digital OTA channel numbers.


Let me try to sort this out, based on what my local CO (Comcast) is sending:

For QAM channels, everything sorts to QAM channel numbers (74-1, 105-3, etc) for everything they broadcast in the clear with no sort of PSIP identifier, with the following exceptions:

The local digital channels (pretty sure that's the breakdown, SD analog versions of the analog don't do this, just HD/SD versions of local OTA digitals) are all remapped to virtual channels 1-1 through 1-3. It works this way on both my S3 and at least two other model of QAM-equipped TV's that I've tested it with. (So for example trying to go to 114-1, which is the CBS HD feed, flips over to virtual channel 1-1. Going to the actual FOX channel of 75-12 also flips over to virtual channel 1-1). Yes, there are MULTIPLE things piled on 1-1, because I can flip through them. On one of the TVs, I'm getting what I believe are PSIP names with the virtual channels (i.e. "WFOX-HD", "WCBS_HD"...Pardon my lack of actual PSIP names, can't remember them right now).

My S3 doesn't stumble on flipping between them, though. Going to channel 1-1 manually jumps me to the "first" one in the list (whatever the first one is), but other than that...

Now why the hell my local CO is mapping things like this, that's another discussion. I'd also like to point out that if those are the proper PSIP names, there is NO consistency between stations (some use _, some use -, some just mash it all together...)

*Edit:* Okay, strike that. I checked again, and the S3 is displaying the PSIP ID names for the 1-1 channels.


----------



## ciper

I'm sure all of you are aware of the delayed digital broadcast deadline. There have already been multiple threads on this board and others. In a given area it's common to have some stations that switched on the original deadline and others who will switch at a date of their own choosing in the future. They have been allowed to email their decision to change to the FCC so in some cases it is not easily possible to determine when the switch will take place.

Here is an example thread where people have been stuck with multiple channels and missing guide data because of this delayed deadline 
http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=419310

If the TiVo had the ability to manually map guide data to these "new" channels it would be a simple end user solution to the issue instead of submitting the problem to TiVo and waiting for them to sort it out.

I am reminded of some who said "manual guide mapping would make everyone crap their pants when a recording was missed and blame TiVo." We have real world evidence that frequency changes and missed recordings have happened and not a SINGLE person has blamed TiVo for it.

Thanks for trying to understand my point of view.

On a somewhat unrelated topic there are hacks for the Series 1 that allow you to add new channels, remap guide data and even add your own IR control codes. This allows them to control whatever OTA/CABLE/SAT STB you want with guide data on all channels that have it available.


----------



## markens

ciper said:


> If the TiVo had the ability to manually map guide data to these "new" channels it would be a simple end user solution to the issue instead of submitting the problem to TiVo and waiting for them to sort it out.


Yes, this would certainly be a good time to have a channel mapping feature available.

I'm finding the uses for me are adding up:

(1) Clear-QAM channels on a municipal cable system that neither supplies nor supports STBs or cable cards

(2) OTA frequency changes yesterday that are not reflected in the lineup mapping

(3) An OTA low power DTV translator for a station that I cannot receive their main signal. The LD comes in fine, with same PSIP as the main channel. But of course no guide mapping for it despite intervention by the station's general manager (who understood the issue immediately) and my direct requests to both TiVo and TMS.

Cable cards, even if available, would only solve one of these three issues for me.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

ciper said:


> I am reminded of some who said "manual guide mapping would make everyone crap their pants when a recording was missed and blame TiVo." We have real world evidence that frequency changes and missed recordings have happened and not a SINGLE person has blamed TiVo for it.
> 
> Thanks for trying to understand my point of view.


it may be your point of view but people do indeed blame TiVo despite TiVo being one part in a larger complex mess of guide data being correct. Note the below quote from the other thread. This person has posted here as well and clearly understands how the whole process works and clearly lays the blame at the company that in the end is the one with their name on the DVR.



markens said:


> Perhaps people should start demanding $$ credit from TiVo for every day that the guide info (and channel mappings) are not correct. After all, TiVo is not providing the service being paid for.
> 
> Really, it's been known for months that this was going to happen and the lineup changes should have been ready. It's beyond belief that TiVo was not on the ball here.
> 
> But yet I'm not surprised. Sigh.


----------



## bicker

Good find, Zeo. I'm actually pretty shocked that markens would make such a statement, given the statements markens has posted in this thread. I wonder if markens understand how much the two perspectives conflict with one another.


----------



## slowbiscuit

ciper said:


> I am reminded of some who said "manual guide mapping would make everyone crap their pants when a recording was missed and blame TiVo." We have real world evidence that frequency changes and missed recordings have happened and not a SINGLE person has blamed TiVo for it.


That you know of, here on this forum. People could've called Tivo in droves and you wouldn't know anything about it.


----------



## jrm01

ciper said:


> I am reminded of some who said "manual guide mapping would make everyone crap their pants when a recording was missed and blame TiVo." We have real world evidence that frequency changes and missed recordings have happened and not a SINGLE person has blamed TiVo for it.


I agree with your point of view, but not with the above statement. many are blaming TiVo for the problems with frequency changes. Here's another one associated with cable change:



> Uh... just called as well, and ... um... you aren't kidding. How can a company like TiVo not completely and absolutely understand every facet of how broadcast (cable) TV channels works? It would be like being a car salesman who has literally never driven a car in their life. I also don't feel any confidence it will get fixed in "7 business days".


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...people do indeed blame TiVo despite TiVo being one part in a larger complex mess of guide data being correct...





bicker said:


> Good find, Zeo. I'm actually pretty shocked...


What's the point of pointing out that some users may blame TiVo for the digital mess we're in, other than arguing with other posters? Whether TiVo is actually at fault or not doesn't materially affect people's perceptions; posts on Forums rarely change opinions.

Over time and many posts this thread hasn't changed much. That's typical; how many molehills does it take to make a foothill?

---

It's TiVo's choice; they could design and build a road up the mountain or just swipe a CableCARD and (virtually) jet to the top!







smbaker said:


> Is there any interest in starting an informal letter-writing campaign to Tivo requesting QAM-mapping features? If they are to be convinced to implement this feature, then it may need some demonstation that there is a demand.
> 
> For those unfamiliar with the problem:
> 
> US cable service includes digital HD network programming as part of "basic cable" service by FCC mandate. The cable companies are required to pass this programming unencrypted, which means it does not require a cablecard to receive these network HD channels. The Tivo HD and S3 have the ability to discover and tune these channels without the need for a cablecard. The Tivo HD lacks the ability to associate guide data with these channels, thus rendering the Tivo functionality back down to the level of a 1980's VCR when attempting to use these HD channels. Tivo's policy is that you must have cablecards to associate guide data with digital channels. For many of us, acquiring cablecards requires us to pay a hefty additional upgrade to "digital cable", a hefty installation fee, and monthly rental fees on the cablecards themselves....
> 
> The Fix:
> 
> There are many possible solutions. The QAM channels include a PSIP header that usually has a channel number. In my case, the channels show up with the same channel number as my OTA HD stations, but the Tivo is still unable to associate guide data with them. Thus, in many cases a mapping function could be automatic. In other cases, a manual mapping function may be necessary....
> 
> IMO (and this is just my opinion), this is a simple feature to implement. Most of functionality is already there, it just needs a user interface. Tivo could do it if they thought the demand great enough.
> 
> Here is a suggested sample letter...





jfh3 said:


> ...even if you had the assignments, you couldn't do anything with them, other than tune the stations manually.
> 
> The whole point of QAM mapping support is to be able to use all the Tivo scheduling features with QAM channels.
> 
> This is absolutely a Tivo problem.





rainwater said:


> No, the cable company has solved it with cablecards. That is not what the original poster is even talking about.





smbaker said:


> I'd say it's the cable company's *fault*, but it's Tivo's *problem*.
> 
> As a consumer, I would like the Tivo to work (with full functionality) on the channels that I pay for and am entitled to receive. Of course, Tivo can punt on the issue by requiring cablecards, but they are missing out on market share by doing so.





rainwater said:


> Didn't the Sony box solve this with a simple mapping feature?





jfh3 said:


> Automatic QAM mapping that deals with MSO assignment changes is hard.
> 
> Basic manual mapping (like the Sony DHG series) is easy, if not trivial, all things considered.





jfh3 said:


> My vote would be to start by putting in a manual mapping function that those who understand the risks can use and then work toward a more robust/PSIP solution.


----------



## markens

bicker said:


> Good find, Zeo. I'm actually pretty shocked that markens would make such a statement, given the statements markens has posted in this thread. I wonder if markens understand how much the two perspectives conflict with one another.


Why do they conflict? I pay TiVo Inc for service to enable my TiVo DVR to function, which includes both OTA and cable. My statements in the other thread regarding expectations for accuracy of guide data for _fully supported_ OTA operation are really orthogonal to the discussions of QAM mapping in this thread. Even with my most recent post here about the usefulness of channel mapping in a larger context, I fully accept that it is TiVo's business decision whether to implement such features. I can still ask for it though (which _is_ the original purpose of this thread).


----------



## vstone

Jazhuis, you are seeing what I wa seeing from December until the beginning of last week. Other areas in the same Comcast system are still seeing just freq data. The head end techs are just learning about this stuff. They may be programming the OTA designations in the near future. It appears that the PSIP tables may be programmed out of Comcast central enginering in stead of locally.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> What's the point of pointing out that some users may blame TiVo for the digital mess we're in, other than arguing with other posters?


I was providing factual evidence that Ciper's viewpoint did not mesh with reality. I was providing a means for moving the conversation along to more salient points.

What was your post I quoted trying to accomplish?


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> What's the point of pointing out that some users may blame TiVo for the digital mess we're in, other than arguing with other posters?


What's the point of pointing out that people are pointing out what they're pointing out, except to try to confuse the issue and divert attention away from a point you don't like to see people making? 



fallingwater said:


> Whether TiVo is actually at fault or not doesn't materially affect people's perceptions


That's actually the point: TiVo will get blamed, thereby incurring both a PR cost and a support cost, even though they're not to blame.


----------



## bicker

markens said:


> Why do they conflict?


Because one of the contentions made in this thread is that there isn't a significant cost associated with adding this feature, but the complaints you make in the other thread show that people are naturally very sensitive to the kinds of inaccuracies that are normal and expected.


----------



## markens

bicker said:


> Because one of the contentions made in this thread is that there isn't a significant cost associated with adding this feature, but the complaints you make in the other thread show that people are naturally very sensitive to the kinds of inaccuracies that are normal and expected.


Well, _other_ people may have made contentions in this thread about cost/benefit of adding QAM mapping. I've tried to stay out of that, simply saying I that would like the feature (and why), without deriding TiVo for not providing it. I actually do understand the marketing decision, and that's the way it is.

With respect to "inaccuracies that are normal and expected" in OTA lineup data, I think this is in the eye of the beholder. What's expected to you may not be so for me. Fine, I was expressing my opinion and you yours. Coloring my opinion have been a number of extremely frustrating phone calls with TiVo support where it was clear the agent had absolutely no idea what the lineup problem was, much less how to address it. But that's fodder for the other thread.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

markens said:


> a number of extremely frustrating phone calls with TiVo support where it was clear the agent had absolutely no idea what the lineup problem was, much less how to address it. But that's fodder for the other thread.


yeah, sorry. I did not mean to start debate on the quoted post in this thread. I have never seen that before on the interwebs.


----------



## markens

ZeoTiVo said:


> yeah, sorry. I did not mean to start debate on the quoted post in this thread. I have never seen that before on the interwebs.


----------



## bicker

markens said:


> With respect to "inaccuracies that are normal and expected" in OTA lineup data, I think this is in the eye of the beholder.


Not as I've used the terms. Normality is a reflection of what happens most of the time. Expectation is a reflection of explicit promises. _Neither _of those things are subjective.



markens said:


> What's expected to you may not be so for me.


Okay, we're talking past each other perhaps. I'm referring to expectations _with foundation_, while you're referring to expectations that are _perhaps unfounded_.



markens said:


> Fine, I was expressing my opinion and you yours.


Just to be clear, I'm not really trafficking in opinion; I'm talking only about what can be objectively established.


----------



## lew

markens said:


> " in OTA lineup data, I think this is in the eye of the beholder. What's expected to you may not be so for me. Fine, I was expressing my opinion and you yours. Coloring my opinion have been a number of extremely frustrating phone calls with TiVo support where it was clear the agent had absolutely no idea what the lineup problem was, much less how to address it. But that's fodder for the other thread.


The President signed the bill extending the mandatory analog to digital conversion weeks before the date. TV stations are notifying the FCC, via email, of their intentions. Any informed person would expect some issues.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> The President signed the bill extending the mandatory analog to digital conversion weeks before the date. TV stations are notifying the FCC, via email, of their intentions. Any informed person would expect some issues.


- Here in my area all but two of the local broadcasters (Fox and CW, I believe) dropped analog on the 17th. And lucky for me, none are changing their digital broadcasts' bands or frequencies, and the local cable company isn't changing their clear QAM channel assignments (they only changed one, a few weeks ago, and it was a change that actually made sense, but apparently that's the only change to be made).

Still would be nice to have the clear QAM mapping feature, but once I buy my own place (within 6 months) I'll be putting up outdoor UHF and VHF antennas and that'll be the end of the problem for me. I can get EVERYTHING else I 'd ever want (including "cable-only" shows) from Netflix, Amazon, Jaman, TiVoCast, etc., at least until my 3-year TiVo subscription ends (at which point I'll probably switch to a pc or Mac-based system, unless by then TiVo SUBSTANTIALLY broadens its features and associated services) because I find that I don't use TiVo's program "recommendations" at *all* and probably never will. Who's got the time to sit in front of the tube to watch all of that stuff??? I'm semi-retired and I *still* have a lot of unwatched recordings sitting on my base TiVo HD unit (I'll probably spring for a drive upgrade though, as I find that I prefer to download movies rather than stream them or wait for a Netflix dvd to arrive in the mail).


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> I was providing factual evidence that Ciper's viewpoint did not mesh with reality. I was providing a means for moving the conversation along to more salient points.
> 
> What was your post I quoted trying to accomplish?





bicker said:


> What's the point of pointing out that people are pointing out what they're pointing out, except to try to confuse the issue and divert attention away from a point you don't like to see people making?
> 
> That's actually the point: TiVo will get blamed, thereby incurring both a PR cost and a support cost, even though they're not to blame.


This thread was created ±520 days and 1660+ posts ago to suggest that TiVo users who wanted manual channel mapping campaign for it.

Despite often repeated claims that 'no one' is actually OPPPOSED to manual channel mapping, self-appointed TiVo defender/apologists repeatedly post opposition based on the theory that harm to TiVo might result if such a feature was available. In reality those who attack optional channel mapping are opposed to user initiated channel mapping.

TiVo management knows better than Forum posters what best advances TiVo's reputation and revenues at this time, and will deal with or ignore manual channel mapping regardless of this thread's advocacy.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> Despite often repeated claims that 'no one' is actually OPPPOSED to manual channel mapping, self-appointed TiVo defender/apologists repeatedly post opposition based on the theory that harm to TiVo might result if such a feature was available. In reality those who attack optional channel mapping are opposed to user initiated channel mapping.
> 
> TiVo management knows better than Forum posters what best advances TiVo's reputation and revenues at this time, and will deal with or ignore manual channel mapping regardless of this thread's advocacy.


It's a shame you can't make your point without misrepresenting others posts.

Tivopony said this feature isn't high on tivo's list. Tivo's website as a section where customers can suggest new features. http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm
QAM mapping doesn't even make the list of over 30 commonly requested features.

*There isn't a single poster in this thread who is against QAM mapping.* I put this in bold so you won't be able to honestly make the same claim in future posts.

Some posters have other features they'd rather see tivo implement, using available resources.

QAM mapping isn't even on tivo's list of popularly requested features. A feature that will inevitably consume resources that could be spent on other features.


----------



## fallingwater

SteveHC1 said:


> - Here in my area all but two of the local broadcasters (Fox and CW, I believe) dropped analog on the 17th. And lucky for me, none are changing their digital broadcasts' bands or frequencies, and the local cable company isn't changing their clear QAM channel assignments (they only changed one, a few weeks ago, and it was a change that actually made sense, but apparently that's the only change to be made).
> 
> Still would be nice to have the clear QAM mapping feature, but once I buy my own place (within 6 months) I'll be putting up outdoor UHF and VHF antennas and that'll be the end of the problem for me. I can get EVERYTHING else I 'd ever want (including "cable-only" shows) from Netflix, Amazon, Jaman, TiVoCast, etc., at least until my 3-year TiVo subscription ends (at which point I'll probably switch to a pc or Mac-based system, unless by then TiVo SUBSTANTIALLY broadens its features and associated services) because I find that I don't use TiVo's program "recommendations" at *all* and probably never will. Who's got the time to sit in front of the tube to watch all of that stuff??? I'm semi-retired and I *still* have a lot of unwatched recordings sitting on my base TiVo HD unit (I'll probably spring for a drive upgrade though, as I find that I prefer to download movies rather than stream them or wait for a Netflix dvd to arrive in the mail).


Actually, I like Sony's just-a-DVR approach and just swapped a couple of TiVos for Sonys for TVGOS channel mapping. More user adjustable options; no internet or pizza! There's way more stuff worth watching than time to watch it, no matter what method of program organizing is employed.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> It's a shame you can't make your point without misrepresenting others posts.
> 
> Tivopony said this feature isn't high on tivo's list. Tivo's website (h)as a section where customers can suggest new features. http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm
> QAM mapping doesn't even make the list of over 30 commonly requested features.
> 
> *There isn't a single poster in this thread who is against QAM mapping.* I put this in bold so you won't be able to honestly make the same claim in future posts.
> 
> Some posters have other features they'd rather see tivo implement, using available resources.
> 
> QAM mapping isn't even on tivo's list of popularly requested features. A feature that will inevitably consume resources that could be spent on other features.


The thread's premise is to call for TiVo users who want optional mapping to advocate it, not for posters to squabble about whether TiVo should or shouldn't adapt it. You've wasted another post, as is certainly your right. But, practically speaking, I disagree that your bold sentence is true.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> This thread was created ±520 days and 1660+ posts ago to suggest that TiVo users who wanted manual channel mapping campaign for it.


You're counting a vast amount of posts that are basically saying that *this feature is not important*. You're beating a dead horse -- a dead, worthless horse. And you're doing so rudely, using malicious slurs such as "apologists" to label folks who are simply keeping things real in this thread, buffering your exaggerations of reality.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> TiVo management knows better than Forum posters what best advances TiVo's reputation and revenues at this time, and will deal with or ignore manual channel mapping regardless of this thread's advocacy.


and all we have really done is repeat that TiVo has already done a defacto pass on this as per TiVoPony's post and then added our speculation as to why.
We present reality and posts hard to argue with and the good old "TiVo fanboy" argument gets pulled out.

Seems a corollary to the usenet rule that once "Nazi" is uttered the thread is over and the side exclaiming it has no counter argument left could be extended for "fanboy" (or its derivatives of defender/apologists ) in this forum.

Oddly I am not concerned about TiVo inc. in any great way other than the cool, geek tech they produce. If replay had won out and survived instead I guess I would be in that forum getting accused of throwing pesky facts around there instead.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> The thread's premise is to call for TiVo users who want optional mapping to advocate it, not for posters to squabble about whether TiVo should or shouldn't adapt it. You've wasted another post, as is certainly your right. But, practically speaking, I disagree that your bold sentence is true.


The OP requested *a letter writing campaign.* PP is correct, TivoPony's post, combined with this feature not even making the top 30 list, suggests it's no longer being considered. A couple of posters are giving you reasons why this feature (evidently) isn't being considered.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> The thread's premise is to call for TiVo users who want optional mapping to advocate it,


so in the thread that has the subject line "Comcast will not support cable cards in TiVos" we should only post about how Comcast does not support cable cards in TiVo's? Hopefully you are now seeing this fallacy of dictating how people should post, assuming it is relavant to the topic.

I might even further point out that I saw no posts saying people should not write in, so the actual mission of the trhead lived on just fine while the reality of TiVo not adding manual mapping is posted about as to the why. I would think that informative and useful to the intelligent letter writer who would want to know what hurdles to address in asking TiVo to add the feature.


----------



## bicker

ZeoTiVo said:


> We present reality and posts hard to argue with and the good old "TiVo fanboy" argument gets pulled out. Seems a corollary to the usenet rule that once "Nazi" is uttered the thread is over and the side exclaiming it has no counter argument left could be extended for "fanboy" (or its derivatives of defender/apologists ) in this forum.


Indeed, calling someone names, like apologist or fanboy, it is a sure-fire indication that someone simply has nothing of substance to say, and is just frustrated. Another common tactic, I've seen is people arguing against something easier to argue against, instead of what people are actually posting. That's where all the silliness about people who are "against" this feature comes from.



ZeoTiVo said:


> Hopefully you are now seeing this fallacy of dictating how people should post, assuming it is relavant to the topic.


Indeed, generally a discussion thread has postings that present _different_ perspectives. A web page that presents only a single perspective sounds more like a blog.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> You're counting a vast amount of posts that are basically saying that *this feature is not important*.


The thread merely asks that TiVo users who want manual channel mapping let TiVo know what they want. Any posts opposed to manual channel mapping are irrelevant in that context.



> You're beating a dead horse -- a dead, worthless horse.


In your opinion. At least you don't state, as other posters have, that you support manual channel mapping, but...



> And you're doing so rudely, using malicious slurs such as "apologists" to label...


It serves no purpose if a post makes statements about TiVo's assumed motivations for either supporting or ignoring features or referring to an equally theoretical cost vs. revenue ratio which might result. When a poster routinely repeats such irrelevancies over and over they're TiVo apologists even when that's not their intention.



> ...folks who are simply keeping things real in this thread, buffering your exaggerations of reality.


You're a self-acknowledged real character :
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6968688#post6968688


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> and all we have really done is repeat that TiVo has already done a defacto pass on this as per TiVoPony's post and then added our speculation as to why.


Why bother?

TiVoPony stated 10+ months ago in http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876 :

_Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.

Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. *That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers.*_ 












> We present reality and posts hard to argue with and the good old "TiVo fanboy" argument gets pulled out
> 
> Seems a corollary to the usenet rule that once "Nazi" is uttered the thread is over...


This thread ain't. Mebbe it's time; mebbe not!



> ...and the side exclaiming it has no counter argument left could be extended for "fanboy" (or its derivatives of defender/apologists ) in this forum.


C'mon, be a FanMAN! 



> Oddly I am not concerned about TiVo inc. in any great way other than the cool, geek tech they produce. If replay had won out and survived instead I guess I would be in that forum getting accused of throwing pesky facts around there instead.


Oh for the battles of the good old days! If only ReplayTV had been properly developed.

ReplayTV was probably doomed from the moment they offered to swap RTV5000's's for RTV4500's because of practical incompatibilities which prohibited interaction between the series that had been promised.

---

It's surprising and disappointing that with only E*, which should have to pay royalties, as a significant (yet still indirect) competitor, TiVo hasn't yet produced consistent profitability.

Wonder how the number of pizzas TiVo has sold compares with the number of Moxi's Digeo has sold?


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Any posts opposed to manual channel mapping are irrelevant in that context.


Luckily, there haven't been any such posts.



fallingwater said:


> It serves no purpose if ....


In your opinion. You're welcome to apply your own personal criteria for the relevance of what *you* post, but just what *you* post.

And the more you attack the right of people to post messages that you'd rather not see posted, *the more you are driving the thread off-topic*.


----------



## vstone

This thread, like many, has resulted in a rather broad discussion. In this case the discussion is not restricted to just the title of the thread, but has expanded to discuss several issues around clear QAM tuners. I don't recall any posts against QAM mapping (although I may forgotten them), but some indicating that the poster thought other issues were more important. I have seen many posts, including mine, saying or implying that Tivo may have good reasons for not providing manual mapping. Assumptions about why Tivo doesn't support manual mapping and whether or not it would be cheap or hard are no more relevant than "TiVo's assumed motivations for either supporting or ignoring features or referring to an equally theoretical cost vs. revenue ratio which might result."

A thread that says only "write a letter" would probably not be very long and certianly wouldn't constitute much of a discussion.

Speaking for myself, the information (as opposed to opinion) posted by fallimgwater and others has given me a more complete picture of how the Tivo performs in a clear QAM environmrnt and the discussion in general has given me insight into the many ways that cable systems are set to support (or not) clear QAM tuners.


----------



## fallingwater

ZeoTiVo said:


> ...Hopefully you are now seeing this fallacy of dictating how people should post, assuming it is relavant to the topic.
> 
> I might even further point out that I saw no posts saying people should not write in, so the actual mission of the thread lived on just fine while the reality of TiVo not adding manual mapping is posted about as to the why. I would think that informative and useful to the intelligent letter writer who would want to know what hurdles to address in asking TiVo to add the feature.


How people should post has little to do with how they do post. Within Forum rules people are free to post whatever they wish. Now it's largely the same small group of TiVo, 'er, fans!

Just to clarify; I stopped posting arguments for TiVo to add manual QAM mapping with post #1621. Instead, my more recent posts point out in detail what other options are available. And, of course, kick the shinola around with y'all!


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Luckily, there haven't been any such posts.


'Dead worthless horse' is close enough.



> In your opinion. You're welcome to apply your own personal criteria for the relevance of what *you* post...


Thanks. Appreciate that!



> ...but just what you post.
> 
> And the more you attack the right of people to post messages that you'd rather not see posted, *the more you are driving the thread off-topic*.


Hmmm. That's true! We'll haveta' work on kickin' the shinola in a straight line, eh?


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> 'Dead worthless horse' is close enough.


That was a comment about the argument, not the feature.


----------



## fallingwater

All arguments are wuthless unless and until they prevail. 

Remember all the shi...nola when stupid posters who didn't know TiVo's financial needs kept stirring the pot for TiVo to restore Lifetime Service.

TiVo showed that wuthless dead horse how to become a PoloPony!


----------



## ZeoTiVo

vstone said:


> Speaking for myself, the information (as opposed to opinion) posted by fallimgwater and others has given me a more complete picture of how the Tivo performs in a clear QAM environmrnt and the discussion in general has given me insight into the many ways that cable systems are set to support (or not) clear QAM tuners.


yes, diversity is the positive side of the argument I made about how name calling and telling people how to post usually signals the useful end of a thread.

Good thing we did not tell them to stay on the topic of a letter writing campaign and to stop posting about how QAM works


----------



## SteveHC1

fallingwater said:


> Actually, I like Sony's just-a-DVR approach and just swapped a couple of TiVos for Sonys for TVGOS channel mapping. More user adjustable options; no internet or pizza! There's way more stuff worth watching than time to watch it, no matter what method of program organizing is employed.


From what I've read about it I'd probably like the Sony too, I just tend to shy away from products that are no longer manufactured.


----------



## SteveHC1

vstone said:


> Until last month, all clear QAM channels showed up as channel "0" on my S3, making them unuseable for either viewing or recording. TV sets' tuners fall back to using QAM frequencies. The S3 was not designed to do that. It was designed to provide guide data in conjunction with a channel lineup. It was not designed to bypass one of its primary features.


- I have a TiVo HD and am just beginning to realize that there apparently ARE some significant differences between the two models other than the obvious.


----------



## SteveHC1

ZeoTiVo said:


> Looks good for someone just wanting to do OTA or clear QAM - but with no cable card option then it really just looks like an expensive option to the HDhomeRun.
> 
> from http://www.gadgetreview.com/2009/02/lacie-launches-dvr-lacinema-black-max.html


- As far as I know the LaCie is currently a Europe-only model, so whether or not they'll have a cablecard option on the US model-to-be remains to be seen. As I recall, some of the newest cable set-top boxes have both HDMI and component outputs, and I *think* I saw in the manuals some of the latest models that they do have some means of connecting to stand-alone dvrs for unit control purposes (may be IR type, I don't recall) so who knows even if the soon-to-be US model doesn't have cablecard slots maybe there'll be some other way of interconnection and programmable control. Regardless, from what I've been reading the number of subscribers to "premium" cable tiers and channels is actually DROPPING, and the cable companies THEMSELVES are apparently about to get into the INTERNET-based streaming (if not download) show/episode business themselves... I think TiVo really WILL have some meaningful competition in the not-too-distant future.


----------



## fallingwater

Real competition would be good for everyone. TiVo will get significant competition from internet based products but perhaps not from products based on TV's traditional modes of delivery. Perhaps TiVo, E*, and cable DVRs are the last of that breed.

Here's a new Sony concept product which if it ever became available in the USA I'd snap up! But it probably is an ephemera not destined for America.
http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news-15787-Sony+BDZ-T90:++The+Ultimate+Sony+DVR?.html
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Sony...-Video-Content-to-the-PSP-Walkman-82868.shtml


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> Real competition would be good for everyone.


Maybe not. Cable company DVRs don't have many of the features and options that premium priced DVRs like tivo (I'd include Moxi but I wonder if it's vaporware). BUT cable company DVRs tend to be less expensive then tivo. No upfront cost. No responsibility for repair. Free upgrades to a new model if necessary. One stop shopping. One bill. No issues with cable cards /SDV. TCF people don't care but the average customer does.

One possibility is tivo won't be able to compete and we'll be left with just the cable company DVRs. I'm not sure there is even a market for one premium priced DVR. Moxi could get enough customers to hurt tivo and/or put them out of business but not enough customers for them to stay in business.

I don't think there is a market for multiple premium DVRs. It's possible the dtvpal dvr might find a place in the price sensitive market.


----------



## fallingwater

Competition depends on the product, the features it offers, and the price. Cable DVRs provide competition as does E*, in both its flavors. 

Moxi is technically competition , but at this point is a lightweight contender with a very skimpy track record. There are even enough Sony hi-def DVRs still available to be lightweight TiVo competition.

TCF posters run the gamut. Perhaps you really mean TCF regulars, aka TiVo FanMEN (and women)!


----------



## candewish

As part of the large majority who had hoped this thread on clear
QAM would provide some incentive for TiVo to change its posture
on clear QAM, I now agree with the contrarians that this thread
no longer serves a purpose - for more than one reason. As a
disappointed TiVo owner, I now conclude -

* TiVo has committed its fortunes exclusively to cable companies
and premium channels carried by those companies, i.e.,
cablecards.

* TiVo does not understand that there is a substantial number of
cable subscribers at the basic and extended basic level who lack
interest or resources to support those premium channels.

* TiVo does not yet understand that the change to all digital
broadcast TV will prompt or force the low level cable
subscribers to find TiVo alternatives.

* TiVo's ostrich posture can not be more evident than its claim
that "TiVo does not support clear QAM reception".

* TiVo does not support clear QAM reception because they DO NOT
or CAN NOT reliably deliver clear QAM reception.

* TiVo has never adequately understood the technological and
economic impacts of HDTV. (a) they were late to the party with
the Series 3 and HD models, (b) they have yet to provide a User
Interface appropriate for HDTV, and (c) they show no signs of
appreciating that 1080p makes HDTV a fine computer monitor.

* TiVo's competitors understand HDTV - that there are a host of
OTA and basic cable HDTV users who want to access the internet
and broadcast TV on their HDTV's, and who are turning to PCs
with internal or external or network based TV tuners, ALL of
whose manufacturers claim ASTC and clear QAM reception.

* TiVo's failure to provide an 802.11n network adapter while
sticking with the 'g' adapter, which is inadequate for streaming
HDTV, is more evidence of its lack of recognition of the importance
of modern networks, PCs and HDTV.

The number of Linux and Windows options for HTPC is exploding.
The software options providing TV program info, recording and
time shifting is exploding. Hardware options from networked TV
receivers to networked HDMI ports to networked multi-terabyte
storage servers are exploding. TiVo will continue to lose share
to these options. TiVo is on schedule to become another
technological relic. Boxes like the ASUS B204 with an ability
to support a Windows/Linux home media center, Ethernet or
802.11n networking, storage and an HDMI port for a few hundred
dollars are coming. Attention is shifting elsewhere.


----------



## lew

candewish said:


> * TiVo has committed its fortunes exclusively to cable companies
> and premium channels carried by those companies, i.e.,
> cablecards.


 Unlike Moxi tivo continues to support OTA. I question how many customers will purchase a tivo, pay a subscription fee but not get any premium cable channels. Cable systems are increasing the number of channels that are encrypted. All evidence suggested extended basic channels will wind up being encrypted.



> * TiVo does not yet understand that the change to all digital
> broadcast TV will prompt or force the low level cable
> subscribers to find TiVo alternatives.


 Some will go OTA.


> * TiVo's failure to provide an 802.11n network adapter while
> sticking with the 'g' adapter, which is inadequate for streaming
> HDTV, is more evidence of its lack of recognition of the importance
> of modern networks, PCs and HDTV.


Has the n standard even been officially approved? Last thing I read suggested it won't be approved until the end of 2009. Based on posts MRV HD streaming is faster then real time. TTG transfer to a PC are slow but that's do to encryption.


> The number of Linux and Windows options for HTPC is exploding.


Very few of those options support cable cards. Sounds like tivo is making a good decision. Concentrate on the part of the market that can't easily be satisfied with a HTPC solution.

I think a bigger problem is the length of time it's taking tivo to solve bugs. Series 1 customers are still having issues with connections. The black/grey screen issue has gone on for months.

edited to add n support is really a non-issue. I can't see tivo offering a g and a n adapter. The majority of customers are still using G adapters, no reason to charge those customers more money for a n adapter. "Geeks" who want a 100%n network have the option of purchasing a game adapter/bridge.


----------



## bicker

You sound frustrated, candlewish, and it seems like that is coloring your perceptions of TiVo's intents and motivations, presenting their bland, uneventful, rational decisions as something nefarious. I'm sorry you've taken this so hard.


----------



## candewish

Yes, both frustrated and disappointed. I was misled by this forum, among other sources into believing that TiVo supported clear QAM reception of
local HD broadcasts carried by cable companies. That is not true. Like
I said, caveat emptor - so you won't feel gyped like me.


----------



## Saxion

I feel for you candewish. Sad to see TiVo losing customers. I also was frustrated by TiVo over this for a long time; when I first purchased my S3, I figured that this feature was so dead simple, and so commonplace among other devices, that it was only a matter of time until TiVo got around to adding this. I was wrong.  My issue was solved when another forum member offered to modify my TiVo to associate OTA guide data to my Clear QAM channels, and now I get full Clear QAM guide data. It's sure great to not have to schedule manual recordings anymore.  But I think that service is no longer offered, so it's definitely not a fix-all. I continue to advocate that TiVo change their mind and at least match their competition in this regard.


----------



## mattack

candewish said:


> * TiVo has never adequately understood the technological and
> economic impacts of HDTV. (a) they were late to the party with
> the Series 3 and HD models, (b) they have yet to provide a User
> Interface appropriate for HDTV, and (c) they show no signs of
> appreciating that 1080p makes HDTV a fine computer monitor.


Though weren't they relatively _early_ to the party with the DirecTV/HD box?


----------



## Roderigo

candewish said:


> I was misled by this forum [...] into believing that TiVo supported clear QAM reception of local HD broadcasts carried by cable companies.


HUH? Where in this forum did someone say it worked the way you want?

And, of course, tivo does support exactly what you said (even though it's not what you meant). A tivo box supports *reception* of clear QAM just fine. It doesn't support tivo features that depend on guide data for those channels (season passes, wishlists, etc)


----------



## bicker

Good point... let's find out where you were misled "by this forum" and correct that misinformation.

But be careful: TiVo does support clear QAM *reception* of local HD broadcasts carried by cable companies. There is no problem with *that*. The issue you have is being about to match that reception to program guide data, schedule recordings, etc., basically do everything that makes TiVo special. However, just as you have an expectation of preciseness and accuracy in the information you receive, you have a similar obligation to understand the information you receive with preciseness and accuracy. You cannot blame others for your wishful thinking that may have driven you to misunderstand the information you have been provided by this forum.


----------



## slowbiscuit

lew said:


> Unlike Moxi tivo continues to support OTA. I question how many customers will purchase a tivo, pay a subscription fee but not get any premium cable channels. Cable systems are increasing the number of channels that are encrypted. All evidence suggested extended basic channels will wind up being encrypted.


The jury is still out on that for Comcast - they are providing all of the SD expanded basic channels in clear QAM as cities are migrated to digital, because the STB (DTA) that they are providing does not have have a separable security waiver from the FCC. They can't encrypt them right now and be compliant with the regs, in other words. Statements have been made by Comcast senior VPs saying that they have not had a problem with the content providers when providing their channels in the clear (so far).

They just put all of them in the clear in the ATL even though they haven't announced a cutover date yet, which makes my Myth HTPC much more useful. Too bad it doesn't include the HD versions as well.


----------



## fallingwater

It's likely that standard-def Extended Basic digital channels and hi-def simulcast (OTA) Limited Basic QAM channels won't be scrambled but hi-def versions of Extended Basic channels will.


----------



## lew

New software seems too have an issue with clear QAM
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7098041#post7098041


----------



## Saxion

lew said:


> New software seems too have an issue with clear QAM
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7098041#post7098041


Specifically, the new 11.0b SW has a bug that can cause a lockup when exiting the System Information screen. This bug may be exacerbated by using Clear QAM. So, don't use the SI screen for now. Clear QAM continues to work otherwise.


----------



## jcthorne

There is not a corrolation between Clear QAM channel reception and the SI exit bug. I have had 11b for some time and never get the SI lockup bug. I assuredly use Clear QAM channels.


----------



## Saxion

Yeah, I use Clear QAM as well and have never encountered the SI exit bug. Other people were conjecturing there may be a relationship, but there's no proof. At any rate, looks like TiVo is still pushing out new updates (from 11.0b.E -> 11.0b) so hopefully this bug goes away completely. I also see that one person with CableCARDs reported an SI exit lockup, so I'm beginning to doubt the Clear QAM causality theory.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

I've never had the SI lockup on my S3 with open QAM.

However, anybody using open QAM should keep an eye out, just in case, of another issue. The "b" software as of 2 days ago has killed my manual recordings with "channel removed from lineup" and "no longer in program guide" reasons in the Recording History.

After the first night I tried rebooting, removing and adding them back in, etc. and they still got skipped over last night too.

I've said all I wanted to say about manual mapping, including writing and mailing my letter, but now if even manual recordings are being fubar'ed, it's getting entirely out of hand.

I'm pretty much SOL with any HD recordings until Tivo gets their act together or some other kind of fix is found in the meantime to get it working again. Any ideas, folks?


----------



## Saxion

BigJimOutlaw said:


> The "b" software as of 2 days ago has killed my manual recordings with "channel removed from lineup" and "no longer in program guide" reasons in the Recording History.


Sorry to hear about your trouble BigJim. I have 11.0b-01-2-648 and my Clear QAM recording (both manual and guide-based*) is still working. Maybe something got corrupted deep inside your channel map or other system database. You might try a "Clear & Delete Everything" restart...it's a sledgehammer, but it might work.

*Note that I have a modified TiVo that maps guide data to my Clear QAM channels.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

Saxion said:


> Sorry to hear about your trouble BigJim. I have 11.0b-01-2-648 and my Clear QAM recording (both manual and guide-based*) is still working. Maybe something got corrupted deep inside your channel map or other system database. You might try a "Clear & Delete Everything" restart...it's a sledgehammer, but it might work.
> 
> *Note that I have a modified TiVo that maps guide data to my Clear QAM channels.


That must be nice.  I couldn't hack my box if I wanted to, unfortunately. Yeah, if this happens again tomorrow I'll try the nuclear option.


----------



## Saxion

BigJimOutlaw said:


> That must be nice.


Yes indeedy!  It's so great to have guide data for my HD channels. It works like a charm, too: 100% reliable and 100% stable. To all the naysayers out there who say Clear QAM recording is unworkable and a support nightmare for TiVo: I'm living proof that it can work just fine.

Keep us informed of your progress on the missed recordings.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Unless your provider moves channels around, and then you have to get the hack redone. As I've said before, it happens at least once a year on Comcast in the ATL.

It will be even worse now that they've put all the expanded basic channels in the clear on digital, because we're talking about 80 or so channels total in clear QAM now. With no guarantees that they'll stay in one place. I'm loving it for my HTPC, but not looking forward to channel moves in future.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

Minor update. It skipped over my Simpsons manual recording (apparently it was either delayed or canceled by my affiliate anyway thanks to nascar) so I went with the nuclear option. 50&#37; through the big database indexing at the moment. We'll see if the enema worked.

I'm a watch & delete type, so I didn't lose anything other than the few missed recordings and the time to start from scratch and re-do season passes. If this works, it's no major catastrophe, but it shouldn't have happened.


----------



## jccfin

Hey, it looks like TW here in Manhattan have actually put the HD broadcast channels in their correct place tonight! I'm in the process of rescanning those channels on the Tivo right now. I will report back once it's done to let you all know if the program information is now correctly mapped. Whahoo!!!

Update: It looks like that there are still a few channels that are not in their proper place and the guide info is still missing. Perhaps it will take a few weeks for Tribune to update their database?


----------



## mattack

Are you claiming you're getting guide info WITHOUT cablecards?


----------



## Saxion

Minckster, what bkdtv was referring to is that if your cable company generated their own PSIP data that mapped the Clear QAM channels to the _cable company designated channel numbers_ (like 702) instead of the OTA channel numbers (like 6.1), then you could probably get TiVo guide data for them. However this is a very non-standard configuration...it was happening in Austin for a while but I'm not even sure that's true anymore. That your Clear QAM channels are mapped to their OTA channel numbers is the industry standard, however it also means you cannot get guide data without CableCARDs or a Tuning Adapter.


----------



## Koan

Comcast has apparently put the expanded basic channels in the clear where I am as I can access them on my TV tuner and my unsubscribed Series 1. However, I am not able to access them on my TivoHD. I know I won't get the guide data, but I thought the Tivo HD would at least let me tune in and schedule manual recordings. Is this likely a cablecard issue? I have re-run Guided Setup and have done a channel scan, but no luck.


----------



## vstone

Koan said:


> Comcast has apparently put the expanded basic channels in the clear where I am as I can access them on my TV tuner and my unsubscribed Series 1. However, I am not able to access them on my TivoHD. I know I won't get the guide data, but I thought the Tivo HD would at least let me tune in and schedule manual recordings. Is this likely a cablecard issue? I have re-run Guided Setup and have done a channel scan, but no luck.


Sounds like they removed the filter that blocks extended basic because it also blocks the HD OTA channels (which they are required to provide), but the digital versions of the extended basic channels are likely encrypted.


----------



## Koan

But doesn't the Tivo HD usually tune in analog cable? Would the cablecard itself filter out the extended basic channels if not subscribed?


----------



## fallingwater

Koan said:


> Comcast has apparently put the expanded basic channels in the clear where I am as I can access them on my TV tuner and my unsubscribed Series 1. However, I am not able to access them on my TivoHD. I know I won't get the guide data, but I thought the Tivo HD would at least let me tune in and schedule manual recordings. *Is this likely a cablecard issue?* I have re-run Guided Setup and have done a channel scan, but no luck.


Are you using a CC with your HDTiVo. If so, yes.


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> Sounds like they removed the filter that blocks extended basic because it also blocks the HD OTA channels (which they are required to provide), but the digital versions of the extended basic channels are likely encrypted.


Digital versions of extended basic channels can be encrypted only when a cable co. doesn't provide DTA's to access Extended Basic service.


----------



## jccfin

minckster said:


> TWCnyc Northern Manhattan seems to have remapped all of the QAM channels for OTA channels 2-, 4-, 5-, 7-, 11-, and 13- to their proper places. Other than OTA channel 9-1, which is still at QAM 93-1, what channels are not in their proper place?
> 
> To get TiVo's guide data, would TWCnyc have to have call signs for the QAM channels that match the OTA call-signs? What I mean is that we now have channels like the following:
> 
> OTA 2-1 WCBSDT (which has guide data)
> QAM 2-1 WCBS_HD (which still lacks guide data)
> 
> OTA 4-1 WNBCDT (which has guide data)
> QAM 4-1 WNBC_HD (which still lacks guide data)
> ...
> 
> Would we get Guide Data if the QAM call-signs were "WCBSDT" and "WNBCDT"?
> 
> (For the curious, TWCnyc used to use a scheme where OTA 2-1 mapped to QAM 1-2, OTA 4-1 to QAM 1-4, etc. It was unchanged for a very long time. Years?)


What's missing is TWC letting Tribune know that they now have those HD channels at their correct line-up, except 9-1. Until they do, we will never see guide data. It remains to be seen whether or not TWC will be willing to do so since they want to rip people off by getting them to move to a Digital tier and pay for a cable box. They're pretending that these channels don't exist for those without a cable box or digital tier.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> Digital versions of extended basic channels can be encrypted only when a cable co. doesn't provide DTA's to access Extended Basic service.


1) Huh?

2) The only channels that a cable company may not encrypt are the OTA channels. You can read that to extend it to the entire basic tier, but beyond that they can encrypt to their heart's content, and they are increasingly doing so.


----------



## mattack

I haven't even opened the DTA thing that I got (since it's mostly for use with my non-Tivo hard-drive/DVD recorder), but what I think fallingwater means is that now that cable companies are moving extended basic to digital... they are UN-encrypting them so that the "dumb" DTAs that are being given away for free will work when just plugging them into cable... so they don't have to be paired. In fact, I haven't bothered to open it partially because I hope Comcast might give me a free cablecard instead of it.


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> 1) Huh?


What he was trying to say was that if a MSO uses DTAs for more than just limited basic, then they cannot encrypt expanded basic, because currently DTAs are not authorized to decrypt programming. Instead, MSOs would be limited to employing traps to secure tier-levels.



vstone said:


> 2) The only channels that a cable company may not encrypt are the OTA channels.


Again, the point is that they cannot do so *if* they're deploying DTAs which they intend to support expanded basic service.

Of course, all they have to do to get around this is simply not provide expanded basic service on DTAs. With expanded basic service, the customer would just get a different box (perhaps a DCH-70) for their primary outlet, and then DTAs (without expanded basic service) for additional outlets. However, including better boxes in the package fee is, of course, more expensive to the MSO, so they may elect to stay with traps, until they can get rid of them completely and entirely. I haven't seen hard data, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the cost of maintaining traps exceeds the added cost of one DCH-70 for each expanded basic customer, over the life of the DCH-70.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> I haven't seen hard data, but I have a sneaking suspicion that the cost of maintaining traps exceeds the added cost of one DCH-70 for each expanded basic customer, over the life of the DCH-70.


The cable system can charge a rental fee for the STB, even if they give one for "free" they can probably make enough renting extra boxes to customers to cover the cost of the free box. That's not even including whatever revenue the cable company may get from an occasional PPV purchase or a customer that decides to upgrade.

I share your suspicion that traps may not be worth the trouble to maintain.


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> 1) Huh?
> 
> 2) The only channels that a cable company may not encrypt are the OTA channels. You can read that to extend it to the entire basic tier, but beyond that they can encrypt to their heart's content, and they are increasingly doing so.


They may be able to encrypt in the future but right now DTA's can't handle encryption as a couple of posters already stated.


----------



## vstone

What a cable company chooses to do and what equipment they decide to provide are differrent from what they legally can or may do.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> The cable system can charge a rental fee for the STB, even if they give one for "free" they can probably make enough renting extra boxes to customers to cover the cost of the free box. That's not even including whatever revenue the cable company may get from an occasional PPV purchase or a customer that decides to upgrade.
> 
> I share your suspicion that traps may not be worth the trouble to maintain.


The only value of traps stem from the additional revenue attributable to keeping customers who will stay with the cable system because it does not require a box for every outlet that wishes to access expanded basic service -- that's it as far as I can tell.



fallingwater said:


> They may be able to encrypt in the future but right now DTA's can't handle encryption as a couple of posters already stated.


Well, the DTAs can handle decryption, they're simply not allowed to, AFAIK.



vstone said:


> What a cable company chooses to do and what equipment they decide to provide are differrent from what they legally can or may do.


I'm not sure I know what you're saying.... is it just what I just said, above?


----------



## jrm01

OK. I used to follow this thread quite regularly until it became obvious (to me) that this was a hopeless cause (at least in the foreseeable future).

But a new situation (related to the topic, but not the same) has me wondering again. Comcast in the NW US is converting parts of basic service to digital, keeping only 31 analog channels and then providing DTA boxes for the extended channels 32-99. Since the extended digital channels (32-99) are still on the same channel number, and since they are unencrypted (from all reports that I have seen), how difficult would it be for the S3 series units to display them with guide data (since the guide data is available from TMS for these channels)?

In other words, since the channel number are fixed (don't move around like clear-QAM HD) and the guide data is present at TMS (again unlike the clear-QAM HD) what else is needed?

Also, I see mention here of traps. Is this the old style traps that they used outside the home (on the pole leading in) or are these traps in the DTA boxes themselves?


----------



## dcstager

jrm01 said:


> But a new situation (related to the topic, but not the same) has me wondering again. Comcast in the NW US is converting parts of basic service to digital, keeping only 31 analog channels and then providing DTA boxes for the extended channels 32-99. Since the extended digital channels (32-99) are still on the same channel number, and since they are unencrypted (from all reports that I have seen), how difficult would it be for the S3 series units to display them with guide data (since the guide data is available from TMS for these channels)?


There's an option in guided setup to "use digital lineup" for channel selection. Choose that and just tune in the channels. The series 3 will tune unencrypted digital channels. It already does what you are requesting.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Well, the DTAs can handle decryption, they're simply not allowed to, AFAIK.


In my location if a Comcast customer only subs to Limited Basic s/he doesn't qualify for a DTA. Further, Comcast's Pace DC50X DTA can't receive hi-def in any form, whether from Extended Basic cable simulcasts or Limited Basic OTA simulcasts.

What would be the point of encrypting and then enabling a DTA to decrypt digital standard-def Extended Basic channels when Comcast gives free DTA's to existing analog Extended Basic customers? Digital standard-def merely frees-up bandwith; hi-def and fee VOD are the money makers!


----------



## jrm01

dcstager said:


> There's an option in guided setup to "use digital lineup" for channel selection. Choose that and just tune in the channels. The series 3 will tune unencrypted digital channels. It already does what you are requesting.


Never saw this option in Guided Setup. However, since I'm talking about an HD TiVo without cablecards, I'm guessing that a Channel Scan would find them. The question is would the TiVo get the guide data. If there were an option as you suggest, I would assume that it would get the guide data.


----------



## fallingwater

Without CC's a Channel Scan would find them as unidentified unscrambled QAM channels with no guide data.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> If a customer only subs to Limited Basic s/he doesn't qualify for a DTA. Further, a DTA can't receive hi-def in any form, whether from Extended Basic cable simulcasts or Limited Basic OTA simulcasts.
> 
> What would be the point of encrypting and then enabling a DTA to decrypt digital standard-def Extended Basic channels when a cable co. gives free DTA's to existing analog Extended Basic customers? Digital standard-def merely frees-up bandwith; hi-def and fee VOD are the money makers!


Cable companies are required to have a basic tier based mostly on OTA channels plus local franchise agreement requirements. They can't require anybody to go with extended basic. IF DTA's are provided to both of these subscriber groups, it could tell only the extended basic cutsomers' DTA's to decrypt that tier. Your statement that a customer who only gets the basic tier doesn't qualify for a DTA doesn't make any sense to me. Cable companies are required to support analog TV sets thry 2012, and they can do that with a DTA if they like. They can even charge for it if they like. Who says any cable company has to give free DTA's? A DTA can even receive a HD channel and down res it as long as they can feed it to an analog TV set. Most, if not all, HD cable boxes can do this right now.


----------



## jrm01

fallingwater said:


> Without CC's a Channel Scan would find them as unidentified unscrambled QAM channels with no guide data.


That is my expectation also. However, my question is, wouldn't it be a relatively easy change by TiVo to allow the user to select an "extended basic" lineup and get the Guide Data, as compared to the much discussed problems with doing the same for clear-QAM HD local HD channels.


----------



## andyf

Wouldn't that allow full TiVo functionality of the Expanded Basic service without cable company involvement? i.e. Billing!


----------



## jrm01

andyf said:


> Wouldn't that allow full TiVo functionality of the Expanded Basic service without cable company involvement? i.e. Billing!


Billing shouldn't be a problem if it is trapped outside, as I think it is.


----------



## mattack

dcstager said:


> There's an option in guided setup to "use digital lineup" for channel selection. Choose that and just tune in the channels. The series 3 will tune unencrypted digital channels. It already does what you are requesting.


so just to make it absolutely clear, this will only work for the "extended basic" channels on digital (and of course unscrambled), not the OTA channels.. right? So I just have to rerun guided setup?

I guess if I connect the DTA box I have now and can get channels, that would confirm that rerunning guided setup would get me channels I can use.

Will I still have access to the analog versions through the existing channel #s? (presumably so, but we know that the cablecards removes access to analog channels.)


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> If a customer only subs to Limited Basic s/he doesn't qualify for a DTA. Further, a DTA can't receive hi-def in any form, whether from Extended Basic cable simulcasts or Limited Basic OTA simulcasts.
> 
> What would be the point of encrypting and then enabling a DTA to decrypt digital standard-def Extended Basic channels when a cable co. gives free DTA's to existing analog Extended Basic customers? Digital standard-def merely frees-up bandwith; hi-def and fee VOD are the money makers!





vstone said:


> Cable companies are required to have a basic tier based mostly on OTA channels plus local franchise agreement requirements. They can't require anybody to go with extended basic. IF DTA's are provided to both of these subscriber groups, it could tell only the extended basic cutsomers' DTA's to decrypt that tier. Your statement that a customer who only gets the basic tier doesn't qualify for a DTA doesn't make any sense to me. Cable companies are required to support analog TV sets thry 2012, and they can do that with a DTA if they like. They can even charge for it if they like. Who says any cable company has to give free DTA's? A DTA can even receive a HD channel and down res it as long as they can feed it to an analog TV set. Most, if not all, HD cable boxes can do this right now.


I edited the first paragraph in post #1728 to read; 'In my location if a Comcast customer only subs to Limited Basic s/he doesn't qualify for a DTA. Further, Comcast's Pace DC50X DTA can't receive hi-def in any form, whether from Extended Basic cable simulcasts or Limited Basic OTA simulcasts.' and substituted 'Comcast' for 'a cable co' in the second paragraph.

Do you know of a cable co. which currently uses DTA's as you surmise or are you just spreading FUD?


----------



## fallingwater

jrm01 said:


> ...wouldn't it be a relatively easy change by TiVo to allow the user to select an "extended basic" lineup and get the Guide Data, as compared to the much discussed problems with doing the same for clear-QAM HD local HD channels.


Without a CableCARD to map a QAM line-up, any kind of QAM mapping requires that TiVo change its system, which is what they apparently don't want to do.


----------



## fallingwater

dcstager said:


> There's an option in guided setup to "use digital lineup" for channel selection. Choose that and just tune in the channels. The series 3 will tune unencrypted digital channels. It already does what you are requesting.


Does the option apply to an S3/HDTiVo used without CableCARDS?


----------



## adamrwinterton

Wow... long thread.

Has there been a resolution to QAM mapping? Is there any way to map guide data to HD QAM channels (ie 2.1, 4.1, 5.1, 13.1, etc)?


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> What would be the point of encrypting and then enabling a DTA to decrypt digital standard-def Extended Basic channels when Comcast gives free DTA's to existing analog Extended Basic customers?


To prevent all existing analog extended basic subscribers from dropping down to limited basic, and buying a stand-alone QAM tuner.


----------



## bicker

adamrwinterton said:


> Has there been a resolution to QAM mapping?


No. The last word from TiVo was that they have no plans to pursue that feature.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> What would be the point of encrypting and then enabling a DTA to decrypt digital standard-def Extended Basic channels when Comcast gives free DTA's to existing analog Extended Basic customers? Digital standard-def merely frees-up bandwith; hi-def and fee VOD are the money makers!





bicker said:


> To prevent all existing analog extended basic subscribers from dropping down to limited basic, and buying a stand-alone QAM tuner.


Your rationale is possible. The 'real' question is whether it would be cost effective and a practical course for Comcast to follow.

A canny Comcast sub could buy a used HDTiVo cheap, not sub it and use it as an unscrambled QAM tuner, an ATSC tuner, and an analog (NTSC tuner) input featuring a free 30 minute buffer of live programming!


----------



## bicker

Yes, it comes down to how exploitative people are -- the more transgressive people there are, the more likely it is that encrypting expanded basic makes sense.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> I edited the first paragraph in post #1728 to read; 'In my location if a Comcast customer only subs to Limited Basic s/he doesn't qualify for a DTA. Further, Comcast's Pace DC50X DTA can't receive hi-def in any form, whether from Extended Basic cable simulcasts or Limited Basic OTA simulcasts.' and substituted 'Comcast' for 'a cable co' in the second paragraph.
> 
> Do you know of a cable co. which currently uses DTA's as you surmise or are you just spreading FUD?


I know that Comcast has Motorola Systems and Scientific Atlanta systems and they operate them differently. They operate different systems in different ways. Some they have already converted some to all digital. Locally they don't appear close, but there is no cable/Fios competition here. I don't know which system the Pace unit works with or if it works with both. All I have tried to bring to this discussion is that there is a difference between what they choose to do and what they have to do for legal or technical reasons.

In the case of the Pace unit, apparently the Pace unit is seen as an acceptable product with a relatively short life as opposed to a minimal HD box which has had its HD output ports disabled (which, for all I know, is what it really is) . I know nothing about the chip sets, but I would think that once you had a chip set capable of receiving clear QAM SD signals, you were almost at the same price as a chip set that receives encrypted QAM HD signals (plus or minus HDMI/IEEE 1394 circuitry). I may be wrong. I presume that the cable companies ask for bids for boxes to meet a certain need and the manufacturers provide quotes. The processing of producing that quote may include the fact that producing a certain kind of box may require the cable company to replace it earlier than sound ecological principles would dictate, but would make more money for the manufacturer. I don't know what decisions they are making, but I can hypothesize their strategies.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> ...it comes down to how exploitative people are -- the more transgressive people there are, the more likely it is that encrypting expanded basic makes sense.


We can argue till the cows come home about how 'real' the likelihood of possible encryption scenarios may be, but let's see what cable co.'s actually do!


----------



## fallingwater

vstone said:


> I know that Comcast has Motorola Systems and Scientific Atlanta systems and they operate them differently. They operate different systems in different ways. Some they have already converted some to all digital. Locally they don't appear close, but there is no cable/Fios competition here. I don't know which system the Pace unit works with or if it works with both. All I have tried to bring to this discussion is that there is a difference between what they choose to do and what they have to do for legal or technical reasons.
> 
> In the case of the Pace unit, apparently the Pace unit is seen as an acceptable product with a relatively short life as opposed to a minimal HD box which has had its HD output ports disabled (which, for all I know, is what it really is) . I know nothing about the chip sets, but I would think that once you had a chip set capable of receiving clear QAM SD signals, you were almost at the same price as a chip set that receives encrypted QAM HD signals (plus or minus HDMI/IEEE 1394 circuitry). I may be wrong. I presume that the cable companies ask for bids for boxes to meet a certain need and the manufacturers provide quotes. The processing of producing that quote may include the fact that producing a certain kind of box may require the cable company to replace it earlier than sound ecological principles would dictate, but would make more money for the manufacturer. I don't know what decisions they are making, but I can hypothesize their strategies.


Comcast is currently making an interesting pitch on their in-house channel for Tru2Way, which they foresee as eventually doing away with Cable STB's completely.

http://telephonyonline.com/iptv/news/comcast-tru2way-1016/


----------



## slowbiscuit

The only fly in that ointment is that nobody other than Panasonic seems to be serious about putting tru2way devices on the market. In a press release posted at AVS for the upcoming CableNet show, Samsung is the only vendor I saw that's going to demo tru2way STBs (among other stuff).
Which is understandable given the current economy.


----------



## 1283

All of the new set top boxes which cable companies hand out must either use CableCard for decryption, or have no decryption capability at all. Comcast, at least in my area, has chosen to keep the expanded basic SD channels in the clear and use the traditional physical traps for limited basic customers, so they can deploy the low cost DTAs.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> the more transgressive people there are, the more likely it is that encrypting expanded basic makes sense.
> 
> 
> 
> We can argue till the cows come home about how 'real' the likelihood of possible encryption scenarios may be, but let's see what cable co.'s actually do!
Click to expand...

Indeed: Our arguing about it is meaningless. What the cable companies actually do indicates clearly the reality, and that reality will be governed by what I said in the message you replied to: The more transgressive people there are, the more likely it is that encrypting expanded basic makes sense.


----------



## vstone

fallingwater said:


> Comcast is currently making an interesting pitch on their in-house channel for Tru2Way, which they foresee as eventually doing away with Cable STB's completely.
> 
> http://telephonyonline.com/iptv/news/comcast-tru2way-1016/


They said a year ago that all of their systems would be tru3way capable by the ned of the year, but they have only announced it in two markets. There has been little or no reports on how that has been going. Not even a review of the Panasonic TV sets!.

The followon to try2way is doenloadable security, which doesn't need a cable card. However, there is probably no legal way to get rid of the cablecard at this point. Stabaility would call for just living with tru2way.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Indeed: Our arguing about it is meaningless.


You indeed are a master at restating the obvious.



> What the cable companies actually do indicates clearly the reality, and that reality will be governed by what I said in the message you replied to: The more transgressive people there are, the more likely it is that encrypting expanded basic makes sense.


Since you restated your premise for cable co. action for no apparent reason I must note that by definition it's incomplete and thus essentially wrong:

*transgressverb (used without object) 1. to violate a law, command, moral code, etc.; offend; sin.

verb (used with object) 2. to pass over or go beyond (a limit, boundary, etc.): to transgress bounds of prudence. 
3. to go beyond the limits imposed by (a law, command, etc.); violate; infringe: to transgress the will of God. *

What cable co.s actually do will be the result of their determination of what business practices best enhance their revenues without unduly alienating potential customers. By definition *trans*gressive people violate or go beyond limits allowed by rules. Besides transgressive people cable co.'s will have to take into account their legal obligations and people who know the rules and take advantage of them to the fullest without transgressing them.

In the post to which first I replied you used the word 'exploitive'. Two of the three definitions of 'exploit' are positive and good. The third isn't. However since, for example, TiVo has chosen to price its hi-def DVRs at levels which don't cause them to lose money producing them, an exploitive person who uses one unsubbed does no harm to TiVo even if he exploits their product for his own purposes, i.e. selfishly.

*Exploit verb (used with object) 1. to utilize, esp. for profit;* _turn to practical account: to exploit a business opportunity._ 
*2. to use selfishly for one's own ends:* _employers who exploit their workers._ 
*3. to advance or further through exploitation; promote:* _He exploited his new movie through a series of guest appearances._

So the beat goes on! (I'll be gone for a few days though.)


----------



## jrm01

adamrwinterton said:


> Wow... long thread.
> 
> Has there been a resolution to QAM mapping? Is there any way to map guide data to HD QAM channels (ie 2.1, 4.1, 5.1, 13.1, etc)?


If it were resolved this thread wouldn't be 1752 posts long.


----------



## lew

jrm01 said:


> If it were resolved this thread wouldn't be 1752 posts long.


Actually it was resolved, tivo decided to only support the mapping that is done by cable cards.


----------



## bicker

Hehe... good point. It's kind of like saying that Margaret Mitchell never finished Gone With The Wind because you didn't like the ending.


----------



## 1003

*Yet*
the Margaret Mitchell estate comissioned 'Scarlett' as a sequel to Gone With the Wind. Apparently when enough people don't care for the ending, or they just want more than the original provided, savvy entepreneurs take action...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n5_v44/ai_12037657


----------



## jrm01

JJ said:


> *Yet*
> the Margaret Mitchell estate comissioned 'Scarlett' as a sequel to Gone With the Wind. Apparently when enough people don't care for the ending, or they just want more than the original provided, savvy entepreneurs take action...
> 
> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n5_v44/ai_12037657


Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.


----------



## cogx

adamrwinterton said:


> Wow... long thread.
> 
> Has there been a resolution to QAM mapping? Is there any way to map guide data to HD QAM channels (ie 2.1, 4.1, 5.1, 13.1, etc)?


The reason why this hasn't (and I can't ever see happening, now without a major overhaul of how TiVo licenses and provides programming guide data) is that the call sign, frequency, and virtual channel mapping information is embedded within the guide data licensed by Tribune Media Services. As several people have repeatedly point in this thread, there is just no feasible way for Tribune to keep track of the underlying QAM frequencies of all of the channels on all of the local cable companies. The issue is how would TiVo allow us end-users do it ourselves. 
The only way I can think to allow this would be if TiVo created a web application to where we login to our TiVo web accounts and are given a way to do a transform on the data Tribune sends TiVo for each lineup that exists out there and then that modified data is pushed to our TiVo boxes. The amount of code and testing it would require to do this on the TiVo hardware itself I have come to my own conclusion is not worth the investment. While I would be thrilled beyond belief if TiVo offered such a web-based lineup modification solution, I also can't see it happening, given that realistically a very small percentage of TiVo owners care about this. If you count how many unique user IDs have posted on this thread, it would be no where near 1700+, not even close. 
Again, I would *love* it if they offered us a way to do it, believe me, but I long ago stopped believed it would happen and I'm not bitter they haven't, even though I know several are. My two cents.


----------



## moyekj

cogx said:


> The reason why this hasn't (and I can't ever see happening, now without a major overhaul of how TiVo licenses and provides programming guide data) is that the call sign, frequency, and virtual channel mapping information is embedded within the guide data licensed by Tribune Media Services.


 That's only the case for OTA listings. QAM frequency assignments change frequently are guide listings are not affected by those changes and Tribune does not need to be notified of frequency changes for those; it would be a nightmare if that was the case.
I agree with rest of sentiment - I've given up on a Tivo solution for this a long time ago. There are hacks out there to do what you want if this is really important to you.


----------



## bicker

jrm01 said:


> Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.


Hehehe...

And given the 'Scarlett' sequel precedent, you've got another 50 years to wait before QAM mapping will be added as a feature.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

fallingwater said:


> Comcast is currently making an interesting pitch on their in-house channel for Tru2Way, which they foresee as eventually doing away with Cable STB's completely.
> 
> http://telephonyonline.com/iptv/news/comcast-tru2way-1016/


from that article link
"With tru2way, the only real installation is connecting the cable services coaxial cable to the TV set and installation of a conditional access card that verifies the user as a paid subscriber."

in essence tru2way would do away with the tech having to call in the pairing info since the appliance can send that to the headend itself. Like mailing a cable modem to the house, or stopping by to pick one up - tru2way might actually make cable cards be a simple put it in the slot and let it set itself up. It makes for a good security model since it is a physical device the customer must have. It lets the cable company verify/limit/charge for the number of digital outlets so they should be happy about that.

Aside from the billing system hassles (I paid for sports tier, where is it?) tru2way could actually add a large benefit of making things customer installed again and of course way less physical hardware the cable company needs to put in the house. So long as the cable companies can still charge a monthly "outlet" fee for the appliance I bought it should be good by them.

I am at a loss as to why tru2way has not picked up more steam already...


----------



## bicker

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=166127&site=cdn
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/10/16/fcc-fines-twc-and-cox-for-deploying-switched-digital-video/
http://gizmodo.com/5065367/fcc-fines-big-cable-for-ditching-tivo-owners
http://www.cedmagazine.com/FCC-fines-TWC-Cox.aspx
http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2008/10/fcc-fines-time.html

As far as I know, the FCC has not yet reversed the fines or done anything to give MSOs a good reason to believe that they won't issue more fines if more systems move channels from linear to SDV.


----------



## 1003

bicker said:


> Hehehe...
> 
> And given the 'Scarlett' sequel precedent, you've got another 50 years to wait before QAM mapping will be added as a feature.


*I have*
lifetime, so routinely pestering TiVo about the lack of guide data availbility for channels that I receive (and pay for) is a given...


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=166127&site=cdn
> http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/10/16/fcc-fines-twc-and-cox-for-deploying-switched-digital-video/
> http://gizmodo.com/5065367/fcc-fines-big-cable-for-ditching-tivo-owners
> http://www.cedmagazine.com/FCC-fines-TWC-Cox.aspx
> http://blogs.kansascity.com/tvbarn/2008/10/fcc-fines-time.html
> 
> As far as I know, the FCC has not yet reversed the fines or done anything to give MSOs a good reason to believe that they won't issue more fines if more systems move channels from linear to SDV.


Cable systems can, and are, deploying tuning adapters to solve the issue with SDV and Tivo. AFAIK there is no such solution for the, probably very few, customers that are using cable cards with a cable card compatible TV set. I wonder if the cable companies will be allowed to just give those few subscribers a free STB.


----------



## bicker

And, of course, the fines were specifically for violating the requirement to support *third party *CableCARD devices.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> And, of course, the fines were specifically for violating the requirement to support *third party *CableCARD devices.


In the context of the fines a TV set is a "third party" cc device. I don't think TV sets can work with the current dongles. The question is if the cable companies will be able to just pay the fines, get an exemption or offer free STBs to those few customers who use cc with a TV set.


----------



## bicker

A television is absolutely a third party CableCARD device, and therefore the fines would apply, if the FCC applies fines fairly and equitably. 

And each MSO will have to evaluate whether the rewards (rewards? where's the beef?) for taking the risk of new fines is worth it.


----------



## Jazhuis

ZeoTiVo said:


> I am at a loss as to why tru2way has not picked up more steam already...


Because, when I last read industry impressions of tru2way, it was just a catchy new name placed on the same OCAP system that the cable companies were pushing and that the device makers were complaining about...Java middleware that allows the CO to essentially run the device interface.

From the way things are going, it sounds like they've made more headway at reaching a common middle ground, but I remember the first round of tru2way just raising the same ire and questions that OCAP did.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

Jazhuis said:


> Because, when I last read industry impressions of tru2way, it was just a catchy new name placed on the same OCAP system that the cable companies were pushing and that the device makers were complaining about...Java middleware that allows the CO to essentially run the device interface.
> 
> From the way things are going, it sounds like they've made more headway at reaching a common middle ground, but I remember the first round of tru2way just raising the same ire and questions that OCAP did.


understood - consumer Electronic companies rightfully saw tru2way as having just as much expense and overhead on their part as OCAP - save for tru2way becoming the one standard and thus a TV or TiVo with tru2way could be hooked up to various cable companies and work off the one base of code. Many of the big name Consumer electronic companies have signed on and some smaller ones like TiVo have as well. That side of the process is on board.

Now though it seems like the cable companies once again dragging their feet over something they came up with and insisted on. getting tired of their refusal to eat their own dog food.


----------



## NotVeryWitty

ZeoTiVo said:


> Now though it seems like the cable companies once again dragging their feet over something they came up with and insisted on. getting tired of their refusal to eat their own dog food.


A recent blog posting on www.zatznotfunny.com regarding a Comcast / Sony team-up in Philladelphia shows some promise on the tru2way front -- here's the article they referenced: http://www.multichannel.com/article...Open_Showcase_Store_In_Philly.php?rssid=20059.


----------



## jccfin

moyekj said:


> There are hacks out there to do what you want if this is really important to you.


Are they practical hacks or do they require you to stand on your head while you twirl a remote to work?

Care to post a few links so I can take a look?


----------



## fallingwater

jccfin said:


> There are hacks out there to do what you want if this is really important to you.
> 
> 
> 
> Are they practical hacks or do they require you to stand on your head while you twirl a remote to work?
> 
> Care to post a few links so I can take a look?
Click to expand...

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=412296


----------



## ZeoTiVo

NotVeryWitty said:


> A recent blog posting on www.zatznotfunny.com regarding a Comcast / Sony team-up in Philladelphia shows some promise on the tru2way front -- here's the article they referenced: http://www.multichannel.com/article...Open_Showcase_Store_In_Philly.php?rssid=20059.


right. Comcast is the one pushing tru2way and most likely a big reason why Sony signed on. Other cable companies - not so much.


----------



## NotVeryWitty

ZeoTiVo said:


> right. Comcast is the one pushing tru2way and most likely a big reason why Sony signed on. Other cable companies - not so much.


Yep. It's good to see that they're starting to go into other cities. Maybe Sony has some influence with the other big cable companies (probably wishful thinking).


----------



## jccfin

fallingwater said:


> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=412296


I saw that thread but I'm not really interested in paying someone to do it for me. Teach a man to fish vs. buying some fish...


----------



## fallingwater

jccfin said:


> I saw that thread but I'm not really interested in paying someone to do it for me. Teach a man to fish vs. buying some fish...


I, 'er, feel your pain. 

Seriously though, when you read through the thread did you follow the link from the post below and was it at all helpful?

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6899001#post6899001


----------



## lew

jccfin said:


> I saw that thread but I'm not really interested in paying someone to do it for me. Teach a man to fish vs. buying some fish...


Yes, but do you want your fishing instructions to start with blueprints so you can build your own boat? Go to the other board, information is available. You don't want to pay someone else. You'll first have to learn how to do surface mount soldering.

The hack must be initially run on drive that's installed in a tivo that's been hacked, in part, by replacing a soldered chip. The drive can later be re-installed in a stock tivo. Assuming your QAM frequencies are stable paying someone makes a lot of sense. Cable card rental fees may be cheaper then paying for the service, shipping and any subsequent changes.

Tivo seems to have no, current interest, in QAM mapping. Hackers seem to have no current interest, or time to develop a hack that can be run on a tivo drive that's temporarily installed in a PC.


----------



## ciper

As noted previously Comcast is modifying certain areas so that extended basic is purely digital. I know multiple people who are using the TiVoHD with extended basic. Once this migration is completed they will have to schedule an installation and pay the monthly fee.

My most recent cable card install went as follows -
*Contractor leaves after two hours saying "it may take another 20 minutes"
*I danced through phone support until I could get them to say it was a bad card. That was after nearly two and a half hours of reboots, hits, reinsertions and other nonsense.
*I drove myself to the Comcast Service center with work order and case number in hand and social engineered two cards from the person. I had to wait in a very long line behind all the people getting digital boxes for the upcoming conversion.
*I called back and said that the previous support person told me to get the card and to call back so you could help me set it up.
*After asking supervisors and multiple other techs the person was able to get it entered in the system and activated

Basically I had lie and use knowledge that a regular person wouldn't have in order to get the install completed. Even knowing exactly what to do it still took about five solid hours of work on my part. The next day I had to call the customer retention department (the ones with real power) to social engineer a refund of the installation fee.

In the end this is way too much for the average Joe to deal with. Even though I was doing all the work my customer at the time was getting fed up and said things like "Are you sure it's worth all this trouble" "I could just return the TiVo and get the cable company unit"



jccfin said:


> Are they practical hacks or do they require you to stand on your head while you twirl a remote to work?
> 
> Care to post a few links so I can take a look?


If you're unit is already hacked the QAM mapping script is no big deal. If you haven't hacked yet then you should come back once you are able to run arbitrary code on the box.



c3 said:


> All of the new set top boxes which cable companies hand out must either use CableCard for decryption, or have no decryption capability at all. Comcast, at least in my area, has chosen to keep the expanded basic SD channels in the clear and use the traditional physical traps for limited basic customers, so they can deploy the low cost DTAs.


I live near you. I can confirm that most of the bay area is like this. I have a few friends who work for Comcast (directly or as contractors) and they are spending LOTS of money on this digital conversion. To handle the load Comcast rented out small offices in strip malls to set up centers where people can pick up cable boxes. (why does that sentence sound odd to me?)



lew said:


> Tivo seems to have no, current interest, in QAM mapping. Hackers seem to have no current interest, or time to develop a hack that can be run on a tivo drive that's temporarily installed in a PC.


I feel that the nature of the hack (leveraging something that exists in the unit) is why people would rather push for TiVo to implement this rather than create a tool. In my mind it's very similar to the buffer hack. 
I am sure all of us can agree that the buffer hack should have been implemented a long time ago.


----------



## vstone

Does bay area Comcast use Motorola or Scientific Atlanta/Cisco?


----------



## ciper

vstone said:


> Does bay area Comcast use Motorola or Scientific Atlanta/Cisco?


Moto why?


----------



## slowbiscuit

ciper said:


> In the end this is way too much for the average Joe to deal with. Even though I was doing all the work my customer at the time was getting fed up and said things like "Are you sure it's worth all this trouble" "I could just return the TiVo and get the cable company unit"


C'mon, get serious. Are you trying to claim that, for the average Joe, dealing with a Cablecard install is more trouble than doing a chip-level desolder/solder replacement of the hardware PROM? Because that's only the first step of what it takes right now to enable the QAM mapping hack.

Regardless of how you feel about what Tivo *should* do, the reality is that a CC install is the only way for Joe to get what he wants. So if that doesn't work for him, he needs to return the box.


----------



## vstone

ciper said:


> Moto why?


We have SA here. I'm just monitoring what is happening elsewhere, knowing that it will eventually happen here.


----------



## lew

ciper said:


> In my mind it's very similar to the buffer hack.
> I am sure all of us can agree that the buffer hack should have been implemented a long time ago.


I have no problem with the "default" buffer size. My DTivos were hacked and I never saw the need to increase the buffer size. Increasing the buffer, with a stock hard drive, is probably a mistake *JMO.*

I'd put the buffer suggestion in the same category as a free space indicator. One of a number of changes that at least some customers would like to see. Many (most?) of the changes in this category will never get implemented.

Sorry but I don't agree an adjustable buffer is a hack that should have been implemented a long time ago.

One poster, not in this thread, blames "lazy tivo programmers" for not implementing his suggestions, for a S1 unit no less. Tivo has a list of features they are considering. Features that help sell new units, that are reliable and won't create a support "nightmare" are features that are likely to be added.

The announced VoD partnership with SeaChange sounds like a feature that will benefit more customers then many of the features some of us ask for.

I'd like the option for "negative padding" to start recording a show 1-2 or 5 minutes late and stop recording a show 1-2 or 5 minutes early.
You'd like an adjustable buffer. Others want a free space indicator. I don't think any of these options are a big deal to program. Tivo decides which features are worth the effort it take to program, troubleshoot and support.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> ...Tivo has a list of features they are considering. Features that help sell new units, that are reliable and won't create a support "nightmare" are features that are likely to be added.
> 
> The announced VoD partnership with SeaChange sounds like a feature that will benefit more customers then many of the features some of us ask for.
> 
> I'd like the option for "negative padding" to start recording a show 1-2 or 5 minutes late and stop recording a show 1-2 or 5 minutes early.
> You'd like an adjustable buffer. Others want a free space indicator. I don't think any of these options are a big deal to program. Tivo decides which features are worth the effort it take to program, troubleshoot and support.


http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7089510#post7089510 
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7098971#post7098971
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoweb


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7089510#post7089510
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7098971#post7098971
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tivoweb


I had 3 hacked DTivo's before I switched to FiOS. I don't think the effort to hack a TivoHD is worth the extra features. JMO but online scheduling removes most of the reason I used to use tivoweb. TTG is an acceptable way to archive shows. I'm happy with the default buffer. Ciper is the one who wants an adjustable buffer and he is aware of the hacks.


----------



## clark_kent

Sorry if this is old news, but I'm finding myself more and more interested in what MOXI has to offer. I don't have a MOXI (yet) but I found this to be interesting reading in the MOXI user guide regarding channel mapping:

(http://moxi6-px.rtrk.com/us/support/MC4R/MoxiHDDVR_userguide.pdf)

Quote:

In the Moxi Menu, navigate to Settings, and then select the Channel List option If there are unmapped tunable channels, the Channel Mapping card appears. When you select it, the vertical list will display all tunable channels that were not associated with an EPG channel at the time of your channel scan. You can select Map All to map all of the channels at once. To map an individual channel:
1. Navigate an unmapped channel into center focus. Press the right arrow and then use the up/down arrows to review the list of available unassociated EPG channels.
2. Determine which unmapped EPG channel applies to an unmapped scanned tunable channel by reviewing the current programming information presented or by watching the channel. When you find a match, press OK on the EPG channel and respond to the Map This Channel? confirmation. The channel will not display in the list as a mapped channel.
3. If you determine that you mapped an EPG channel to a tunable channel in error, from the Channel Mapping card, navigate to the mapped channel, press OK, and respond to the confirmation, Un-map this channel? Follow procedures in the steps above to map the channel correctly.

End Quote.

It doesn't look like channel mapping is rocket science after all.

Another Quote:

Purchase your MOXI HD DVR today and put it to work for 30 days. At the end of 30 days, if you dont agree its the best HD DVR on the market, send it back, no questions asked. Go-ahead, Buy Now (Edit inserted link: http://moxi6-px.rtrk.com/us/buy_now.html).

End Quote.

Here's a MOXI vs TiVo comparison (by MOXI):

http://moxi6-px.rtrk.com/us/tivo_vs_moxi.html

I like TiVo and have ever since I got the Series 1 when it first came out. I have a TiVoHD (still using the S1) and have been very frustrated (and annoyed) how TiVo has treated the hole cable card issue including the lack of clearQAM mapping. I hope TiVo gets on the stick and fixes the mapping issue in light of some (apparently) real competition, otherwise I'm moving on.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

clark_kent said:


> Here's a MOXI vs TiVo comparison (by MOXI):
> 
> http://moxi6-px.rtrk.com/us/tivo_vs_moxi.html


one example from that MOXI site
MOXI
Recording Management Automatically delete your oldest programs to make room for new ones; If you want to manage your recording, you can do it all from one place  watch, delete, protect, or keep until a certain date; Choose to record the entire series or one episode only. Or, choose to record new episodes only 
TiVo
Uses Season Pass Manager to set priorities; Also can set up Wishlist (records actors, directors, etc.)

TiVo needs to sue them for false advertising but why give them even that acknowledgment at this point, I guess.



> I like TiVo and have ever since I got the Series 1 when it first came out. I have a TiVoHD (still using the S1) and have been very frustrated (and annoyed) how TiVo has treated the hole cable card issue including the lack of clearQAM mapping. I hope TiVo gets on the stick and fixes the mapping issue in light of some (apparently) real competition, otherwise I'm moving on.


Does MOXI pick up all the digital channels as it only comes with digital tuners out of the box?


----------



## clark_kent

ZeoTiVo said:


> Does MOXI pick up all the digital channels as it only comes with digital tuners out of the box?


Don't know, as I said, I don't have one. The 30 trial is tempting. I may wait a bit to see how things start shaping up... but the more I think about the 30 trial, the more tempted I am in wanting to try it out. It would be nice to see some "real" comparing since I fancy myself as a fairly knowledgeable  [clearQAM/cableCard/"other" issues] TiVo user.


----------



## mattack

If you get a Moxi, please write up a comparison somewhere (has anybody already done one?). From what I remember reading, there were a lot of downsides -- like no two tuner analog recording IIRC.. while that probably sounds minor to most, at least currently I do analog recording.. (and I guess I will get a cablecard for at least one of my Tivos to keep access to extended basic channels when they go digital).


----------



## fallingwater

Moxi received a rather lightweight revue in the current (April/May) _Sound & Vision_ Magazine, not yet online. The reviewer, John Sciacca, made an obvious error when he confused CableCARDS with tuners. He then went on to say that if Moxi is used with its optional analog tuning dongle it can record three programs at the same time.

He stated that the Switched Digital Video resolver currently available only works with HDTiVo but that Digeo expects 'a Cable Labs approved solution to be available for the Moxi in mid 2009'. He was able to receive only 120 of his Time Warner cable system's 274 channels, including only 13 out of 48 hi-def channels. Comcast Cable in my area doesn't utilize SDV.

Sciacca reported having to deal with a defective CableCARD during installation which resulted in Moxi's clock at first losing 6 to 10 minutes an hour making recordings impossible until the card was replaced. His review also stated that Moxi's PC Link feature didn't work at all, even after a Digeo tech came out to troubleshoot it, and that 'Digeo...says that an upgrade to 'full DNLA compliance this spring should eliminate the problem'.
http://www.dlna.org/industry/why_dlna/overview

I'll be getting Moxi next month to evaluate it along with the analog tuner dongle, taking advantage of Digeo's 30 day money back guarantee. Sciacca's review states that Digeo charges $25 shipping and handling for the dongle so Moxi's price is closer to $825 than $800. Amazon.com, Moxi's only retail source, currently is offering free shipping for both Moxi and HDTiVo.

If there's interest I'll post about Moxi after getting familiar with it. Moxi's reliability is most important to me along with whether it's intuitive and fun to use. I won't be evaluating all the computer related features, acknowledgedly important to many TCF posters, because they're not important to me.

Overall, it will be interesting to see how Moxi's approach works compared with TiVo and cable's (Moto) hi-def DVR.


----------



## teeitup

fallingwater said:


> I'll be getting Moxi next month to evaluate it along with the analog tuner dongle, taking advantage of Digeo's 30 day money back guarantee. Sciacca's review states that Digeo charges $25 shipping and handling for the dongle so Moxi's price is closer to $825 than $800. Amazon.com, Moxi's only retail source, currently is offering free shipping for both Moxi and HDTiVo.
> 
> If there's interest I'll post about Moxi after getting familiar with it. Moxi's reliability is most important to me along with whether it's intuitive and fun to use. I won't be evaluating all the computer related features, acknowledgedly important to many TCF posters, because they're not important to me.
> 
> Overall, it will be interesting to see how Moxi's approach works compared with TiVo and cable's (Moto) hi-def DVR.


I am very curious to hear about your review of the Moxi, particularly its ability to remap clear QAM channels in the EPG. Definitely post a review. I currently own a Sony DHG-HDD250 HD DVR and am looking into the Moxi as a second HD DVR. I would just like to see the price drop $100 to $200.


----------



## fallingwater

I've been exchanging emails with Digeo, and will order a Moxi tomorrow when my CC billing period rolls over.

Three things worth noting so far:

Digeo confirms that when used with the analog tuning dongle Moxi can record three programs simultaneously, one of course from a standard-def analog source. 

Digeo, without my requesting it, has stated they'll waive the shipping and handling fee for the dongle.

Digeo stated that the price for out-of-warrantee service after Moxi's 90 day labor/1 yr. parts warrantee expires is a flat $75 for labor and $55 for a 500GB replacement HDD which is competitive with TiVo's (unofficial, I believe) $150 flat rate out-of-warrantee service for TiVo brand DVRs.


----------



## clark_kent

Hello all,

A couple of thoughts regarding Moxi and some recent posts from: 

ZeoTiVo
mattack
fallingwater
teeitup

and myself included:

There are probably a fair number of people that ignore this thread. 

A TiVo/Moxi comparison/debate is probably interesting reading to a greater number of community members at large.

May I suggest we start a new topic/thread and consolidate recent post regarding Moxi from my earlier post #1785 on forward?

If Moxi is going to be a viable alternative to TiVo aficionados, fans and TiVo lovers, a new, specific tread may also serve our community in that it may get more scrutiny and attention from TiVo Inc and provide added incentive for TiVo Inc to step up TiVo evolution.


Maybe we can even get a Sticky


----------



## fallingwater

I agree. The only Moxi feature appropriate to revue here is its system of mapping unscrambled QAM channels. Otherwise Moxi belongs in another thread.

A new thread can be started as clark_kent suggests, or either of two existing threads can be continued; the newer one at the Coffe House or the more comprehensive one here. I favor the existing Moxi thread here, but will gladly follow other posters' leads.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=420942
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413204


----------



## clark_kent

fallingwater said:


> I agree. The only Moxi feature appropriate to revue here is its system of mapping unscrambled QAM channels. Otherwise Moxi belongs in another thread.
> 
> A new thread can be started as clark_kent suggests, or either of two existing threads can be continued; the newer one at the Coffe House or the more comprehensive one here. I favor the existing Moxi thread here, but will gladly follow other posters' leads.
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=420942
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413204


I vote to have a Moxi thread within Series3 rather then the Coffee House since I think it would have more better  exposure to the community at large, and fine by me to use the previously stated thread:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=413204


----------



## ciper

I thought this was relevant from http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7183506#post7183506



micmason said:


> My ongoing problems with cable cards is that my cable provider (Comcast) is unable to differentiate between a cable card and what they call " additional digital outlets". I have two TiVos that use three cable cards between them, and according to Comcast website information, I should be charged two dollars per month for cable card use. Instead, they have been trying to continuously charge me for three additional digital outlets instead of 3 cable [email protected]$8.99 X 3=$26.97. When I call to inform them of the error and tell them that I only have one additional digital outlet,the Comcast service rep thinks the cable cards are additional outlets, so they deactivate them causing me to lose my digital service. This has resulted in five unnecessary service calls, because once they deactivate the cards, they are never able to activate them again without having to send a technician out. I have had 3 "defective" cable cards replaced in the past five months. If you use Comcast make sure you're not being overcharged and look for the A/O charge on your statement.





slowbiscuit said:


> C'mon, get serious. Are you trying to claim that, for the average Joe, dealing with a Cablecard install is more trouble than doing a chip-level desolder/solder replacement of the hardware PROM? Because that's only the first step of what it takes right now to enable the QAM mapping hack.


I think you missed the point because that is not what I was trying to say. Dealing with a cablecard install is more trouble that *NOT* dealing with a cable card install. QAM mapping is needed even more so than in the past since many cable companies are moving to pure digital with the extended basic portion of the lineup being unencrypted.

Moto has sold a ton of those micro digital STB because of it.



slowbiscuit said:


> Regardless of how you feel about what Tivo *should* do, the reality is that a CC install is the only way for Joe to get what he wants. So if that doesn't work for him, he needs to return the box.


The only way only because of an artificial barrier created by TiVo. You should take a look at the QAM mapping script (found on ddb). You'll see that its blindingly simple for anyone use to hacking their box. The minor modifications done by the script make me think TiVo may have considered manual QAM mapping from the start.


----------



## slowbiscuit

They don't want to provide a QAM mapping screen in the UI, either officially or unofficially. The script has nothing to do with a UI implementation for the average Joe, and Joe wants nothing to do with hacking anyway.

So the only way to get QAM mapping is to get a CC. End of story. You can keep *****ing here but it's not going to change a damn thing.


----------



## The_Linux_Crew

slowbiscuit said:


> They don't want to provide a QAM mapping screen in the UI, either officially or unofficially. The script has nothing to do with a UI implementation for the average Joe, and Joe wants nothing to do with hacking anyway.
> 
> So the only way to get QAM mapping is to get a CC. End of story. You can keep *****ing here but it's not going to change a damn thing.


Thanks for clarifying that. I was about the buy a TiVo HD, but I guess I will just stick with my series 2 until it expires.


----------



## mattack

You should *call* Tivo and tell them that. Otherwise, they have no idea that the lack of this functionality is losing them sales.


----------



## fallingwater

cogx said:


> ...the call sign, frequency, and virtual channel mapping information is embedded within the guide data licensed by Tribune Media Services. As several people have repeatedly point in this thread, there is just no feasible way for Tribune to keep track of the underlying QAM frequencies of all of the channels on all of the local cable companies. The issue is how would TiVo allow us end-users do it ourselves.
> The only way I can think to allow this would be if TiVo created a web application to where we login to our TiVo web accounts and are given a way to do a transform on the data Tribune sends TiVo for each lineup that exists out there and then that modified data is pushed to our TiVo boxes. The amount of code and testing it would require to do this on the TiVo hardware itself I have come to my own conclusion is not worth the investment. While I would be thrilled beyond belief if TiVo offered such a web-based lineup modification solution, I also can't see it happening, given that realistically a very small percentage of TiVo owners care about this. If you count how many unique user IDs have posted on this thread, it would be no where near 1700+, not even close.
> 
> Again, I would *love* it if they offered us a way to do it, believe me, but I long ago stopped believed it would happen and I'm not bitter they haven't, even though I know several are. My two cents.





cogx said:


> As the argument continues on this (OTA frequency changes) thread, I think the crux of the issue is understanding what exactly the focus is for Tribune/Zap2It (and others) in terms of providing guide data. It seems to me that providing guide data is really all about the programming itself - what show is on which channel when and the like - so I guess I can understand why this digital transition is causing guide data providers so much grief. How much time and effort should Tribune/Zap2It put into proactively fixing these channel frequencies changes and have they/are they currently doing enough? I've come to the conclusion, as I've posted before, I believe that the ultimate authority for keeping a 100% accurate database table of call signs, frequencies, and virtual channel numbers should be the FCC, not really each individual guide data provider. The guide data providers shouldn't have to be getting frequency changes by individual TV watchers, like myself, or even their guide data licensees, like TiVo, if the FCC could be counted on to have current and completely accurate data that could easily be pulled down from their web site by the guide data providers and merged into their own data stores.
> 
> On the technical side of things, the frustration as a TiVo user ultimately comes back to the fact that a TiVo box relies on the "fccChannelNumber" to be accurate in the guide data coming from Tribune, to match up programming data with each individual's tuned in stations. This was a software design decision that people have been complaining about for years, such as in the infamous QAM channel mapping threads and now continues in this thread. If TiVo were to have separated out the channel frequency from the guide data, then they would be able to control these channel mappings and perhaps even add end-user control over it (I would say, via our web site accounts, not actually through the TiVo unit's UI). Unfortunately, that is not how they implemented it and like others have said repeatedly in many threads on this site, while we disagree with TiVo on their implementation, none of these complaints over the years on this site has resulted in them making a change.





fallingwater said:


> I'm just curious and have no knowledge of the cost or simplicity of what you suggest, but why do you suggest that a tie through the internet to a user's account be used instead of allowing a relatively simple (XX-XX) number to be substituted directly for a channel number incorrectly mapped in TiVo's EPG.





cogx said:


> My observation as a 5 year TiVo user is that they are extremely conservative when it comes to making changes to the UI on their hardware, let alone writing and testing the routines to do channel mapping adjustments in our TiVo hardware. I'm pretty sure anytime this end-user channel mapping might have come up in their developer meetings, they would strike it down as just too much work to want to bother with it.
> However, if they wrote a web app interface to our channel lineups and let us make channel mapping changes on-line, then their central servers would do the necessary processing of our guide data and then the TiVo hardware in our homes just downloads the fixed guide data the same as always. Not trivial, by any means, but far less complicated than adding such functionality to the TiVo software.
> 
> That's just what popped into my head, anyway, but that's as someone who has never seen their source code or data stores, so this is all completely speculative on my part.


Interesting speculation!

TiVo's S3/HDTiVo employs CableCARDS for all mapping functions. Without CableCARDS only manual recordings with no guide info can be set up.

Sony's (discontinued but still available on eBay) hi-def DVRs with TVGOS employ CableCards or permit users to enter QAM channel numbers directly into channel guide info. TVGOS's QAM mapping offers the greatest number of options and the most flexibility, largely because it's one-size-fits-most approach offers more channel listings than are typically available. The downside is that a user has more work to do. Digitally based TVGOS has made manual QAM mapping easier than earlier versions.

Moxi's new hi-def DVR employs CableCARDS or a server based QAM mapping system which requires users to manually pair channel numbers with listing info, in a similiar fashion but less automated than the system cogx speculates about. Moxi's system is relatively easy to use, offering program info simultaneously with a view of what's actually showing on a channel. Some TVGOS options aren't available however.


----------



## SteveHC1

Over the past few months I've seen TiVo's development move in an interesting direction, but its marketing strategy hasn't kept up.

Specifically, TiVo seems to no longer be interested in concentrating on its original, "core" function of being the manufacturer of a dvr per se. Rather, it has been focusing its product development on facilitating increased revenue streams for the company with primary efforts such as programming into its user interface exotic advertising tie-ins, multiple (Internet-based) program sources, improved ways of searching for video products across program providers, and the collection and sale of relevant data regarding advertising, viewer preferences and demographics. In other words, they seem to be striving to provide an "all-in-one" multi-media set-top box that provides the company with as diversified a constellation of revenue streams as possible. Thus, providing user-defined clear QAM mapping capability is at the bottom of its "to-do" list if for no other reason than it wouldn't contribute to the company's efforts to increase its revenue streams.

On the surface, at least, this might seem to make sense given that the overwhelming majority of dvr users (at least in the US) seem to be perfectly satisfied with relying on their cable or satellite company-provided dvr. HOWEVER, TiVo has for whatever reason (still) not seen fit to even actively, let alone aggressively, market its consumer product AS an "all-in-one" set-top box. THUS, the majority of consumers CONTINUE to stick with their "generic" dvrs, while those who wish diversification of programming sources stick with those "generic" dvrs but ALSO purchase OTHER products such as the Roku box (i.e. "streaming" products). Heck, not only do most people NOT know that TiVo "does" Internet linking, downloading and streaming, they ALSO don't realize that *downloading* more often than not results in a higher quality video experience than *streaming* does.

So what we seem to have (at least from my perspective) is a product that's striving to become an all-in-one multimedia hub that does recording of entire programs - from OTA, cable and Internet - as well as link with other Internet and home network a/v sources, but ALSO does streaming - yet is NOT actively marketed as such. This may be good enough to provide the company with enough of an increase in revenue short-term to keep it going, but I question its long-term viability if the company doesn't make a major effort to reposition its product to attract a larger market share by acknowledging and PROMOTING its product's versatility. And if this keeps up for much longer, I suspect some other company - possibly a PC or television maker - could EASILY step in to fill the vacant "spot," even if they wound up having to pay TiVo some sort of royalty for use of a feature or two (heck, TiVo's incorporated other companies' creations - such as Apple's Bonjour - into ITS own product ANYWAY). And I would think that any such company would incorporate user-defined clear QAM mapping into such a product, because the GOAL of such a product would be to become a CONSUMER market LEADER.

As long as TiVo continues to try to make its money primarily by controlling access to company-contracted programming sources rather than company-manufactured product, I think it will continue to lead a very precarious life because it will NEVER be able to "keep up" with the ever-expanding variety of online video SOURCES that people will demand easy access to.


----------



## bicker

So what you're saying, Steve, is that the integrations with Rhapsody, Netflix and Amazon are figments of my imagination?


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> TiVo's S3/HDTiVo employs CableCARDS for all mapping functions. Without CableCARDS only manual recordings with no guide info can be set up.
> 
> Sony's (discontinued but still available on eBay) hi-def DVRs with TVGOS employ CableCards or permit users to enter QAM channel numbers directly into channel guide info. TVGOS's QAM mapping offers the greatest number of options and the most flexibility, largely because it's one-size-fits-most approach offers more channel listings than are typically available. The downside is that a user has more work to do. Digitally based TVGOS has made manual QAM mapping easier than earlier versions.
> 
> Moxi's new hi-def DVR employs CableCARDS or a server based QAM mapping system which requires users to manually pair channel numbers with listing info, in a similiar fashion but less automated than the system cogx speculates about. Moxi's system is relatively easy to use, offering program info simultaneously with a view of what's actually showing on a channel. Some TVGOS options aren't available however.





Bimwad said:


> To get into diagnostic mode, hold down the Info button until the screen comes up. You can then use the CH +/- buttons to cycle between three screens.
> 
> To get a channel table listing all the channels and their frequencies, press 123, then use the Enter button to scroll through the tables. Pressing other buttons will return you to the main diagnostic screen.
> 
> Pressing the Info button again exits the diagnostic mode.


http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7209407#post7209407

_The channel listing table screens on a Pace DTA, coupled with the North American cable television frequencies linked to below, provide exactly the info needed to map unscrambled QAM channels!_  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_cable_television_frequencies


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> So what you're saying, Steve, is that the integrations with Rhapsody, Netflix and Amazon are figments of my imagination?


- I *think* I was pretty clear in saying that although the TiVo product has those features, TiVo Inc.'s marketing efforts are not focusing on them (and that given TiVo's efforts to stay focused on increasing revenue streams for itself, clear QAM remapping probably isn't on the "corporate To Do List" - a BIG mistake in my estimation).


----------



## bicker

So what you're saying, Steve, is that TiVo managed to deploy integrations with Rhapsody, Netflix and Amazon without focusing on them. Wow. Who knew they were magicians?

Steve: I think your passion for this one feature, which is, as you say, not going to increase revenue streams, is biasing your rhetoric. The reality is that TiVo is, again, as you say, focused on doing what they're supposed to, i.e., serve the best interests of their owners, and in doing so they're not going to focus on things that so few customers care enough about to have it as a driver of revenues.

What they're doing is not a mistake; it is something that you don't like. Big difference.


----------



## SteveHC1

bicker said:


> So what you're saying, Steve, is that TiVo managed to deploy integrations with Rhapsody, Netflix and Amazon without focusing on them. Wow. Who knew they were magicians?
> 
> Steve: I think your passion for this one feature, which is, as you say, not going to increase revenue streams, is biasing your rhetoric. The reality is that TiVo is, again, as you say, focused on doing what they're supposed to, i.e., serve the best interests of their owners, and in doing so they're not going to focus on things that so few customers care enough about to have it as a driver of revenues.
> 
> What they're doing is not a mistake; it is something that you don't like. Big difference.


- LOL!!! A negative, concept-and-word-twisting response as usual! Well, at least you're consistent! Take care, and have a nice day.


----------



## lew

Steve--Like most DVR users I FF through commercials, even tivo commercials. I don't have the slightest idea how features like Netflix streaming are promoted by tivo or if tivo is letting Netflix do the promotion. Tivo wins if the features you list result in new customers *or create additional revenue from existing customers.* It's certainly possible those features won't add any significant number of new customers but will generate revenue after a customer activates their tivo.

I agree with your second point, it's clear features like Netflix and the announced cable VoD feature are getting resources that could have been used for QAM mapping. I'll assume tivo has decided features they are adding will attract more potential customers, and extract extra revenue from customers, then QAM mapping. Based on the hack adding QAM mapping is trivial. I'll assume tivo is assessing the support costs, and issues when cable systems change frequencies.

I think you're agreeing with Bicker's main point, tivo has decided to allocate resources to add features other then QAM mapping. It's not clear from your post if you think tivo is making a mistake in not promoting these new features more.


----------



## SteveHC1

lew said:


> Steve--Like most DVR users I FF through commercials, even tivo commercials. I don't have the slightest idea how features like Netflix streaming are promoted by tivo or if tivo is letting Netflix do the promotion. Tivo wins if the features you list result in new customers *or create additional revenue from existing customers.* It's certainly possible those features won't add any significant number of new customers but will generate revenue after a customer activates their tivo.
> 
> I agree with your second point, it's clear features like Netflix and the announced cable VoD feature are getting resources that could have been used for QAM mapping. I'll assume tivo has decided features they are adding will attract more potential customers, and extract extra revenue from customers, then QAM mapping. Based on the hack adding QAM mapping is trivial. I'll assume tivo is assessing the support costs, and issues when cable systems change frequencies.
> 
> I think you're agreeing with Bicker's main point, tivo has decided to allocate resources to add features other then QAM mapping. It's not clear from your post if you think tivo is making a mistake in not promoting these new features more.


I agree that TiVo, via its added features, will gain additional revenue from its pre-existing customers via movie rentals etc. But relying on getting more money out of those pre-existing accounts does not in and of itself bode well for the company's long-term viability and certainly not for its stock holders. For that, it will need to significantly increase unit sales and gain market share among dvr owners. I don't see that happening without much more aggressive marketing, which can - and I believe should - hang its hat on TiVo's multitude of features (which distinguish TiVo from its "generic" competitors).

You can have a product that has a million and one features (and given the current economy I believe clear QAM mapping would be a MARKETABLE feature, and thus financially more than compensate for whatever minor "support costs" would be incurred), but if consumers aren't even AWARE of those features (and/or don't see how those features can benefit them in any way) they will not buy the product - ESPECIALLY if the product requires an on-going subscription just for even basic functionality. By now, TiVo (especially TiVo HD) can - no, make that *should* - be a BLOCKBUSTER (no pun intended) product. But it isn't, largely due to inadequate marketing. (And BTW, Netflix's marketing efforts seem to be successful at selling ROKU units, NOT TiVo units. TiVo therefore should not be relying on other companies to do its marketing, it needs to do it for ITSELF.)


----------



## Saxion

I agree that TiVo needs to focus on winning new customers. A good way to do this is for TiVo to expand their marketing to encompass more than just the 100-plus-channel-cable-crowd, especially in light of current economic conditions where people are much more sensitive to recurring costs. To some degree, TiVo is moving in that direction. They recently put together a new marketing page, linked from their homepage, that directly markets to the OTA-only crowd  ("Get over-the-air HD programming FREE!"). I think this is very wise.

What they are missing from that page is a discussion of how TiVo can also support the same channels when received on a limited basic cable package (along with a CableCARD or Tuning Adapter, of course). And, if TiVo did add guide support for clear QAM channels when received without a CableCARD/TA, that would be an even simpler marketing message.


----------



## lew

I agree offering a cable card free option for unencrypted QAM channels would be a natural extension of this marketing approach.

We know from the hackers that QAM mapping is doable.

This tells me tivo is concerned about the reliability and stability of offering QAM mapping. I'll speculate frequency changes, possible SDV issues and support issues if a cable system starts to encrypt channels a customer was receiving, but not paying for are all real issues.


----------



## AKThunder

I have wanted this too. I dont want to have to get digital just so the info comes up.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> I agree offering a cable card free option for unencrypted QAM channels would be a natural extension of this marketing approach.
> 
> We know from the hackers that QAM mapping is doable.
> 
> This tells me tivo is concerned about the reliability and stability of offering QAM mapping. I'll speculate frequency changes, possible SDV issues and support issues if a cable system starts to encrypt channels a customer was receiving, but not paying for are all real issues.


Seems as though Moxi's QAM mapping system required devoting a fair amount of resources toward developing it. Without DVR competition TiVo may not have felt QAM mapping a worthwhile expenditure. It's likely they still won't; it's much easier to utilize CableCARDS not only for Premium access, which is CC's primary purpose, but for channel mapping. But CC mapping often creates extra costs for DVR users!


----------



## mattack

Kriever said:


> I have wanted this too. I dont want to have to get digital just so the info comes up.


Have you contacted your cable company? *some* people HAVE been able to get CableCards without getting digital..


----------



## ciper

I wanted to thank SteveHC1 for post 1800 (and 1807).

edit: This post seems relevant http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7152010#post7152010



Saxion said:


> especially in light of current economic conditions where people are much more sensitive to recurring costs.
> 
> if TiVo did add guide support for clear QAM channels when received without a CableCARD/TA, that would be an even simpler marketing message.


Agreed. There are many types of customers and not everyone thinks the same way as you or I. It seems that some of the TCF members don't remember that its the case.

I'm sure many of us have heard the saying "Penny wise and pound foolish." I think manual QAM mapping would take advantage of this fairly common trait.


----------



## bicker

You've said something similar probably a dozen times, but have yet to provide any normalized market research showing that the costs associated with doing what you want would be sufficiently exceeded by the profits. It seems to me that in implying with your rhetoric that your _preference _is _fact_, you're being foolish.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> You've said something similar probably a dozen times, but have yet to provide any normalized market research showing that the costs associated with doing what you want would be sufficiently exceeded by the profits. It seems to me that in implying with your rhetoric that your _preference _is _fact_, you're being foolish.


Bicker--Tivo is promoting using tivo OTA as a lower cost way to obtain TV programming. Clear QAM would be a natural extension of this approach. Most of the shows I tivo are OTA shows but an antenna won't work for me. I might consider a second tivo, for unencrypted shows, and save the cost of cable card rental.

We know from the hack that QAM mapping isn't that difficult. My conclusion, *nothing more then speculation* that support issues are more substantial then some posters realize. Frequencies might change. Some channels may wind up being encrypted. Some stations could be part of SDV.

At one time I thought a QAM mapping solution, limited to broadcast channles, might work. Those channles are less likely to be subject to frequency changes, will never become encrypted and are have virtually no chance of changing to SDV status. I don't think this would satisfy some of the posters in this thread and would probably result in many support calls. Why can't I record ESPN?


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Bicker--Tivo is promoting using tivo OTA as a lower cost way to obtain TV programming.


That doesn't obligate them to support Clear QAM. You seem to be implying that there is a vast amount of revenue to be had from people looking to use TiVo for OTA. I can tell you that if I needed an OTA DVR, I'd spend $250 for a DTVPal plus, instead of $250 + $299 for a TiVo HD. You cannot convince me that TiVo expects to make a lot of revenue off of OTA-only customers. They're not going to turn down a few extra sales, and they'll spend a few bucks trying to prompt such sales, but no friggen way are they going to waste a lot of money doing new development, given that the competition for that offering is charging less than half.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> I can tell you that if I needed an OTA DVR, I'd spend $250 for a DTVPal plus, instead of $250 + $299 for a TiVo HD.


Bicker, you constantly miss the point about this.

The person you're replying to said: *"an antenna won't work for me".*

That means he *can't* use the DTVPal.
That means he *can't* use the DTVPal.
That means he *can't* use the DTVPal.
Now do you understand?

Me too. I tried OTA but had too much multipath. Originally, cable was intended for *exactly* my situation, people who couldn't get OTA. But now cable companies have managed to convince most people that cable is synonymous with spending $100/mo for all sorts of premium services.

I want my TiVo HD to work with cheap cable. The DTVPal does *not* work with cheap cable. It doesn't solve my problem and it doesn't solve the problem of the poster you responded to.


----------



## ciper

I think this thread needs to be renamed since QAM is not the only use.

Read the thread I am linking below. It demonstrates yet another reason for Guide data mapping

http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=423859

With that thread in mind I argue that Guide Data Mapping could *reduce* support costs since it would reduce or eliminate the need for custom lineups to be created! It would be nice if I had the choice to either work with support to create a custom lineup OR make one myself I wish I knew how many [email protected] emails they get...


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> That doesn't obligate them to support Clear QAM. You seem to be implying that there is a vast amount of revenue to be had from people looking to use TiVo for OTA. I can tell you that if I needed an OTA DVR, I'd spend $250 for a DTVPal plus, instead of $250 + $299 for a TiVo HD. You cannot convince me that TiVo expects to make a lot of revenue off of OTA-only customers. They're not going to turn down a few extra sales, and they'll spend a few bucks trying to prompt such sales, but no friggen way are they going to waste a lot of money doing new development, given that the competition for that offering is charging less than half.


You read my post wrong. The fact that tivo hasn't extended the promotion to include QAM mapping suggests the support costs are more expensive then claimed by a few zealots in this thread.


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Bicker, you constantly miss the point about this.
> 
> The person you're replying to said: *"an antenna won't work for me".*


You are not paying attention. Read the message I was replying to!!!


lew said:


> Bicker--Tivo is promoting using tivo OTA as a lower cost way to obtain TV programming.


Take up your objection with Lew, not me!

"Now do you understand?"


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I want my TiVo HD to work with cheap cable.


Well I would never have guessed. 

Of course you do. Tough! Don't you understand that there is more money to be made expending development and support resources towards services that people *who aren't cheap* want?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> Don't you understand that there is more money to be made expending development and support resources towards services that people *who aren't cheap* want?


But your argument is fallacious. If I spend $10/mo for cheap cable or if I spend $100/mo for premium cable, I'm still buying a TiVo HD and I'm still paying TiVo their monthly fee.

If TiVo supported clear QAM, they would make *Mo' Money* from me. I'd buy more boxes from them and I'd pay them more in monthly fees (or the lifetime equivalent). How is that being cheap?

This thread has made clear that there are many people who want to give TiVo money for clear QAM, even though they don't want to spend $100/mo for a fancy cable package.


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> But your argument is fallacious. If I spend $10/mo for cheap cable or if I spend $100/mo for premium cable, I'm still buying a TiVo HD and I'm still paying TiVo their monthly fee.


However, will you be more or less likely to buy another one? Are you going to be more likely or less likely to spring for the TiVo wireless adapter? My argument is *far *from fallacious.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> This thread has made clear that there are many people who want to give TiVo money for clear QAM


No. This thread has made it clear that the* same few* people *repeatedly *want TiVo to support clear QAM.


----------



## clark_kent

Relatively speaking, compared to the number of TiVo owners, there probably are very few people posting anything about clearQAM mapping. It may be the "same few" people asking for clearQAM support, I don't know.

However, statistically speaking, "the few" people that are speaking out about the need for clearQAM support, in all likelihood, represent a significant number. Like the tip of an iceberg.

Personally, I think there is a significant number of DVR users that, for the most part, are happy watching major broadcast network shows and they don't want any "premium" cable service. I believe that most of these people do not want or like being "forced" into cable tiers or premium cable service, for channels that they don't want, just because TiVo requires a CableCard, for proper guide data, just to be able to record "basic HD" (not premium) network shows from abc, nbc, cbs, or fox.

TiVo needs to print, in big bold letters, on the outside of the TiVoHD box, the following disclosure:

WARNING: GUIDE DATA IS REQUIRED FOR FULL TIVO FUNCTIONALITY!

WARNING: IN ORDER TO RECORD HIGH DEFINITION (HD) PROGRAMS USING FULL TIVO FUNCTIONALLY FROM BROADCAST NETWORKS SUCH AS ABC, CBS, NBC, OR FOX, GUIDE DATA IS REQUIRED!

WARNING: YOU ARE REQUIRED TO RENT A CABLECARD FROM YOUR CABLE PROVIDER IN ORDER TO RECEIVE COMPETE GUIDE DATA.

WARNING: YOU MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBSCRIBE TO "PREMIUM" CABLE SERVICE IN ORDER TO RENT A CABLECARD FROM YOUR CABLE PROVIDER.


----------



## bicker

clark_kent said:


> However, statistically speaking, "the few" people that are speaking out about the need for clearQAM support, in all likelihood, represent a significant number.


Bull.

Without proof, you're just one of those few saying basically the same thing all over again.

And *TiVo *actually has the resources and inclination to survey their market and therefore *know*, rather than *guess*, which is what you're doing.



clark_kent said:


> TiVo needs to print, in big bold letters, on the outside of the TiVoHD box, the following disclosure:


No they don't. You just *want* them to. Big difference.


----------



## nipster00

i would like it as well


----------



## Adam1115

nipster00 said:


> i would like it as well


I know, lots of us do, Bicker just likes to bicker...


----------



## bicker

bicker just likes to inject a little bit of reality into the discussion.


----------



## clark_kent

bicker said:


> *TiVo *actually has the resources and inclination to survey their market and therefore *know*, rather than *guess*, which is what you're doing.


Yes, I am guessing. However, statistically, most surveys are responded to by a relatively small number compared to the global population set that any survey is trying to ping. Survey responders may not accurately represent any majority within the global set, or represent a significant number within the global set, on any one specific issue, like the need for TiVo to support clearQAM mapping.

And, your proof is what, "becasue _you_ say so?"



clark_kent said:


> TiVo needs to print, in big bold letters, on the outside of the TiVoHD box, the following disclosure:
> 
> *WARNING: GUIDE DATA IS REQUIRED FOR FULL TIVO FUNCTIONALITY!
> 
> WARNING: IN ORDER TO RECORD HIGH DEFINITION (HD) PROGRAMS USING FULL TIVO FUNCTIONALLY FROM BROADCAST NETWORKS SUCH AS ABC, CBS, NBC, OR FOX, GUIDE DATA IS REQUIRED!
> 
> WARNING: YOU ARE REQUIRED TO RENT A CABLECARD FROM YOUR CABLE PROVIDER IN ORDER TO RECEIVE COMPETE GUIDE DATA.
> 
> WARNING: YOU MAY BE REQUIRED TO SUBSCRIBE TO "PREMIUM" CABLE SERVICE IN ORDER TO RENT A CABLECARD FROM YOUR CABLE PROVIDER.*


*
*



bicker said:


> No they don't. You just *want* them to. Big difference.


So, you are arguing that some *basic* functionality *facts* as to how a TiVo _*actually works*_ should be hidden from potential customers because only a "*few*" customers may be affected???

*NICE!!!!!*

Why not ask the surgeon general to stop warning people that smoking can cause cancer because only *some people* that smoke get cancer.



bicker said:


> bicker just likes to inject a little bit of reality into the discussion.


*Reality:*

You probably think (and would argue) that George W Bush was the best President ever.

You probably think (and would argue) that we've "won" the war in Iraq.

You probably think (and would argue) that Brownie FEMA director actually did a heck of a job, as did George W.

And, you probably work for the cable industry.

End of *Reality*.

And, yes, those are my personal opinions. I have no proof, or survey to support my opinions.


----------



## ZeoTiVo

clark_kent said:


> However, statistically speaking, "the few" people that are speaking out about the need for clearQAM support, in all likelihood, represent a significant number. Like the tip of an iceberg.


That is not statistically speaking since this forum is very skewed towards those that know about clear QAM in the first place. This forum is the epitome of getting the bad results you speak of elsewhere.

Most poll takers however have very mature and formal formulas to follow to derive the + or _ error that will occur based on the population they sureveyed and how truly random it is


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

clark_kent said:


> However, statistically speaking, "the few" people that are speaking out about the need for clearQAM support, in all likelihood, represent a significant number. Like the tip of an iceberg.


I'm one of those people speaking out.

One other thing to consider. After I got my first TiVo I evengelized it to my colleagues at work. Four of them went on to buy their first TiVo because of me (and they have bought others since then). I was 1/2 responsible for a fifth colleague doing the same. And I used to evangelize the product to many other people; doubtlessly a number of them also converted to the TiVo religion.

But I don't do that any more. Between the simple things the product is missing (like free space indicator, clear QAM support, etc) and the silly bugs, I've stopped pushing the product. Sure it's better than what the cable company offers. But it's not a "religious" experience any more, and I don't feel the need to evangelize it.

My sincere apologies if anyone is offended by the "religious" metaphor. I'm using a "lay" meaning and don't intend to discrespect anyone's faith.


----------



## bicker

clark_kent said:


> Yes, I am guessing. However, statistically, most surveys are responded to by a relatively small number compared to the global population set that any survey is trying to ping.


That's a tautology.

Are you really trying to assert that your personal preference or gut-feel is superior to normalized, statistical samples? 



clark_kent said:


> And, your proof is what, "becasue _you_ say so?"


I'm asserting that you don't know, which is not only self-evident, but now admitted; and also that the best indication of what you would "know" if you *actually *had access to the information that is necessary in order to "know", is what TiVo does, because they do have access to the information that is necessary in order to "know", and also their primary rational motivation is to use that information to serve their owners' best financial interests, rather than being subjected to your motivations, dominated by what would be best for viewers.



clark_kent said:


> So, you are arguing that some basic functionality facts as to how a TiVo _actually works_ should be hidden from potential customers because only a "*few" customers may be affected???*


*No, I'm arguing that your personal preferences are nothing more than that, and have no impact whatsoever on what you asserted in your message, i.e., what TiVo "needs" (YOUR WORD) to do. What TiVo needs to do is what is required by law, what is expected by generally-accepted mass-consumer market practices, and what is demanded by their owners.

Not you.



clark_kent said:



Why not ask the surgeon general to stop warning people that smoking can cause cancer because only some people that smoke get cancer.

Click to expand...

Because there is an overriding public interest in protecting people from the hidden dangers of smoking cigarettes. There is no overriding interest in doing what you suggest, even though you think so, insist that is so, even if you do so in big letters and with wild fonts. (You might be thinking about posting a reply to that, overlooking [either through neglect or malevolence] the word "overriding" in what I wrote. The result would be an emotional reply totally devoid of relevance as a result. Here's a warning in advance: If you don't understand the word "overriding", and don't understand why it applies to health issues and not to DVRs, then don't bother replying.)



clark_kent said:



Reality:

Click to expand...

Your attacks are ridiculous, and as wrong as everything else you've written in this message.



clark_kent said:



You probably think (and would argue) that George W Bush was the best President ever.

Click to expand...

I voted for Clinton and Obama.



clark_kent said:



You probably think (and would argue) that we've "won" the war in Iraq.

Click to expand...

I have never supported the war in Iraq.



clark_kent said:



You probably think (and would argue) that Brownie FEMA director actually did a heck of a job, as did George W.

Click to expand...

I don't have a strong feeling about Mr. Brown; I think the cheap bastards that we taxpayers are left him with utterly inadequate resources to do the job, and we continue to be cheap bastards, putting everyone who would be in Mr. Brown's situation in the same predicament.



clark_kent said:



And, you probably work for the cable industry.

Click to expand...

Four wrong assertions in a row, but par for the course given how wrong you are about so many things.

The issue so many consumers seem to be unable to understand is just how often when "people like them" cast aspersions on others (FEMA, Comcast, TiVo, etc.) the vast majority of times the core of fault rests in themselves and their fellow taxpayers/consumers/investors/citizens, rather than in the targets of their whining. The reality is that "little people with little minds" see only their frustration, not the underlying causes for it, and therefore in that frustration, lash out, with emotional outbursts of criticism. The media feeds this. That's why it is so distasteful to put oneself in the public arena -- in doing so, you're basically just inviting a never-ending series of vacuous mud-slinging in your direction, coming from the masses, and the sensationalistic media that teaches the masses to engage in such baseless emotionalism. And that's why our leaders are all the cream of the dregs, instead of the cream of the crop. The cream of the crop are too smart to prostitute themselves in that manner.

That's "reality".

And bringing this back to QAM mapping and this thread: TiVo knows how much this feature would serve their owners' best interests. They have not only demonstrated by their actions the results of their research into that, but have explicitly stated it. Asserting that one's own personal preference or gut-feel is superior in value in determining what TiVo should be done is nothing but baseless arrogance.*


----------



## lew

Tivo may decide to continue the present policy and never implement a clear QAM mapping feature. Posters in this thread including Bicker and myself have nothing to do with tivo's decision.

Tivo may decide to implement a QAM feature. This might occur if frequency changes become rare. Posters in this thread will have nothing to do with tivo's decision.

I'll speculate the kind of customer that is willing to pay for a premium priced DVR is the kind of customer who subscribes to premium cable stations which require cable cards. This might be an issue to those subscribers who currently record analog channels when their cable system converts to digital. I'm sure tivo has an idea as to how many customers are affected.

Clark-kent--Tivo is very clear in saying cable cards are required for digital stations. They don't need to talk about guide data. Tivo won't work as designed and marketed without guide data which require cable cards. Your comments imply some usability without cable cards. Tivo properly just says cable cards are required.

Tivo offers a 30 day money back guarantee, should a customer not understand the warning on the box, website and in the manual.


----------



## ciper

I wanted to nitpick with all of you that "QAM mapping" is a misnomer and the topic is actually Guide Data Mapping which has a variety of uses even outside of cable subscribers 



Phantom Gremlin said:


> And I used to evangelize the product to many other people; doubtlessly a number of them also converted to the TiVo religion.
> 
> But I don't do that any more. Between the simple things the product is missing (like free space indicator, clear QAM support, etc) and the silly bugs, I've stopped pushing the product.


Same here. Throughout the years I would guess that I was involved in creating 50+ TiVo customers. Not only am I the resident geek for family/friends/acquaintances but it is also my job as a "technology consultant" (not my real title). I specifically didn't say TiVo units because some of those people bought more as time went on. I am personally responsible for bringing TiVo "significant" revenue.

Bicker doesn't like it but TiVo has lost multiple customers because the people can't watch the "free" HD channels that every other device in there house can. I mean it's really hard to convince someone to pick TiVo over the cable co DVR in the first place and this extra headache of installing a card AND paying extra fees end up as the straw that broke the camels back.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> But your argument is fallacious. If I spend $10/mo for cheap cable or if I spend $100/mo for premium cable, I'm still buying a TiVo HD and I'm still paying TiVo their monthly fee.
> 
> If TiVo supported clear QAM, they would make *Mo' Money* from me. I'd buy more boxes from them and I'd pay them more in monthly fees (or the lifetime equivalent). How is that being cheap?


Agreed. Rather than buying another THD, that I already budgeted for, I am finding a way to clone a cable card. For example...I dont mind to spend 600-700$ on the TiVo hardware with lifetime but

I DO NOT want to give the cable company more money.

It's not even entirely about being cheap. I like TiVo and I dislike my cable company. I would rather give TiVo significantly more money than even another dollar to the cable co. Its my personal feeling and it may be foolish but I am not alone in this belief.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

bicker said:


> However, will you be more or less likely to buy another one? Are you going to be more likely or less likely to spring for the TiVo wireless adapter?


Yes to all the above for me.  Not only would I a) remain a customer beyond my last remaining contract with them, I would b) replace my S2 with a THD and c) replace my old wireless adapter with Tivo's to keep up with the transfer of HD recordings between the S3 and the would-be THD.

I'm just one person and it's anecdotal, but that's a favorable result in my case.

But for now, I'm not going to spend any extra on Tivo up to or beyond the contract expiration unless I'm confident they're going to provide a service that's worth it to me in the long run. Paying monthly for more than 50% manual recordings won't pass that test.

Fortunately there's a little time left. The choice is really theirs, and I accept whatever they choose. It'll be a shame to (likely) no longer be a customer. Oh well. c'est la vie.


----------



## nipster00

ciper said:


> I DO NOT want to give the cable company more money.
> 
> It's not even entirely about being cheap. I like TiVo and I dislike my cable company. I would rather give TiVo significantly more money than even another dollar to the cable co. Its my personal feeling and it may be foolish but I am not alone in this belief.


Well said!!


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> I wanted to nitpick with all of you that "QAM mapping" is a misnomer ...


Because there isn't _enough_ conflict in this thread, already, right? 



ciper said:


> Same here. Throughout the years I would guess that I was involved in creating 50+ TiVo customers.


I think you vastly overestimate your importance to the future of the TiVo company. Assuming that your claims are even correct, and even granting you the honor of credit not just for influencing 50 subscribers, but even being completely and single-handedly responsible for them subscribing, you wouldn't be important enough to be worthy of the power of fiat you are asserting you should have. 

My estimate, by the way, is a little bit higher than "50+", but maybe I've been a TiVo customer a little longer... not sure.



ciper said:


> Bicker doesn't like it but TiVo has lost multiple customers because the people can't watch the "free" HD channels that every other device in there house can.


"Multiple" customers is a worthless datum. What is the size of the revenue stream associated with the market segment that TiVo has lost? Provide your answer to that, and present your market studies proving your assertion, and then we can talk (actually, then you can talk with Pony). Until then, you're just blowing smoke.

And I *know *that that sucks. I know how much folks want the rational logic to go their way on this issue. It just isn't the case though.


----------



## bicker

BigJimOutlaw said:


> Yes to all the above for me.  ...
> I'm just one person and it's anecdotal


That's something that a lot of posters seem to be unable to understand or integrate into their thinking. However, it is a most critical aspect.

One more thing that some folks keep forgetting: There may not be *any* viable business model for a stand-alone DVR. Many real people make a very compelling argument that the excellent TiVo is simply not worth it, given how satisfactory cable company DVRs are. As long as so many people choose the no-upfront-cost "satisfactory" option over the high-upfront-cost "excellent" option, TiVo's best hope is to be accepted by MSOs as their supplier of software. We, the owners of their stand-alone DVRs, could very well be just the loss-leader for their entréz into the real marketplace that they are aiming for. We're the showcase -- not only of satisfaction (I challenge you to find a DVR for which there are so many vociferous and rabid fans ), but really mostly just *of the technology itself*.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> One more thing that some folks keep forgetting: There may not be *any* viable business model for a stand-alone DVR. Many real people make a very compelling argument that the excellent TiVo is simply not worth it, given how satisfactory cable company DVRs are. As long as so many people choose the no-upfront-cost "satisfactory" option over the high-upfront-cost "excellent" option, TiVo's best hope is to be accepted by MSOs as their supplier of software. We, the owners of their stand-alone DVRs, could very well be just the loss-leader for their entréz into the real marketplace that they are aiming for. We're the showcase -- not only of satisfaction (I challenge you to find a DVR for which there are so many vociferous and rabid fans ), but really mostly just *of the technology itself*.


+1 Sometimes the first company with a product doesn't last. Does Xerox even make copiers any more?


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> One...thing that some folks keep forgetting: There may not be *any* viable business model for a stand-alone DVR. Many real people make a very compelling argument that the excellent TiVo is simply not worth it, given how satisfactory cable company DVRs are. As long as so many people choose the no-upfront-cost "satisfactory" option over the high-upfront-cost "excellent" option, TiVo's best hope is to be accepted by MSOs as their supplier of software. We, the owners of their stand-alone DVRs, could very well be just the loss-leader for their entréz into the real marketplace that they are aiming for. We're the showcase -- not only of satisfaction (I challenge you to find a DVR for which there are so many vociferous and rabid fans ), but really mostly just *of the technology itself*.


Digeo provides OEM DVR STBs to cable co.'s as its main product much as TiVo might provide DVR software as its main product. It's unlikely that standalone Moxis can realistically become profitable given Moxi's relatively small sales base and total absence of advertising tie-ins. IMHO, Digeo's standalone Moxi may be their version of a loss-leader to showcase their approach to DVR service.

Moxi has a very different approach than TiVo and for the first time in this hi-def era provides competition which may not require standalone DVR profitability. At this point TiVo remains the most reliable and robust DVR but, as these Forums illustrate, still has its share of imperfections. Moxi isn't as developed but its reliability is within the same order of magnitude.

This isn't the Forum to compare TiVo and Moxi philosophies except regarding QAM channel mapping. Moxi makes clear that CableCARDS are its suggested way to enjoy cable service but if a user chooses to use a Moxi DVR without them Moxi's channel line-up can be mapped to the equivalent of a CableCARD mapped line-up utilizing cable co. channel numbers for all QAM channels that Moxi is capable of receiving.


----------



## teeitup

TiVo's lack of channel mapping support is the reason I am no longer a TiVo subscriber. When/if TiVo implements this feature I will buy 2 TiVo HD's. Until then I will look for alternatives. I currently own a Sony DHG-HDD250 which allows clear-QAM channel mapping. It looks like my next box will be a MOXI.

If TiVo had ever supported channel mapping, then removed the feature, there would be a mass outcry of customers complaining. Most people don't even know what "clear-QAM" is and those who do will probably never find this forum. If my case, renting a cablecard ties me into spending a extra $30 on a digital package. I want to be able to keep my basic $20 cable TV and be able to record the unencrypted local HDTV channels. More people would buy TiVo if it resulted in them saving money on their cable bill.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Why? Cablecards should be provided with a basic cable sub and many members here have them. If not, file a complaint with your local franchise authority and the FCC.


----------



## bicker

Just a small correction: A CableCARD is provided with most digital cable packages, except if the MSO has been granted an exception. If your MSO refuses to provide one, file a complaint with your local franchise authority and the FCC.


----------



## lrhorer

Phantom Gremlin said:


> But I don't do that any more. Between the simple things the product is missing


Every product is missing something. If you are waiting for perfect product to come along, I suggest you not hold your breath in the mean time.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> (like free space indicator


This really gets me. One of the very best features of the Tivo is it doesn't have a free space meter. It's a really, really, really bad idea, only present on really, really, really bad DVRs which require it. My Camaro didn't come with a large hole in its radiator, and I am just as happy about that as the Tivo not having a FSM. It serves no purpose other than to induce the individual to waste time persuing a goal which affords him nothing, much like a treasure map leading to a sewage treatment plant. It is useless, worthless, and detrimental to the Tivo experience to try to employ a FSM, so why would any engineer in his right mind tack one on? If anything should induce you to sing the praises of the Tivo, it is the lack of an FSM.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> clear QAM support


If anything, clear QAM support may be an even worse idea. Widespread employment of clear QAM support is very liable to result in the CATV companies sucessfully doing what they have been trying to do all along: prevent 3rd party implementations of separable secuity. The end result? Neither Tivo nor Moxi nor any other DVR or even TV will be allowed to attach directly to any CATV plant. If large numbers of people are allowed to circumvent separable security, then the CATV companies have a legal leg to stand upon in bringing suit to the FCC to eliminate it altogether.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> And I *know *that that sucks.


Maybe not. When my mother was a very little girl, she caught her first glimpse of jellied cranberry sauce at some family repast - Thanksgiving, maybe. As I'm sure everyone knows, jellied cranberry sauce looks a great deal like strawberry jam, and looks like it should taste like strawberry jam, but in fact tastes much different. Her mother, knowing perfectly well my mother would not want to eat a big heap of cranberry sauce, tried to disuade her from spooning a huge helping of the condiment upon her plate. My mother was adamant she wanted it, however, so her mother simply told her she could go ahead and take the massive helping, but if she did she would have to eat the entire thing, and would get nothing else until she was done. Having a stubborn streak, my mother agreed. The end result was when she was unable to finish the helping, my grandmother took it and saved it for the next meal, and the next, giving my mother nothing but the cranberry sauce to eat until she had finished every last bit.

The moral of the story of course is to be careful for what one asks, as one may wind up getting it. It is also important to listen to those who may know better (TiVo in this case) than one's self the ultimate implications and impact of any desire, especially a purely self-centered one. When I read all the posts here, I cannot help be be reminded of that little girl, over 80 years ago, whining she knew beter than her mother what she wanted. The arguments are almost to the last one based upon misdirected and self-centered desires for instant gratification without a deeper understanding of the wider issues involved or what the implementation implies even for themselves, let alone Tivo or the industry as a whole. Let me hasten to point out this does not mean anyone here is a bad person. My mother was not a bad person at all, either as an adult or as a child. She just had not yet learned that things are not always what one thinks, or that others may actually know better than herself what she really wanted, as opposed to what she thought she wanted. I also hasten to point out that while the existence of an FSM is a minor issue regardless of the outcome, the same may not be true for Cear QAM sans CableCards. I am also compelled to admit that the widespread delivery of Clear QAM may not ultimately have serious consequences, but it is not unlikely. My main point, however, is a much better approach all the way around is rather than trying to mount a campaign to force TiVo et al to provide Clear QAM guides is to convince the FCC to place reasonable pricing limits on CableCards. It's a universal solution, and one which I feel might be readily adopted by the FCC: it's a very natural extension of Separable Security and it can easily be argued that the CATV vcompanies should not be allowed to charge over $100 (over the life of a card) for a device which costs them $8 and is mandated by the FCC, not the customer. It also heads off at the pass any potential move by the CATV companies to eliminate CableCard support altogether based upon poor penetration of the product. All one must do is read the quarterly reports to the FCC by the CATV companies to see that is precisely for what they are positioning themselves.

Oh, one more thing. Placing a cap on the lease costs of CableCards benefits everyone except the CATV companies, including those of us who want premium services. As such, I thnk everyone with a Series III class unit except those who only are interested in OTA would very likely support such a measure with some enthusiasm. Even some of the OTA-only folks might like to see the FCC "stick it" to the CATV companies. The majority of Series III calss users don't really care whether those who don't have CableCards can get their guide data, or not, but I bet almost every last one, me inlcuded, would vote for a cap on CableCard costs. With 5 CableCards in my house at $2.95 each, you bet I would. (Even I am not totally immune to being self-centered.)


----------



## ZeoTiVo

lrhorer said:


> Even some of the OTA-only folks might like to see the FCC "stick it" to the CATV companies. The majority of Series III calss users don't really care whether those who don't have CableCards can get their guide data, or not, but I bet almost every last one, me inlcuded, would vote for a cap on CableCard costs. With 5 CableCards in my house at $2.95 each, you bet I would. (Even I am not totally immune to being self-centered.)


lets not forget to lobby the FCC to end the waiver for DBS and make them provide seperable security as well, and as a reward for being able to put it off so long - make the DBS companies use the same cable card technology so that 3rd parties would have less differences to account for in making a universal DVR box. That alone would likely spur more DVR makers to enter the market.


----------



## bicker

Let's actually do that FIRST. That is far more important.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

lrhorer said:


> This really gets me. One of the very best features of the Tivo is it doesn't have a free space meter. It's a really, really, really bad idea, only present on really, really, really bad DVRs which require it. My Camaro didn't come with a large hole in its radiator, and I am just as happy about that as the Tivo not having a FSM. It serves no purpose other than to induce the individual to waste time persuing a goal which affords him nothing, much like a treasure map leading to a sewage treatment plant. It is useless, worthless, and detrimental to the Tivo experience to try to employ a FSM, so why would any engineer in his right mind tack one on? If anything should induce you to sing the praises of the Tivo, it is the lack of an FSM.


Just because *you* don't like a feature doesn't make it a bad idea. E.g. a few posts ago you were singing the praises of Suggestions. I turned those off the 1st day I got my 1st TiVo, and will *never* turn them back on. Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## ciper

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Just because *you* don't like a feature doesn't make it a bad idea. E.g. a few posts ago you were singing the praises of Suggestions. I turned those off the 1st day I got my 1st TiVo, and will *never* turn them back on. Different strokes for different folks.


We have the choice to enable/disable suggestions.

We do not have the choice to either use cable cards for guide data or use manual mapping for guide data.

I still see no downside to the manual guide data mapping. Even if there were customer support calls the service rep could instantly say "It's the cable companies fault and you can either remap the guide or get a cable card and have it automatically mapped from now on."

There are other uses for mapping guide data. For example I can RF modulate a channel from another type of receiver (say a satellite box) and apply the appropriate guide data to channel three antenna.

BTW I am using a cable card and receive a channel with no guide data. Now that the upgrade cycle is over I plan to rehack the unit and use the guide data mapping script to reapply the guide data. Manual repeated recordings of channels without guide data DOES NOT WORK on my TiVo and TiVo was aware of it since I was told to test it and report the results during the beta.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> We do not have the choice to either use cable cards for guide data or use manual mapping for guide data.


You have a choice between using CableCARDs to get guide data mapped, or to do manual recordings without benefit of guide data. You do have choice.



ciper said:


> I still see no downside to the manual guide data mapping.


Says the person who wouldn't have to divert valuable resources to design, develop, implement and support it. 



ciper said:


> Even if there were customer support calls the service rep could instantly say "It's the cable companies fault and you can either remap the guide or get a cable card and have it automatically mapped from now on."


Oh yes, that'll get TiVo rave reviews, here in the forum. I wouldn't be surprised if, if it wasn't for this thread where a few people have basically stuck their necks out, if any one of them would have turned out to be one of the biggest complainers about such an answer provided by TiVo. What you're suggesting is so incredibly out-of-touch that it is ridiculous.


----------



## lew

*I understand what I'm suggesting, isn't worth what it would cost to implement and provide even limited support* but an advanced (backdoor) setup menu could add a variety of non-core options. Give users the option of extending the buffer size. Provide a free space indicator. Provide negative padding. Change the duration of the 30 second skip. Even allow for channel mapping. Provide an option not to display the progress meter...

*The first thing a CSR * would have a caller do is hit the menu option which would reset all those settings to the default settings.

It's interesting a poster who wants a feature that relatively few people want, and will be somewhat costly to implement and support is against giving a free space indicator which tivo has said is the most requested feature. Many of us don't auto record suggestions. I have a free space meter (% space free) on my FiOS DVR. It's useful for a stock unit but less useful for a unit with upgraded capacity. I understand some customers won't use a FSI but not every feature is going to be used by everyone. The size of the recently deleted folder is only an approximation. It fails if long show (Oscars, superbowl) is gone but hasn't been replaced.


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> ...One of the very best features of the Tivo is it doesn't have a free space meter. It's a really, really, really bad idea, only present on really, really, really bad DVRs which require it. My Camaro didn't come with a large hole in its radiator, and I am just as happy about that as the Tivo not having a FSM. It serves no purpose other than to induce the individual to waste time persuing a goal which affords him nothing, much like a treasure map leading to a sewage treatment plant. It is useless, worthless, and detrimental to the Tivo experience to try to employ a FSM, so why would any engineer in his right mind tack one on? If anything should induce you to sing the praises of the Tivo, it is the lack of an FSM.


TCF posters like you are so much smarter than TiVo users like me. 



> If anything, clear QAM support may be an even worse idea. Widespread employment of clear QAM support is very liable to result in the CATV companies sucessfully doing what they have been trying to do all along: prevent 3rd party implementations of separable secuity. The end result? Neither Tivo nor Moxi nor any other DVR or even TV will be allowed to attach directly to any CATV plant. If large numbers of people are allowed to circumvent separable security, then the CATV companies have a legal leg to stand upon in bringing suit to the FCC to eliminate it altogether.


Golly, let's keep the sky from falling!


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> When my mother was a very little girl, she caught her first glimpse of jellied cranberry sauce at some family repast...Her mother, knowing perfectly well my mother would not want to eat a big heap of cranberry sauce, tried to disuade her from spooning a huge helping of the condiment upon her plate. My mother was adamant she wanted it, however, so her mother simply told her she could go ahead and take the massive helping, but if she did she would have to eat the entire thing, and would get nothing else until she was done. Having a stubborn streak, my mother agreed. The end result was when she was unable to finish the helping, my grandmother took it and saved it for the next meal, and the next, giving my mother nothing but the cranberry sauce to eat until she had finished every last bit.
> ...
> 
> (Even I am not totally immune to being self-centered.)


Perhaps you take after your mom and are just full of it?


----------



## fallingwater

lrhorer said:


> ...The majority of Series III class(?) users don't really care whether those who don't have CableCards can get their guide data, or not, but I bet almost every last one, me inlcuded, would vote for a cap on CableCard costs. With 5 CableCards in my house at $2.95 each, you bet I would...


Actually in my area an 'M' CableCARD is free; the real cost is Comcast's $5.10 _Additional Outlet Fee_ for every device that uses one.


----------



## ciper

bicker said:


> You have a choice between using CableCARDs to get guide data mapped, or to do manual recordings without benefit of guide data. You do have choice.


The manual recordings must be manually created for every episode since repeated ones don't work. Since there is no guide data you have to use an external source to determine what time and channel the show is on. You have to determine in your head which episodes you have not seen already. You can't thumbs up the show which prevents suggestions from working. It's hard to know which show is which since the NPL is now filled with date/time codes. The shows don't get organized into folders. You can't use a wishlist to catch the show on other channels or find your favorite actor.... 
Must I go on? I've only touched on some of the issues.

Without guide data you lose nearly everything that makes a TiVo into a TiVo. Since my VCR can do repeated manual recordings I'd say the TiVo without guide data is an inferior device.


----------



## lew

ciper said:


> Without guide data you lose nearly everything that makes a TiVo into a TiVo. Since my VCR can do repeated manual recordings I'd say the TiVo without guide data is an inferior device.


which is why tivo simply says cable cards are required for digital stations.


----------



## bicker

ciper said:


> The manual recordings must be manually created for every episode


That's correct. You have a choice.



ciper said:


> Since there is no guide data you have to use an external source to determine what time and channel the show is on.


Check out zap2it.com



ciper said:


> Must I go on?


Rather, you should acknowledge that you have a choice.


----------



## jrm01

Not that I want to interrupt the philosophica discussion going on here, but since many here are using the Manual recording by Time & Channel for clear-QAM I have a question.

When I originally got 11.0 software, all of my Manual recording by Time & Channel for clear-QAM ended up not recording, and Recording History said it was due to the fact that "No longer in Program Guide", which is hard to believe since it wasn't using program guide.

TiVo actually put some run-me software on my THD to check out the problem, and it was then fixed with the release of 11.0b. Everything was fine.

Now when I got 11.0c the problem is back. TiVo is checking it out, but I'm surprised no one else has reported this problem. Anyone?

I have a TiVo HD with basic cable and antenna, no cablecards.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

Jrm, I had the same problem. The last v11 software screwed me. At the time the only thing that seemed to work quickly without missing recording after recording until it was fixed was to use the nuclear option -- "Clear and Delete everything" so that I could start fresh again.

But I hope they can fix your problem ASAP so you don't go without anymore.


----------



## slowbiscuit

fallingwater said:


> Actually in my area an 'M' CableCARD is free; the real cost is Comcast's $5.10 _Additional Outlet Fee_ for every device that uses one.


Yes, that sucks, but it's the same whether you get a card or get a box - it's a programming mirror fee. They wanted to charge this for analog many years ago but had no way to do so after cable-ready TVs came out. Moving to digital gave them back what they wanted - another revenue stream (among all the other enhancements).


----------



## MediaLivingRoom

Comcast is removing analog channels 30+ and over, I we need QAM Mapping support without CableCard!!!


----------



## nipster00

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Comcast is removing analog channels 30+ and over, I we need QAM Mapping support without CableCard!!!


agreed!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

Comcast users losing their analogs are a tiny niche, not big enough to be worth Tivo's development and support hassles. You will accept Comcast's hassle-free cable cards, installation services, all new applicable fees, and enjoy it without incident or comment.

Or accept that despite loss of guide data, you still own a Tivo and that's good enough. It's a TIVO, folks. It's like... way better. So just love it already.

Tivo accepts your apology for this temporary lapse of foresight.


----------



## 1283

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Comcast is removing analog channels 30+ and over, I we need QAM Mapping support without CableCard!!!


Why? The HD channels as part of the Expanded Basic service are still encrypted.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom

We would still like programming data for local HD, the sad thing is that Cable can place it anywhere on there digital lineup, then they use the remapping to give it a meaningful location.


----------



## mattack

c3 said:


> Why? The HD channels as part of the Expanded Basic service are still encrypted.


I believe you're incorrect. Don't the "free" digital tuning adapters that they give out simply convert *unencrypted* QAM channels to analog? (I actually have one that I haven't hooked up yet.. I *might* use it to hook up to my non-Tivo recorder, but only to play with.. mostly it's too big of a pain.)


----------



## 1283

mattack said:


> Don't the "free" digital tuning adapters that they give out simply convert *unencrypted* QAM channels to analog?


DTA does not support HD channels. Expanded Basic SD channels are not encrypted, but Expanded Basic HD channels are still encrypted.


----------



## fallingwater

c3 said:


> DTA does not support HD channels.


True.



> Expanded Basic SD channels are not encrypted, but Expanded Basic HD channels are still encrypted.


Not true. A DTA can't receive any hi-def channels but S3/HDTiVos used without CC(s) receive HD Limited Basic QAM channels without EPG data.


----------



## 1283

fallingwater said:


> Not true. A DTA can't receive any hi-def channels but S3/HDTiVos used without CC(s) receive HD Limited Basic QAM channels without EPG data.


Your comment and my comment are completely unrelated.


----------



## bicker

Yes, that's true, but also note that what you're saying is location-dependent. There are places where the SD digital channel for an expanded basic channel is in-the-clear and the HD channel for that expanded basic channel is encrypted, but that is not the case everywhere. In some places, both, if available, are encrypted, and some places where both, if available, are in-the-clea.r


----------



## jrm01

mattack said:


> I believe you're incorrect. Don't the "free" *digital tuning adapters* that they give out simply convert *unencrypted* QAM channels to analog? (I actually have one that I haven't hooked up yet.. I *might* use it to hook up to my non-Tivo recorder, but only to play with.. mostly it's too big of a pain.)


I assume that you are talking about the Digital *Transport* Adaptors, not the Digital *Tuning* Adaptors used for SDV.


----------



## fallingwater

c3 said:


> Your comment and my comment are completely unrelated.


It appears that bicker hit the nail on the head. Since we live in different locations your comment and my comment can easily both be true. However in a given location either your statement is true and mine isn't or the reverse. Your statement and mine are in direct opposition and thus are directly related.



bicker said:


> Yes, that's true, but also note that what you're saying is location-dependent. There are places where the SD digital channel for an expanded basic channel is in-the-clear and the HD channel for that expanded basic channel is encrypted, but that is not the case everywhere. In some places, both, if available, are encrypted, and some places where both, if available, are in-the-clear.


Sadly, what you state appears to be true. The link below gives the best explanation I've run across, but still doesn't provide a definitive answer.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...l-cable-operators-from-hd-must-carry-rule.ars

The FCC website isn't helpful:
http://search2.fcc.gov/search/index.htm?job=search&ref=f


----------



## fallingwater

Digging a little further through http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/ are the FCC's rules regarding Cable carriage:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-170A1.pdf


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

fallingwater said:


> Digging a little further through http://www.fcc.gov/dtv/ are the FCC's rules regarding Cable carriage:
> 
> http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-170A1.pdf


Thanks. I love it when people link to actual FCC documents. Unfortunately this particular item is 68 pages and I haven't had the time to read it yet.


----------



## bicker

That publication is a useful one to read through, and it is one of the two or three sources that you need to internalize to reach the answer to the question. (My earlier statement reflects such internalizations.) 

(And before you ask, I don't remember the other sources that apply, here. It's hard enough having to read and internalize 68 page documents. Taxing my aging brain with having to remember which publication each bit of regulation came from is not worth the bother, since where the regulations are written doesn't actually affect their impact on me.)


----------



## fallingwater

A complicated affair indeed, where FCC rules apply completely differently depending whether a cable operator presents its line-up in an analog, digital, or mixed format. In my lay opinion if Comcast continues to offer Limited Basic chs. 2 through 28 in analog it has no obligation to provide unscrambled hi-def digital versions of these channels.

A brief core excerpt from:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-07-170A1.pdf

_7. We retain the requirement that HD signals be carried in HD, as well as the comparative approach to determining whether material degradation has occurred. In 2001, the First Report and Order established two requirements to avoid material degradation. First, "a cable operator may not provide a digital broadcast signal in a lesser format or lower resolution than that afforded to any" other signal on the system.12 Second, a cable operator must carry broadcast stations such that, when compared to the broadcast signal, "the difference is not really perceptible to the viewer."13 Thus, "a broadcast signal delivered in HDTV must be carried in HDTV."14 Because we decline to rely on measurement of bits to determine whether degradation has occurred, we do not require carriage of all content bits. Additionally, for the reasons described below, we decline to adopt the proposed negotiation framework.

8. The Act requires that broadcast signals not be materially degraded. It also requires the Commission to adopt carriage standards to ensure that, to the extent technically feasible, the quality of signal processing and carriage provided by a cable system for the carriage of local commercial television stations will be no less than that provided by the system for carriage of any other type of signal.15 The Commission stated in 2001 that [f]rom our perspective, the issue of material degradation is about the picture quality the consumer receives and is capable of perceiving.16 Cable commenters argued that this should remain the focus of the Commissions decision making, and we agree.17

9. We considered the all content bits proposal, the main benefit of which was a clear means of measurement and consequently ease of enforcement.18 Ultimately, we conclude, however, that the all content bits approach is likely to stifle innovation and the very efficiency that digital technology offers, and may be more exacting a standard than necessary to ensure that a given signal will be carried without material degradation. We also conclude that it is unnecessary at this time to impose such a requirement in light of the paucity of material degradation complaints over the 15 years since enactment of the Must Carry statute.19
---
13. Commenters requested clarification that downconversion to analog does not constitute material degradation.27 We accordingly clarify that it is not material degradation to downconvert that signal to comply with the viewability requirement discussed below.

14....Given the broad based objections to the proposal, we decline to establish a formal procedure by which broadcasters would waive the material degradation requirements.32

*B. Availability of Signals  Sections 614(b)(7) and 615(h)*
15. In this section, we adopt rules requiring cable systems that are not all-digital to provide must-carry signals in analog, while all-digital systems may provide them in digital form only.33
---
18. We adopt these proposals, and note that they apply to all operators, regardless of their rateregulated status.42 In sum, cable operators must comply with the statutory mandate that must-carry broadcast signals shall be viewable via cable on all television receivers of a subscriber which are connected to a cable system by a cable operator or for which a cable operator provides a connection, and they have two options of doing so.43 First, to the extent that such subscribers do not have the capability of viewing digital signals, cable systems must carry the signals of commercial and non-commercial mustcarry stations in analog format to those subscribers, after downconverting the signals from their original digital format at the headend.44 This proposal is in line with the approach already voluntarily planned by many cable operators, as described in testimony by Time Warner CEO Glenn Britt before the House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.45 In the alternative, operators may choose to operate all-digital systems.46 Under this option, operators will not be required to downconvert the signal to analog, and may provide these stations only in a digital format. In any event, any downconversion costs will be borne by the operator.

19. To fulfill its must-carry obligations in cases where a cable operator uses digital-to-analog converter boxes that do not have analog tuners, the operator can deliver a standard definition digital version of a must-carry broadcasters high definition digital signal, in addition to the analog and high definition signal, or use boxes that convert high definition signals for viewing on an analog television set, or use other technical solutions so long as cable subscribers have the ability to view the signals._


----------



## mychen66

MediaLivingRoom said:


> Comcast is removing analog channels 30+ and over, I we need QAM Mapping support without CableCard!!!


Agree. We really need this feature now. Please add this feature for us.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Get up, you stupid dead horse or I shall beat you again!


----------



## Adam1115

I'm one that would like QAM mapping, but really, you "need" it? If you need those channels so much GET CABLECARDS! It's not that big of a deal.

Do you guys realize how often QAM channels change? It would be a real PITA to have to actual rely on it.


----------



## jcthorne

The effictive price to add a cable card to my subscription is about $40 a month. Out of the question.

On a brighter note, Comcast Houston has started applying or passing some correct psip data for channel 2-1 and 13-1 so guide data now shows up for those. 11-1 and 8-1 etc not yet. There may be hope if we can just get the correct data applied to the stream so that TIVO knows what the channel is.


----------



## Adam1115

jcthorne said:


> The effictive price to add a cable card to my subscription is about $40 a month. Out of the question.


Cable card rentals are *NOT* $40/month.

Judging by your statement I'm taking that to mean you are getting channels that you don't pay for. What makes you think that if TiVo set up QAM mapping to take advantage of this that Comcast wouldn't respond by encrypting those channels?

Or are you wanting QAM remapping for HD Locals? That would make sense actually....


----------



## Rdian06

Adam1115 said:


> Cable card rentals are *NOT* $40/month.
> 
> Judging by your statement I'm taking that to mean you are getting channels that you don't pay for. What makes you think that if TiVo set up QAM mapping to take advantage of this that Comcast wouldn't respond by encrypting those channels?
> 
> Or are you wanting QAM remapping for HD Locals? That would make sense actually....


I believe he means he's on one of those basic analog plans that also gets the HD locals if you bring your own QAM tuner. His cable company probably won't issue cable cards unless he moves up to at least the first digital tier. Just like they wouldn't hand a digital tuner box to an analog customer.

Couple bucks for the CableCard and $30+ for the analog to digital tier upgrade sounds about right.


----------



## bicker

Y'know, perhaps basic cable is a good reason to consider the Moxi or Samsung DVRs, instead of a TiVo. TiVo is really, very clearly, intended to be used, with cable, with CableCARD.


----------



## jcthorne

Adam1115 said:


> Cable card rentals are *NOT* $40/month.
> 
> Judging by your statement I'm taking that to mean you are getting channels that you don't pay for. What makes you think that if TiVo set up QAM mapping to take advantage of this that Comcast wouldn't respond by encrypting those channels?
> 
> Or are you wanting QAM remapping for HD Locals? That would make sense actually....


Sorry, but you are quite mistaken and I really don't like being called a thief.

NO, I want guide data for the channels I PAY FOR on BASIC CABLE. Adding a cable card to my subscription adss over $40 a month to the bill as they are NOT available for basic cable, only if I upgrade to a 'digital' package which includes lots of stupid channels I would never watch.

Yes, I want guide data and or proper QAM Mapping for ALL of our local channels (all digital now and all on my Comcast basic subscription)


----------



## jcthorne

Rdian06 said:


> I believe he means he's on one of those basic analog plans that also gets the HD locals if you bring your own QAM tuner. His cable company probably won't issue cable cards unless he moves up to at least the first digital tier. Just like they wouldn't hand a digital tuner box to an analog customer.
> 
> Couple bucks for the CableCard and $30+ for the analog to digital tier upgrade sounds about right.


Yes, you got it. Except they don't call it analog cable any more. Its just called Basic Cable and includes all local digital station, an analog conversion of some of them and a few select additional channels (also sent analog for now) With my current 'deal' its $10 a month. Digital Starter is $54.95 a month now, outragous for what it includes.


----------



## bicker

jcthorne said:


> NO, I want guide data for the channels I PAY FOR on BASIC CABLE.


You actually think your fee for basic cable includes program guide data for a TiVo? What kind of twisted logic is that? 
You pay your cable provider for basic cable, and they provide you what they promise.
You pay TiVo for TiVo service, and they provide you what _they_ promise.
 There are no representations made by either party that the two in combination with each other, as you've seen fit to secure service from these two separate vendors, are necessarily going to meet your personal specifications or needs.

The TiVo does not support program guide data mapping without CableCARD. People need to stop blaming others for their own lack of insight in that regard.


----------



## fallingwater

*!!!!*



Adam1115 said:


> Do you guys realize how often QAM channels change? It would be a real PITA to have to actual rely on it.


Perhaps where you are. Unscrambled QAM is quite stable at my location! But Comcast copy flags Premium channels so MRV doesn't work for them.



bicker said:


> Y'know, perhaps basic cable is a good reason to consider the Moxi or Samsung DVRs, instead of a TiVo. TiVo is really, very clearly, intended to be used, with cable, with CableCARD.


Moxi, yes. What Samsung DVR maps unscrambled QAM?



jcthorne said:


> I want guide data for the channels I PAY FOR on BASIC CABLE...I want guide data and or proper QAM Mapping for ALL of our local channels (all digital now and all on my Comcast basic subscription)


To get such guide data you need (in order of ascending price) either (1) Comcast's free Pace DTA; (2) a Comcast standard-def STB, (3) a Comcast hi-def STB, (4) a Comcast DVR, or (5) Moxi, not TiVo.


----------



## Adam1115

jcthorne said:


> Sorry, but you are quite mistaken and I really don't like being called a thief.


I didn't call you a thief.



jcthorne said:


> NO, I want guide data for the channels I PAY FOR on BASIC CABLE. Adding a cable card to my subscription adss over $40 a month to the bill as they are NOT available for basic cable, only if I upgrade to a 'digital' package which includes lots of stupid channels I would never watch.


HUH?

So you have basic cable, you pay for the stations, you're telling me they are in clear qam but NOT in analog? So you're paying for a service you can't receive and your cable company won't provide a method to receive it??



jcthorne said:


> Yes, I want guide data and or proper QAM Mapping for ALL of our local channels (all digital now and all on my Comcast basic subscription)


Yes. I said, that is one situation that makes sense.

But people were saying they 'needed' it to get the history channel and stuff.

That makes no sense. If you're paying for the history channel, they have to give you a way to receive it...


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Moxi, yes. What Samsung DVR maps unscrambled QAM?


You tell me. The 3090 just came out and I know very little about it. I'm asking this very question, in the Samsung thread on AVSForum.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> If you're paying for the history channel, they have to give you a way to receive it...


To be clear, there is nothing wrong with requiring customers to have certain levels of service to be able to obtain other services. The confusion in the case of this thread is injected by people thinking that the are buying the ability to record content with their TiVo, regardless of the TiVo's limitations. Neither TiVo nor the service provider are responsible for the customer's erroneous assumptions along those lines.


----------



## Adam1115

bicker said:


> The confusion in the case of this thread is injected by people thinking that the are buying the ability to record content with their TiVo.


Wait, people shouldn't expect their TiVo to record content...??


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> Neither TiVo nor the service provider are responsible for the customer's erroneous assumptions along those lines.


I disagree. Strongly.

TiVo holds the "balance of power" because a "reasonable" customer would assume that a TiVo HD could be used with cable. This average customer doesn't know WTF a CableCARD is, so the burden is on TiVo to clearly disclose that information.

The TiVo HD box, web site, and all related sales information should say something like this, in large bold print:

*If you want to use a TiVo HD with cable or FiOS, you must get CableCARDs from your provider. Otherwise the TiVo HD will be a true POS and your experience will truly suck. We mean it! Your experience will be awful, beyond unbelievably bad. We're not exaggerating. You must believe us!*

That would be honest disclosure, and TiVo doesn't do it.

The only mitigating factor in TiVo's defense is that they offer a 30 day money back guarantee. That's a very good idea, it probably solves most cases of customers being surprised after the fact by the CableCARD requirement.


----------



## bicker

Adam1115 said:


> Wait, people shouldn't expect their TiVo to record content...??


Try reading, and quoting, the whole message you are replying to.

Doing a partial quoting as you did is incredibly dishonest. :down:


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I disagree. Strongly.


Unremarkably, that doesn't change the reality you're going to encounter.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> TiVo holds the "balance of power" because a "reasonable" customer would assume that a TiVo HD could be used with cable.


It can be used with cable.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> This average customer doesn't know WTF a CableCARD is, so the burden is on TiVo to clearly disclose that information.


They do. You don't *LIKE* the extent to which they do so. Tough. Get over it.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> That would be honest disclosure, and TiVo doesn't do it.


Let's deal with Adam's dishonesty first; then we can discuss whether TiVo's honesty can be called dishonesty, just because you want to call it that.


----------



## Adam1115

bicker said:


> To be clear, there is nothing wrong with requiring customers to have certain levels of service to be able to obtain other services. The confusion in the case of this thread is injected by people thinking that the are buying the ability to record content with their TiVo, regardless of the TiVo's limitations. Neither TiVo nor the service provider are responsible for the customer's erroneous assumptions along those lines.


Wait, people shouldn't expect their TiVo to record content...??


----------



## bicker

Repeating a lie doesn't make you look any better, Adam.


----------



## lew

TIVO DOES EXACTLY THAT:



> Requires a
> CableCARD decoder from
> your cable company to
> receive digital and HDTV


It's not tivo's fault some customers misinterprets that paragraph. Tivo offers a 30 day money back guarantee.



Phantom Gremlin said:


> I disagree. Strongly.
> 
> TiVo holds the "balance of power" because a "reasonable" customer would assume that a TiVo HD could be used with cable. This average customer doesn't know WTF a CableCARD is, so the burden is on TiVo to clearly disclose that information.
> 
> The TiVo HD box, web site, and all related sales information should say something like this, in large bold print:
> 
> *If you want to use a TiVo HD with cable or FiOS, you must get CableCARDs from your provider. Otherwise the TiVo HD will be a true POS and your experience will truly suck. We mean it! Your experience will be awful, beyond unbelievably bad. We're not exaggerating. You must believe us!*
> 
> That would be honest disclosure, and TiVo doesn't do it.
> 
> The only mitigating factor in TiVo's defense is that they offer a 30 day money back guarantee. That's a very good idea, it probably solves most cases of customers being surprised after the fact by the CableCARD requirement.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Y'know, perhaps basic cable is a good reason to consider the Moxi or Samsung DVRs, instead of a TiVo.





fallingwater said:


> What Samsung DVR maps unscrambled QAM?





bicker said:


> You tell me. The 3090 just came out and I know very little about it. I'm asking this very question, in the Samsung thread on AVSForum.


I don't know. That's why I asked. Your post referred to a Samsung DVR.


----------



## fallingwater

jcthorne said:


> I want guide data and or proper QAM Mapping for ALL of our local channels (all digital now and all on my Comcast basic subscription)





fallingwater said:


> To get such guide data you need (in order of ascending price) either (*1*) Comcast's free Pace DTA; (*2*) a Comcast standard-def STB, (3) a Comcast hi-def STB, (4) a Comcast DVR, or (5) Moxi, not TiVo.


FYI, options 1 and 2 will work in conjunction with TiVo's standard-def S2, TiVo's relatively cheap standard-def DVR.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> I don't know. That's why I asked. Your post referred to a Samsung DVR.


Yup, the 3090. It just came out and we're still getting more information with it -- specifically, at this point, it would be interesting to know if it supports QAM mapping or not. I'll let you know.

(It may be a while before we get an answer though: There are so many problems with the Samsung DVR that it is possible that there aren't any posters in that thread actively using it at this time. )


----------



## fallingwater

From this year old info it seems likely that Samsung's SMT-H3090 maps by using a CableCARD.

http://www.samsung.com/us/system/consumer/product/2008/05/09/smt_h3090twc/SMT-H3090_080205.pdf (scroll to bottom of page 2)

http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/05/19/samsung-shows-off-smt-3090-tru2way-dvr/
'The dual-tuner HD DVR comes with a 160GB HDD, DOCSIS 2.0 modem for interactive communication to the headend and Multistream CableCARD.'


----------



## lew

A few posters may have been using a TivoHD exclusively with analog stations. Some cable systems have switched to 100% digital. Those posters may now be viewing the same stations in unencrypted QAM. They may be unable to rent a cable card without upgrading their service. Some suggestions:

1) Contact tivo. Enough customers have this problem tivo may make a change. I'll speculate relatively few customers pay for tivo but don't pay for premium, or at least extended basic, service. 

2) Negotiate with your cable company. At least some posters in this situation were able negotiate cable card rental without upgrading service. At least one poster upgraded service then downgraded service. They were able to keep their cable card.

3) Drop tivo service. If you're currently under commitment, or have pre-paid service, try to negotiate with tivo so you can get a refund and/or get released from your comittment. 

4) Change to OTA. One poster said cable cards will cost $40/month. The payback period for a roof antenna will be relatively short.

5) Complain on a long thread on TCF. Probably won't be effective.


Tivo clearly states cable cards are required for digital service. QAM mapping might be a nice feature for some people but it's not a feature tivo directly, or indirectly, promised.


----------



## dv8

Just to jump in for no good reason...

I'm fully aware of whats required for the tivo to get the HD channels but I will say that I would buy a Tivo HD hands down if it could map the clear QAM's. I'm just not in the mood to drop 60+ a month for digital/HD via comcast and only need to really watch the big four anyway... I would like to continue with basic cable and record clear QAM w/ guide data and pay for the tivo service.

Oh well... I can hope and or build a 500 ft tower in the back yard to get digital OTA. 

for now, I'll get standard w/ guide data and watch the clear from the TV.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> From this year old info it seems likely that Samsung's SMT-H3090 maps by using a CableCARD.


Yup, I got confirmation from the other forum, just now. No QAM mapping with the Samsung.


----------



## mattack

dv8 said:


> Just to jump in for no good reason...
> 
> I'm fully aware of whats required for the tivo to get the HD channels but I will say that I would buy a Tivo HD hands down if it could map the clear QAM's.


Call up Tivo and tell them this.


----------



## fallingwater

dv8 said:


> Just to jump in for no good reason...
> 
> I would like to continue with basic cable and record clear QAM w/ guide data and pay for the tivo service.





mattack said:


> Call up Tivo and tell them this.


TiVo made its decision regarding QAM mapping awhile ago. Like it or not, TiVo is consistent.

Sony's discontinued high-def DVRs, still widely available on eBay, use digital sourced TVGOS to provide the most versatile manual QAM mapping available.

Moxi, the new expensive kid on the block currently available from Amazon.com, provides the easiest manual QAM mapping available.

Considering the comparatively small demand for manual QAM mapping, TiVo probably made the right decision for its bottom line.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> TiVo made its decision regarding QAM mapping awhile ago. Like it or not, TiVo is consistent.
> 
> .....
> Considering the comparatively small demand for manual QAM mapping, TiVo probably made the right decision for its bottom line.


http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/2web519.htm
I provided this link earlier in this thread. QAM mapping doesn't make tivo's list of commonly requested features. Nevertheless a request to tivo makes more sense then thinking a post on a long thread on TCF will have any affect.

I think the only thing that will make tivo change is if the reasons that caused tivo to omit this feature changes. Maybe PSIP data is handled better or QAM assignments rarely change for the vast majority of cable systems. Tivo's research would probably have to indicate enough customers, and potential customers, don't subscribe to any encrypted channels.

My guess is the demand is still very small.


----------



## mattack

fallingwater said:


> TiVo made its decision regarding QAM mapping awhile ago. Like it or not, TiVo is consistent.


This guy is saying he would buy a Tivo HD if it had clear QAM mapping.

Calling up Tivo and telling them this shows that they are NOT gaining a potential customer by not doing this.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> I think the only thing that will make tivo change is if the reasons that caused tivo to omit this feature changes.


That's a very good point. At this point, onezies and twozies aren't going to ever add up to enough to matter. Something has to substantially change -- specifically, though, I think it would have to be something like a new regulation requiring MSOs to publish QAM mappings (virtual channel to physical frequency) and provide 30 days notice of changes.


----------



## billyjoebob99

Oh "QAM mapping letter campaingn" thread how I've missed you. So glad to see you're back. This was my first thread, way back in the day. It's nice to see some things never change.


----------



## MediaLivingRoom

It's like

I never thought I needed a DVR until it was brought to market.
I never thought I needed a TrackPad until it was brought to market.
I never thought I needed a Touch Screen phone until it was bought to market.
I never thought I could use Digital Cable until I was forced to use a CableCard.


----------



## jcthorne

You guys missed my point entirely. I knew the limitations of Tivo's use of clear QAM before I got into this. Tivo did nothing dishonest to me.

I use OTA to get the channels and it works fine. Better since the transistion completed and the stations moved to thier full power VHF frequencies.

My point was, since the transistion, 2 channels on Comcast in Houston have changes something in ther PSIP data and they now map correctly from clear QAM to tivo guide data for that channel. Would be very nice if the data for the other digital channels was also corrected so that it maps correctly to its OTA identifiyer. I have no idea what exactly changed, thought perhaps someone here might and knowing what specificly to ask for is the basis for getting it changed and fixed. I was trying to make a situation better, not continue this long discussion that has gone nowhere for years.


----------



## gsu13

mattack said:


> This guy is saying he would buy a Tivo HD if it had clear QAM mapping.
> 
> Calling up Tivo and telling them this shows that they are NOT gaining a potential customer by not doing this.


I am in the same boat - analog, basic cable with a Series 2 and am considering upgrading to a Series 3 HD Tivo, but without clear QAM mapping, I am going to look at something else. I talked with 6 other friends and family, and they all said they would not upgrade since it seems silly to not be able to record those HD channels or they are going to ditch Tivo and pay for the cable company's DVR. Everyone I come across from now on, I will tell them the same thing.

Is there an active letter writing campaign about this to Tivo? I want to add our names to it


----------



## jrm01

gsu13 said:


> I talked with 6 other friends and family, and they all said they would not upgrade since it seems silly to not be able to record those HD channels or they are going to ditch Tivo and pay for the cable company's DVR.


Seems like a strange solution since to do so would require renting the new HD DVR and paying for an HD Digital package. This would cost more than just getting the cablecards for TiVo.


----------



## dwynne

jcthorne said:


> NO, I want guide data for the channels I PAY FOR on BASIC CABLE. Adding a cable card to my subscription adss over $40 a month to the bill as they are NOT available for basic cable, only if I upgrade to a 'digital' package which includes lots of stupid channels I would never watch.
> 
> Yes, I want guide data and or proper QAM Mapping for ALL of our local channels (all digital now and all on my Comcast basic subscription)


Comcast basic in your area is this?

*2 KNWS 
3 KZJL 
4 KTXH - My Network TV HD* 
5 KIAH - CW* 
6 KTMD - Telemundo 
7 KPXB - ION 
8 KUHT - PBS* 
9 KRIV - FOX* 
10 KXLN - Univision 
11 KHOU - CBS* - ON 
12 KPRC - NBC* - ON 
13 KTRK - ABC* - ON 
14 KETH - TBN 
15 KFTH - Telefutura 
16 Municipal Channel 
17 Houston Media Source 
18 Houston ISD 
19 HCC TV 
20 KLTJ+ 
53 KAZH 
54 WGN 
55 KTBU - The Tube 
75 Leased Access+ 
76 Leased Access+ 
98 KUHT - PBS 
310 11 NOW+ 
315 13NOW+ 
319 Universal Sports 
320 THIS - TV+ 
321 KPRC - LA TV+ 
322 KLTJ+ 
323 KUHT2+ 
324 KUHT - V - ME+ 
325 KHLM - TV Informa+ 
326 KVQT - Vision Celestial+ 
*

And that is all you get now and all you want watch? I am on limited basic cable (similar idea and price here) and the cablecard is free. When I put it in the HDTivo I actually LOSE channels as all the clear QAMs go away that are not part of the package I pay for. The cost to me for the multi-strean cablecard from Comcast? Nothing, it is free. If all you want are the stations shown in the plan you buy, it should be the same for you. Now if Tivo DID provide a way for me to manually map clear QAM I would pick up a few digital channels, but I do get what I pay for now with the free cablecard.

From the Comcast FAQ:

*How much will I be charged to use a CableCARD?
There is no charge for the first CableCARD that you use as it is already included in the primary outlet fee. If you have a multi-card device on the same outlet (i.e. TiVo Series 3 or two Digital Cable Tuners connected to the same personal computer), you will be charged an additional regulated fee of up to $2.05 for the second CableCARD.

If additional CableCARDs are needed for other devices that are installed on additional outlets, you will not be charged for the first CableCARD installed on this outlet as the cost is included in the additional outlet fee. In addition to the cost of the digital cable service, you will be charged a regulated fee of up to $2.05 for the second CableCARD on the additional outlet in addition to the cost of the digital cable service.

**Note: The same pricing schedule will be applicable to additional outlets with multi-CableCARD devices, e.g. no charge for first CableCARD on the third outlet and an additional regulated fee of up to $2.05 for the second CableCARD in addition to the digital service charge.

Disclaimer: Regulated Prices quoted above may not apply in all markets. Please call 1-800-COMCAST to learn more about Regulated Prices for your area. *

It does rates my vary, but for most Comcast folks the first cablecard is free.

Dennis


----------



## 1283

dwynne said:


> I am on limited basic cable (similar idea and price here) and the cablecard is free. When I put it in the HDTivo I actually LOSE channels as all the clear QAMs go away that are not part of the package I pay for.


CableCard does not block unencrypted channels. I have CableCard with limited basic only and have been getting the expanded basic digital channels (35-75) because they have not been moved to the trap frequencies yet.


----------



## bicker

You are correct that CableCARD does not block anything. However, with CableCARD, any channels that the service provider does not consider part of the service that the subscriber is supposed to receive via CableCARD generally will not be mapped, and therefore can only be tuned in manually. I suspect that that was what dwynne was referring to. Of course, dwynne can solve this problem, by paying for a package that the service provider specifies to the program guide service that it includes all the channels that are desired.


----------



## gsu13

jrm01 said:


> Seems like a strange solution since to do so would require renting the new HD DVR and paying for an HD Digital package. This would cost more than just getting the cablecards for TiVo.


The cox person I spoke to said to get the cablecards for Tivo, I had to upgrade to the digital gateway service ($55) from my current basic ($23) and get a second cablecard ($2) so that is an extra $34 / month. It did not sound like I needed an HD Digital package for their HD DVR, so that would be an extra $18 / month. Am I missing something or is the Cox rep scamming me?


----------



## 1283

gsu13 said:


> It did not sound like I needed an HD Digital package for their HD DVR, so that would be an extra $18 / month.


It would be very odd if that's the way Cox works. For Comcast, limited basic does not qualify for HD DVR rental. I would have to pay ~$40 more for the expanded basic portion first. CableCard, on the other hand, is available with just limited basic in my area.


----------



## bicker

Not directly, at least not everywhere. If limited basic is available in-the-clear, then there is no regulation requiring provision of a CableCARD for that level of service, and some service providers, in some areas, don't offer it.

Indeed, this whole thread is complaining about the (TiVo-acknowledged) limitation in TiVo that *itself* brings about the need for CableCARD with limited basic service -- in other words, it's TiVo's "fault", and TiVo accepts responsibility (but makes it clear that they never promised to fulfill that need, and have no intention of doing so).

Having said that, service providers may provide CableCARD with limited basic service, and/or will allow folks who had digital service for at least one month to downgrade back to limited basic service and keep the CableCARD (for a fee, of course, but that could be a higher fee than for the CableCARD when it was included in the digital package fee). It simply isn't assured, nor required.


----------



## fallingwater

dwynne said:


> ...I am on limited basic cable (similar idea and price here) and the cablecard is free. When I put it in the HDTivo I actually LOSE channels as all the clear QAMs go away that are not part of the package I pay for...





c3 said:


> CableCard does not block unencrypted channels. I have CableCard with limited basic only and have been getting the expanded basic digital channels (35-75) because they have not been moved to the trap frequencies yet.





bicker said:


> You are correct that CableCARD does not block anything. However, with CableCARD, any channels that the service provider does not consider part of the service that the subscriber is supposed to receive via CableCARD generally will not be mapped, and therefore can only be tuned in manually. I suspect that that was what dwynne was referring to. Of course, dwynne can solve this problem, by paying for a package that the service provider specifies to the program guide service that it includes all the channels that are desired.


It's wrong to make sweeping general statements about what may or may not occur in a given area or cable system with regard to CableCARDS.

My cable system (Comcast) has unscrambled digital feeds for several channels that aren't offered here using any officially recognized STB or CableCARD. I assume it's just cheaper/simpler for them to throw everything onto a common system for their 100± mile long service area and program STB/CableCARD's so a subs' location selects what's available.

In that regard:

Moxi provides a channel line-up line-up associated with the set-up ZIP so although all unscrambled channels in a given location's line-up can be mapped, guide data isn't provided for all channels on Comcast's system.

Sony's TVGOS takes a one-size-fits-all approach with data for many more channels than are officially available at any given location so anything on Comcast's system can be mapped with the correct data.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> It's wrong to make sweeping general statements about what may or may not occur in a given area or cable system with regard to CableCARDS.


*Except* if you use the word "*generally*" in your statement, clearly indicating that you're *not *talking about "a given area of cable system".


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> My cable system (Comcast) has unscrambled digital feeds for several channels that aren't offered here using any officially recognized STB or CableCARD. I assume it's just cheaper/simpler for them to throw everything onto a common system for their 100± mile long service area and program STB/CableCARD's so a subs' location selects what's available.
> .


You just came up with another reason why tivo might not want to support QAM mapping, customer complaints when guide data for "phantom" or "bonus" stations is missing.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

bicker said:


> *Except* if you use the word "*generally*" in your statement, clearly indicating that you're *not *talking about "a given area of cable system".


Hey, that's a good one. Probably the origin of the word *generalization.*


----------



## bicker

Amazing how things work out, eh?


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> You just came up with another reason why tivo might not want to support QAM mapping, customer complaints when guide data for "phantom" or "bonus" stations is missing.


True!

TiVo must strive to do everything absolutely perfectly or its business partners might question their relationships with it. Sort of reminds me of politics. TiVo has NEVER been unfaithful!


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> It's wrong to make sweeping general statements about what may or may not occur in a given area or cable system with regard to CableCARDS.





bicker said:


> *Except* if you use the word "*generally*" in your statement, clearly indicating that you're *not *talking about "a given area of cable system".


Didn't you see the 'or'?

But I wonder if it applies merely at a major-general level:

*It's wrong to make sweeping statements about what may or may not occur in a given area or cable system with regard to CableCARDS.*


----------



## bicker

Get over, dude.


----------



## fallingwater

Why?


----------



## bicker

If you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> True!
> 
> TiVo must strive to do everything absolutely perfectly or its business partners might question their relationships with it. Sort of reminds me of politics. TiVo has NEVER been unfaithful!


Sorry I didn't word my post better. I was talking about complaints *from tivo customers* not cable systems. There is no reason to assume tivo will supply guide data for a channel that's not part of the official local lineup, but is (currently) available clear QAM. Guide data is a result of communication between cable systems and tribune. "Bonus" stations won't show up unless tivo creates custom line ups for a handful of customers. Not going to happen.

Early in this thread I wondered if tivo could support a compromise position and offer mapping for broadcast channels that are received via cable. I'll speculate those channels are less likely to moved and less likely to change to encrypted. I don't think that would satisfy posters in this thread.


----------



## CrispyCritter

lew said:


> Early in this thread I wondered if tivo could support a compromise position and offer mapping for broadcast channels that are received via cable. I'll speculate those channels are less likely to moved and less likely to change to encrypted. I don't think that would satisfy posters in this thread.


My broadcast channels have moved often over the past 2 years (at least 3 times, but I gave up on them after that), and Comcast still doesn't send out good identifying info over some of them. Who is a TiVo subscriber going to complain to when things suddenly stop working?


----------



## lew

CrispyCritter said:


> My broadcast channels have moved often over the past 2 years (at least 3 times, but I gave up on them after that), and Comcast still doesn't send out good identifying info over some of them. Who is a TiVo subscriber going to complain to when things suddenly stop working?


I'm wrong, based on posters I thought at least the local broadcast channels were stable in most systems. Tivo has a good reason for requiring cable cards for digital stations.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Sorry I didn't word my post better. I was talking about complaints *from tivo customers* not cable systems. There is no reason to assume tivo will supply guide data for a channel that's not part of the official local lineup, but is (currently) available clear QAM. Guide data is a result of communication between cable systems and tribune. "Bonus" stations won't show up unless tivo creates custom line ups for a handful of customers. Not going to happen.
> 
> Early in this thread I wondered if tivo could support a compromise position and offer mapping for broadcast channels that are received via cable. I'll speculate those channels are less likely to moved and less likely to change to encrypted. I don't think that would satisfy posters in this thread.


I understood your post and was being facetious. 

IMHO TiVo would never supply guide data for 'bonus' stations since they officially don't exist. Only TVGOS supplies such data, not as an incentive, but merely as a side effect of TVGOS one-size fits-all approach to data transmission, similiar to Comcast's one-size-fits-all cable feeds for its large coverage area.

TiVo has made its decision and is unlikely to change it. If TiVo users want TiVo functionality and guide data they should use TiVo with CableCARDS.

The beat goes on!


----------



## jlb

Just a semi-related note.....

Looks like Comcast moved subchannels around last night. What once was on 78-5 might now be 88-5, etc. Not those exactly, but things did move.

Rescan as necessary.


----------



## oldsyd

> Moxi Advantage: Clear QAM channel mapping through a web interface to fully support HD locals on cable -- with program information-- without the need for a CableCard.


Amen to that.

My local cable company is slowly migrating away from any analog cable signals and slowly forcing everyone to rent digital boxes or rent CableCards in order to map clear QAM channels.

On one hand, it does make sense to drop analog channels to make way for QAM digital, but requiring people to continue to rent more crud from them is pure evil.

I purchased a TiVo HD with a lifetime subscription JUST SO I COULD STOP RENTING EQUIPMENT. I don't care if it is $2 or $1 or whatever, I don't want to rent equipment from ANYONE.

So, when my cable company finally kills the basic cable package and kills all the analog channels, then I will be forced to Ebay my TiVo and purchase a MOXI.

If MOXI can map clear QAM, then Tivo can figure it out too. Even if TiVo is too lazy to update the software for this, AT LEAST allow me to manually map the channels through an advanced user interface and maintain the list myself.


----------



## bicker

It was never about whether they could "figure it out". 

People asked them to do it. They said 'no'. They said it was because it wasn't important enough. That seems very plausible despite the blathering in this thread.

Maybe in the next generation box.


----------



## slowbiscuit

oldsyd said:


> ... more crossposted dead horse beating...


Hit it harder so it will get up!


----------



## oldsyd

Where did TiVo officially say this was something they will not do?

I've been lurking around here and other places for quite a while and wouldn't have made my first post here had I seen something from TiVo saying they won't add clear QAM channel mapping.


----------



## lew

oldsyd said:


> Where did TiVo officially say this was something they will not do?
> 
> I've been lurking around here and other places for quite a while and wouldn't have made my first post here had I seen something from TiVo saying they won't add clear QAM channel mapping.


Read through, or search, this thread. Someone gave a link to a post from one of the tivo employees who posts on TCF. He basically said QAM wasn't on the "to do list" of new features. Although a post by a tivo employee isn't an official announcement it's pretty close.

Here's the link
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876

Although it's not official it seems pretty clear QAM mapping won't happen.


----------



## Adam1115

oldsyd said:


> Where did TiVo officially say this was something they will not do?
> 
> I've been lurking around here and other places for quite a while and wouldn't have made my first post here had I seen something from TiVo saying they won't add clear QAM channel mapping.


They've posted it on this very forum.


----------



## fallingwater

oldsyd said:


> Where did TiVo officially say this was something they will not do?
> 
> I've been lurking around here and other places for quite a while and wouldn't have made my first post here had I seen something from TiVo saying they won't add clear QAM channel mapping.


This thread is just shy of two years old. TiVo hasn't officially said anything but their actions do speak.

But feel free to, 'er, horse around! 
 http://archive.perfectduluthday.com/beating-a-dead-horse.gif


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876
> 
> Although it's not official it seems pretty clear QAM mapping won't happen.


From TiVoPony's own mouth: (Isn't a pony just a little horse? Or perhaps he's just a little hoarse. )

_Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. *That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers.* But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).

EDIT: Hi-lites added for emphasis _


----------



## oldsyd

lew said:


> Read through, or search, this thread. Someone gave a link to a post from one of the tivo employees who posts on TCF. He basically said QAM wasn't on the "to do list" of new features. Although a post by a tivo employee isn't an official announcement it's pretty close.
> 
> Here's the link (I'm not allowed to post links yet)
> 
> Although it's not official it seems pretty clear QAM mapping won't happen.


Thanks for that link, Lew. I'm a relative newbie here, having made my first post yesterday and reading since April. I would have never found that message on my own, even reading all 1,900 posts in this thread is quite a feat. It's also interesting to note that post talks about how difficult it is to add M-card support 

The only reason I am flogging this dead horse as some people say, is because I see MOXI has this feature, and I'm guessing they added it because they thought end users wanted it. I'm also guessing MOXI's business strategy is to profit off things that TiVo won't or can't change, even though at this point TiVo clearly has the better product. Even if MOXI's implementation is flawed and require manual intervention, it's still better than your DVR turning into a brick lest you rent equipment from El Cabelero.

Okay, I'm officially sticking a fork in this dead horse and letting out all the gas, because I'm done. ***pffffttt***


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> From TiVoPony's own mouth: ...
> 
> 
> 
> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping ... *do not target a significant portion of our subscribers*, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But *it is a consideration when trading off those features against others*
Click to expand...

Thanks for finding and posting this quote.


----------



## Grey Griffin

While I agree that Tivo can and should do something to support clear QAM mapping I think we should also be complaining to the cable companies. 

I've had an S3 (original) for over 2 years with cable cards. At Christmas we wanted a second HD Tivo and I found a display S3 on Ebay for a good price. We were mainly getting this Tivo for Mondays and Thursdays when the networks had more than 2 shows we liked in the same time slot. Other than that it was our "re-run" box. I chose not to get cable cards since Cox would charge $30 per card to install and I knew I needed 2. I did a channel scan and found my locals. Of course, they were on channels like 79.2 and 80.3 with no guide data. I set up manual recordings and dealt with it. It wasn't bad since I think I only had 4 shows I had to do manual recordings for.

Around April I noticed that the QAM channels were coming up blank. I wasn't surprised, I had read on these forums that cable companies sometimes changed the frequency channels were sent on. I did another channel scan and found my locals again. But I noticed this time they didn't have the odd numbering (79.2, 80.3, etc). The channels were coming up matching the HD tier numbers. I went back through guided set up and told Tivo to use the digital lineup and I would get cable cards later. To my amazement, it worked. I now have my local HD channels showing up where they would just as if I had cable cards and I had guide data. I did have to go through and uncheck all the scanned and digital channels I can't get but that was well worth it. I've also experimented and the local HDs don't come up unless I do a channel scan, just telling the Tivo I have digital doesn't find them.

I've said all that to say this. Clearly there is something the cable companies could do that would help accommodate users who don't have cable cards. I don't know if my company assigned the local HDs so their frequency and channel numbers match or if they added something to the data on the frequency (I think that's called PSIP data) or what. But it seems that both Tivo and cable companies could be doing a lot more to solve this issue.

BTW, my provider is Cox-Tulsa.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> Read through, or search, this thread. Someone gave a link to a post from one of the tivo employees who posts on TCF. He basically said QAM wasn't on the "to do list" of new features. Although a post by a tivo employee isn't an official announcement it's pretty close.
> 
> Here's the link
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876
> 
> Although it's not official it seems pretty clear QAM mapping won't happen.





fallingwater said:


> From TiVoPony's own mouth: (Isn't a pony just a little horse? Or perhaps he's just a little hoarse. )
> 
> _Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. *That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers.* But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).
> 
> EDIT: Hi-lites added for emphasis_





> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support *do not target a significant portion of our subscribers*, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But *it is a consideration when trading off those features against others* (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).


Hi-lights added; not in original post.



bicker said:


> Thanks for finding and posting this quote.


Thank Lew.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Hi-lights added; not in original post.


Neither set. Each set of highlights highlighted something important, and so together everything important was highlighted appropriately.



fallingwater said:


> Thank Lew.


Thanks Lew!


----------



## lew

Posters who think Moxi is the answer should read bkdtv's post



bkdtv said:


> Moxi only allows you to manually remap information from the analog channel to the digital version. For now, Moxi does not allow you remap guide information to digital-only channels.
> 
> If your cable company won't allow you to get a CableCard with basic cable service, you might consider upgrading temporarily, and then retain the CableCard after you revert to basic cable service. You'd be hit with a monthly charge for the CableCard, but then you'd get digital versions of all your basic cable channels with program information.
> 
> Over time, more and more channels will be moved to the digital tier, and many will be encrypted, so you will need a CableCard eventually if you want much more than locals.


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> Each set of highlights highlighted something important, and so together everything important was highlighted appropriately.


Not quite. But thanks to lew there's a way to emphasize the entire set of important points raised by TiVoPony:
 http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=6149876#post6149876 


TiVoPony said:


> *I'm sorry you feel we've become more secretive, having been here from day one I'd argue that's not the case. Our product roadmap has never been public, as we've had to explain here on the forum many times over the years (yes, prior to 2004). Even back when Replay was our only competitor we were careful about how and when information was shared...there's nothing like giving a competitor free information on what you're doing. I will agree that there was a period, about four years ago, where we had a string of unfortunate leaks regarding new features. Those were not planned, sanctioned, or in any way helpful to us, trust me. You shouldn't take a lack of leaks as a change in policy though...we didn't intend to have the leaks to begin with!
> 
> There have never been release notes regarding bug fixes in the past either. It's possible that we're not any more secretive today than you remember us being.
> 
> Regarding the specific features you've asked about, the free space indicator is certainly the longest running request. Longevity does not equal priority though. If that single feature would have sold more boxes and increased customer satisfaction for a significant portion of our subscribers, it would have been added years ago. It may get in there one day, but when prioritized against other things, it's often pretty low on the list.
> 
> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features against others (M-Card for S3 is technically possible, but also technically very complex. We've learned that there is a lot of risk inherent in that development).
> 
> I assume by 'digital setup support for S2' you're referring to the ATSC converter boxes just coming onto the market in advance of next February's cut over for antenna signals (cable is not affected). That's being worked on, but I don't have a date or support plans to share yet.
> 
> We're also pretty open here, myself, Jerry, and Stephen, about engaging with customers who have issues, helping to identify what can be done, soliciting help (and beta testers), etc. There aren't many companies that allow employees to participate on open forums the way that TiVo does.
> 
> We do our best. But I have to acknowledge that no matter how much time we spend here, there will always be one more post to answer. If we can help, and provide information, we always will. Just don't ask for our product roadmap.*
> 
> Cheers,
> Pony
> __________________
> Director of Product Marketing
> TiVo Inc.


Hi-lites added for emphasis!


----------



## fallingwater

bkdtv said:


> Moxi only allows you to manually remap information from the analog channel to the digital version. For now, Moxi does not allow you remap guide information to digital-only channels.
> 
> If your cable company won't allow you to get a CableCard with basic cable service, you might consider upgrading temporarily, and then retain the CableCard after you revert to basic cable service. You'd be hit with a monthly charge for the CableCard, but then you'd get digital versions of all your basic cable channels with program information.
> 
> Over time, more and more channels will be moved to the digital tier, and many will be encrypted, so you will need a CableCard eventually if you want much more than locals.





lew said:


> Posters who think Moxi is the answer should read bkdtv's post


At this point bkdtv is just speculating. Moxi isn't the answer but does provide competition to TiVo that all DVR users will benefit from.

Sony's discontinued hi-def DVRs with TVGOS can't set timers or their clocks without TVGOS data, but with (Ver. 8) TVGOS provide much more comprehensive unscrambled QAM channel mapping than Moxi's easier to set method.



fallingwater said:


> It's too soon to speculate on what Moxi may or not provide regarding programming info for unscrambled QAM mapping or to what degree cable co's will scramble Extended Basic QAM channels. Here's an interesting thread which discusses the issue. Notice how FUD and fact are both represented.
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22753607-DTA-Sony-XBR-TV-and-DTA


----------



## lew

I'm not sure there is enough of a market for even one premium priced DVR (tivo). I doubt there is enough of a market for two. I don't think Moxi will get enough market share to grow the market enough for two companies. Moxi could provide just enough competition to kill both companies. Sorry but I don't think competition will help us.


No matter what part of TivoPony's post you decide to bold the post made it pretty clear QAM mapping was very low on tivo's priority list. It doesn't even make tivo's list of requested features on their web poll. How long did it take for tivo to solve the FiOS pixelation issue? The problem with S1 units not connecting? Tivo seems to be allocating resources solving real problems and adding features that generate revenue. Some customers must be ordering pizza (or whatever round "food" that Domino's delivers)

I don't have the kicking the dead horse GIF to attach but the issue looks dead. Doesn't even to be very many posters on the other board using the hack to map QAM channels.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> I'm not sure there is enough of a market for even one premium priced DVR (tivo). I doubt there is enough of a market for two. I don't think Moxi will get enough market share to grow the market enough for two companies. Moxi could provide just enough competition to kill both companies. Sorry but I don't think competition will help us.


And some experts seem to think that the DVR market, itself, is reaching its peak:

http://www.tvweek.com/blogs/tvbizwire/2009/08/game-changer-cbs-research-guru.php

I'm not sure that I agree with Poltrack (on several counts beyond this one) but he's paid for being right, and the people who pay him for being right aren't idiots. (Imagine that!)



lew said:


> No matter what part of TivoPony's post you decide to bold the post made it pretty clear QAM mapping was very low on tivo's priority list. It doesn't even make tivo's list of requested features on their web poll. How long did it take for tivo to solve the FiOS pixelation issue? The problem with S1 units not connecting?


Yet it is bewildering how much energy some folks will put into defending the viability of their pipe dream, thereby fostering yet-even-more dissatisfaction from their own perspective, and infuriating how their prosecution actually diverts more people onto their death spiral of bitterness and disappointment.



lew said:


> Tivo seems to be allocating resources solving real problems and adding features that generate revenue.


This is critical. The FiOS pixelation issue you mentioned is a great example. Another big push, falling into the "generate revenue" category, has got to be their efforts to provide a customized advertising path to their subscribers. Some of us might have adopted TiVo because we want to avoid commercials, but it is clearly in TiVo's best interest to help us avoid the commercials that they don't get money for, but send commercials our way when they do get money for doing so.



lew said:


> I don't have the kicking the dead horse GIF to attach but the issue looks dead. Doesn't even to be very many posters on the other board using the hack to map QAM channels.


----------



## lew

I'm not sure I completely agree with the DVR peaking comment. There is evidence that suggests at least some cable and satellite companies will be including a DVR in all future HD STBs.

That said a number of those customers don't realize they have a DVR let alone how to use it to record programs. I wonder if the comment was referring to customers purchasing a retail DVR (Tivo/Moxi).


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> There is evidence that suggests at least some cable and satellite companies will be including a DVR in all future HD STBs.


While others are pursuing the centralize DVR approach, where they have more control over how recorded programming is played back (i.e., with or without targeted commercials that you can or cannot skip).


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> While others are pursuing the centralize DVR approach, where they have more control over how recorded programming is played back (i.e., with or without targeted commercials that you can or cannot skip).


Cablevision, and maybe others. Which is why I think Poltrack was referring to DVRs "purchased retail".

I'm not sure I'd be happy with the Cablevision option. But it has some advantages. Increase your "hard drive" capacity instantly by just paying an extra monthly fee. No need for an UPS. Very little worry about losing programs as a result of hardware failure. Likelihood of being able to view "your shows" on any STB in your house without having to worry about running cat5 cables or messing with wireless.

It may not appeal to "geeks" on TCF but I suspect those advantages appeal to the average consumer.


----------



## bkdtv

I don't know if this was mentioned, but in a handful markets, Comcast is now using PSIP to remap its "Clear QAM" channels to the same numbers that you get with a CableCard.

Let's hope this is a growing trend, as it eliminates the need for QAM mapping [on those systems].


----------



## mattack

Do you have specific markets this is happening in?


----------



## sbourgeo

mattack said:


> Do you have specific markets this is happening in?


Some chatter about it at dslreports.com.

I can confirm that it doesn't appear to be in Comcast New England yet though.


----------



## Grey Griffin

> I don't know if this was mentioned, but in a handful markets, Comcast is now using PSIP to remap its "Clear QAM" channels to the same numbers that you get with a CableCard.


This appears to be what they're doing at Cox-Tulsa. It's just for the local HDs but it makes things much more convenient.


----------



## dig_duggler

Convenient, but it still won't help anyone get guide data without a cable card. Our market has used PSIP data to map the channels to the callsigns for about a year (ABC 33 is at 33.1, etc). Much better than having to go look for it every few months though....


----------



## aindik

dig_duggler said:


> Convenient, but it still won't help anyone get guide data without a cable card. Our market has used PSIP data to map the channels to the callsigns for about a year (ABC 33 is at 33.1, etc). Much better than having to go look for it every few months though....


Mapping them to OTA channel numbers won't help. Mapping them to the cable company's with-a-box channel number might.


----------



## dig_duggler

They would still have to add the channel to your guide list if you don't use a cable card. The fundamental reason for not doing that (it might hop) is the same regardless of where they map them.


----------



## Grey Griffin

I just told Tivo to use the digital lineup and I would get cable cards later. The channels now map to their digital counter part and I have full guide data. I can see where it might not work if they map to OTA numbers but if they use the STB numbers then you'll have guide info.


----------



## dig_duggler

Grey Griffin said:


> I just told Tivo to use the digital lineup and I would get cable cards later. The channels now map to their digital counter part and I have full guide data. I can see where it might not work if they map to OTA numbers but if they use the STB numbers then you'll have guide info.


Ahh, I didn't know that would work. Indeed, a good workaround then.


----------



## clark_kent

A couple of days ago, I helping a friend set up a TiVoHD. They are planning on adding a CableCard so that's what I told setup and selected the digital lineup. Much to my amazement, all the guide data came in but the TiVo can't tune any of the clearQAM channels.


----------



## Grey Griffin

> A couple of days ago, I helping a friend set up a TiVoHD. They are planning on adding a CableCard so that's what I told setup and selected the digital lineup. Much to my amazement, all the guide data came in but the TiVo can't tune any of the clearQAM channels.


Did you do a channel scan?


----------



## mattack

Grey Griffin said:


> I just told Tivo to use the digital lineup and I would get cable cards later. The channels now map to their digital counter part and I have full guide data. I can see where it might not work if they map to OTA numbers but if they use the STB numbers then you'll have guide info.


Please excuse my stupid question, and I am not trying to insult your intelligence.

So you're absolutely sure these aren't just the analog versions for OTA channels that have stuck around in many markets for the OTA channels, right? (E.g. start a recording, and if it asks you to choose the recording quality, it's still an analog channel.)

I guess my issue was covered recently, but at least for a few of the channels, I would get the data mapped to the OTA variants (which also matched the cable versions of the *non-HD* channels), but didn't get guide data... at least for a few channels. For example, the banner bar would show 'KQED' for 9-1, but there would be no guide data. (KQED analog was 9, KQED digital with cablecards was 9, I think KQED-HD is 709.)

I finally have cablecards (due to the cable move to digital and loss of 'extended basic' otherwise), but I would still use this for my S3 (or possibly move the cablecards to my S3 and use my TivoHD this way).


----------



## Grey Griffin

> Please excuse my stupid question, and I am not trying to insult your intelligence.
> 
> So you're absolutely sure these aren't just the analog versions for OTA channels that have stuck around in many markets for the OTA channels, right? (E.g. start a recording, and if it asks you to choose the recording quality, it's still an analog channel.)
> 
> I guess my issue was covered recently, but at least for a few of the channels, I would get the data mapped to the OTA variants (which also matched the cable versions of the *non-HD* channels), but didn't get guide data... at least for a few channels. For example, the banner bar would show 'KQED' for 9-1, but there would be no guide data. (KQED analog was 9, KQED digital with cablecards was 9, I think KQED-HD is 709.)
> 
> I finally have cablecards (due to the cable move to digital and loss of 'extended basic' otherwise), but I would still use this for my S3 (or possibly move the cablecards to my S3 and use my TivoHD this way).


Yes, I'm completely sure. When I record I'm not asked to set recording quality and the channel numbers match the HD locals for digital cable, in my case channels 705-711. I can also tell because neither the Tivo nor my TV will allow me to change the aspect ratio. I have my Tivo set to 1080i hybrid and when I go from the SD channels (2-65) to the HD channels (705-711) I get the 2-3 seconds of flickering associated with a resolution change. And I've compared these channels to their SD counterparts and they are in HD.


----------



## clark_kent

Grey Griffin said:


> Did you do a channel scan?


No. I don't think you can do a channel scan when you have a CableCard. And, I didn't think it would do any good anyway since the guide was displaying the channel numbers as if a CableCard was already installed. In other words, if local NBC-HD is on cable channel 1005, the clearQAM might be something like 113.1. The guide was displaying data for channel 1005 and there is no way to associate 113.1 to the 1005 guide data. Probably why you can't do a channel scan if you have a CableCard.


----------



## mitchk

clark_kent said:


> A couple of days ago, I helping a friend set up a TiVoHD. They are planning on adding a CableCard so that's what I told setup and selected the digital lineup. Much to my amazement, all the guide data came in but the TiVo can't tune any of the clearQAM channels.


Same experience on Comcast in Central Illinois.


----------



## Grey Griffin

> No. I don't think you can do a channel scan when you have a CableCard. And, I didn't think it would do any good anyway since the guide was displaying the channel numbers as if a CableCard was already installed. In other words, if local NBC-HD is on cable channel 1005, the clearQAM might be something like 113.1. The guide was displaying data for channel 1005 and there is no way to associate 113.1 to the 1005 guide data. Probably why you can't do a channel scan if you have a CableCard.


If the cable card wasn't installed yet then you would have been able to do a channel scan. AFAIK the scan is the only way to find clear QAM channels. To use your example, if the cable company has applied the correct PSIP data to QAM channel 113.1 then it would remap to virtual channel 1005 and you would be able to tune NBC-HD with guide data, even without a cable card. This is what my local provider has apparently done, but it appears to be very rare. It's more likely that you would have just had 113.1 with no guide data and 1005 with no picture until the cable cards were installed.


----------



## troycarpenter

lew said:


> Posters who think Moxi is the answer should read bkdtv's post


Having set up three Moxi's in a clearQAM environment, I can confirm that the entire channel range can be remapped. There are no limitations.


----------



## fallingwater

After this exchange in the 'Things that Moxi has...' thread, bkdtv acknowledged that his info was outdated. The first link is to the post lew referred to:

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7422730#post7422730
_Moxi only allows you to manually remap information from the analog channel to the digital version. For now, Moxi does not allow you remap guide information to digital-only channels..._

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7425189#post7425189

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7425459#post7425459

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7427774#post7427774

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7428033#post7428033
_Thanks, good to know that is no longer an issue. I'll update my posts._


----------



## fallingwater

Is TiVo damned smart or just lucky? 

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=637


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> Is TiVo damned smart or just lucky?
> 
> http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=637


Smart, not damned smart. Common sense suggests cable companies aren't going to continue to air extra cost stations in the clear. Common sense suggests the FCC would work with the cable companies.

A couple of us said posters who thought QAM mapping would be a means to "bonus stations" were living in another world.

This may change the way you look at it, but it doesn't really change much. I guess it saved tivo complaints when the "bonus" stations start to disappear.

The question is if enough customers and potential customers would subscribe a tivo to record local broadcast stations carried on cable. That would probably be limited to people who can't receive their local channels OTA. The issue is how often the cable company changes the frequencies.

Some of us might subscribe an additional tivo if we didn't need cable cards. Having an extra 2 tuners for local stations works. There are a couple of posters in private cable systems that air everything in the clear.

I don't think QAM mapping is a bad idea. The question is if it would produce enough additional subscriptions to be worth it.


----------



## fallingwater

If TiVo chose not to consider QAM mapping precisely because they realized that developing an easy to use system (a la Moxi's) would require significant resources BUT soon become an ephemera with no competitive advantage I'd say they were damned smart!

Here, as soon as Comcast scrambles all channels above 28 (Extended Basic), Moxi will lose any advantage it presently has over TiVo regarding the accessibility of guide data for recordable channels. QAM mapping will indeed become a bad (useless) idea.

Bellingham is one of those locations where 'local' Seattle channels can only be received via cable or satellite as we're behind a mountain. Comcast rarely changes actual QAM channels used for a given program source, but the issue is confusing because virtual (PSIP generated) channels for Extended Basic cable channels are often routinely only a few subchannels away from actual channels and Moxi or TiVo receive one or the other but never both.

We do receive Vancouver, BC OTA stations, which still have two years before going all digital and provide many American network programs, sometimes before they air here, but their news commentary and current events have a different slant. (There's much more about Ontario than Washington State.)

IMHO, an HDTiVo with a CableCARD plus a Dish DVR for OTA might be the most cost effective combo when a viewer needs more than two tuners.

Watching TV used to be easy; now it requires strategic planning.


----------



## lew

fallingwater said:


> If TiVo chose not to consider QAM mapping precisely because they realized that developing an easy to use system (a la Moxi's) would require significant resources BUT soon become an ephemera with no competitive advantage I'd say they were damned smart!
> 
> ............
> 
> IMHO, an HDTiVo with a CableCARD plus a Dish DVR for OTA might be the most cost effective combo when a viewer needs more than two tuners.
> 
> Watching TV used to be easy; now it requires strategic planning.


Not damned smart. Even a person of average (or below) intelligence had to assume cable systems won't continue to allow customers to receive stations they're not paying for. I never understood why some people thought QAM mapping was so important. Only a few posters have "private" cable systems that don't encrypt. I didn't realize posters thought "bonus" stations would remain free. I guess that's why some of us thought QAM was a low priority on tivo's "to do list". I couldn't understand why a person willing to pay for tivo (and tivo subscription) would only be viewing the dozen or so cable carried broadcast stations that are expected to remain unencrypted.

Using a Tivo HD for OTA and a second Tivo HD with cable cards may still be a good combo. You can put each box with a seperate TV set and use MRV.


----------



## fallingwater

Perhaps TiVo is darned smart? (Otherwise we'll havta' agree to disagree! )

Right now Extended Basic cable service of perhaps 60-70 channels is the recordable 'bonus' without CableCARDS, with or without channel mapping. But OTA (network) simulcasts still garner a disproportionate number of viewers.

Considering the cost of a TiVo sub even with MSD, it seems (to me) that a second TiVo dedicated for OTA is a bit over the top for most viewers. Dish's DVR is no TiVo but it's a cheap OTA backup.

As always, YMMV!


----------



## 84lion

> Considering the cost of a TiVo sub even with MSD, it seems (to me) that a second TiVo dedicated for OTA is a bit over the top for most viewers. Dish's DVR is no TiVo but it's a cheap OTA backup.


For maximum flexibility and minimal recurring cost, what is needed is a "whole house" Tivo. What I am thinking of here is a "headend" that has outputs for all or nearly all of the occupants in the house. For example, in a family of four, the unit could have four outputs, one for each member of the family, assumes there are four displays in the house. The unit would have, say, six tuners, so that, for example, three items could be watched while three items are being recorded (or, four items being recorded while 2 items are watched live and 2 are watched recorded). This unit would be capable of outputting composite, S-Video, component, or HDMI for each output. Using wireless remotes, each user could have their display receive any one of the four outputs (for example, TV A and TV B could both watch output 1, if desired, although TV A would have "priority" on output 1 and TV B could not change channels on that output, to prevent TV A and TV B users from "walking over" each other). A unit with six tuners would have three M-Cards, but would be considered one box, just as a two-tuner Tivo HD is currently considered one box. Ideally, the storage would be expandable. MRV would not be required, any output could view anything recorded on the hard drive(s), and so every user could access recorded premium content on any output. Unprotected content could still be offloaded either wired or wireless if desired.

The advantage of this unit would be that the customer would avoid per-box charges (the unit would be treated as one box) and would also only require one "access fee." Additionally, premium recorded content would be available to any display. Although this solution would no doubt be expensive up front, theoretically the cost of renting HD boxes and/or DVRs over time would amortize the cost of the "whole house headend." This would also avoid HD box or DVR rental increases.


----------



## lew

A M card can decode up to 6 channels simultaneously. Your proposed unit would only need one M card.

It's not realistic to think tivo would produce such a unit without either making a real profit on the hardware and/or charging a higher service fee.

The unit may output 3 different HDMI, component etc signals but it may not practical or possible to run the necessary cables throughout the house.

Makes more sense to have MRV client boxes so the signal can run via network wiring/wireless/MoCA. Tivo would need some kind of streaming option to handle shows with CCI issues. Tivo would either have price the box profitably or have some type of subscription cost associated with it.



84lion said:


> For maximum flexibility and minimal recurring cost, what is needed is a "whole house" Tivo. What I am thinking of here is a "headend" that has outputs for all or nearly all of the occupants in the house. For example, in a family of four, the unit could have four outputs, one for each member of the family, assumes there are four displays in the house. The unit would have, say, six tuners, so that, for example, three items could be watched while three items are being recorded (or, four items being recorded while 2 items are watched live and 2 are watched recorded). This unit would be capable of outputting composite, S-Video, component, or HDMI for each output. Using wireless remotes, each user could have their display receive any one of the four outputs (for example, TV A and TV B could both watch output 1, if desired, although TV A would have "priority" on output 1 and TV B could not change channels on that output, to prevent TV A and TV B users from "walking over" each other). A unit with six tuners would have three M-Cards, but would be considered one box, just as a two-tuner Tivo HD is currently considered one box. Ideally, the storage would be expandable. MRV would not be required, any output could view anything recorded on the hard drive(s), and so every user could access recorded premium content on any output. Unprotected content could still be offloaded either wired or wireless if desired.
> 
> The advantage of this unit would be that the customer would avoid per-box charges (the unit would be treated as one box) and would also only require one "access fee." Additionally, premium recorded content would be available to any display. Although this solution would no doubt be expensive up front, theoretically the cost of renting HD boxes and/or DVRs over time would amortize the cost of the "whole house headend." This would also avoid HD box or DVR rental increases.


----------



## 84lion

lew said:


> A M card can decode up to 6 channels simultaneously. Your proposed unit would only need one M card.
> 
> It's not realistic to think tivo would produce such a unit without either making a real profit on the hardware and/or charging a higher service fee.
> 
> The unit may output 3 different HDMI, component etc signals but it may not practical or possible to run the necessary cables throughout the house.
> 
> Makes more sense to have MRV client boxes so the signal can run via network wiring/wireless/MoCA. Tivo would need some kind of streaming option to handle shows with CCI issues. Tivo would either have price the box profitably or have some type of subscription cost associated with it.


Thanks for pointing that out about the M Card - obviously I was not aware of that. That makes the proposed unit look even better!

I certainly wouldn't expect Tivo or any other company to produce that kind of animal for the cost of a Tivo HD XL plus, say, 50%. Currently the Tivo HD XL is running $599 on Amazon. Assuming that such a unit could be bought for, say, $1500 or a slight decrement on the cost of 3 Tivo HD XLs, I could see that cost as being supportable to some folks who would want this whole house solution. Using current subscription costs, a lifetime for this unit would be $399 + $299 + $299 = $1000, making the total unit cost $2500. Granted, wouldn't appeal to everybody but I'm sure there would be some folks interested. Actually, I think the subscription costs probably could be somewhat less since we are not talking three separate units that could be resold separately but rather one unit, but that's Tivo's call.

As far as running cables, it depends on the house. I'm sure a professional installer could do it for those who didn't want to do it themselves. Again, an additional cost but if you can afford the unit at $2500 I think that the cost of running the cables shouldn't be a deterrent.

The current Tivo HD XL does support MRV on non-protected content but the content cannot be moved gracefully, the move takes time and space on the HDD. I don't understand why the Tivo HD currently cannot stream protected content to another Tivo HD (it seems like the deal is that protected content must stay on the HDD it is recorded on). For example, if a copy-protected program is on my wife's Tivo HD and she is using hers, I cannot move the program to my Tivo HD for my viewing. The only remedy I see to this is to record such content on both Tivos. This is wasteful of hard drive space, and one cannot tell beforehand what content is protected and what is not (although typically stuff on premium channels is almost always protected). I believe the amount of protected content is going to increase rather than decrease so anything that provides more flexibility would be welcome.

Finally, to compare costs, our cable operator charges about $7 for each unit for montly "HD access" and an additional $15 monthly for DVR rental, or about $22 for HD DVR rental. I am figuring this cost to increase, let's figure an average of $25 per month for HD DVR rental over the life of the unit. For three cable company HD DVRs that do not allow MRV or download of any content, that's $75 per month or $900 per year. At that rate I would have the "dream system" paid for in three years, plus I own the equipment and at that point could probably sell it used for at least 50 percent original cost if I decide I want to make a change. Plus, as long as I own the system I am "future proofed" against DVR rental cost increases, which I believe will only continue to climb.


----------



## innocentfreak

84lion said:


> I certainly wouldn't expect Tivo or any other company to produce that kind of animal for the cost of a Tivo HD XL plus, say, 50%. Currently the Tivo HD XL is running $599 on Amazon. Assuming that such a unit could be bought for, say, $1500 or a slight decrement on the cost of 3 Tivo HD XLs, I could see that cost as being supportable to some folks who would want this whole house solution. Using current subscription costs, a lifetime for this unit would be $399 + $299 + $299 = $1000, making the total unit cost $2500. Granted, wouldn't appeal to everybody but I'm sure there would be some folks interested. Actually, I think the subscription costs probably could be somewhat less since we are not talking three separate units that could be resold separately but rather one unit, but that's Tivo's call.


I would be interested in a 6 tuner Tivo but I doubt I would pay more than $1000 for it before subscription fees. I can buy 3 Tivo HDs for $900 MSRP so the hardware costs would have to be around that price range. I could see it at $1000 for the convenience of having it in one unit and maybe lifetime around $500 but that is the max I would probably pay.

Right now there is actually a company which has a cable card tuner coming soon to the market for the HTPC which will offer supposedly 6 tuners on one card. The price isn't known yet so depending on the price of that and any other cards which may be announced at CEDIA in September we would probably have a decent idea where Tivo would have to price themselves. The card is by Ceton if you want to read about it. Obviously Tivo could price themselves higher than the card but if I can buy a HTPC with one of the cards for say $1500 I would have a tough time justifying paying anything more than $1500 for a Tivo with lifetime.


----------



## jcthorne

As far as distribution to other tvs in the house, the new tivo needs an HD RF output. Not multiple HDMIs. Output the HD video on a simple RF Coax cable and the distribution and even remote control are easy. The hardware chips to do this now exist and would match up well to the cableing already in most homes. There are outboard devices already on the market but this should be internal to a multiroom version of Tivo.


----------



## bicker

Isn't the technology to put a video stream onto a QAM signal prohibitively expensive for household applications?


----------



## jcthorne

bicker said:


> Isn't the technology to put a video stream onto a QAM signal prohibitively expensive for household applications?


If stand alone boxes are available today at $299 it cant be that bad. The chipsets will certianly get cheaper and I predict this to be commonplace as RF modulators were in consumer electronics were before......someday.


----------



## innocentfreak

The only other option I have seen to do something like this is the ZvBox which if I remember costs around $1000 so I don't see it happening anytime soon.


----------



## bicker

jcthorne said:


> If stand alone boxes are available today at $299 it cant be that bad.


Huh? There is no such circuitry in stand-alone DVRs.


innocentfreak said:


> The only other option I have seen to do something like this is the ZvBox which if I remember costs around $1000 so I don't see it happening anytime soon.


Yes, that's a price point that sounds more realistic for this technology.


----------



## lew

http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7421485#post7421485

Current chipsets can support 4 tuners and it's possible the next generation of chipsets will support 6 tuners.

I don't think multiple HDMI outputs or modulating HD output to coax will be a cost effective way to have one tivo support multiple TV sets in different parts of your house.

An increasing number of cable systems are using CCI flags. Tivo needs to come up with a solution. Netflix movies stream. That may be the easiest solution.

I think a tivo client box makes some sense. I don't know if tivo could produce such a box at a price point that would be attractive. A customers could reduce the costs for cable card rentals and even digital outlet fees.


----------



## Saxion

lew said:


> Not damned smart. Even a person of average (or below) intelligence had to assume cable systems won't continue to allow customers to receive stations they're not paying for.


MSOs can continue to use traps to block access to SD digital stations in the extended basic tier, and many of them do. HD versions of extended basic channels are more likely to be encrypted (except for local broadcast stations, of course). This was the choice that MSOs faced previously for their analog reclamation projects: whether to use traps (cheap; less secure; equivalent user experience to the old analog system with no boxes or CableCARDs needed) or distribute expensive CableCARD DTAs to everyone (expensive; more secure; worse user experience than old analog system since you need a box/CableCARD for every TV). Now, MSOs have a third option: distribute cheaper DTAs with integrated encryption (cost is somewhere between the above two; more secure; worse user experience than current analog system). The real loser here is the consumer who is saddled with more boxes, more rental fees, and a more cumbersome user experience. Some MSOs do see the value in using traps instead of encryption for digital SD channels in terms of user expectation and convenience, and not all of them will take that third option (Massillon certainly isn't given their most recent FCC filing). It's not clear yet which MSOs will pick which option. To each (MSO) his own.

TiVo Clear QAM support was generally desired in order to support local broadcast HD, for those people who can't receive them OTA. Certainly extended basic SD in clear QAM is very nice too and if those channels become encrypted, it does erode the value of clear QAM, but not to the point of irrelevancy.



lew said:


> I couldn't understand why a person willing to pay for tivo (and tivo subscription) would only be viewing the dozen or so cable carried broadcast stations that are expected to remain unencrypted.


Can you understand why TiVos have ATSC tuners?


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

I have to disagree with the premise that traps are "cheap" or inexpensive, since they require a truck roll.

Also, at least in some jurisdictions, DTAs can bring the wrath of the Feds down on cable "pirates". If the local prosecutors are too busy to file charges for "theft of service", there is always the possibility that the local US district attorney can be "persuaded" to go for DMCA since an argument can be made about circumventing encryption in a DTA. There is no corresponding DMCA argument about a trap.


----------



## lrhorer

bicker said:


> Isn't the technology to put a video stream onto a QAM signal prohibitively expensive for household applications?


No, not really. QAM modulators are not particularly more difficult to manufacture than analog RF modulators. Residential HD QAM modulator / receiver systems can be had for under $500, including a wireless remote. Of course, adding $200 to the cost of an already pricey box may push it over the edge in terms of consumer interest. The big problem, however, is DRM. CableLabs isn't likely to approve a CableCard based HD system which doesn't implement DRM and encrypted / protected content on the DVR. A 2-way system is certainly possible, but then that blows away the 1 box, multiple TV idea. You'll have to have a two-way capable DRM enabled box at the remote TV or a CableCard in the remote TV. Even clear channel content is encrypted on the hard drive, although I suppose TiVo could implement a scheme to disable encryption on clear channel content. I can't see a justification for CableLabs to deny such a capability.


----------



## lrhorer

innocentfreak said:


> The only other option I have seen to do something like this is the ZvBox which if I remember costs around $1000 so I don't see it happening anytime soon.


'Try $499 for the ZV 100, and that's a low volume retail channel.


----------



## bicker

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I have to disagree with the premise that traps are "cheap" or inexpensive, since they require a truck roll.


Indeed, in business, labor cost typically trumps other considerations.


----------



## bicker

lrhorer said:


> Of course, adding $200 to the cost of an already pricey box may push it over the edge in terms of consumer interest.


Yes, that's what what I suspected.


----------



## jccfin

Some of you should stop wasting time complaining about no channel mapping here. Instead, you should write Tivo like I did. I wrote an e-mail to Shanan Carney, their AD spokesperson. She said that she's never heard of that request before. I guess we were so busy *****ing about it with each other than we failed to contact the people that would actually do something about it. I recommend that everyone e-mail her also. Please be polite about it. I'm sure she has the power to speak to the higher-ups about it. Her e-mail is [email protected]

I would also point out that even though I didn't give her my name I received a call from their customer service people within 24hours. I guess the traced my e-mail to my Tivo account. In any case, after some chit chat with the customer service person, he said that he would forward my request to advanced customer service for research. This is the reply I received:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for contacting TiVo! Advanced Customer Service has researched your request regarding manual channel mapping. We do not have an estimated time in which this idea could be implemented since it is not a simple request. For the most recent information pertaining to this or any other TiVo issue please visit http://tivo.mediaroom.com/
Please feel free to call TiVo directly at 877 367-8486 from 6am to 9pm PST. We apologize for any inconvenience this might cause. Thank you for your time and patience.

Sincerely,
TiVo ACS Support
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think if we get enough people writing Shanan, she would let management know that this is a priority issue. Best of luck and report back what you find.


----------



## innocentfreak

I think my only issue is I don't think it would be a difficult option necessarily. There are home users who have already written such tools for Media Center. For example Guidetool. Now Media Center does allow mapping internally and Guidetool just makes it extremely simple to do all your channels at once especially using a link like http://www.silicondust.com/hdhomerun/channels_us.

All Tivo would have to do is allow uploading your channels. Obviously this still may be easier said than done.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

jccfin said:


> I think if we get enough people writing Shanan, she would let management know that this is a priority issue. Best of luck and report back what you find.


I think that's just wishful thinking. We have, in fact, had an "official" TiVo spokesman say that TiVo was aware of the problem but it wasn't a priority for them. Read back in this thread.

Also, TiVo is incapable of fixing even simple problems (like crashing while in diagnostics, a problem for many years, see other recent thread). Kind of reminds me of the dog scientists struggling with a problem clearly beyond their comprehension. So it's unlikely TiVo will ever get around to tackling this issue.

Let this one go. I did.


----------



## bicker

And you're a better man for it.


----------



## fallingwater

If anyone still wants manual channel mapping for clear hi-def QAM, buy Moxi or a Sony DVR. 

But understand you may get locked out without a CableCARD if cable co.s scramble everything above Limited Basic. Cable can use DTA's to unscramble programming since an FCC waiver was recently granted.

Comcast here provides a CableCARD for free if a user forgoes a separate regular STB and only uses TiVo. Then there's no extra charge at all beyond TiVo service. With Extended Basic and higher levels of service Comcast here provides 2 free DTAs in addition. Comcast's DTA thus provides a cheap and surprisingly trouble free source for digital standard-def on two auxilliary TVs.

Manual QAM channel mapping is now a non-issue here.


----------



## innocentfreak

fallingwater said:


> If anyone still wants manual channel mapping for clear hi-def QAM, buy Moxi or a Sony DVR.


Or even cheaper a clear qam tuner for Windows 7. If I can map it using the links I mentioned above, anyone else should have an easy time.


----------



## CrispyCritter

fallingwater said:


> Manual QAM channel mapping is now a non-issue here.


No, it's now a non-issue for you. Others in your area may still have issues. I have the same setup as you (cablecard TiVoHD + 2 Comcast DTAs), but I also have another TiVoHD, and would ideally like manual QAM channel mapping on that.

Note that I'm firmly of the belief that TiVo should not offer manual QAM because the support costs far outweigh the benefit for TiVo, but this issue seems to attract people on both sides who base their arguments only on their particular situation. No one is served well by those arguments.


----------



## mattack

fallingwater said:


> Comcast here provides a CableCARD for free if a user forgoes a separate regular STB and only uses TiVo.
> ...
> Manual QAM channel mapping is now a non-issue here.


It's not "for free". What you describe has, according to tons of other posters, been typical of most cable companies in the US. You get the first cable card *instead* of a regular cable box. So you could technically call it "free" as part of the digital cable subscription.

So the issue hasn't changed for the rest of us -- some have multiple Tivos, some already DO have a cable box, etc.

I *do* have cable cards in one of my Tivos, but would *still* prefer the ability to manually map channels on my other Tivo. Heck, just so that I could still record the analog versions of the broadcast channels (and the relatively few other channels I still get in analog, but that includes Discovery). I know it's blasphemy here, but personally, storage space in many cases outweighs picture quality.. (and I had to even add my own amplifier to even get usable picture quality on many of my digital channels).


----------



## cogx

CrispyCritter said:


> Note that I'm firmly of the belief that TiVo should not offer manual QAM because the support costs far outweigh the benefit for TiVo


The "support costs" you throw out there probably assumes this feature would *have* to be implemented within the TiVo hardware itself, yes? (Like the Moxi does?) What if the Tribune/Zap2It channel/guide data was modified with a pre-processing script *before* it is sent to our TiVo hardware, thus allowing the QAM channel/guide mapping interface to be web-based through the TiVo web site? They could even make us accept some lengthy EULA before we could make use of this advanced feature by saying how we run the risk of missed recordings and don't call them to complain and that we could even develop brain cancer due to our need to meddle with the holy Tribune/Zap2It data stream.

Whether that is a viable idea or not, I can't answer, but it would be nice to know whether folks at the company have thought about whether there is a different way to add this functionality that might not be as impossible as some posters here keep trying to convince the rest of us that it is (especially given that other companies have figured out how to do it).


----------



## bicker

The way I understand it, the various ways of satisfying this need are well-understood. I suspect that that was never the issue, but rather my guess is that the issues were always (1) There are so many more things that have so much more priority, and (2) Every one of the possible approaches holds the promise of more support costs than would be justified by revenues attributable to satisfying this need.


----------



## cogx

bicker said:


> The way I understand it, the various ways of satisfying this need are well-understood. I suspect that that was never the issue, but rather my guess is that the issues were always (1) There are so many more things that have so much more priority, and (2) Every one of the possible approaches holds the promise of more support costs than would be justified by revenues attributable to satisfying this need.


The problem I have with supposition #2 is that it implies that TiVo does nothing at all to enhance their product, unless they have a strong belief that any and all new code will directly lead to new customer purchases. While that might be an accepted business model for many (most) companies, it is still hard to accept for some/many/most of us.

Obviously, they do what they do and they don't do what they don't do. They have their priorities and this is not one of them. The thing I find way more bizarre, though, is how there appears to be so much passion on arguing against this feature in this thread. Indifference I completely understand, so one would think it would just be a bunch of us malcontents griping amongst ourselves here.


----------



## billyjoebob99

cogx said:


> there appears to be so much passion on arguing against this feature in this thread.


Could you cite an example. The only people arguing against it that I can see are those who feel there are MUCH more serious issues with basic functionality that TiVo should address first. I don't think anyone would hate to see the feature implemented so long as it doesn't adversely affect usability of other core functions.


----------



## bicker

cogx said:


> The problem I have with supposition #2 is that it implies that TiVo does nothing at all to enhance their product, unless they have a strong belief that any and all new code will directly lead to new customer purchases.


Not quite, but close, and having worked in the software world for more than a couple of decades, that's the way the strongest consumer-facing companies operate. If you are continually wasting investors' money on things that provide no return, you're going to get your head cut off pretty quickly.



cogx said:


> While that might be an accepted business model for many (most) companies, it is still hard to accept for some/many/most of us.


Consumers never like the way companies putting a priority on profits.



cogx said:


> The thing I find way more bizarre, though, is how there appears to be so much passion on arguing against this feature in this thread.


I think that's simply a reflection of how over-the-top the insistence has been that TiVo is wrong about not implementing this feature. Read back a thousand posts or so, and you'll see how the tenor of this thread was set by those in favor of the feature.

Do keep in mind that everyone is affected by TiVo choosing to do this feature, instead of something "more important". Also, do keep in mind that everyone is affected by people poisoning the pool by fostering unfounded expectations on the part of casual readers.


----------



## lew

Tivo spent time solving the connection issues with S1 units. I suspect tivo could have designated the S1 as being eol (end of life) and done nothing.

I'm not even sure you can call QAM mapping an enhancement. QAM mapping doesn't add any feature over cable cards. How much money should tivo spend so a few customers can save a few dollars a month? What other new features/bug fixes should be delayed so tivo can implement a feature that's designed to reduce some customers monthly charges?

I concede a couple of posters are in a private cable system that don't use cable cards. Nothing is encrypted. I wonder if tivo could just create a lineup for those customers.



cogx said:


> The problem I have with supposition #2 is that it implies that TiVo does nothing at all to enhance their product, unless they have a strong belief that any and all new code will directly lead to new customer purchases. While that might be an accepted business model for many (most) companies, it is still hard to accept for some/many/most of us.
> 
> Obviously, they do what they do and they don't do what they don't do. They have their priorities and this is not one of them. The thing I find way more bizarre, though, is how there appears to be so much passion on arguing against this feature in this thread. Indifference I completely understand, so one would think it would just be a bunch of us malcontents griping amongst ourselves here.


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> Manual QAM channel mapping is now a non-issue here.





CrispyCritter said:


> No, it's now a non-issue for you. Others in your area may still have issues. I have the same setup as you (cablecard TiVoHD + 2 Comcast DTAs), but I also have another TiVoHD, and would ideally like manual QAM channel mapping on that.
> 
> Note that I'm firmly of the belief that TiVo should not offer manual QAM because the support costs far outweigh the benefit for TiVo, but this issue seems to attract people on both sides who base their arguments only on their particular situation. No one is served well by those arguments.


What part of 'here' do you have trouble understanding?

You actually have almost the same set-up I have regarding TiVos and DTAs, except my TiVos are S3's, one with 2 CCs and one with none. I also have a Moxi and several Sony hi-def DVRs without CCs which are manually mapped.

If anyone still has issues anywhere they'd do better buying Moxi or Sony than *****ing at Tivo!


----------



## fallingwater

fallingwater said:


> Comcast here provides a CableCARD for free if a user forgoes a separate regular STB and only uses TiVo.
> ...
> Manual QAM channel mapping is now a non-issue here.





mattack said:


> It's not "for free". What you describe has, according to tons of other posters, been typical of most cable companies in the US. You get the first cable card *instead* of a regular cable box. So you could technically call it "free" as part of the digital cable subscription.
> 
> I *do* have cable cards in one of my Tivos, but would *still* prefer the ability to manually map channels on my other Tivo...


The absolutely perfect terminology for those who like to pick dingle berries out of their askmenoquestions, is 'at no extra cost'. :up::up::up: But for a plain ol' jack-askmenoquestions like me it's free :up::up::up: (of extra cost). Either way of course somebody pays for cable service! 

So *****abboutit, fugetaboutit, or buy a DVR that maps unscrambled QAM. It's your choice.


----------



## fallingwater

lew said:


> I'm not even sure you can call QAM mapping an enhancement. QAM mapping doesn't add any feature over cable cards. How much money should tivo spend so a few customers can save a few dollars a month? What other new features/bug fixes should be delayed so tivo can implement a feature that's designed to reduce some customers monthly charges?...


QAM mapping here affords access to several additional channels unavailable with CCs. But QAM mapping's main appeal is that it cuts $$$ from a monthly cable bill for exactly the same service. But that may change soon if cable co.s start to scramble standard-def Extended Basic channels provided from DTAs and hi-def simulcasts of Limited Basic channels already unavailable from DTAs.

(Comcast here is raising its _Additional Outlet Fee_ for CC equipped devices from $5.10 to $6.10. But they did drop the 2nd CC fee from $1.79 to $1.60. Go figure!)

TiVo has long maintained noncontroversial relationships with all businesses it deals with in maintaining its service. There's no reason for TiVo to stir the pot with manual QAM mapping.


----------



## cmaquilino16

I got basic cable too, with the Tivo HD I can connect to cable from the wall and a ota antenna, I got both connected The ota antenna for my Hd locals which maps the OTA channels with a guide.


----------



## cogx

billyjoebob99 said:


> Could you cite an example. The only people arguing against it that I can see are those who feel there are MUCH more serious issues with basic functionality that TiVo should address first. I don't think anyone would hate to see the feature implemented so long as it doesn't adversely affect usability of other core functions.


Given that this thread is now over two years old with over 2000 posts, I'm pretty sure anyone can cite any type of example to fit whatever it is they think they are right about. Since there are no right or wrong opinions, you can have yours and I'll have mine. Mine is that this thread has a lot of people who just like to take the other side, simply because they like to be argumentative. That is the way of every discussion board I've ever visited, though, so this is no special case by any stretch of the imagination.

I will say, personally, for me, my TiVo S3 has no serious issues with the functionality currently provided. YMMV.
Although, I've read *way* too many new threads on this site over the past year claiming the TiVo software is a buggy mess and that the whole platform is in ruins... when actually it turns out that their HDD failed.

All I can say is that if QAM mapping was made possible, I'd use it day one. Since it isn't available, I don't use it.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

cogx said:


> Although, I've read *way* too many new threads on this site over the past year claiming the TiVo software is a buggy mess and that the whole platform is in ruins... when actually it turns out that their HDD failed.


TiVo's software *is* a buggy mess. TiVo should *report* when the HDD failed. Here's my longer version of that rant.


----------



## billyjoebob99

cogx said:


> anyone can cite any type of example to fit whatever it is they think they are right about.


And yet you haven't.


----------



## cogx

billyjoebob99 said:


> And yet you haven't.


Thanks for the chuckle.


----------



## dwynne

Phantom Gremlin said:


> TiVo's software *is* a buggy mess. TiVo should *report* when the HDD failed. Here's my longer version of that rant.


While I don't agree that the software is a buggy mess, I DO agree about reporting the errors. My HD Tivo froze at the "almost there" screen and would go no further. I tried kickstart, etc - no go.

I pulled the drive and popped it into a PC, the BIOS on boot said the SMART error detection on the drive said the drive was going bad / or was bad and I should back it up. The WD diag program said the same thing - "Re-Allocated Sector Count Value 117 Threshold 140".

Anyway I booted into a MFS CD and mounted the partitions looked at the kernel log.

Sep 5 23:23:13 (none) kernel: Performing basic S.M.A.R.T. checks 
Sep 5 23:23:13 (none) kernel: This can cause DriveStatusError messages in some cases... don't worry. 
Sep 5 23:23:13 (none) kernel: Checking /dev/hda 
Sep 5 23:23:14 (none) kernel: S.M.A.R.T. pass on /dev/hda

Even the BIOS on the PC knew the drive had issues and when the Tivo could not even boot it is reporting SMART passes on the drive. It would have been a lot nicer to have a "message from Tivo" when it detected errors - even if just via SMART at boot up - so I could have caught it sooner.

Dennis


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

dwynne said:


> While I don't agree that the software is a buggy mess, I DO agree about reporting the errors.


The choice of words "buggy mess" was done by another poster and I was simply agreeing with him (even though he wasn't necessarily implying that it was true). Reconsidering, I'd say that those words are a little harsh. TiVo software has lots of bugs, but they are mostly minor, and in little used areas (e.g. using diagnostic screen for displaying signal strength crashes the box).

Also, not reporting errors is not a bug. Rather, it's a deliberate marketing decision (that I strongly disagree with).


----------



## PGrey

Saxion said:


> MSOs can continue to use traps to block access to SD digital stations in the extended basic tier, and many of them do. HD versions of extended basic channels are more likely to be encrypted (except for local broadcast stations, of course). This was the choice that MSOs faced previously for their analog reclamation projects: whether to use traps (cheap; less secure; equivalent user experience to the old analog system with no boxes or CableCARDs needed) or distribute expensive CableCARD DTAs to everyone (expensive; more secure; worse user experience than old analog system since you need a box/CableCARD for every TV). Now, MSOs have a third option: distribute cheaper DTAs with integrated encryption (cost is somewhere between the above two; more secure; worse user experience than current analog system). The real loser here is the consumer who is saddled with more boxes, more rental fees, and a more cumbersome user experience. Some MSOs do see the value in using traps instead of encryption for digital SD channels in terms of user expectation and convenience, and not all of them will take that third option (Massillon certainly isn't given their most recent FCC filing). It's not clear yet which MSOs will pick which option. To each (MSO) his own.
> 
> TiVo Clear QAM support was generally desired in order to support local broadcast HD, for those people who can't receive them OTA. Certainly extended basic SD in clear QAM is very nice too and if those channels become encrypted, it does erode the value of clear QAM, but not to the point of irrelevancy.
> 
> Can you understand why TiVos have ATSC tuners?


I've been recently thrown into this situation as well, having acquired a decent enough LCD to want to be able to record HD now.
The response from my cable company (Comcast) was to spend 5 times the monthly to get a digital cable package, so they'd "allow" me to rent the cable cards from them, all so I could watch the same basic channels.
TiVo support's response was basically the same, which makes me wonder a bit as to whether there's some type of agreement between the two.
I just can't understand for the life of me why TiVo wouldn't want to add manual re-mapping in this case. I've been a s/w developer for over 20 years, and this process really couldn't be that hard on their side, there's got to be another reason they're not doing it...

Weird stuff. I'm gathering parts to build a Mediacenter PC, as that seems to be the only reasonable solution here. Even at that cost, I'll recoup it in less than a year, vs paying for the fancy "digital" package that I don't need...

-pete


----------



## jrm01

Glad to see that you made it over here so quickly.


----------



## dwynne

PGrey said:


> The response from my cable company (Comcast) was to spend 5 times the monthly to get a digital cable package, so they'd "allow" me to rent the cable cards from them, all so I could watch the same basic channels.


I am with Comcast as well, on the limited basic (or lifeline basic) which is $13 a month and includes the locals, CSPAN, etc. My cablecard (1 multi-stream) is free of charge and I get the locals in HD and it works fine with the Tivo.

If I want more HD programming, then yes I too would have to move up to a digital package for a lot more money.

So if you just want the locals, Comcast should be free with the cards.

For basic cable, the move to HD and digital has nothing to do with cablecards or their cost or the Tivo requirement for them. Anyone wanting the basic w/HD (and digital) channels will have to pay a lot more than they were paying for analog basic cable. "In theory" they could give you a free cablecard and let you tune the current analog channels you have now, but it would look like crap (like their analog does on any Tivo) and you would not be happy. I don't think they will do this, however, as you would need to be on a digital tier to get digital programming (even SD).

There probably are some clear QAM channels you could pick up without a cable card if you could map the channels, but I would not think you would be very happy with the selection - locally there are a few clear QAM channels and very few HD clear QAM channels. Not much more than you would get with a cable card.

Dennis


----------



## PGrey

dwynne said:


> I am with Comcast as well, on the limited basic (or lifeline basic) which is $13 a month and includes the locals, CSPAN, etc. My cablecard (1 multi-stream) is free of charge and I get the locals in HD and it works fine with the Tivo.
> 
> If I want more HD programming, then yes I too would have to move up to a digital package for a lot more money.
> 
> So if you just want the locals, Comcast should be free with the cards.
> 
> For basic cable, the move to HD and digital has nothing to do with cablecards or their cost or the Tivo requirement for them. Anyone wanting the basic w/HD (and digital) channels will have to pay a lot more than they were paying for analog basic cable. "In theory" they could give you a free cablecard and let you tune the current analog channels you have now, but it would look like crap (like their analog does on any Tivo) and you would not be happy. I don't think they will do this, however, as you would need to be on a digital tier to get digital programming (even SD).
> 
> There probably are some clear QAM channels you could pick up without a cable card if you could map the channels, but I would not think you would be very happy with the selection - locally there are a few clear QAM channels and very few HD clear QAM channels. Not much more than you would get with a cable card.
> 
> Dennis


This is exactly what I want, one cable-card to pick up the locals in HD. Comcast on-the-phone said "no problem, just go over to your local store and pick them up. When I got there, they told me no-way-no-how, not with a limited package. They weren't receptive to talking to a supervisor there either.
I came back and have been on hold for nearly an hour to talk to a supervisor about getting the card(s). 
I don't understand, some people have them, some don't, some say they had no problem, etc. It seems like Comcast is all over the map here.
I live in the Seattle area, for reference.

-pete


----------



## dwynne

PGrey said:


> This is exactly what I want, one cable-card to pick up the locals in HD. Comcast on-the-phone said "no problem, just go over to your local store and pick them up. When I got there, they told me no-way-no-how, not with a limited package. They weren't receptive to talking to a supervisor there either.
> I came back and have been on hold for nearly an hour to talk to a supervisor about getting the card(s).
> I don't understand, some people have them, some don't, some say they had no problem, etc. It seems like Comcast is all over the map here.
> I live in the Seattle area, for reference.


That is the way it works here. I know a lot of folks with the cheap cable package and a free cablecard here. It SHOULD work that way there as well.

Post or search over in the AVSForum Seattle Comcast Forum http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=253006 and see what others are doing or being told. Maybe there is some magic words you have to say when trying to pick up the cablecard? In my case, I always go to the main office here (rather than one of the little community offices) since they always have stock on hardware and seem to know more about the issues and what can and can't be done.

Dennis


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

PGrey said:


> This is exactly what I want, one cable-card to pick up the locals in HD.


If I were you, I wouldn't let this one go. For comparison I live in the Portland area and had absolutely no problem getting CableCARDs with my $10/mo service.


----------



## PGrey

Phantom Gremlin said:


> If I were you, I wouldn't let this one go. For comparison I live in the Portland area and had absolutely no problem getting CableCARDs with my $10/mo service.


Finally talked to a supervisor, who said he'd never heard of needing the cards with limited, and that he'd look into it and call me back.
Message left while I was in a meeting said that I was the first person with limited cable to EVER request a card, period, so you can see just how straight they're shooting here.
His message said they'd continue to look into it and call me back at some point later.

I don't want to let it go, but then I don't want to spend hours and hours waiting to talk to supervisors. If anyone has other suggestions on the "magic words" that others have used to get their cards, I'd sure be open.
I'm really scratching my head on this one.

-pete


----------



## andyf

Search through the generic Comcast thread for Comcast Cares. There's a whole group somewhere within Comcast who have amazing powers throughout the country.

They have resolved most every problem that anyone has contacted them about and usually within a couple of hours.

Or I believe someone from that group called Frank? who's sole job is to monitor the Comcast Twitter account. You can post a tweet there.

I'm sure someone can point you to the exact entry in the thread. Try a search for Frank in the thread.

Edit: Here you go [email protected]


----------



## dwynne

PGrey said:


> Finally talked to a supervisor, who said he'd never heard of needing the cards with limited, and that he'd look into it and call me back.
> Message left while I was in a meeting said that I was the first person with limited cable to EVER request a card, period, so you can see just how straight they're shooting here.


Did you go check the Seattle Comcast forum I linked for you? I would go post or search there and see if anyone else has done this in your area. I would think that would be the case, but you never know until you ask over there.

Dennis


----------



## burdellgp

Clear QAM would be nice, but it has the possibility to greatly diminish the "TiVo experience" (which tries to be "set and forget" for recordings). For example, one of the local cable companies here (Knology) has apparently shuffled digital channels around a couple of times in the last week or so. They used to have valid PSIP data so clear QAM tuners could display the Knology-assigned virtual channel numbers (still only worked after a scan of course), but that went away months ago.

If I had no CableCard and was trying to track clear QAM channels, I'd be frustrated. The average user is going to blame TiVo in that case (and no amount of "they didn't tell us" will help, as it'll just sound like finger pointing). There would be a small return for TiVo for a fairly significant ongoing customer support problem (and people reporting "TiVo is broke and can't record what it said it would" in random places all the time).


----------



## PGrey

dwynne said:


> Did you go check the Seattle Comcast forum I linked for you? I would go post or search there and see if anyone else has done this in your area. I would think that would be the case, but you never know until you ask over there.
> 
> Dennis


I pulled it down into text and scanned the last few months. Lots of people were told, like myself, that they had to upgrade to the spendy digital package, and some did. 
A few others went to one cable office, were denied like myself and went to another (I think Lynnwood is unfortunately the next closest to Redmond) and were handed cards.
It doesn't seem like there's any real policy or understanding, it's whatever random person you happen to talk to on the phone, or walk up to at the counter, and whether or not their lunch was good that day?
This is a fascinating user experience.
I haven't heard back from the supervisor, beyond his first call telling me that I was the "first ever" person in the Seattle area who wanted the cards with basic cable...
I could trek over to the Redmond office again and roll the dice I suppose, provided the person didn't recognize me from last week.

-pete


----------



## PGrey

burdellgp said:


> Clear QAM would be nice, but it has the possibility to greatly diminish the "TiVo experience" (which tries to be "set and forget" for recordings). For example, one of the local cable companies here (Knology) has apparently shuffled digital channels around a couple of times in the last week or so. They used to have valid PSIP data so clear QAM tuners could display the Knology-assigned virtual channel numbers (still only worked after a scan of course), but that went away months ago.
> 
> If I had no CableCard and was trying to track clear QAM channels, I'd be frustrated. The average user is going to blame TiVo in that case (and no amount of "they didn't tell us" will help, as it'll just sound like finger pointing). There would be a small return for TiVo for a fairly significant ongoing customer support problem (and people reporting "TiVo is broke and can't record what it said it would" in random places all the time).


I guess that's one way to look at it, but look at the other side, where the end-user is trapped between the cable company and TiVo, with no alternative, where I sit currently.
In my 15 or so years of TiVo use I've never had any experience remotely like this; I had nothing but good things to say about it until now...

-pete


----------



## slowbiscuit

<shrug> You're a dev like me, so build a Myth or 7MC box if all you want is the HD locals in clear QAM - you'll be a lot happier with the result in the end. Probably cheaper than a Tivo HD w/lifetime too.


----------



## Budget_HT

PGrey said:


> I pulled it down into text and scanned the last few months. Lots of people were told, like myself, that they had to upgrade to the spendy digital package, and some did.
> A few others went to one cable office, were denied like myself and went to another (I think Lynnwood is unfortunately the next closest to Redmond) and were handed cards.
> It doesn't seem like there's any real policy or understanding, it's whatever random person you happen to talk to on the phone, or walk up to at the counter, and whether or not their lunch was good that day?
> This is a fascinating user experience.
> I haven't heard back from the supervisor, beyond his first call telling me that I was the "first ever" person in the Seattle area who wanted the cards with basic cable...
> I could trek over to the Redmond office again and roll the dice I suppose, provided the person didn't recognize me from last week.
> 
> -pete


There are many examples of folks in the greater Seattle area that have requested and received cable cards with the Limited Basic service from Comcast. Most I heard about were charged under $2, the exact amount apparently depending on where they live and who authorizes Comcast to operate in that area (City of Seattle, other cities, King County, etc.).

In most cases, the Comcast representatives, particularly those in the stores, had never been given any training nor instructions for how to deal with that scenario. They are victims of their employer just like we customers are.


----------



## kb7oeb

This discussion may be moot if cablevision gets their way

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=182232&site=cdn&f_src=lightreading_gnews


----------



## bicker

You mean moot-*er*.


----------



## bsacco

i'm on board!


----------



## jrm01

bsacco said:


> i'm on board!


Which idea is so "great"? The fact that Cablevision wants to encrypt all channels?


----------



## bsacco

I think asking for a cable card when you have basic cable is a great idea.

Though, I wonder if ComCast is legally obligated to give you one?

Where can I confirm this?


----------



## bicker

Confirm the non-existence of a requirement? There is no place that the government provides such information. The way government regulations work is that they list what is required, and/or what is prohibited -- not what is not required or what is not prohibited. The basic principle is that if it is not required/prohibited, then the decision is left up to offer-and-acceptance.

The regulation specifically requires service providers to provide a means of accessing services with any security mechanism separated from the host device, thereby allowing use of an alternative host device. Any television with a QAM tuner can access basic cable services without need for CableCARD, therefore the regulations are fully satisfied. (Our personal decision to use some other device, i.e., a TiVo, which is crippled without benefit of a CableCARD, does not negate the fact that the services that the service provider are providing are accessible without need of CableCARD.)

The key fact is that this is TiVo's problem to remedy, if they choose to. They have made it clear that they do not choose to. Hence the dead end reached in this thread months ago. Nothing has changed. We're still at the dead end, with all dependency on changing that situation resting on TiVo and TiVo alone.

The earlier recommendation is still the best: Ask. Ask nicely. If that doesn't work, then subscribe to a Digital package for a month, without making a service commitment, and then downgrade back down, and see if they'll let you keep the CableCARD(s). If they say you have to return them, then again ask to be able to keep them. If they still say no, you've done your best. Make your decision between a Digital package, for which they'll let you keep the CableCARD(s), or basic service, and do without the benefits of CableCARD.


----------



## slowbiscuit

bsacco said:


> i'm on board!


LOL. Complete waste of time to resurrect this dead thread, judging from Tivo's non-action since the box was released.


----------



## nathanls

slowbiscuit said:


> LOL. Complete waste of time to resurrect this dead thread, judging from Tivo's non-action since the box was released.


I have been a TiVo subscriber for years and I still dont get it! Is TiVo worried about being sued by the cable companies?


----------



## bicker

Someone from TiVo explained it earlier in the thread. This issue is too low priority to perhaps ever make it to the top of their To Do List. They have many things, that they consider more important, to work on.


----------



## Speeden71

Comcast in ATL just did away with analog basic. I am an OTA and basic cable user. I have run scans on both my HD Tivo's and guess what? Found all the basic channels in digital form. But like one of the posters said, the program guide is now useless. I do manual recordings and use a TV guide. It would seem to be to be so easy to put in a manual mapping function so I could map the digital channels to the old analog guide info. Of course, it is probably only a matter of time before the analog guide info disappears since there are not longer any analog basic cable channels. 

Better yet, will it ever come to pass that the new digital basic channel numbers get added to the program guide?

I am perfectly happy with digital basic SD and OTA. I really do not need HD versions of the cable channels and have no desire to pay for cable cards. 

Anyone else in this boat???


----------



## jrm01

I don't think that Comcast in ATL did away with all analog basic, however they did move many channels from analog to digital. You should still be getting about 20 channels in analog form.

I also use Comcast basic cable and an antenna (OTA) on my TiVo HD, however I have it connected to an HD TV. Comcast here moved 13 channels from analog to digital. When I did a re-scan I found not only my local channels in HD (as usual) but also the complete Standard Cable and Digital Starter in digital form (about 70 channels). Of course, other than the local HD channels, they are on strange channel numbers like 68-12, etc.

It certainly would be nice to have TiVo provide guide data for all of these channels, but as pointed out here for two years that doesn't seem likely.

On the tivo.com help forum (where I post regularly) a program engineer from a small cable company said that he had been working with TiVo and Tribune Media Services for six months to get them to do this. His company is 100% digital, but does not use cableboxes or cablecards. Everything is provided clear-QAM. He stated that the stumbling block is that Tribune Media Services says that their software does not support sub-channels for cable lineups (although they do for OTA) and they have no plans to change this.

It is probably a lost cause, but I continue to encourage people to post this on the TiVo "New Features" web page, requesting program guide information for clear-QAM channels. In the past two weeks I've signed up five new recruits. You may want to try it:

http://research.tivo.com/suggestions/


----------



## sbourgeo

Speeden71 said:


> Anyone else in this boat???


Absolutely, but TiVo has pretty much stated that adding it is not a priority.


----------



## fallingwater

Here in Bellingham Comcast made the Extended Basic digital cutover about 3 weeks ago. We don't have SDV. Now that things have apparently stabilized; here's how TiVo, Moxi, and the Sony hi-def DVR now operate when used without CableCARDS:

TiVo provides EPG data for _Limited Basic_ analog Chs. 2 through 28 plus 75 and 78. All actual digital channels above Ch. 28 are scrambled and unavailable except for a handful, also viewable from a DTA, as a promoted freebie extra.

All formerly analog _Extended Basic_ Chs. are now included in a totally new line-up of virtual Chs., viwable on HDTiVo with no EPG info. Hi-def simulcasts of OTA Chs. are available, using PSIP generated virtual OTA equivalent Ch. #'s with no EPG info.

Bottom line is that Comcast's _Extended_ and _Limited Basic_ Chs. remain watchable on HDTiVo, but only _Limited Basic_ Chs. have EPG info. :down: :up:
---

Moxi automatically maps all Comcast Limited Basic Chs., including OTA hi-def simulcasts, to their Comcast channel numbers without viewer involvement. Hi-def Chs. use Comcast's numbering system instead of PSIP OTA equivalents. (IOW, Ch. 5 hi-def is Ch. 105, not 5.1)

*Moxi is totally oblivious to the new virtual Extended Basic channel numbers!* IOW, *Comcast's Extended Basic Chs.* (except for the handful of unscrambled DTA promo channels) *are not viewable from Moxi*. :down: :down:
---

Sony's hi-def DVR accesses the same Comcast line-up as TiVo. If a viewer invests the time and effort (almost) the entire Comcast Extended Basic Ch. line-up can be mapped to Sony's advanced (Ver. 8) TVGOS EPG.

A few minor mapping glitches, apparently related to subchannel groups, cause several channels not to be mappable at the same time as others but with apparently only 1 exception data is available for all channels. Sony's DVR is a single tuner recorder but aside from that significant limitation offers, at this time, in this area, the best and cheapest Comcast viewing experience with no CableCARD hassles or _Additional Outlet Fees!_


----------



## cogx

jrm01 said:


> He stated that the stumbling block is that Tribune Media Services says that their software does not support sub-channels for cable lineups (although they do for OTA) and they have no plans to change this.


I think that most of us have always assumed that it is up to TiVo to do the implementation to allow us to map guide data to our clear QAM channels. This is why I've been asking what if TiVo made a web-based app that let us specify the Station-Lineup-(QAM)Channel relationship. The new element(s) would be added to our specific cable company <lineup> with a post-processing script, before the data was pushed to our specific devices. This approach would eliminate the absolutely impossible request and that is to get TiVo to add this new mapping ability on the TiVo hardware itself. TiVo would have control over it centrally and letting "advanced users" have access to this "advanced feature" would allow them to make us click through a EULA that would all but say, listen, we aren't responsible if your recordings end up blank, because your cable company changed the QAM channel or you are just outright clueless as to what you are doing. It would also be a single click to disable any such extra guide data processing through our TiVo accounts.


----------



## lew

jrm01 said:


> On the tivo.com help forum (where I post regularly) a program engineer from a small cable company said that he had been working with TiVo and Tribune Media Services for six months to get them to do this. His company is 100% digital, but does not use cableboxes or cablecards. Everything is provided clear-QAM. He stated that the stumbling block is that Tribune Media Services says that their software does not support sub-channels for cable lineups (although they do for OTA) and they have no plans to change this.


Sounds like tivo would just have to create a lineup for that system. Just map the Tribune designations for the channels to the QAM channels used by that system.


----------



## jrm01

lew said:


> Sounds like tivo would just have to create a lineup for that system. Just map the Tribune designations for the channels to the QAM channels used by that system.


Except, he said that they all are provided with sub-channel numbers, which TMS does not support.


----------



## cogx

jrm01 said:


> Except, he said that they all are provided with sub-channel numbers, which TMS does not support.


TMS shouldn't have to. This is something TiVo should being doing.


----------



## schwinn

I'm so annoyed that my TivoHD can't use existing QAM channels. I wish I had known this. My MythTV box has no issues with this type of "cohesion"... there's no reason the TivoHD can't do this as well. MythTV uses the channel ID and matches the network accordingly... very easy to do. There's no reason this can't be done here. Ugh... frustrating and annoying.

If you don't want to do it automatically, that's fine too - allow users to set the correlations themselves. For those "advanced" users who can do it, like myself, we get the functionality quickly and easily. For the people who don't want to / can't deal with it, they can get cablecards and pay for the convenience.

Manual correlation should be easy enough to do... what's the excuse for not doing it?


----------



## jrm01

schwinn said:


> Manual correlation should be easy enough to do... what's the excuse for not doing it?


Check the previous 2,048 posts for your answer.


----------



## SugarBowl

schwinn said:


> I'm so annoyed that my TivoHD can't use existing QAM channels. I wish I had known this. My MythTV box has no issues with this type of "cohesion"... there's no reason the TivoHD can't do this as well. MythTV uses the channel ID and matches the network accordingly... very easy to do. There's no reason this can't be done here. Ugh... frustrating and annoying.
> 
> If you don't want to do it automatically, that's fine too - allow users to set the correlations themselves. For those "advanced" users who can do it, like myself, we get the functionality quickly and easily. For the people who don't want to / can't deal with it, they can get cablecards and pay for the convenience.
> 
> Manual correlation should be easy enough to do... what's the excuse for not doing it?


The HDHomeRun does it too. It matches based on the call sign of the station.


----------



## cogx

To followup on my last post, about my idea of TiVo giving us the ability to add QAM channel mapping to our specific TiVo guide data, before it is pushed out to our devices, via our TiVo web accounts - suppose this hypothetical one channel lineup:



Code:


<data>
<stations>

<station id='12345'>
<callSign>KQZX</callSign>
<name>KQZX (KQZX-DT)</name>
<fccChannelNumber>10</fccChannelNumber>
</station>

</stations>

<lineups>

<lineup id='PC:00000' name='Local Broadcast Listings' location='Antenna' type='LocalBroadcast' postalCode='00000'>
<map station='12345' channel='10' channelMinor='1'/>
</lineup>

<lineup id='CableCoID' name='CableCoName' location='City' type='CableDigital' device='Digital' postalCode='00000'>
<map station='12345' channel='430'/>
</lineup>

</lineups>

</data>

This hypothetical TiVo owner does not pay for a digital cable STB and they also now have problems getting in "KQZX" OTA, since that station switched to VHF from UHF, back in February '09. Although they are able to view station KQZX on QAM channel 101.4, there is no guide data available, even though this station _already exists_ in the guide data pushed out to their TiVo.

But, what if this TiVo owner was able to get this child element _added_ to their <lineup id='CableCoID' ...> element:



Code:


<map station='12345' channel='101' channelMinor='4'/>

Obviously, the web-based application would abstract things so that the owner was simply given a way to associate station 12345, which _already exists_ in their guide data, to channel 101.4 in their existing cable lineup.

Anyway, maybe this is all nonsense, maybe I missed my calling as fiction writer, but as others have pointed out repeatedly over the past 3+ years, devices exist that allow this sort of thing and TiVo claims to be the superior product to everything and anything else on the planet that records TV, so... ya know. Of course, I recently had the displeasure of using a Moto STB at a friend's house and, wow, it does make one appreciate a TiVo, even despite this gaping hole of ineptitude.


----------



## lessd

cogx said:


> To followup on my last post, about my idea of TiVo giving us the ability to add QAM channel mapping to our specific TiVo guide data, before it is pushed out to our devices, via our TiVo web accounts - suppose this hypothetical one channel lineup:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> <data>
> <stations>
> 
> <station id='12345'>
> <callSign>KQZX</callSign>
> <name>KQZX (KQZX-DT)</name>
> <fccChannelNumber>10</fccChannelNumber>
> </station>
> 
> </stations>
> 
> <lineups>
> 
> <lineup id='PC:00000' name='Local Broadcast Listings' location='Antenna' type='LocalBroadcast' postalCode='00000'>
> <map station='12345' channel='10' channelMinor='1'/>
> </lineup>
> 
> <lineup id='CableCoID' name='CableCoName' location='City' type='CableDigital' device='Digital' postalCode='00000'>
> <map station='12345' channel='430'/>
> </lineup>
> 
> </lineups>
> 
> </data>
> 
> This hypothetical TiVo owner does not pay for a digital cable STB and they also now have problems getting in "KQZX" OTA, since that station switched to VHF from UHF, back in February '09. Although they are able to view station KQZX on QAM channel 101.4, there is no guide data available, even though this station _already exists_ in the guide data pushed out to their TiVo.
> 
> But, what if this TiVo owner was able to get this child element _added_ to their <lineup id='CableCoID' ...> element:
> 
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> <map station='12345' channel='101' channelMinor='4'/>
> 
> Obviously, the web-based application would abstract things so that the owner was simply given a way to associate station 12345, which _already exists_ in their guide data, to channel 101.4 in their existing cable lineup.
> 
> Anyway, maybe this is all nonsense, maybe I missed my calling as fiction writer, but as others have pointed out repeatedly over the past 3+ years, devices exist that allow this sort of thing and TiVo claims to be the superior product to everything and anything else on the planet that records TV, so... ya know. Of course, I recently had the displeasure of using a Moto STB at a friend's house and, wow, it does make one appreciate a TiVo, even despite this gaping hole of ineptitude.


I am sure TiVo could give us the mapping but it would different for each cable system, TiVo has enough problem keeping the line-up correct for each ZIP code, their is a real cost to TiVo in doing this and cable cards solves the problem. The question is how much should TiVo put into mapping to save a few customers the expense of getting cable cards.


----------



## lew

lessd said:


> The question is how much should TiVo put into mapping to save a few customers the expense of getting cable cards.


Tivo decided the answer is zero.


----------



## cogx

lessd said:


> I am sure TiVo could give us the mapping but it would different for each cable system, TiVo has enough problem keeping the line-up correct for each ZIP code, their is a real cost to TiVo in doing this and cable cards solves the problem.


That's why I'm not talking about TiVo staff creating custom mappings, as everyone has agreed _long, long ago_ that is a non-starter. However, computers are great things, they have a real knack for automating things so that humans aren't involved in every step. With my idea here, a "map processing" routine is run on guide data, before it is pushed out to our devices. For people who don't take advantage of the custom mapping, the routine doesn't do anything, for those of us who would make use of it, the extra map elements are added.


----------



## schwinn

^ +1

Exactly...

But if that's not acceptable, give us a way to hack/modify the mappings in some special way, and I'll be happy. That way, those who are experienced with the concept/process can do it, and the rest can pay for the convenience with cablecards.

On the other hand, all of this is moot because of the FCC waiver which now allows them to encrypt clearQAM anyway. Morons. I know in my area, it's just a matter of time before I lose my QAM channels.


----------



## fallingwater

Isn't scrambling authorized by FCC waiver for what used to be QAM _Extended Basic_ different and less secure than scrambling for Premium channels?

As I posted *above* Comcast has already begun scrambling _Extended Basic_ actual channels in my area. But now there is a whole new tier of equivalent unscrambled PSIP virtual channels available.

---
I'd forget about getting any kind of TiVo involvement with any kind of QAM mapping unless you like beating your head against the wall because it feels oh-so-good when you stop, because it's just not worth it for TiVo.

HDTiVo users without CableCARDS can receive these new virtual _Extended Basic_ channels and can record them manually. Moxi with its much ballyhooed mapping feature is completely oblivious to virtual channels making its QAM mapping largely irrelevant.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> Isn't scrambling authorized by FCC waiver for what used to be QAM _Extended Basic_ different and less secure than scrambling for Premium channels?


No. The distinction has nothing to do with the service level. All cable networks can be encrypted by the standard means. What you are thinking of is the special waiver granted to Pace, Thompson, Cisco and Motorola, allowing their customers to deploy DTAs with privacy mode enabled. That is a different and less secure encryption. However, there is no requirement for service providers to secure expanded basic using only privacy mode, as long as they do not plan to use these DTAs for expanded basic. They could, instead, just require regular (non-waiver) STBs for expanded basic, and then encrypt in the normal manner.


----------



## PGrey

schwinn said:


> ^ +1
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> But if that's not acceptable, give us a way to hack/modify the mappings in some special way, and I'll be happy. That way, those who are experienced with the concept/process can do it, and the rest can pay for the convenience with cablecards.
> 
> On the other hand, all of this is moot because of the FCC waiver which now allows them to encrypt clearQAM anyway. Morons. I know in my area, it's just a matter of time before I lose my QAM channels.


The other side is, Comcast for example really, really doesn't want to sell to or allow basic-cable users to have cablecards at all. I had to go through several weeks of haggling and various supervisor levels in order to get approval to get one with basic-cable.
They were fine with it however, if I wanted to upgrade to their full extended digital package, for three times the cost. 
Others have had an easier time getting them, but apparently the seattle-area is particularly difficult...
One solution is a mediacenter PC, which allows any type of remapping, QAM or otherwise. I almost went this route and ditched Tivo entirely (after having the service since the last 90's) when Comcast relented.

-pete


----------



## fallingwater

bicker said:


> ... What you are thinking of is the special waiver granted to Pace, Thompson, Cisco and Motorola, allowing their customers to deploy DTAs with privacy mode enabled. That is a different and less secure encryption. However, there is no requirement for service providers to secure expanded basic using only privacy mode, as long as they do not plan to use these DTAs for expanded basic...


But that's exactly what Comcast uses DTA's for; to provide _Extended Basic_ channels for customers who previously received analog versions.


----------



## fallingwater

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7650911#post7650911


fallingwater said:


> Here in Bellingham Comcast made the Extended Basic digital cutover about 3 weeks ago. We don't have SDV. Now that things have apparently stabilized; here's how TiVo, Moxi, and the Sony hi-def DVR now operate when used without CableCARDS:
> 
> TiVo provides EPG data for _Limited Basic_ analog Chs. 2 through 28 plus 75 and 78. All actual digital channels above Ch. 28 are scrambled and unavailable except for a handful, also viewable from a DTA, as a promoted freebie extra.
> 
> All formerly analog _Extended Basic_ Chs. are now included in a totally new line-up of virtual Chs., viwable on HDTiVo with no EPG info. Hi-def simulcasts of OTA Chs. are available, using PSIP generated virtual OTA equivalent Ch. #'s with no EPG info.
> 
> Bottom line is that Comcast's _Extended_ and _Limited Basic_ Chs. remain watchable on HDTiVo, but only _Limited Basic_ Chs. have EPG info. :down: :up:
> ---
> 
> Moxi automatically maps all Comcast Limited Basic Chs., including OTA hi-def simulcasts, to their Comcast channel numbers without viewer involvement. Hi-def Chs. use Comcast's numbering system instead of PSIP OTA equivalents. (IOW, Ch. 5 hi-def is Ch. 105, not 5.1)
> 
> *Moxi is totally oblivious to the new virtual Extended Basic channel numbers!* IOW, *Comcast's Extended Basic Chs.* (except for the handful of unscrambled DTA promo channels) *are not viewable from Moxi*. :down: :down:
> ---
> 
> Sony's hi-def DVR accesses the same Comcast line-up as TiVo. If a viewer invests the time and effort (almost) the entire Comcast Extended Basic Ch. line-up can be mapped to Sony's advanced (Ver. 8) TVGOS EPG.
> 
> A few minor mapping glitches, apparently related to subchannel groups, cause several channels not to be mappable at the same time as others but with apparently only 1 exception data is available for all channels. Sony's DVR is a single tuner recorder but aside from that significant limitation offers, at this time, in this area, the best and cheapest Comcast viewing experience with no CableCARD hassles or _Additional Outlet Fees!_


http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=7658112#post7658112

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17699310#post17699310

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=17701932#post17701932


fallingwater said:


> Thanks for your skeptical post! I immediately switched the monitor from the PC to the S3 TiVo in this room, and checked the EPG channel list including all the new virtual channels in the 30 to 70 range.
> 
> As of now you're right! I have no explanation for what was true yesterday when all the virtual equivalents of the scrambled _Extended Basic_ actual QAM channels were in the clear on S3 TiVo and the Sony DVR. I deleted all channels and rescanned the S3.
> 
> (To complicate matters my monitor decided this morning to pull a new trick and produced no audio from its HDMI inputs, a more immediate concern than clear QAM availability. After a short panic a hard reboot solved the HDMI audio problem!)
> 
> Again I don't know why things work or don't work. Later, when I've got time to check the Sony DVR's remap and verify that yesterday was a fluke, I'll confirm and edit or delete several posts.
> 
> It now appears that TiVo doesn't have an advantage over Moxi in being able to receive more unscrambled channels without a CableCARD. Indeed Moxi retains an advantage by providing EPG data for the unscrambled hi-def simulcasts of _Limited Basic_ OTA channels although channel mapping is no longer as significant an advantage now that most QAM channels are scrambled.


----------



## bicker

fallingwater said:


> But that's exactly what Comcast uses DTA's for; to provide _Extended Basic_ channels for customers who previously received analog versions.


Yes generally. I was just clarifying the earlier statement that, stand-alone, maybe have been misconstrued by a casual reader. You're correct about what you meant by what you were saying. :up:


----------



## lew

Cable systems are using DTA to encrypt expanded basic channels. It looks like the clear QAM channels won't be much more then broadcast stations. Looks like the potential market for QAM mapping will be customers who only want broadcast channels but are in a location or situation that doesn't lend itself to OTA reception. Doesn't sound like a big market to me.


----------



## cogx

lew said:


> Cable systems are using DTA to encrypt expanded basic channels. It looks like the clear QAM channels won't be much more then broadcast stations. Looks like the potential market for QAM mapping will be customers who only want broadcast channels but are in a location or situation that doesn't lend itself to OTA reception. Doesn't sound like a big market to me.


True enough and we all know this hope of this thread died over 3 years ago after the very first post. It's just sad that the "greatest CE device ever made" couldn't do something so simple from the outset. For the $1000 I paid to get the Series 3 the day it was released... I honestly don't think I've got my money's worth. I can't even get Netflix streaming to work properly, even though my Xbox 360 plugged into the same switch running Cat5e to my router has never had a problem with it; but that's for an entirely different thread.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Cable systems are using DTA to encrypt expanded basic channels.


To be clear, though, the point someone made earlier is that it is a lesser form of encryption. (However, I don't think that really matters -- it isn't like it is legal to break the encryption, nor is it possible to buy a device that supports the lesser form of encryption, while you can buy a device that support the stronger form of encryption.)



lew said:


> It looks like the clear QAM channels won't be much more then broadcast stations.


The regulated portion of the service -- the portion of the service that is considered a public utility. This is consistent with non-legacy competitors in the industry.


----------



## lew

Bicker--Maybe I'm being cynical, but I think asking for permission to use the "privacy" mode was a way to request a waiver without directly asking for a repeal of the separable security rules. I have little doubt if the "privacy" mode is cracked a request will be made to the FCC to allow use of full decryption. At least some of the boxes are capable of "regular" decryption and PPV.

Maybe the compromise will wind up only requiring separable security with HD and DVR boxes.


----------



## jrm01

lew said:


> Cable systems are using DTA to encrypt expanded basic channels.


Not here in Pittsburgh suburbs. Last month Comcast moved 13 channels from analog to digital and began giving out 2 DTAs for free. When I did a rescan on my TiVo HD (no cablecards) I now not only have the local HD channels, but 70 digital channels free and clear. Of course they are all on hard to find channels, 38-12 etc., but they are there.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin

jrm01 said:


> Not here in Pittsburgh suburbs. Last month Comcast moved 13 channels from analog to digital and began giving out 2 DTAs for free. When I did a rescan on my TiVo HD (no cablecards) I now not only have the local HD channels, but 70 digital channels free and clear. Of course they are all on hard to find channels, 38-12 etc., but they are there.


Enjoy it while you can. You will lose access to all but HD locals in a few months. The same has happened all around the country on a rolling basis. E.g. *here* is a posting from the middle of our local HD thread on AVS Forum, after Comcast started encrypting the digital channels.


----------



## bicker

lew said:


> Bicker--Maybe I'm being cynical, but I think asking for permission to use the "privacy" mode was a way to request a waiver without directly asking for a repeal of the separable security rules.


You are being cynical. The waiver represents a compromise: The alternative would have been to move some of the service to a higher tier, thereby forcing more subscribers to have STBs instead of DTAs. In the end, without the waiver, both the industry and its customers would have lost a little bit. With the waiver, with specific limitations with regard to in which cases it is permitted to be used, everyone gets a little.


----------



## jrm01

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Enjoy it while you can. You will lose access to all but HD locals in a few months. The same has happened all around the country on a rolling basis. E.g. *here* is a posting from the middle of our local HD thread on AVS Forum, after Comcast started encrypting the digital channels.


Oh that would not surprise me at all. I very well expect them to disappear soon.


----------



## rdauenhauer

lew said:


> Cable systems are using DTA to encrypt expanded basic channels. It looks like the clear QAM channels won't be much more then broadcast stations. *Looks like the potential market for QAM mapping will be customers who only want broadcast channels but are in a location or situation that doesn't lend itself to OTA reception. Doesn't sound like a big market to me.*


Wow I read way more of this thread than I expected and come to the end hoping for a revelation  I guess Im disappointed. 
lew I dont know where you are in the country but I wouldn't call the Greater Seattle Metro area a small market. Here the topography and forestation (not to mention the weather) make OTA reception sketchy at best. 
I too got fed up with Comcast charging me too much for too few usefull channels, the last straw was receiving a letter recently advising me that the 2nd cable card Id received 2 yrs earlier was now going to be charged monthly at their STB rate. When I argued that wasn't reasonable since It didn't provide equivalent features (On demand PPV) I was told thats policy.:down::down::down:
So I dumped them in lue of a roof top antenna only to find too few channels viewable. So I started reading, learned of QAM reconected my cable, rescanned via the Tivo and WALA! 
After three yrs sinice this topic was introduced you'd think Tivo's could have progressed on a number of projects QAM mapping included. 
Hey TivoPony you still out there...?


----------



## bicker

He provided a very definitive answer for you, rdauenhauer. No one is saying that you're wrong to want what you want. What TiVo has said, in no uncertain words, is that there simply isn't enough demand for what you want. The depth of your own desire doesn't give it more weight -- each potential customer gets conceptually one vote. And what TiVo has said is essentially that while the idea remains on their priority list, it is so far down below other things that other people want so much more that we shouldn't expect to see this feature introduced anytime soon.

Now that doesn't necessarily mean that it won't magically happen. However, it isn't reasonable to expect there to be "progress" on your personal favorite project given what TiVo has already said about it. Sorry.


----------



## schwinn

Maybe what people here can do is setup a "petition" or poll to simply count how many people are interested in this feature... that would shed light on the numbers we're dealing with... and let the people here see what the real need is for this feature, versus the published subscriber numbers.

Granted, I expect this won't yield a satisfactory answer, since only a very limited number of people are here, from the total subscriber base... but, it would be informative, if nothing else.

That being said, I would have voted for it anyway, as I wanted that feature before. However, now that I have cable cards (for $1.50 or $0... haven't gotten my first bill yet)... I certainly don't "need" it. Still, it was annoying that I had to get CCs to get access to QAM... I wish this were mentioned on the device box or instructions, rather than finding out through this forum or through Tivo.com support (afterwards).

Of course, all of this is kinda moot these days anyway - pretty much every cableco has been granted encryption waivers on QAM... so any such feature is likely short lived.

Sad that Tivo didn't see QAM mapping as a need from the start... particularly since everyone else does it already.


----------



## bicker

schwinn said:


> Maybe what people here can do ...


Maybe *you* can actually read the thread you're responding to. If you had read it, from the beginning -- heck, even just the title of the thread -- you wouldn't have posted such a silly suggestion.


----------



## schwinn

bicker said:


> Maybe *you* can actually read the thread you're responding to. If you had read it, from the beginning -- heck, even just the title of the thread -- you wouldn't have posted such a silly suggestion.


WTF?

The OP suggestion was to write a letter to Tivo. That's fine, but only tivo knows the number of such requests.

My statement was to provide a way for us (ie, the users) to see the "count" of such requests. This way we can see what the true-quantities are.

Lastly, I stated that it's a pretty moot point now that waivers have been granted, so I wonder if any effort is worth it at all.

I don't know what your problem is with anything I said above...


----------



## bicker

schwinn said:


> That's fine, but only tivo knows the number of such requests.


And I don't think they're going to share the number, except to say what they said, that it is a very small number. However, it is the only thing close to reliable information that we can possibly get.



schwinn said:


> My statement was to provide a way for us (ie, the users) to see the "count" of such requests. This way we can see what the true-quantities are.


There is no such way, short of spending tens of thousands of dollars to have normalized survey conducted.



schwinn said:


> Lastly, I stated that it's a pretty moot point now that waivers have been granted, so I wonder if any effort is worth it at all.


I've only seen waivers granting service providers the ability to encrypt basic service for six or seven communities, total, nationwide.



schwinn said:


> I don't know what your problem is with anything I said above...


The assertion that a non-normalized poll or petition can actually provide any real information. They cannot. Generally, the purpose of non-normalized polls is to deceive and/or manipulate. They have no other practical purpose.


----------



## vstone

The FCC could easily direct cable companies to publish their clear QAM listings, which would automatically flow into the appropriate databases, allowing Tivo to populate card less Tivos with very, very little effort by Tivo and negligible cost to everybody involved. CFR actually talks about channel Line-up cards, but does not discuss them in context with non-scrambled digital signals. There are several possible reasons why the FCC has not addressed this issue, none of them flattering to the FCC.


----------



## lew

bicker said:


> I've only seen waivers granting service providers the ability to encrypt basic service for six or seven communities, total, nationwide.


Do the cable systems need to get a waiver to use the privacy mode on DTAs to encrypt extended basic channels? I thought the waiver obtained by the DTA mfg waiver was sufficient.

My point is encrypting chananels like TNT and USA greatly reduce the number of customers interested in maping clear QAM.

Peope interested in recording clear QAM stations should consider Moxi or a PC based solution.

The possibility of an increasing number of cable systems getting permission to encrypt even basic broadcast stations further reduces the already extremely small chance of tivo mapping QAM stations.

Vstone--your point is'nt relevent. A couple of posters are in private cable systems. Their system is willing to make the listings available. The problem is Tribune doesn't provide the information.


----------



## aindik

lew said:


> Do the cable systems need to get a waiver to use the privacy mode on DTAs to encrypt extended basic channels? I thought the waiver obtained by the DTA mfg waiver was sufficient.


I think the current rule is that they can't roll out any box (or maybe it's just any "new" box) that does decryption, unless that box does its decryption with a CableCARD. Because DTAs don't have CableCARDs in them, they are not allowed to do decryption. Therefore, any channel that they want the DTA to receive cannot be encrypted. It is, of course, up to them which channels they want the DTA to be able to receive.

It's possible that either the rules have changed, or waivers to the CableCARD-only policy are easy to come by.


----------



## lew

aindik said:


> I think the current rule is that they can't roll out any box (or maybe it's just any "new" box) that does decryption, unless that box does its decryption with a CableCARD. Because DTAs don't have CableCARDs in them, they are not allowed to do decryption. Therefore, any channel that they want the DTA to receive cannot be encrypted. It is, of course, up to them which channels they want the DTA to be able to receive.
> 
> It's possible that either the rules have changed, or waivers to the CableCARD-only policy are easy to come by.


The rules have changed.


----------



## aindik

lew said:


> The rules have changed.


What are they now?


----------



## lew

aindik said:


> What are they now?


Search this thread for "privacy mode".


----------



## bicker

vstone said:


> The FCC could easily direct cable companies to publish their clear QAM listings, which would automatically flow into the appropriate databases, allowing Tivo to populate card less Tivos with very, very little effort by Tivo and negligible cost to everybody involved.


And if this was important enough, perhaps they would have done that.



lew said:


> Do the cable systems need to get a waiver to use the privacy mode on DTAs to encrypt extended basic channels? I thought the waiver obtained by the DTA mfg waiver was sufficient.


Oh THAT waiver. Sorry, my confusion. I was only thinking about the full encryption waiver, such as the one that Cablevision got this past week, for some communities in the Bronx.


----------



## schwinn

bicker said:


> And I don't think they're going to share the number, except to say what they said, that it is a very small number. However, it is the only thing close to reliable information that we can possibly get.
> 
> There is no such way, short of spending tens of thousands of dollars to have normalized survey conducted.


Not really. If the majority of people having QAM issues are here (presumably they are, otherwise they wouldn't see this thread at all)... then we can tally them. That's all I'm suggesting. No need to go off into a nationwide search.

Again, it's moot because:


> I've only seen waivers granting service providers the ability to encrypt basic service for six or seven communities, total, nationwide.


Not true... Comcast is rolling out in my area very agressively. You must have a DTA box from them now to receive any channels at all. Beverly, where my friend lives, just had this happen, and he has boxes now. I was told that my area (Gloucester) would have this happen by the end of the year. Comcast is planning to do this throughout their entire service area.

As for the legality of this, I wrote to the FCC and they have confirmed that the waiver allows them to encrypt ALL channels, including the local QAM channels. This is why they had to ask for the waiver in the first place (otherwise it would have run afoul of the Telecom Act).


----------



## bicker

schwinn said:


> Not really. If the majority of people having QAM issues are here (presumably they are, otherwise they wouldn't see this thread at all)... then we can tally them.


Fair enough... if you can get thousands upon thousands of people to log in and express their dissatisfaction about QAM mapping here, in this thread, that would be interesting. The thing that folks, lamely trying to make a point based on ridiculously inadequate sourcing of data, try to do is post a "Yes" versus "No" poll and then try to say something about the percentages. A meaningful poll, in this context, would have one vote: "Yes" -- and you'd need to compare the number of "Yes" votes to the total number of TiVo S3 and TiVo HD units, which is probably a number we could get for you.


----------



## jrm01

lew said:


> Vstone--your point is'nt relevent. A couple of posters are in private cable systems. Their system is willing to make the listings available. The problem is Tribune doesn't provide the information.


The owner of a small cable system in the midwest (I forget the name) reported on tivo.com help forum that he personnally spent several weeks trying to get TribMediaSvce to publish the clear-QAM channels for his system. He was repeatedly told that TMS uses sub-channel identification for OTA channels but their software does not support it for cable listings and they had no interest in making the modification. He eventually gave up.


----------



## slowbiscuit

schwinn said:


> Not true... Comcast is rolling out in my area very agressively. You must have a DTA box from them now to receive any channels at all. Beverly, where my friend lives, just had this happen, and he has boxes now. I was told that my area (Gloucester) would have this happen by the end of the year. Comcast is planning to do this throughout their entire service area.
> 
> As for the legality of this, I wrote to the FCC and they have confirmed that the waiver allows them to encrypt ALL channels, including the local QAM channels. This is why they had to ask for the waiver in the first place (otherwise it would have run afoul of the Telecom Act).


And this is not true for all areas, at least the part about having to get a DTA to receive *any* channels. Comcast is not encrypting the basic (local channel) tier in the ATL, nor do they have plans to do so regardless of what the waiver allows. They are only encrypting the old SD expanded basic tier on QAM for the DTAs, which is temporarily available in the clear before an area is migrated.

So, you will (for now) be able to receive the locals in HD and SD on clear QAM until they change their policy. Check the Comcast Portland/Seattle threads on BBR or AVS if you want confirmation.


----------



## schwinn

bicker said:


> Fair enough... if you can get thousands upon thousands of people to log in and express their dissatisfaction about QAM mapping here, in this thread, that would be interesting. The thing that folks, lamely trying to make a point based on ridiculously inadequate sourcing of data, try to do is post a "Yes" versus "No" poll and then try to say something about the percentages. A meaningful poll, in this context, would have one vote: "Yes" -- and you'd need to compare the number of "Yes" votes to the total number of TiVo S3 and TiVo HD units, which is probably a number we could get for you.


The point is that there won't be thousands of thousands of people posting here... the numbers will show that it IS a small number of people. Sorry you couldn't connect the dots, but in a sense, I'm on your side with this matter, even if it sucks for those still dealing with it. Furthermore, as I have also stated, it's all moot since the waivers allow them to encrypt these channels "soon" anyway... so having this capability now is a bit too late/moot.

Not sure what your problem is with me, but whatever... maybe you just need to practice a little reading comprehension as well? And get off your high-horse while your at it.


----------



## schwinn

slowbiscuit said:


> And this is not true for all areas, at least the part about having to get a DTA to receive *any* channels. Comcast is not encrypting the basic (local channel) tier, nor do they have plans to do so regardless of what the waiver allows. They are only encrypting the old SD expanded basic tier on QAM for the DTAs, which is temporarily available in the clear before an area is migrated.
> 
> So, you will (for now) be able to receive the locals in HD and SD on clear QAM until they change their policy. Check the Comcast Portland/Seattle threads on BBR or AVS if you want confirmation.


I have conversations with Comcast (Executive Support) that they are going to all-digital (no analog). Because of this, they require any TV to have a DTA box. The FCC basically said this was ok, as long as the little DTA boxes are provided for free (no additional cost):


> Since your cable company plans to transition to a digital-only service, (which includes the basic service tier plus additional digital cable channels), cable providers may often insist that a set top box from the cable company is required to watch any digital cable channels including unencrypted channels.
> 
> Currently, basic tier subscribers, and some other subscribers who have additional television sets without set top boxes, can rely on the digital cable tuner in their television to receive basic tier programming without the need to obtain a box. However, if the basic tier is encrypted, these subscribers would need to obtain additional equipment (either a set-top box or a CableCARD).
> 
> You have noted that the cable company plans to provide free transport adapters (low-end cable boxes, as per the FCC waiver http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-09-1854A1.pdf, which will allow you to unencrypt the basic service tier.
> 
> Thank you for your inquiry.
> 
> Brenda Althoff
> Consumer Advocate and Mediation Specialist
> Federal Communications Commission
> Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau


The last paragraph, to me, means that they are permitted to encrypt the basic service tier, as long as they provide the DTA boxes for free... which is what Comcast plans to do in my region, at least. Am I reading something wrong with the statements from Comcast and the FCC?


----------



## bicker

schwinn said:


> The point is that there won't be thousands of thousands of people posting here...


Correct. Indeed the vast majority -- not all, but the vast majority -- of folks who would be inclined to respond would be people who are pissed off about the issue. That goes back to what I said earlier, which you asked me about.



schwinn said:


> the numbers will show that it IS a small number of people. Sorry you couldn't connect the dots, but in a sense, I'm on your side with this matter, even if it sucks for those still dealing with it.


Sorry, but no: Even if you think that the numbers would "side" against QAM mapping, that is *not* "my side". "My side" is the side of reality and truth. Abusing numbers to prove something I believe* is no better than* abusing number to prove something I don't believe.



schwinn said:


> Not sure what your problem is with me, but whatever... maybe you just need to practice a little reading comprehension as well? And get off your high-horse while your at it.


Get over yourself. Only fools would be convinced by your feigned indignation, given the context of some previous discussions you've participated in.


----------



## slowbiscuit

schwinn said:


> The last paragraph, to me, means that they are permitted to encrypt the basic service tier, as long as they provide the DTA boxes for free... which is what Comcast plans to do in my region, at least. Am I reading something wrong with the statements from Comcast and the FCC?


Yes, those statements do not indicate that they will encrypt the basic tier in all areas. They might, but right now they aren't, and the proof is in the results for the areas that have already been migrated. Locals are still in the clear.


----------



## schwinn

Agreed - my friend hasn't lost analog "yet"... because they haven't switched it off. Comcast is doing this to prevent problems when they switch off, and so that they can make sure the DTAs are all in and working properly first.

My other friend (another part of MA), however, is already all-digital with Comcast. He cannot get ANY analog channels without a cable box or DTA box (he has only 1 TV, so he chose the cable box route). Direct-connecting the TV gets him nothing at all.

Comcast is calling this "Project Cavalry", which is further detailed here: http://www.multichannel.com/blog/BI...ject_Cavalry_The_March_of_28_Million_DTAs.php

Note how the article states "The idea: to eliminate 40-50 analog channels in a cable system, freeing up 250-300 MHz of spectrum, by giving basic cable subs who won't upgrade to a digital tier a cheap "digital terminal adapter" to convert digital TV signals to analog. (DTAs have also been called "digital-to-analog" devices.)"

Contrary to this, I see (from http://www.multichannel.com/article/294767-Comcast_Expands_Project_Cavalry_In_Northern_N_J_.php):
"All told, Comcast will be eliminating the analog standard expanded basic channels -- generally, channels in the 26 through 99 range - while continuing to deliver limited basic channels in analog, which include local broadcast stations like ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and PBS, shopping channels, Univision and various public access and government channels."

This doesn't address QAM, but implies there may still be some basic analog provided anyway? Needless to say, even people asking on Comcast's forums aren't getting a straight answer about ClearQAM here: http://blog.comcast.com/2009/05/going-all-digital-tons-more-hd-and-a-faster-internet.html

Again, based on what I was told by Exec Support at Comcast, QAM channels will be encrypted as well. But now, I don't know if I believe her anymore...

EDIT: Looks like the Comcast Blog page I listed does tell us that QAM will not be encrypted after all... this is further supported by their FAQ page here: http://digitalnow.comcast.com/FAQs.aspx?map=all_faq_map


> 29. How do I connect a digital adapter (DTA) to my high-definition television (HDTV) so I can continue receiving broadcast HD channels?
> To continue receiving broadcast HD channels with a feed directly to your HDTV, you will need:
> 
> * DTA
> * Splitter
> * Coaxial cable (x5)
> * A/B switch
> (snip)


So, you need a more complicated setup (unless you have two RF inputs on your TV to work with)... of course, Tivos don't, so they would not be able to use this method.

I guess, with that, QAM would remain available... which means QAM mapping is certainly something that will continue to hold value in some areas (again, I refer to my friend who says he can't get any analog/QAM... I may have to ask him again!)


----------



## slowbiscuit

Although I do believe that analog will go away for good eventually, I don't believe that the local QAM channels will be encrypted, at least not right away. Perhaps that will happen as the local analogs are retired, but I can say that in the ATL the locals are still available in analog after the current expanded basic migration. They're just moving the 40-50 expanded basic channels to digital as mentioned, and are only encrypting those channels in QAM.


----------



## schwinn

I don't hold that much faith in my cableco, but at least we are being told "for now" that QAM locals will remain unencrypted, as well as the "antenna replacement plan" channels in analog (local channels).

Seems Executive Support doesn't even know that locals will remain unencrypted... but I'll admit, I do like my cablecards now...


----------



## Saxion

Digital local broadcast channels must remain in Clear QAM by law, unless a specific waiver is granted by the FCC. The blanket waiver granted to some recent DTAs does *not *allow for encryption of local broadcast channels...that was only a waiver for _separable security_, which is a different issue. There have only been a small number of waivers granted for encryption of local broadcast channels in specific markets, and those were very narrowly granted (ex: due to unusually high levels of cable service theft) and/or came with significant concessions (ex: free CableCARDs and/or free cable boxes for all affected users).


----------



## justthinking

I just wanted to chime in to say that I also desperately want this. I don't expect it to be automatic, I just want to manually match up the ClearQAM channel with a guide channel. If it changes frequently, then I'll manually change it frequently. I'm working on getting a CableCARD but I get my cable through a university and I doubt they'll be able to provide one. It's good to see that there are so many other people out there that also want this.


----------



## bicker

This bears repeating:


TiVoPony said:


> Likewise, features such as QAM remapping and M-Card S3 support *do not target a significant portion of our subscribers, both are in fact very small numbers of subscribers*. That doesn't mean that they automatically get set aside, or that TiVo is ignoring or doesn't care about those customers. But it is a consideration when trading off those features* against others* ...


It would be great -- assuming TiVoPony is still reading this thread (doubtful) -- if we could get an update on whether or not any of this has changed from TiVo's perspective. I don't see any reason to believe that it has changed.


----------



## Speeden71

It looks like some of the QAM channels have been moved around since I last did a scan, but all the basics are there in original digital standard def or downcoverted HD, not just the locals. A few years back when I tried cable cards from Comcast, I got nothing but grief. Was always having to call and get them re-authorized. Then they started charging me extra outlet charges for the second cable card.That's when I said enough and turned them in. Don't really watch that much TV, but when I do I only need a few shows: Daily Show(cable), 24(OTA), Sons of Anarchy(cable), Fringe(OTA), Rescue Me(cable), Weather Channel for winter weather, sometimes a cable news channel. That's about it. If I could just map about 5 -10 channels I would be in business.


----------



## bsmith1051

I just signed-up for Basic Cable on TWC and my S3 'sees' the clear-QAM channels but doesn't have any guide data for them. If I also agree to rent 2 cablecards will those channels work properly? I'd still be spending a lot less than Expanded Basic so I wouldn't complain about the added cost.


----------



## lessd

bsmith1051 said:


> I just signed-up for Basic Cable on TWC and my S3 'sees' the clear-QAM channels but doesn't have any guide data for them. If I also agree to rent 2 cablecards will those channels work properly? I'd still be spending a lot less than Expanded Basic so I wouldn't complain about the added cost.


With a cable card you will not see the X.YY ch as they will be remapped to numbers without dots in them. For me as example CBS-HD I can get at ch 3.1without cable cards but when the cable cards were installed CBS-HD came in at ch 233. You will than get the guide data also.


----------



## TexasGrillChef

Has anyone actually had any luck with this letter writing cam"pain"?????

As old as this thread is... I honestly don't think this will happen as much as many of you want it too.

I wish the best for you.... but I wouldn't place any bets on you winning this issue!

TGC


----------



## enjoyoutdoors

Well, I wonder how many come here like I did and just get disgusted and never bother posting?

Add me as another experiencing this problem. I just bought a Tivo HD and have comcast service. I knew that I can get the channels and had expected them to be covered. I would not have bought the Tivo had I known they would not provide it.

*Lets all be honest here. What this REALLY is ALL about is MONOPOLISTIC practices and companies enabling each other to continue them. *

HD should be free as part of a general subscription, but all the providers are hanging onto extra charges because they can and because there is really not enough competition that they lose customers. Heck, the big providers are all working hard right now to make sure that pay per channel never ends up being provided over internet, thus removing some serious future competition.


----------



## slowbiscuit

No, that's not what it's about at all, but feel free to join another forum and continue your rant.


----------



## bicker

enjoyoutdoors said:


> Lets all be honest here. What this REALLY is ALL about is MONOPOLISTIC practices and companies enabling each other to continue them.


Yup, you're right. TiVo is a monopoly. It is the only provider of TiVo DVRs. Call the SEC! 



enjoyoutdoors said:


> HD should be free as part of a general subscription


Where in the Bible is that written? "Let's all be honest here..." You are describing what you *want*, not what "should be".

If you think you can do a better job, then start your own company.


----------



## dwynne

enjoyoutdoors said:


> I just bought a Tivo HD and have comcast service. I knew that I can get the channels and had expected them to be covered. I would not have bought the Tivo had I known they would not provide it.


I have an HD Tivo and Comcast as well. They gave me the multistream cable card I need to pick up the programming I pay for. There was a small, one time fee to activate the card - but (by law, I think) the M card costs me nothing per month.

Would I PREFER to be able to pick up clear QAM and have guide data? Sure. But I have no complaint about getting what I need for nothing. And, they are now in the process of scrambling all the clear QAM channels anyway, except for perhaps the local channels, so having the ability to map to clear QAM will soon be a moot point (here, at least).


----------



## bicker

dwynne said:


> I have an HD Tivo and Comcast as well. They gave me the multistream cable card I need to pick up the programming I pay for. There was a small, one time fee to activate the card - but (by law, I think) the M card costs me nothing per month.


The law requires that the *average* rental fee a specific MSO charges for CableCARDs be "reasonable". They can accomplish that either by charging everyone the same reasonable fee (like FiOS does) or they can accomplish that by charging half of their customers nothing, and the other half of their customers double the "reasonable" amount (like most of the rest do).


----------



## Stormspace

bicker said:


> Yup, you're right. TiVo is a monopoly. It is the only provider of TiVo DVRs. Call the SEC!
> 
> Where in the Bible is that written? "Let's all be honest here..." You are describing what you *want*, not what "should be".
> 
> If you think you can do a better job, then start your own company.


If SD is being phased out it stands to reason that whatever they use to replace it will have to be included in the basic rate plans. I guess it could be downrezzed digital HD to SD, but there might be a stink about degrading a signal unless you pay more, or not. People may not be able to tell the difference.


----------



## bicker

SD is not being phased out. Analog is. Big difference.

The B1 tier includes the local over-the-air broadcast channels. It's not a matter of what "stands to reason" -- it's explicit in the law.

The regulations require provision of HDs at their broadcast resolution, but not the broadcast bitrate. Again: Big difference (between resolution and bitrate).

Within the context of what the regulations actually require (i.e., resolution; not bitrate), the typical viewer "telling the difference" is *all* that matters.


----------



## mattack

bicker said:


> SD is not being phased out.


Sorry, tangential question. I have been curious about this.

If they can/have pretty much gotten people to "get digital" (even just with the DTAs), why don't they get even MORE bandwidth back by getting rid of SD and having everything HD? (I realize this would require the DTAs to be able to decode HD channels, even if just outputting composite video, like my TivoHD does to my ancient TV.. heh)

Don't get me wrong, I personally *don't* want this because then my Tivo drive would be even more full than it already is (though esp with the olympics now, I have started downloading tons of stuff to an external 1.5 TB drive.. and I'm not even recording the olympics in HD).. but it seems to me like it would make sense from the cable company point of view -- EXCEPT it would get rid of their ability to charge extra for HD. (Though IMHO they could essentially do the same thing by having different bundles of HD channels for different price points.)


----------



## bicker

mattack said:


> If they can/have pretty much gotten people to "get digital" (even just with the DTAs), why don't they get even MORE bandwidth back by getting rid of SD and having everything HD? (I realize this would require the DTAs to be able to decode HD channels, even if just outputting composite video, like my TivoHD does to my ancient TV.. heh)


I suppose the first question is how many SD channels (that have HD counterparts) are there, really? Even with there being 100, we're really only talking about 60 MHz.

Beyond that, look how long TNT and TBS stretched their video, in recognition of how many regular people react negatively to black bars on the broadcast. I suspect when all the (pardon the pejorative) dullards who care about black bars are gone, then there will be no real need to have both SD and HD signals for a network.


----------



## vstone

enjoyoutdoors said:


> Well, I wonder how many come here like I did and just get disgusted and never bother posting?
> 
> Add me as another experiencing this problem. I just bought a Tivo HD and have comcast service. I knew that I can get the channels and had expected them to be covered. I would not have bought the Tivo had I known they would not provide it.
> 
> *Lets all be honest here. What this REALLY is ALL about is MONOPOLISTIC practices and companies enabling each other to continue them. *
> 
> HD should be free as part of a general subscription, but all the providers are hanging onto extra charges because they can and because there is really not enough competition that they lose customers. Heck, the big providers are all working hard right now to make sure that pay per channel never ends up being provided over internet, thus removing some serious future competition.


FCC could eaily interpret CFR to require posting clear QAM channels lineups, but won't.


----------



## vstone

Cable compaies are required to support analog TV sets until FEB 2012. They can do this by supplying an analog TV signal for the basic broadcast tier or by providing an adapter, which they are allowed to charge for. The cable companies are doing a balancing act with regard to supporting analog. They probably would like to go all digital today, but do not want to buy a trainalod of analog TV adapters that they will discard in two years. Some cable systems have already gone all digital. Others will when the economics of doing so make sense. 

As far as SD vs HD, not all of the available SD material will make it to an HD channel in the near future, so SD is probably here for a while.


----------



## mattack

vstone said:


> Cable compaies are required to support analog TV sets until FEB 2012. They can do this by supplying an analog TV signal for the basic broadcast tier or by providing an adapter, which they are allowed to charge for.


Are you claiming that the 2 free DTAs per household that Comcast gives out is due to their kindness?

(yes I'm being sarcastic of course)


----------



## bicker

The first DTA is mandated until 2012. The second DTA is _strategic _generosity, sort of like when Exxon sponsors Masterpiece Theater on public television.


----------



## lew

mattack said:


> Are you claiming that the 2 free DTAs per household that Comcast gives out is due to their kindness?
> 
> (yes I'm being sarcastic of course)


Not out of kindness, but not required by current regulations.


----------



## schwinn

lew said:


> Not out of kindness, but not required by current regulations.


I thought the waiver required them to provide these, so they could move more channels to digital? Hence the creation of these mini-cable-boxes?


----------



## bicker

No, the DTA waiver allowed them to use the boxes. They could have moved the channels to digital without the waiver; they just would have had to require consumers to rent full STBs instead, of giving cheaper DTAs away complementary.


----------



## rv65

Comcast Bay Area is planning to encrypt the Expanded basic channels. Other divisions will follow suit so you might have to consider getting a cable card in order for a Tivo HD to work. Only the local HD and limited basic will be receivable without a cablecard.


----------



## tvmaster2

Tivo would be smart to include the guide data for the "local" channels that the cable company provides over Qam - no more. This way, they'd make a sale to people who didn't want to pay fees, and who would go the HTPC/MCE route. Once those people get hooked on Tivo, at least half of them would likely up the ante and put in the cablecard. C'mon Tivo, essentially, just map the guide data that gets mapped for OTA locals to the simultaneous Qam channel. Everyone wins


----------



## cogx

As far as I can tell, TiVo doesn't want anything to with the guide data, which they license from TMS. Our station lists and station-to-channel mappings, for our selected zip code and cable providers, is all in the TMS data. Clearly, TMS doesn't want to get into the business of trying to keep track of QAM channel numbers and TiVo either can't (due to their licensing agreement with TMS?) or they won't come up with a way for us customers to take matters into our own hands and add the necessary station-to-channel mappings. Bottom line, it just isn't going to happen and now this old wound of a thread just got picked at and will likely start bleeding again...


----------



## carios23

Does anybody know if Moxi can do this?

"Clear QAM channel mapping through a web interface to fully support HD locals on cable -- with program information-- without the need for a CableCard."

http://www.dslreports.com/faq/16232

I found this online, but I would like to know how good it works?


----------

