# Tivo filing to FCC re: S3 (and SDV)



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Tivo filing to the FCC ...
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518400258

Several interesting sections, such as:


> This product (Tivo Series3 HD Digital Video Recorder Model No. TCD648250B) is currently being tested by a small number of consumers in cable markets accross the country, and will be generally available in retail stores soon.


which is the first time (to my knowledge) *Tivo* has confirmed the S3 is actually in beta testing.

SDV was discussed ...

Oh ... and an email from a member of this forum (zync) to one of the Tivo employee members ...

Anyway, check it out:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518400258


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Thanks as always dt_dc, very interesting reading :up:
You make me think of Joe Friday from dragnet -- just the facts, Ma'am.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> You make me think of Joe Friday from dragnet -- just the facts, Ma'am.


No use in me regurgitating what people can read for themselves. I'll leave that to the blogs ... how long before "Tivo confirms S3 in testing" shows up on engadget?

I did like:


> I've made no comment yet, and will continue to say nothing unless told otherwise.


Censorship! (ooops, sorry wrong thread  )


----------



## Oknarf (Oct 30, 2003)

> ...and will be generally available in retail stores soon!




Bring it on!


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> No use in me regurgitating what people can read for themselves. I'll leave that to the blogs ... how long before "Tivo confirms S3 in testing" shows up on engadget?


Should we place a wager...


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

davezatz said:


> Should we place a wager...


and how many minutes box are you checking off Dave


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

TCD648250*B*

TCD648250*A* was the model they first had verified by CableLabs ... they now have two products listed at:
http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/OC_PNP.pdf
TCD648250*A* and TCD648250*B*

Hadn't seen that before either.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> and how many minutes box are you checking off Dave


Well I got my post up, and the Eng and Giz editors have been notified. For those that think this is exciting news (even though "soon" can mean anything) the Digg link is here:

http://digg.com/hardware/TiVo_confirms_current_Series3_beta_testing,_hitting_retail_soon!

PS dt_dc, I owe you even more Starbucks. You should collect your reward one day soon. 

Wonder if the model numbers refer to different hard drive configurations.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

> _
> This product (Tivo Series3 HD Digital Video Recorder Model No. TCD648250B) is currently being tested by a small number of consumers in cable markets accross the country, and will be generally available in retail stores soon._



Yayayayayayayayayayayayayayay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK...I got that out of my system....now where's the stinkin' signup list?


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Wow! Cool find! 

I see everyone is excited about "coming soon", and I don't blame you, but why isn't everyone more excited about TiVo raising the topic of SDV with the FCC? 

My interpretation: TiVo is essentially saying SDV may be anti-competitive, right? 

I think it's great that TiVo is bringing this to the FCC's attention, and can only hope something good comes out of it for potential S3 users.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Yes it's great to see the issue of SDV so clearly acknowledged by Tivo and brought to the attention of FCC as potentially anti-competitive. However this also seems to confirm what we suspected all along - that the S3 hardware in it's present form cannot handle SDV and that at least for now Tivo doesn't have a workaround for it. Especially for markets that already have deployed SDV somehow I don't see the FCC mandating cease and desist so it's unclear what the FCC can do about it.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> TCD648250*B*
> 
> TCD648250*A* was the model they first had verified by CableLabs ... they now have two products listed at:
> http://www.cablelabs.com/udcp/downloads/OC_PNP.pdf
> ...


Any information on what the difference is between an "A" and "B' model?


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

jfh3 said:


> Any information on what the difference is between an "A" and "B' model?


One could be the S3 and the other the Comcast Tivo


----------



## btl-a4 (Dec 28, 2005)

Great post.

Now all I need to do is keep hitting refresh on http://www.tivo.com/cablecard. I imagine as soon as that page become active the S3 will be shipping. Man is my finger going to get a workout.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

cherry ghost said:


> One could be the S3 and the other the Comcast Tivo


No... the Comcast TiVo is software running on a Motorola box. The letters probably refer to slightly different configs. My guess would be something like hard drive size or case color (front display or not?), since it's a little too early for a DVD S3.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

btl-a4 said:


> Great post.
> 
> Now all I need to do is keep hitting refresh on http://www.tivo.com/cablecard. I imagine as soon as that page become active the S3 will be shipping. Man is my finger going to get a workout.


Yeah, I tried that right away, too, and nothing yet. It will remain bookmarked


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

davezatz said:


> No... the Comcast TiVo is software running on a Motorola box.


This has come into question recently.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8007656&&#post8007656

http://www.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/14/147565/Comcast_DVR_Factsheet_Q106.pdf


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

The pdf from the second link above has a picture of a Motorola DVR that looks a lot like the DCT64xx/DCT34xx models.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

cherry ghost said:


> This has come into question recently.


It was supposedly seen in a backroom at CES, and Tom Rogers mentioned existing Comcast boxes could be upgraded... http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2006-02/tivos-ceo-video-interview/

However, anything is possible since we're largely out of the loop.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

The sad part is that the FCC isn't going to stop the rollout or force the removal of SDV anytime soon even if it agrees with Tivo. This really translates to the S3 could be screwed before its even shipped.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

HiDefGator said:


> This really translates to the S3 could be screwed before its even shipped.


That's just patently not true and a gross oversimplification. I'm getting a bit tired of posts like these. :down: The S3 will work just fine with OTA and cable regardless of what transpires with SDV.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

jfh3 said:


> Any information on what the difference is between an "A" and "B' model?


A=Alpha
B=Beta


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

davezatz said:


> However, anything is possible since we're largely out of the loop.


The people on those other boards are utterly and completely wrong. The Comcast deal is software only -- the contract between the companies discusses software development only, and Tom Rogers has said at least twice in public presentations to investors that the Comcast deal is software only. He was making that statement specifically to clear up some misconceptions about the deal, and to emphasize how cable DVR deployments can actually be a good thing for TiVo (as they provide platforms upon which the TiVo software can eventually be distributed).


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

Adam1115 said:


> A=Alpha
> B=Beta


Right. Or Rev. A, Rev. B.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

ChuckyBox said:


> The people on those other boards are utterly and completely wrong.


I was trying to be polite. It's the 6412 and we all know it! 

Bierboy has me thinking, wouldn't it be cool if there was an S3 that was purely OTA? I have no idea how large a market that would be, and probably shrinking as more cable channels migrate to HD... but I'd appreciate it and probably at a lower cost.

As far as SDV, OCAP, yadda yadda, the cable companies will always fight to protect their monopolies. The best care scenario is other players make software deals with TiVo - that way plenty of people get an authentic TiVo experience and the cable folks can share ad revenue and sell their PPV. Consumers don't have to mess with technologies they don't understand (renting CableCARDS - we're smarter here in the forums than most). And TiVo gets to the the software & service only company they've always aspired to be. I'm sure Comcast is just the first... If DTV had any brains, they'd implement all the already existing advanced features (including ads) - we'd get extra goodies and they'd make a few bucks.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

davezatz said:


> My guess would be something like hard drive size or case color (front display or not?), since it's a little too early for a DVD S3.


The 250 portion of the number indicates the hard drive size, so that's not the change. In the past they have had these "A" and "B" configurations and they simply meant that a very minor hardware change was made like the brand of the hard drive.

Dan


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Bierboy said:


> That's just patently not true and a gross oversimplification. I'm getting a bit tired of posts like these. :down: The S3 will work just fine with OTA and cable regardless of what transpires with SDV.


If I pay a small fortune for the S3 and it can't tune some or even one of the channels I pay for (including the precious HD channels) then I would be one very unhappy customer.

What am I going to do the first time my football team is playing on a channel I can't get? Say oh well I guess my $800 investment just couldn't get that game. It doesn't matter how many channels it can get, if it can't get some of them people are not going to be happy.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

And somewhere on this board someone previously stated that their cable system had already put an HD channel in SDV. The S3 will not be able to record that channel.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

davezatz said:


> Bierboy has me thinking, wouldn't it be cool if there was an S3 that was purely OTA? I have no idea how large a market that would be, and probably shrinking as more cable channels migrate to HD... but I'd appreciate it and probably at a lower cost.


Actually TiVo showed off just such a unit over 4 years ago at CES. It was later scrapped due to lack of interest in an OTA only solution.

Dan


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

HiDefGator said:


> If I pay a small fortune for the S3 and it can't tune some or even one of the channels I pay for (including the precious HD channels) then I would be one very unhappy customer.
> 
> What am I going to do the first time my football team is playing on a channel I can't get? Say oh well I guess my $800 investment just couldn't get that game. It doesn't matter how many channels it can get, if it can't get some of them people are not going to be happy.


What I'm saying is that for me (and I'm sure many others) the S3 will work great. I pick up six OTA HD channels and have expanded basic cable. To have a dual tuner HD TiVo for my OTA and cable reception is worth the money to me. I do not (and will never) pay extra for cable HD channels or other "premium" fare. So, for those of us who have this setup, the S3 will work just great regardless of the status of SDV. Perhaps for you it won't, but to simply say that "...the S3 could be screwed before its even shipped" is just that....way too simple a statement.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

dt_dc said:


> Oh ... and an email from a member of this forum (zync) to one of the Tivo employee members ...


It was to Pony. I can't tell who he was sending it to, but somewhere up the chain.


----------



## ChuckyBox (Oct 3, 2005)

dt_dc said:


> TiVo said:
> 
> 
> > This product (Tivo Series3 HD Digital Video Recorder Model No. TCD648250B) is currently being tested by a small number of consumers in cable markets accross the country, and will be generally available in retail stores soon.


By "accross [sic] the country" they mean "in New York City" (which is, indeed, across the country), by "small number of consumers" they mean "our New York employees," and by "available in retail stores soon" they mean "as soon as the fox hunting and yachting seasons are over and we decide to wander back from our vast estates and see about maybe doing some business."

160 days to late delivery.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

ChuckyBox said:


> By "accross [sic] the country" they mean "in New York City" (which is, indeed, across the country), by "small number of consumers" they mean "our New York employees," and by "available in retail stores soon" they mean "as soon as the fox hunting and yachting seasons are over and we decide to wander back from our vast estates and see about maybe doing some business."
> 
> 160 days to late delivery.


My, my...someone got up on the wrong side of the bed today


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> My, my...someone got up on the wrong side of the bed today


Actually, he's been getting up on that side of the bed for about a month and a half.


----------



## George Cifranci (Jan 30, 2003)

Has this already been posted?

http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2006-07/tivo-confirms-series3-testing-hitting-retail-soon/


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

ChuckyBox said:


> as soon as the fox hunting


cmon, it is way too hot now for fox hunting


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

ChuckyBox said:


> 160 days to late delivery.


Chucky, how about a group hug?



George Cifranci said:


> Has this already been posted?
> http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2006-07/tivo-confirms-series3-testing-hitting-retail-soon/


My post was based on dt_dc's scoop and intended for the greater public who might not have caught this TCF thread. It definitely would have been awhile, if ever, before anyone else picked up the FCC submission (I probably haven't searched the CC letters in 2 months - I've been negligent).


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

And, if anyone still thinks that most consumers can't do a CableCard install without a truck roll and a "professional installer", Tivo's instructions should put that thought to rest.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Now we just have to get more people working on trying to find out if there really is a clue in the DT to indicate what the planned release date of the S3 is ... I've tried some bizzare stuff looking for clues.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

This couldnt come at at worse time, or a better one. I have been waiting so long for this news to finally come out but I am on the verge of paying for my wedding and working on building a house. AHHHHHhh I hope there is some sort of monthly option so I can justify this to my fiancee otherwise I am screwed!!!


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

I suggest everyone go to http://www.changenotes.com/addapage.php
and enter in www.tivo.com/cablecard and you will get an email as soon as this page goes live. Just another way to stay up on Series 3 news


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

drew2k said:


> Wow! Cool find!
> 
> I see everyone is excited about "coming soon", and I don't blame you, but why isn't everyone more excited about TiVo raising the topic of SDV with the FCC?
> 
> ...


Agreed. This is just as important as the S3 itself.


----------



## zync (Feb 22, 2003)

dt_dc said:


> Tivo filing to the FCC ...
> Oh ... and an email from a member of this forum (zync) to one of the Tivo employee members ...


*blink* Seriously? I don't believe I ever got a reply from Pony on that email. I'll have to go check it out!

...

OK - I checked it out. It was fun to read my PM on a FCC filing... I guess. I'm very happy to see that the boat rocking got the attention of someone... though I guess it remains to be seen if it actually means switched video will or will not work.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Silly Question.... (Not Tivo Related)

Doesn't implementing SDV at the provider side amount to the oversubscribing of their trunk distrution lines on the assumption that only x% of the channels will be active at one time? And if so, what happens if each on of their customers on the same SDV trunk tunes to a different channel than all the rest, so that there is someone on that line tuned to each and every channel at once? Does it break? 

-Ken


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

kdmorse said:


> Silly Question.... (Not Tivo Related)
> 
> Doesn't implementing SDV at the provider side amount to the oversubscribing of their trunk distrution lines on the assumption that only x% of the channels will be active at one time? And if so, what happens if each on of their customers on the same SDV trunk tunes to a different channel than all the rest, so that there is someone on that line tuned to each and every channel at once? Does it break?
> 
> -Ken


 Hmmm, I'm smelling sabotage and revolt if/when SDV is implemented.  I've got 4 TVs in my house but will need to get to know more of the neighbors and where they keep their TVs and we'll have a "how fast can you tune through all the channels" contest. 

Seriously though the worse that can happen is denied service for a while for a few unlucky subscribers.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

moyekj said:


> Yes it's great to see the issue of SDV so clearly acknowledged by Tivo and brought to the attention of FCC as potentially anti-competitive. However this also seems to confirm what we suspected all along - that the S3 hardware in it's present form cannot handle SDV and that at least for now Tivo doesn't have a workaround for it. Especially for markets that already have deployed SDV somehow I don't see the FCC mandating cease and desist so it's unclear what the FCC can do about it.


but TiVo is essentially asking the FCC to make the cable companies and cablelabs get together and incorporate SDV into the cablecard standard.

This could result in a a 1.7 version wherein the cablecard itself could do enough bidrectional work to get the headend to send the "asked for channel" down the pipe without all the extra modem, UI and so forth of a full blown 2.0 bidirectional spec.

How hard or easy that would be, I have no idea


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

kdmorse said:


> Silly Question.... (Not Tivo Related)
> 
> Doesn't implementing SDV at the provider side amount to the oversubscribing of their trunk distrution lines on the assumption that only x% of the channels will be active at one time? And if so, what happens if each on of their customers on the same SDV trunk tunes to a different channel than all the rest, so that there is someone on that line tuned to each and every channel at once? Does it break?
> 
> -Ken


When oversubscribed there are two choices 1) disallow the tune request and put up some type of error message or 2) ratchet up the compression (subsequently lowering the quality) on some of the lesser watched shows.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

It would be nice if the resolution of all these issues also lead to the ability to access OnDemand content from the Series 3. We have had OnDemand for about a year now, and it is nice from time to time but I dont think its a deal or no deal scenario for me on weather or not to buy a Series 3


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

davezatz said:


> Well I got my post up, and the Eng and Giz editors have been notified.


It's up on Engadget now.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

kdmorse said:


> Doesn't implementing SDV at the provider side amount to the oversubscribing of their trunk distrution lines on the assumption that only x% of the channels will be active at one time? And if so, what happens if each on of their customers on the same SDV trunk tunes to a different channel than all the rest, so that there is someone on that line tuned to each and every channel at once?


One of the big reasons why, as cable companies look at SDV, VOD, and HSI, they are talking more about "node splitting" (reducing the number of homes in a service group) as a more effecient investment for increasing capacity rather than simply ratcheting up bandwidth into the home.


ah30k said:


> When oversubscribed there are two choices 1) disallow the tune request and put up some type of error message or 2) ratchet up the compression (subsequently lowering the quality) on some of the lesser watched shows.


Another option ... cable companies are looking at automatic fall-back methods. For example, say a cable company carries:
ESPN-HD (switched digital)
ESPN-SD (switched digital)
ESPN-SD (broadcast analog)
If someone tunes into either of the switched ESPN channels, and no switched capacity was available ... the box would automatically "fall back" to analog ESPN.

Edit: Communications Technology article on SDV and "analog fall back" here:
http://www.ct-magazine.com/archives/ct/0606/0606_switcheddigitalvideo.htm


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

amjustice said:


> It would be nice if the resolution of all these issues also lead to the ability to access OnDemand content from the Series 3. We have had OnDemand for about a year now, and it is nice from time to time but I dont think its a deal or no deal scenario for me on weather or not to buy a Series 3


I agree...I see no future (for me) in VOD. I'd get the S3 strictly for OTA HD recording and cable SD recording. For me, it'll be worth it -- especially with the TiVo UI.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> I agree...I see no future (for me) in VOD. I'd get the S3 strictly for OTA HD recording and cable SD recording. For me, it'll be worth it -- especially with the TiVo UI.


If you think about it, if you have your season passes and recordings all set up and going why would you need onDemand anyways, Tivo then acts as the OnDemand function and is way better. The only time I have really used OnDemand was to watch previous seasons of Entorage, since I didnt have HBO when those were on and didnt want to go out and buy the DVDs.


----------



## weldon (Jun 17, 2001)

moyekj said:


> The pdf from the second link above has a picture of a Motorola DVR that looks a lot like the DCT64xx/DCT34xx models.


Yes, but the PDF refers to both the existing iGuide service (on Motorola boxes) and TiVo-branded DVR's. While I don't think there will be new hardware myself, that interpretation is still open to speculation.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

weldon said:


> Yes, but the PDF refers to both the existing iGuide service (on Motorola boxes) and TiVo-branded DVR's. While I don't think there will be new hardware myself, that interpretation is still open to speculation.


Yeah, "TiVo-branded" could mean simply a Moto box with a TiVoGuy sticker.


----------



## SurfPine (Dec 3, 2004)

dt_dc said:


> Another option ... cable companies are looking at automatic fall-back methods. For example, say a cable company carries:
> ESPN-HD (switched digital)
> ESPN-SD (switched digital)
> ESPN-SD (broadcast analog)
> ...


I know someone will try and question my comments with their "industry" knowledge (not directed at you dt_dc as I enjoy reading your information), please feel free. I do want to point out, as it is mentioned in the ct-magazine link, that SDV efforts are for the channels that don't get constant use. I know dt_dc was trying to create an example and the example does make sense to explain a "fall-back" type scenario. But, ESPN would not be considered a channel that would/should make the SDV lineup (I do believe dt_dc believes this as well). SDV does not make sense for any channels that are constantly being viewed. Why would you potentially spend the money to purchase new equipment and realign 100% used channels to put them in a SDV line-up and then never see that channel switched out?

In the article it is stated that SDV is expected to be used for the niche channels, the channels that do not have someone viewing them constantly. This would allow for an increase of channel line-ups as well to better compete with satellite.

Again, I am not defending any cable MSO and I do not or have never worked for a cable MSO. I do work with them though.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

If I were a Cable Company, I'd say that TiVo wants to cripple the entire Cable industry's ability to expand offerings to 10s of millions of subscribers based on a product that they have not yet sold, and may never sell more than a few thousand of.

In terms of the entire CC space, I'd say the number of CC users is currently trivial, and far more benefits can be obtained through SDV w/ proprietary hardware & that some new consumer standard that deals with SDV ought to be considered if having alternative non-proprietary hardware is something the FCC wants to enforce.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

amjustice said:


> If you think about it, if you have your season passes and recordings all set up and going why would you need onDemand anyways, Tivo then acts as the OnDemand function and is way better. The only time I have really used OnDemand was to watch previous seasons of Entorage, since I didnt have HBO when those were on and didnt want to go out and buy the DVDs.


Unless you are going to stores dozens frequently changing movies on your Tivo it is not a better OnDemand than the real thing. OnDemand is not about something you would setup with season passes. I got to try it at my brother's house recently and it was very cool.


----------



## Rcam10 (Apr 13, 2004)

Well, I really have to wonder if most people would buy the S3 just for OTA. There are always some that will do that of course, but I'd think most wouldn't. I mean the point of cable is not having a antenna in lots of people's minds. But of course they would be able to get the Local HD on cable anyway probably. I'm not sure if they are going to try and use SDV for local or not. 

But not being able to get some of the HD channels on cable just isn't going to go over so good. Right now in SC there are at "least" 3 HD channels on SDV. TWC is going to take it into more states really soon and several other cable companies are talking about it. 

I'd bet also that any future HD channels that are added will be on SDV on TWC systems using it. Maybe one day when HD is into more homes then it could be they might not use SDV for HD so much, but I wouldn't bet on that. 

Personally, I just wish the S3 would just work with SDV and not have to worry about it.


----------



## andydumi (Jun 26, 2006)

i agree with the above.
i also liked the idea someone mentioned that maybe this will stimulate the creation of CC 1.7 which will handle basic upstream channel requests, and thus SDV, although not necessarily on demand and such.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

SurfPine said:


> In the article it is stated that SDV is expected to be used for the niche channels, the channels that do not have someone viewing them constantly.


 TWC users in select markets have already reported that some/most of their HD channels are on SDV and that future potential HD channel additions will be via SDV. This makes sense on 2 fronts for TWC: current set of cable HD customers is limited and vast majority of HD customers are renting a 2-way capable set top box (capable of handling SDV). Of course as the number of HD customers increases the benefits of SDV for those channels will be greatly reduced and they would have to re-arrange SDV set of channels.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Rcam10 said:


> Well, I really have to wonder if most people would buy the S3 just for OTA....


I agree, but I think many folks are missing the (or my) point, here. I'm getting the S3 for several purposes -- NOT just for dual recording of OTA HD, but also the capability of dual recording of SD cable. Now, I realize the recently-released DT TiVo has the dual tuner capability (w/o HD). That's why I say the S3 fills several uses for me -- 1) OTA HD reception, 2) dual recording of OTA HD reception, 3) dual tuning of SD cable reception, 4) dual tuning of SD OTA reception, 5) mix of the previous. I will likely never use the cablecard.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Rcam10 said:


> Personally, I just wish the S3 would just work with SDV and not have to worry about it.


Unfortunately that's not even possible. The current CableCARD spec is unidirectional, which means there is no stadard way for the TiVo to communicate with the head end.



andydumi said:


> i agree with the above.
> i also liked the idea someone mentioned that maybe this will stimulate the creation of CC 1.7 which will handle basic upstream channel requests, and thus SDV, although not necessarily on demand and such.


Unfortunately I don't think this is possible either. Inorder for this to work the box would have to have some sort of reverse modulator so it could send a signal back up the line. The current CableCARD 1.0 spec does not require anyhting like this, so it's unlikely any CableCARD 1.0 device would have the hardware required to do even basic bidirectional communication.

What they could do however is switch to MPEG-4 compression. With that they could get the same quality from lower bitrates, and there are companies that make CableCARDs which can transcode MPEG-4 on the fly. (http://www.neotion.com/products/modules.php)

Dan


----------



## KJW (Sep 27, 2003)

Did someone say $800 for a series 3 box? That can't be right, can it? Because if its a choice between free+$9.99/mo. for a cablevision box and $800+$6.95 for a Tivo, I'm going with cablevision, no matter how much I hate them and how inferior their technology may be.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

davezatz said:


> No... the Comcast TiVo is software running on a Motorola box. The letters probably refer to slightly different configs. My guess would be something like hard drive size or case color (front display or not?), since it's a little too early for a DVD S3.


The HD size is in the number. A vs B is likely a minor hardware revision.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Rcam10 said:


> Well, I really have to wonder if most people would buy the S3 just for OTA. There are always some that will do that of course, but I'd think most wouldn't. I mean the point of cable is not having a antenna in lots of people's minds. But of course they would be able to get the Local HD on cable anyway probably. I'm not sure if they are going to try and use SDV for local or not.
> 
> But not being able to get some of the HD channels on cable just isn't going to go over so good. Right now in SC there are at "least" 3 HD channels on SDV. TWC is going to take it into more states really soon and several other cable companies are talking about it.


The potential market for the S3 seems to be shrinking. I find it hard to believe that many people are going to fork over that kind of money for the S3 just to record OTA and the channels that aren't switched. The S3 already doesn't work with DirecTV or Echostar customers. Now add in the Time Warner SDV customers. The Comcast customers are already going to find it much cheaper to go with the Comcast-Tivo upgrade rather than buying an S3 themselves. Other cable companies are going to roll out SDV at some point. There is no way there will be a 1.7 CC spec any time soon as someone hoped. The spec alone would take 2 years of arguing. The S3 is sounding more like a niche market product everyday.


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

Bierboy said:


> I will likely never use the cablecard.


Same here, I will use my S3 exactly as you have stated. We have analog cable and that is all we want. Netflix takes care of our lack of premium channels.

Heck, we chose not to have cable at all for more than 10 years. The only reason we broke down and had it installed was because the tuner on our Series 2 is pretty lame and it was having trouble recording shows. I won't put an antenna on the roof so I was left with no choice but to use cable.

We have found that OTA channels fill the bulk of our viewing needs.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

KJW said:


> Did someone say $800 for a series 3 box? That can't be right, can it? Because if its a choice between free+$9.99/mo. for a cablevision box and $800+$6.95 for a Tivo, I'm going with cablevision, no matter how much I hate them and how inferior their technology may be.


 Cool, one less person in line ahead of me for the S3 release. Prices are all speculation right now but Tivo themselves have pointed out that this is a box intended for high end users so I don't expect it to be cheap compared to current series 2 box pricing or cable company DVR offerings.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

cherry ghost said:


> This has come into question recently.
> 
> http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8007656&&#post8007656
> 
> http://www.corporate-ir.net/media_files/irol/14/147565/Comcast_DVR_Factsheet_Q106.pdf


I guess it isn't in question. Pony has stepped in

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8036220&&#post8036220


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

I hope TiVo makes and sells/rents a Peanut for the Moto-TiVo; then it'll be very interesting to compare an S3 to a Moto-TiVo (w/o any Cable System compatibility worries.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

My MOXI DVR is nothing more then a Moto box with a MOXI sticker on the outside and a special MOXI remote. I think Comcast will probably do the same for these TiVo units.

Dan


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

having to provide a different remote would be an additional hassle for comcast. My guess is it will be a software only download that will work with the existing remote. 

One question i still have have is how you downgrade a box if the customer decides to stop paying for the Tivo upgrade.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> My MOXI DVR is nothing more then a Moto box with a MOXI sticker on the outside and a special MOXI remote. I think Comcast will probably do the same for these TiVo units.
> 
> Dan


Comcast will probably do a $30 truck roll for a remote and a sticker.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HiDefGator said:


> One question i still have have is how you downgrade a box if the customer decides to stop paying for the Tivo upgrade.


My guess is the box will do something akin to a full format and reinstall. They'll probably have to make sure that the customer understands that reverting to the old software will wipe out all their settings and recordings.



cherry ghost said:


> Comcast will probably do a $30 truck roll for a remote and a sticker.


LOL 

Dan


----------



## ping (Oct 3, 2005)

It's possible it's still a box swap even if it's just a software upgrade. It could be they just do the upgrades at the office to keep it simple (which may entail swapping hard drives or flashing memory through some special connection). They give you a box that's already been upgraded and take your box to either be upgraded or just emptied to be given to another customer with the old software still on it.


----------



## andydumi (Jun 26, 2006)

cherry ghost said:


> Comcast will probably do a $30 truck roll for a remote and a sticker.


LOL they are doing a roll out to our house and not even installing our box.

We got 9.99 installation (their current special) with our service setup in the new house, and they said they will hook up the cable to the house, but if we want them to actually plug in the box and wire it with the tv, it will be 39.99.
So i specifically asked, what does the 9.99 include and she said it is connect the house and hand me the cable box to hook it up myself...

I laughed on the phone and said fine... ill do it, and she was offended because i was laughing and made me talk to a manager.

So now when they show up im gonna make him/her wait until i physically install everything, and then sign the work order and pay the bill.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

I am curently a Comcast cable subscriber, can someone explain the whole switched digital thing to me and if it will affect me for my HD channels? Basicly, will I be able to get my HD channels over cablecard?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Currently the only cable provider using switched digital is Time Warner, and even then they only use it in parts of South Carolina, parts of Texas and in San Diego, CA. All other markets are currently unaffected. Although Time Warner has said that they want to deploy switched digital to more markets, so if you have Time Warner you could be at risk. 

Dan


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

Thanks Dan, thats good to know!


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> If I were a Cable Company, I'd say that TiVo wants to cripple the entire Cable industry's ability to expand offerings to 10s of millions of subscribers based on a product that they have not yet sold, and may never sell more than a few thousand of.


That's just BS. The cable companies have done it to themselves. Had they not been dragging their feet, we could already have a CableCARD 2.0 standard that would make the whole issue of SDV moot.


----------



## andydumi (Jun 26, 2006)

jfh3 said:


> That's just BS. The cable companies have done it to themselves. Had they not been dragging their feet, we could already have a CableCARD 2.0 standard that would make the whole issue of SDV moot.


i agree. cable companies are interested in keeping a variety of formats active so that they can all gouge prices on their proprietary boxes.
if CC2 was around, and it handled everything that is currently used, generic DVRs, cable boxes and such would appear and Comcast and every other provider would lose out.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> 1) OTA HD reception, 2) dual recording of OTA HD reception


That's all I care about right there.
As it stands now, I have to pick and choose what OTA content I want to see in HD,
using the TiVo's listed in my Sig, and not being able to watch primetime TV live,
throw in the occasional HBO and SHO HD programs, and that lessens the choices even more.



KJW said:


> Did someone say $800 for a series 3 box? That can't be right, can it?


$800 plus monthly charge is ridiculous, and totally not worth it for what I'd be using it for, IMHO of course.

I could see myself forking out $400 +monthly fee though.

Now if they reinstated Lifetime for the Series 3, then $800 might be doable,
$400 for the box, $400 for Lifetime.

phox


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

KJW said:


> Did someone say $800 for a series 3 box? That can't be right, can it? Because if its a choice between free+$9.99/mo. for a cablevision box and $800+$6.95 for a Tivo, I'm going with cablevision, no matter how much I hate them and how inferior their technology may be.


Nothing has been announced, but speculation is that the S3 will be between $499 and $799. (With prices on 250GB drives dropping quickly, perhaps it'll be closer to the lower end).

If price is a significant consideration for you, perhaps the Series 2 DT is a better choice - it has never been the plan for the Series 3 to be the Tivo box for the masses.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

jfh3 said:


> That's just BS. The cable companies have done it to themselves. Had they not been dragging their feet, we could already have a CableCARD 2.0 standard that would make the whole issue of SDV moot.


Dumb like a fox.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

HDTiVo said:


> Dumb like a fox.


I have no doubt it's been calculated to thwart the intent of the CableCard mandate all along. I'm just saying that the cable companies can't complain about anything that the FCC might do to limit SDV deployment.


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

First, I have a noob question. What does SDV stand for? And why is it significant in this discussion?

Second, is it safe to assume that CableCARD 2.0 will be available with the introduction of the Series 3, or at least soon thereafter? It was promised in mid-2006 and I know the cable companies are dragging their feet on all things CableCARD, in favor of their software based solution. As I understand it however, this software solution (and someone please help me with the acronym) may also require some sort of OpenCard as an additional protection. One would assume that since this is still in development that the OpenCard is not compatible with the Series 3? If you go with a Series 3, you're tied to either CableCard 1.0 or 2.0, right?

I don't see CableCARD 2.0 as being a bad option, provided I can readily get one (or two in necessary) from Comcast. I understand it to be capable of 5 simultaneous streams. Whether or not 5 streams would be enabled however is up for debate. I don't realistically expect more than 2 streams, but more is just icing on the cake. So presumably with 2 streams in one card, you'd only need one card, yes? Someone mentioned that the Series 3 from CES could only handle one 2.0 card, but I thought it was two. I'm sure the answer is just wait and see what the actual specs are but if anyone has any insight here, please share. 

I guess I just don't see any disadvantage to CC 2.0, besides not being future proof. The software-based solution may enable more features as time goes on, and the inclusion of full-featured PVR's in many more gadgets (computers, TV's, etc.). I was under the impression that this wouldn't be released until at least 2007, with 2008 more likely. I suppose it will be driven by cable's distaste of CableCard, how fast the technology reaches the market. In the interim however, it appears that the only 2 stream HD Tivo solution will be the Series 3, is this correct? If that's the case, then I'm sold, provided there aren't any red flags with recording quality, or the ability to obtain a CableCARD.


----------



## HDTiVo (Nov 27, 2002)

jfh3 said:


> I'm just saying that the cable companies can't complain about anything that the FCC might do to limit SDV deployment.


Of course they _can_, that's just part of the game.

Anyway, there is some weight to Cable taking the position that abandoning the non-SDV stuff now, while its in its infancy, would cost far less than the "benefits" Cable can provide with SDV.

What if they offered to settle with all current CC users for $250 each to obsolete their devices? Isn't that just a few million $ at this point?

What if you could get a global settlement between all parties on some CC2.0+ thing plus some other CE industry incentives in return for enormous infrastructure cost savings on the Cable Co side?


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

greenstork said:


> First, I have a noob question. What does SDV stand for? And why is it significant in this discussion?


The simple answer is that cable companies want to play switch-a-roo on the channels that are being broadcast out to the neighborhoods (SDV=Switched Digital Video). They can save bandwidth by not transmitting channels that no one is watching. For them to do this, the set top boxes need to be able to communicate back to the headend to tell the headend that Bobby wants to watch the Game Show Network and please turn it on. Cable STBs can do this, TiVo cannot. Hence the outrage by TiVo users.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

greenstork said:


> First, I have a noob question. What does SDV stand for? And why is it significant in this discussion?


 Refer to HDTV & Cable: Switched Digital, CableCARD, and Series3 thread for all the gory details about SDV=Switched Digital Video


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

moyekj said:


> Cool, one less person in line ahead of me for the S3 release. Prices are all speculation right now but Tivo themselves have pointed out that this is a box intended for high end users so I don't expect it to be cheap compared to current series 2 box pricing or cable company DVR offerings.


I think Tivo will surprise everyone with a significantly lower-than-expected price point. $800 + monthly fee is quite high, even for a 'high end' niche box. They wouldn't be investing so much time and money with the R&D for this box if they didn't plan to sell it and sell it big. At $800, I can see thousands on sales but not even breaking the 10,000 mark, because of the people with the money and motivation to buy it, only a subset will ever find it useful and reasonable to own. Some will have Satellite. DOH! Some will be in SDV areas. DOH!

If it's $800, I'm waiting for the price to drop or a new cheaper HD product to be released. Tivo can't ever hope to be profitable with a price like that.

Which is why I'm speculating (and hoping) for a $300 price tag. It will be subsidized by the monthly fee. And for those that say it will take forever for Tivo to recoup that cost... maybe it's true. But can you image someone having an S3 and NOT paying for the sub? Especially an early adopter?


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

ah30k said:


> The simple answer is that cable companies want to play switch-a-roo on the channels that are being broadcast out to the neighborhoods (SDV=Switched Digital Video). They can save bandwidth by not transmitting channels that no one is watching. For them to do this, the set top boxes need to be able to communicate back to the headend to tell the headend that Bobby wants to watch the Game Show Network and please turn it on. Cable STBs can do this, TiVo cannot. Hence the outrage by TiVo users.


Thanks for the explanation.

So as I read it, CC 2.0 completely eliminates all of the concerns about SDV, because it works with upstream/downstream communication devices like STBs and CC 2.0.

I know that CC 2.0 is being repeatedly delayed but I really see the introduction of the Series 3 as a coming out party for CableCARD 2.0. I mean, why release the Series 3 with many of it's most appealing features not fully operational. Don't you think that TiVo has been waiting to release the S3 to coincide with the release of CC 2.0? I can't see them releasing it without it. Are there other dual tuner HD TiVo options out there right now or will the Series 3 be the first? If the Series 3 is the first then I guess I could see TiVo rushing it to market before CC 2.0 but if not, then what's so compelling about the S3 with CC 1.0?


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

classicX said:


> I think Tivo will surprise everyone with a significantly lower-than-expected price point. $800 + monthly fee is quite high, even for a 'high end' niche box. . . .
> Which is why I'm speculating (and hoping) for a $300 price tag. It will be subsidized by the monthly fee.


MSRP of $800,
but if you buy now you can have it for the low low price of $699,
plus an instant rebate of $200,
then the mail in $100 rebate if you sign up for 2 years prepaid service.

phox


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

greenstork said:


> First, I have a noob question. What does SDV stand for? And why is it significant in this discussion?


SDV = Switched Digital Video. It's siginificant in this discussion because it's in the title. 



greenstork said:


> Second, is it safe to assume that CableCARD 2.0 will be available with the introduction of the Series 3, or at least soon thereafter?


No! Industry insiders don't expect CableCARD 2.0 to actually go live for at least 2 more years. Also the Series 3 TiVo will only support CableCARD 1.0, so it wouldn't matter anyway. The part from CES that you're thinking about is that the S3 will support Multi-Stream CableCARDs (a subsiquent standard which should start getting deployed soon) With a Multi-Stream CableCARD the Series 3 will be able to use a single card to support dual tuners, rather then requiring two cards. That's the ONLY advantage to using one of those new cards. It does not add any support for bidirectional technologies like SDV or VOD.



greenstork said:


> I guess I just don't see any disadvantage to CC 2.0, besides not being future proof.


CableCARD 2.0 will support every technology that the propritary boxes can support now, so it would be a huge advantage over th current CableCARD 1.0 spec. Unfortunately the cable industry is still fighting for it to require OCAP, which will basically allow the cable company to force their own interface onto any 3rd party device. Obviously CE manufactureres like TiVo don't want this so they're fighting for a simple communications protocol to be established so they can use their own UI to access the advanced features.

Dan


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

Does any one knows if the S3 will support unencrypted 256QAM without a CableCard?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It has QAM tuners, so it should. However no one knows yet how it will handle mapping of QAM channels without a CableCARD. It could have some sort of interface, it could use special lineups, or it could simply limit you to manual recordings. We wont know until they're actually released.

Dan


----------



## MediaLivingRoom (Dec 10, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> It has QAM tuners, so it should. However no one knows yet how it will handle mapping of QAM channels without a CableCARD. It could have some sort of interface, it could use special lineups, or it could simply limit you to manual recordings. We wont know until they're actually released.
> 
> Dan


Ok, I am now ready to buy.


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> No! Industry insiders don't expect CableCARD 2.0 to actually go live for at least 2 more years. Also the Series 3 TiVo will only support CableCARD 1.0, so it wouldn't matter anyway. The part from CES that you're thinking about is that the S3 will support Multi-Stream CableCARDs (a subsiquent standard which should start getting deployed soon) With a Multi-Stream CableCARD the Series 3 will be able to use a single card to support dual tuners, rather then requiring two cards. That's the ONLY advantage to using one of those new cards. It does not add any support for bidirectional technologies like SDV or VOD.
> Dan


But the CES reports (below) claimed that it would support CC 2.0. Is this a misrepresentation? Is it really something in between 1.0 and 2.0 that doesn't do upstream? I understood 2.0 to be bi-directional.

http://www.tivolovers.com/252572.html
http://ces.engadget.com/2006/01/05/tivo-announces-series-3-hd-tivo-due-this-year/
http://www.tivoblog.com/archives/2006/03/24/how-about-a-lightweight-series-3-tivo/
http://hdbeat.com/2006/01/06/ces-high-def-tivo/

You're the first person I've heard say that the Series 3 will not support CC 2.0. Could you please point me to an website that backs up this claim? I'm not doubting you, I'm just interested in learning more.


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

Ars Technica, who I trust implicitly on most technology articles, stated in February that CC 2.0 would be released in mid-2006.

http://arstechnica.com/guides/other/cablecard.ars/3

Are they wrong? I can certainly accept that HDTV and PVR's aren't their strong suit, as may be the case here.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

greenstork you should really go and read the thread I pointed you to - a lot of your questions are covered in detail there: HDTV & Cable: Switched Digital, CableCARD, and Series3


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

greenstork said:


> You're the first person I've heard say that the Series 3 will not support CC 2.0. Could you please point me to an website that backs up this claim? I'm not doubting you, I'm just interested in learning more.


CC 2.0 defines bidirectional and multistream support. Everyone's agreed on multistream and in theory the S3 will support it, but bidirectional is still being fought over. So the reality is there could be something less than full CC 2.0 support out there and S3 as it's currently configured/programmed can't do bidirectional.


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

greenstork said:


> But the CES reports (below) claimed that it would support CC 2.0. Is this a misrepresentation? Is it really something in between 1.0 and 2.0 that doesn't do upstream? I understood 2.0 to be bi-directional.
> 
> http://www.tivolovers.com/252572.html
> http://ces.engadget.com/2006/01/05/tivo-announces-series-3-hd-tivo-due-this-year/
> ...


All those articles come from the same source


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Those were all misprints! The biggest piece of proof is to simply look at the letter linked to in the first post of this thread. In that letter TiVo specifically refers to the Series 3 as a "unidirectional digital cable product". The second peice of proof is that the CableCARD 2.0 specification is not even finished yet. If you look at the status on the CableLabs website you'll see that it's status is "Issued" and that a spec is not final until it's listed as "Closed".

The Series 3 unit will NOT support CableCARD 2.0! It's a CableCARD 1.0 device with support for Multi-Stream cards, that's it.

Dan



greenstork said:


> But the CES reports (below) claimed that it would support CC 2.0. Is this a misrepresentation? Is it really something in between 1.0 and 2.0 that doesn't do upstream? I understood 2.0 to be bi-directional.
> 
> http://www.tivolovers.com/252572.html
> http://ces.engadget.com/2006/01/05/tivo-announces-series-3-hd-tivo-due-this-year/
> ...


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

cherry ghost said:


> Comcast will probably do a $30 truck roll for a remote and a sticker.


TWC will charge $70, and it will take two trips for them to get it right. No, wait. Three. The first time they'll have the sticker and not the remote. The second time they'll have the remote but not the sticker. The third time they will have the sticker again, and when I make a big stink they'll have another guy drive out there with the remote while the first guy waits.

(based on a true story of my last cable install. the remote and sticker have been changed to protect them)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

greenstork said:


> Ars Technica, who I trust implicitly on most technology articles, stated in February that CC 2.0 would be released in mid-2006.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/guides/other/cablecard.ars/3
> 
> Are they wrong? I can certainly accept that HDTV and PVR's aren't their strong suit, as may be the case here.


You're misreading that page. It' specifically says...



> As CableLabs (the group that developed them) tells Ars, *"Two-way, multistream CableCARDs are currently being tested successfully at CableLabs and should be ready for deployment in [the second half] of 2006.* The real question is the availibility of retail consumer devices that can take advantage of the features that these CableCARDs offer." That "availability of retail consumer devices" will be key, and analyst *Gary Sasaki doesn't think we're going to see a usable CableCARD v2.0 system in 2006and maybe not even in 2007.* "Earlier hopes for 2007 were characterized as optimistic," he says, "and this is probably still true." So don't hold your breathyou could be holding it into 2008.


The first part is referring to Multi-Stream CableCARD 1.0 PODs. The second part outlines exactly what I was refering to when I said that industry insiders think that CableCARD 2.0 is 2 years away.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

davezatz said:


> CC 2.0 defines bidirectional and multistream support. Everyone's agreed on multistream and in theory the S3 will support it, but bidirectional is still being fought over. So the reality is there could be something less than full CC 2.0 support out there and S3 as it's currently configured/programmed can't do bidirectional.


Actually the spec for Multi-Stream cards was ratified not long after the CableCARD 1.0 standard was ratified. The reason we haven't seen them sooner is because the FCC did not mandate their use, and the cable companies didn't want to spend money on them if they didn't have to. Multi-Stream card support is still not required, but the cable industry has been feeling pressure from the FCC due to the delay of CC2.0 so they went and agreed to start producing Multi-Stream cards to help supliment the market until CC2.0 is actually finished.

Dan


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

moyekj said:


> greenstork you should really go and read the thread I pointed you to - a lot of your questions are covered in detail there: HDTV & Cable: Switched Digital, CableCARD, and Series3


I don't know, I'm still pretty skeptical. I read through most of that entire other thread and all of the claims about CC 2.0 not being ready were from Dan203. The evidence wasn't from media sources or blogs but based on precedent (the fact that the spec was "issued" and not "closed") and the fact that there isn't a Firewire port on the back.

Clearly Dan203 is more knowledgeable than me and most on this forum but almost every report I've read about CC 2.0 says mid-2006, bidirectional, and supported by the Series 3. While I concede that Dan may very well be right, it's dozens of blogs and news stories versus claims on precedent and the lack of a Firewire port.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> agreed to start producing Multi-Stream cards to help supliment the market until CC2.0 is actually finished.


So instead of saying something less than 2.0, it would be better to say something more than 1.0. I think you've set me straight three times in the last 24 hours! 

greenstork, go check out the FCC website for 97-80 filed comments and check out the bickering. You might also search the forum for posts by dt_dc if you want additional authoritative info. CC 2.0 technology (as opposed to function) is not fully agreed upon last I checked. You have to remember, at the end of the day many of these sites (like Ars, including mine) are run by hobbyists and amateur journalists. We often get it wrong or incomplete. On an obscure topic like CC there are very few out there to see and correct us.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

The fact that in the recent filing by Tivo to FCC (posted by OP as 1st topic in this thread) that they also brought SDV as a concern strongly implies that the S3 in it's current form does not support SDV. Why would they go through the trouble of bringing that up if the S3 had a means of dealing with it?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

greenstork said:


> I don't know, I'm still pretty skeptical. I read through most of that entire other thread and all of the claims about CC 2.0 not being ready were from Dan203. The evidence wasn't from media sources or blogs but based on precedent (the fact that the spec was "issued" and not "closed") and the fact that there isn't a Firewire port on the back.


While I understand your skepticism, I can guarantee you that I'm right on this. All of those articles you read about the Series 3 were taken from one report that came from CES about the Series 3 written by our own Megazone. He mistakenly listed the Multi-Stream CableCARD support as being CableCARD 2.0 and everyone just ran with it.

You're free to believe whatever you want, but you're the one who's going to end up being disappointed.

Dan


----------



## mfogarty5 (Apr 27, 2006)

greenstork said:


> I don't know, I'm still pretty skeptical. I read through most of that entire other thread and all of the claims about CC 2.0 not being ready were from Dan203. The evidence wasn't from media sources or blogs but based on precedent (the fact that the spec was "issued" and not "closed") and the fact that there isn't a Firewire port on the back.


greenstork,

Dan is right.

I posted a message at avsforums to the director of marketing of TWC in Coumbia, SC which is one of the places that has implemented SDV. If you go to their site you will see that Universal HD is NOT AVAILABLE TO CABLECARD USERS! This is because it is a switched channel and CableCard is unidirectional.

The Series 3 is a cablecard 1.0 device.


----------



## mfogarty5 (Apr 27, 2006)

The TWC site

https://www.twcsc.com/

My post to Diana at TWCSC.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7956765&&#post7956765

She acknowledged my email, but has not responded.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

weldon said:


> Yes, but the PDF refers to both the existing iGuide service (on Motorola boxes) and TiVo-branded DVR's. While I don't think there will be new hardware myself, that interpretation is still open to speculation.


Not really, since TiVo has stated bluntly that it will be a software update to existing Comcast DVRs. Repeatedly. They had one in the back room at CES2006, and in quarterly conference calls they've talked about how the Comcast deal will work. It has always been stated that it will be a software update to Motorola DVRs and not new HW.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

greenstork said:


> But the CES reports (below) claimed that it would support CC 2.0. Is this a misrepresentation? Is it really something in between 1.0 and 2.0 that doesn't do upstream? I understood 2.0 to be bi-directional.


Almost all of those reports stem from my original report on TiVoLovers.com, in which I said it supported 2.0.

I was incorrect and later corrected my statement. It stemmed from confusion and miscommunication in the TiVo booth. I asked if the S3 would support CC2.0 and was told 'yes'.

I was thinking 'support' as in full support - bidirectional communication, etc.

The person I was speaking to was thinking support in that if you stuck a CC2.0 in the S3 it would work - but only because the CC2.0 spec is backwards compatible and works as 1.0 in a 1.0 device, like the S3.

There is a intermediate standard - 1.0+Multistream, aka '1.5', which will work in the S3 as well. It supports Multistream. That contributed to the confusion, because 'Multistream' is often associated with 2.0 - but it is available without 2.0.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> While I understand your skepticism, I can guarantee you that I'm right on this. All of those articles you read about the Series 3 were taken from one report that came from CES about the Series 3 written by our own Megazone. He mistakenly listed the Multi-Stream CableCARD support as being CableCARD 2.0 and everyone just ran with it.


Yep, and it is the miscommunication that won't die.


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

megazone said:


> Not really, since TiVo has stated bluntly that it will be a software update to existing Comcast DVRs. Repeatedly. They had one in the back room at CES2006, and in quarterly conference calls they've talked about how the Comcast deal will work. It has always been stated that it will be a software update to Motorola DVRs and not new HW.


When you were at CES, did you happen to see this demonstration?

http://www.cmcsk.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=147565&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=800562&highlight=panasonic


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

Bierboy said:


> What I'm saying is that for me (and I'm sure many others) the S3 will work great. I pick up six OTA HD channels and have expanded basic cable. To have a dual tuner HD TiVo for my OTA and cable reception is worth the money to me. I do not (and will never) pay extra for cable HD channels or other "premium" fare. So, for those of us who have this setup, the S3 will work just great regardless of the status of SDV. Perhaps for you it won't, but to simply say that "...the S3 could be screwed before its even shipped" is just that....way too simple a statement.


Just had to second this. It will be disappointing if S3 can't handle all the same channels the cable DVR can, but for me and many others it won't make a difference, since we use OTA and expanded basic only.

I want this S3 now.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

MickeS said:


> Just had to second this. It will be disappointing if S3 can't handle all the same channels the cable DVR can, but for me and many others it won't make a difference, since we use OTA and expanded basic only.


 I guess you and these others are not big sports fans then. Personally I would find it difficult to do without ESPNHD (especially now with Monday Night Football), TNTHD and a couple of other channels that have HD sports not available OTA. Watching SD versions of those channels for sports just doesn't cut it anymore.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

moyekj said:


> I guess you and these others are not big sports fans then. Personally I would find it difficult to do without ESPNHD (especially now with Monday Night Football), TNTHD and a couple of other channels that have HD sports not available OTA. Watching SD versions of those channels for sports just doesn't cut it anymore.


Watching SD versions of _anything_ doesn't cut it anymore 

I'm glad to hear it's in beta testing, but I want to see it in the stores - and soon!


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

cherry ghost said:


> When you were at CES, did you happen to see this demonstration?
> 
> http://www.cmcsk.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=147565&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=800562&highlight=panasonic


Unfortunately no, I didn't catch it.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

moyekj said:


> I guess you and these others are not big sports fans then. Personally I would find it difficult to do without ESPNHD (especially now with Monday Night Football), TNTHD and a couple of other channels that have HD sports not available OTA. Watching SD versions of those channels for sports just doesn't cut it anymore.


I am a big sports fan, but not to the exclusion of other network programming. Network HD sports will fill my plate just fine for the near and medium future. But I also enjoy other network HD programming, too. I understand once you've watched sports in HD it's tough to watch it in SD (I suffer with the Cubs on SD WGN and SD Comcast here 150 miles west of Chicago). I just refuse to cough up the extra money to watch ESPN or TNT HD. I don't mind paying the monthly TiVo fee.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

SurfPine said:


> I know someone will try and question my comments with their "industry" knowledge (not directed at you dt_dc as I enjoy reading your information), please feel free. I do want to point out, as it is mentioned in the ct-magazine link, that SDV efforts are for the channels that don't get constant use. I know dt_dc was trying to create an example and the example does make sense to explain a "fall-back" type scenario. But, ESPN would not be considered a channel that would/should make the SDV lineup (I do believe dt_dc believes this as well). SDV does not make sense for any channels that are constantly being viewed. Why would you potentially spend the money to purchase new equipment and realign 100% used channels to put them in a SDV line-up and then never see that channel switched out?
> 
> In the article it is stated that SDV is expected to be used for the niche channels, the channels that do not have someone viewing them constantly. This would allow for an increase of channel line-ups as well to better compete with satellite.


I specifically used ESPN for the example becuase it's one of the few channels that simulcast the same content on their HD and SD channels.

However, as to SDV only making sense for "niche" channels. Well ...

My personal belief is that exactly what (and how many) channels to switch (and not switch) depends on the particulars of a given cable plant _and_ other initiatives that the cable plant (and company) are persuing.

And, it very well may make sense to use SDV for ESPN-SD (digital) and ESPN-HD (digital) ... my two examples above.

Take a cable plant with 150 homes per node, 35% digital penetration, and 3% HD penetration. Heck, there's very few people who even _subscribe_ to ESPN-SD (digital) and ESPN-HD (digital) in a given service group. Now lets say they've deployed some other unicast / narrowcast services ... for example, ESPN-On Demand and Start Over ... so that of that small number that actually subs to ESPN-SD (digital) and ESPN-HD (digital) ... they may very well be watching ESPN via other (non-broadcast) methods anyway.

You still think this cable plant is going to see anywhere near 100% utilization of ESPN-SD (digital) and especially ESPN-HD (digital) in a given service group? No way.

On top of that, lets say the cable plant has prioritized narrowcast advertising services as an initiative. Very similar to SDV, except that you also then have the ability to insert (unique) advertising for each service group (or even for a particular household if you go down the unicast path) ...

Now, which channel is more likely to get higher narrowcast advertising rates ... ESPN or SCNHO (SomeChannelNobodyhasHeardOf)?

For such a cable plant ... I would say it would make alot of sense to use SDV with ESPN-SD (digital) and ESPN-HD (digital) ... _especially_ while they're still broadcasting ESPN-SD (analog) as a fallback (for UDCPs and in case of channel blocking). When they drop ESPN-SD (analog) ... it may make sense to go to broadcast for ESPN-SD (digital), but untill then ... switch away. In fact, it would probably make sense for them to use SDV on as many channels as possible.

OTOH, a cable plant with 1000 homes per node, 65% digital penetration, 10% HD penetration, 10% CableCard penetration, and a focus on buiness services ... well, for them it might very well make more sense to _not_ switch ESPN and continue using broadcast. It would probably make sense for them to look critically at usage patterns and only use SDV on a few, niche channels (but specifically channels that some subs would consider "must haves").

These are the things cable network engineers get paid to figure out.

I know CW here is that "SDV will only be used with niche channels", but no, I do not think that is _always_ the case.

SDV is certainly intended to allow for adding more (nich channels, VOD content, broadband speed, HD content, whatever) ... but exactly _how_ it will be used is still a bit up in the air. Very similar to "digital cable" and "HFC networks" back in the 90's.

BTW, in the article it is two _vendors_ ... not network engineers ... not industry analysts ... two _vendors_ (C-COR and OpenTV) who are quoted as saying they expect to see SDV used only for niche channels. Well, that makes alot of sense with their particular product offerings and focus. OTOH, you can also find vendors (like BigBand) who will happily explain the benefits of switching as many channels as possible and why eventually SDV will be used for all digital channels (which, again, makes sense with their particular product offerings and focus).

Vendors are in the process of trying to sell their particular flavor / view of SDV ...

Cable is still in the process of evaluating and figuring out what makes the most sense (for them). BTW, there's alot of $$$ to be made (and lost) in accurately predicting exactly what / when / how (and even if) cable is going to implement SDV (and other initiaves) so ... lots of people are trying to guess. Anyone who truly "knows" exactly what the end-game will be should be able to retire to their own private island in 5 years.

I will just add that both Time Warner and Cox have both said that they plan on using SDV for digital simulcast channels (which would include digital ESPN-SD and alot of other very popular non-niche channels).


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

The simple solution to the problem would be for the FCC to require Cable Co STB's to use a cable card and be certified in the same way as Competitors equipment. Then at least TW and Cox couldn't implement anything that wasn't in the standard and available for Tivo to copy. 

I thought I'd read somewhere that this was going to happen, but I can't find a reference now so I may have been imagining it.


----------



## kjnorman (Jun 21, 2002)

What I do not understand is if CC2.0 is so far off, how can Samsung announce a TV that is fully OCAP compliant and features a 2 way cablecard for VOD and interaction.

From AVS



> Samsung is also making progress in the cable set-top space as well. The Korean company has developed an OCAP-compliant HD cable set-top, the SMT-H3050, that Time Warner Cable and Brighthouse Networks are expected to deploy in select markets this fall. At retail, Samsung will also be introducing a 56-inch DLP 1080p HDTV set that will be fully OCAP-compliant and will feature a two-way CableCARD to enable video-on-demand and other interactive features.


So is the deal that 2 way cablecards exist, but that they are not CC2.0 compliant, rather they conform to OCAP (which I do not fully understand by the way) which is something else entirely?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

petew said:


> The simple solution to the problem would be for the FCC to require Cable Co STB's to use a cable card and be certified in the same way as Competitors equipment. Then at least TW and Cox couldn't implement anything that wasn't in the standard and available for Tivo to copy.
> 
> I thought I'd read somewhere that this was going to happen, but I can't find a reference now so I may have been imagining it.


there was an FCC mandate for cable companies to use teh cable card standard in new STBs. The deadline has been pushed back from lobbying by cable cos. TiVo was opposing it until they got the Comcast deal and then TiVo went quiet on it.
SInce cable card 2 is stalled in dispute who knows when

BUT
you imply a loophole in that they can use the cablecard BUT also have the STB do bidirectional stuff in whatever way they want which keeps them able to do things like Switched digital without needing anything in the standard about it unless they are mandated to.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

petew said:


> I thought I'd read somewhere that this was going to happen, but I can't find a reference now so I may have been imagining it.


It was supose to happen this year, but the cable companies got an extension to next June because CableCARD 2.0 is not finished yet. And even if CableCARD 2.0 does get finished by then, they'll probably get another extension to give them time to impliment it. So I wouldn't expect this to happen until at least 2008.

Dan


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

kjnorman said:


> What I do not understand is if CC2.0 is so far off, how can Samsung announce a TV that is fully OCAP compliant and features a 2 way cablecard for VOD and interaction.
> 
> From AVS
> 
> So is the deal that 2 way cablecards exist, but that they are not CC2.0 compliant, rather they conform to OCAP (which I do not fully understand by the way) which is something else entirely?


The deal is the hardware part of the spec is fixed, software for a "universal" bi-directional system is in the air.

Apparently the sotware side of the set is fixed for that one provider, or set up the way the cablecos want it.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

petew said:


> The simple solution to the problem would be for the FCC to require Cable Co STB's to use a cable card and be certified in the same way as Competitors equipment. Then at least TW and Cox couldn't implement anything that wasn't in the standard and available for Tivo to copy.


I think the way the MSOs were getting around this was to force language into the spec that said if you wanted bi-directional cable card you needed to fully support OCAP which means the MSO can overrride the user interface application. Clearly this would apply to both STBs and any retail CE equipment. Same certification right? CEs have to yield control over to the MSOs just like the MSOs have to yield control over to the MSOs... Oh wait... Seems to be a better deal for the MSOs that are yielding control right back to themselves.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The OCAP spec has been finished for a while, so a device with CableCARD 2.0 compliant hardware and OCAP is possible. Although currently no cable providers that I know of have deployed OCAP, so this will only be useful if the MSOs start deploying OCAP.

As for what OCAP is... It's basically a stadard way for the cable company to load their guide software onto your hardware. That way you can use their interactive serivices on 3rd party hardware. Unfortunately it's an all or nothing approach, so those devices are forced to use whatever UI the cable company chooses to access those feature. (this is why it's not good for devices like a TiVo)

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Couldn't TIVO have provided an OCAP interface within the S3 that let the cable companies download their own guide software into the unit and also kept the TIVO guide available in the unit separately? This might have been the best of both worlds as it might have opened up VOD and other services on the S3? Or, am I not seeing the picture clearly?

I guess what I'm asking is couldn't TIVO have made a hybrid S3 which let the cable company put their UI on it and also (even in some underhanded way) allowed the S3 to use the standard TIVO UI on the same box?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yes that would be possible. But the CableCARD 2.0 hardware spec didn't get issued until this April, so if they waited for that the S3 would probably be another year away. They had to do something, so they took advantage of what was available at the time.

Dan


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

So OCAP might be cool one day, if the cable co's can get their head out of their a$$es long enough to realize that they have a lousy UI, and to eventually model it after TiVo. It sounds as if TiVo will never make use of OCAP/DCAS because they would then be locked in to the cable co's UI, guides, etc. 

It's a shame really, TiVo has the software, hardware, and brand, but the cable co's are holding all of the cards (content). TiVo is, in essence, beholden to them. If they don't like CC 2.0, and instead favor OCAP, it's just tough luck TiVo. There's got to be enough money and brand loyalty there for everyone, sheesh.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The cable industry is pushing hard for OCAP, but I think ultimately they're going to lose. Forcing all CableCARD 2.0 devices to have the same UI creates no competitive edge in the market and thus gives CE manufacturers no incentive to develope CableCARD 2.0 devices. OCAP is great for TV manufacturers who just want an easy way to add a guide to their system. But for companies that make inovative products like TiVo it's useless and would completely kill any advantage they have. (why would anyone buy a TiVo when they could rent a DVR from the cable company that does EXACTLY the same thing?)

Dan


----------



## mahk (Mar 1, 2005)

Is it possible for Tivo to release the S3 with CC 1.5 support and then once the CC 2.0 spec is finalized, do some kind of software update that makes the S3 compliant?

Or is it more of a hardware thing?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It's a hardware thing.

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

It's always possible that the wait for a TIVO series 4 might not be as long as the wait between the TIVO series 2 and the TIVO series 3. Next year, perhaps TIVO will issue the a TIVO series 3.5 (OCAP compatible) model - who knows? It's also possible that the FCC will get involved, find some nerve and dictate to the cable companies that they can only use SDV for VOD services and what not and that all broadcast and cable channels must not use SDV. Then again maybe Jesus will return on clouds of glory long before any of that can occur as well. Time will tell...


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> It's a hardware thing.
> 
> Dan


Given the number of times you answer this question, an FAQ may be in order.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

So what is Microsoft's stance on this whole SDV issue? For a long time they have touted Windows Vista will be CableLabs certified for CableCard but doesn't sound like CC 2.0 devices will be available for a long time so won't the SDV issue affect them as well? They certainly have a lot more might to throw at the FCC than Tivo does on this issue. Granted in PCs it would probably be much easier to add the necessary hardware/software for 2-way compared to the S3 but still... Then again given Microsoft's anti-competitive history it would be 2-faced for them to call out the cable industry for doing the same.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

moyekj said:


> . . . Then again given Microsoft's anti-competitive history it would be 2-faced for them to call out the cable industry for doing the same.


Actually, that would just be business.


----------



## PAP (Oct 6, 1999)

All this is too overtechnical for me to get my hands around, but from what I'm reading I'm understanding that basically the S3 is outdated before it's even released??

Basically for those of us who want real tivo interface but can't get OTA signal and therefore need either cable or sat. we're totally screwed.

Do I have that about right?


----------



## shady (May 31, 2002)

PAP said:


> Do I have that about right?


No


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

PAP said:


> Do I have that about right?


No, not even close.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

moyekj said:


> So what is Microsoft's stance on this whole SDV issue? For a long time they have touted Windows Vista will be CableLabs certified for CableCard but doesn't sound like CC 2.0 devices will be available for a long time so won't the SDV issue affect them as well?


Vista *is* CableLabs certified - for CC1.0, just like TiVo. Yes, SDV would affect Vista just like the S3. Not only would it require new hardware but it'd have to be recertified too - just like TiVo.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

PAP said:


> All this is too overtechnical for me to get my hands around, but from what I'm reading I'm understanding that basically the S3 is outdated before it's even released??
> 
> Basically for those of us who want real tivo interface but can't get OTA signal and therefore need either cable or sat. we're totally screwed.
> 
> Do I have that about right?


Nope. The Series 3 TiVo is state of the art and exploits the best technology that is available at this point in time. Unfortunately one cable company, TWC, is testing a new technology, SDV, in 3 markets (TC, SC and San Diego) which breaks ALL CableCARD equipment. At this time there is NOTHING that TiVo, or any other CE manufacturer, can do to work around that technology because a standard for doing so does not exist. So all they can do is work with what is available for now or wait for the CableCARD 2.0 standard to be completed and deployed, which according to industry insiders could be 2+ years away.

So if you want to record digital cable and HD, and you don't want to use your cable companies DVR the Series 3 TiVo is your ONLY option. And for the majority of people, who are not in those TWC markets, it will be a viable alternative.

Dan


----------



## weathertop (Jan 24, 2003)

Isn't AT&T's U-Verse (aka Lightspeed) also a SDV product?

If so, their nationwide deployment is ramping up....


----------



## Deacon West (Apr 16, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> So if you want to record digital cable and HD, and you don't want to use your cable companies DVR the Series 3 TiVo is your ONLY option. And for the majority of people, who are not in those TWC markets, it will be a viable alternative.
> 
> Dan


A related question. I live in a Comcast area, so wouldn't it be smarter for me to try the Comcast TiVo first? Even if it isn't a TiVo box, I could live with the software I love and HD with no upfront cost and a smaller or at least similar monthly charge.
and yes, I do realize that they may not be introduced at the exact same time, but I think they will probably be introduced within a few weeks of each other. If this is true, isn't TiVo worried about marketing cannibalism of the S3 from the Comcast TiVo? Am I missing something, or does this seem logical to my TCF brothers and sisters?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

wj777 said:


> A related question. I live in a Comcast area, so wouldn't it be smarter for me to try the Comcast TiVo first? Even if it isn't a TiVo box, I could live with the software I love and HD with no upfront cost and a smaller or at least similar monthly charge.
> and yes, I do realize that they may not be introduced at the exact same time, but I think they will probably be introduced within a few weeks of each other. If this is true, isn't TiVo worried about marketing cannibalism of the S3 from the Comcast TiVo? Am I missing something, or does this seem logical to my TCF brothers and sisters?


As for them being released around the same time, I wouldn't count on it. Everything I've seen indicates Comcast/Tivo is end of this year/beginning of next, Series 3 in the next couple of months.

As for "Tivo cannibalism", I'm sure Tivo expects to lose some standalone customers (higher profit) to ComcasTivo (much lower profilt), but, as they saying goes, they hope to make it up in volume.

Those customers using Tivo on a Comcast box for HD are going to be disappointed, given the small (120GB or 160GB) hard drive sizes on the Motorola DVRs.

Tivo has shown that they don't know how (or can't afford) to market to those that don't already understand what Tivo is - hopefully Comcast will do a better job.

I'm going to have both, but expect that I'll drop the Comcast box fairly quickly. But then I'm already prepared to buy the stand-alone Tivo Series 3. If cost is a significant consideration, you may want to wait for the Comcast offering.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

wj777 said:


> A related question. I live in a Comcast area, so wouldn't it be smarter for me to try the Comcast TiVo first? Even if it isn't a TiVo box, I could live with the software I love and HD with no upfront cost and a smaller or at least similar monthly charge.
> and yes, I do realize that they may not be introduced at the exact same time, but I think they will probably be introduced within a few weeks of each other. If this is true, isn't TiVo worried about marketing cannibalism of the S3 from the Comcast TiVo? Am I missing something, or does this seem logical to my TCF brothers and sisters?


I am in a similar situation being a comcast customer, however I think the Series 3 is going to be hands down a much better product then the comcast tivo. I think they are really aiming at two different markets here. The comcast Tivo is aimed at the regular joe cable use. Personally the only way I would get the comcast option is if it came out first to hold me off until the Series 3. However after calling comcast the other day they basicly said October/November it will be out. So basiclly...same time frame that we are expecting the Series 3 if not later. Some people are still thinking it will happen but I do not think we will see the following options on the comcast box:
-Multi Room Viewing
-Many of the Home Media Options
-Support for Tivo desktop and file transfers

Now who is to say that all those things will be supported on the Series 3, we still dont know that either. Basicly I would think most people who are enough of Tivo geeks to be on this board are also the same target market for the Series 3 which will be a high end devise of the upmost quality. I have a feeling once both are out and the features are all out there everyone will see that the Series 3 will stand much higher then the cable box option. I also just dont see Tivo selling them selves out of sales opportunities by having a supperior cable box option.


----------



## Deacon West (Apr 16, 2006)

Thanks for two great and quick responses. One of the many reasons in my short time here I have become a big fan of the TCF. Another item occured to me - wouldn't having the Comcast TiVo eliminate any uncertainty about the SDV issues that have been discussed at great length in these forums? I know that TW and Cox are the big players in Switched Digital Video, but I know that Comcast will be watching. Yes, I would hate to lose TTG and HMO, but unfortunately, even though I'm a TiVo afficianado, cost is a constraint.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

weathertop said:


> Isn't AT&T's U-Verse (aka Lightspeed) also a SDV product?
> 
> If so, their nationwide deployment is ramping up....


It depnds how you look at it, technically it's IPTV not cable. Apart from the video signal coming out of the STB the entire system is an IP network and shares nothing in common with cable TV. However looking at a high level it could be considered the ultimate in SDV with only the few channels being watched delivered to the premises.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Cable is still in the process of evaluating and figuring out what makes the most sense (for them). BTW, there's alot of $$$ to be made (and lost) in accurately predicting exactly what / when / how (and even if) cable is going to implement SDV (and other initiaves) so ... lots of people are trying to guess. Anyone who truly "knows" exactly what the end-game will be should be able to retire to their own private island in 5 years.
> 
> I will just add that both Time Warner and Cox have both said that they plan on using SDV for digital simulcast channels (which would include digital ESPN-SD and alot of other very popular non-niche channels).


The "most" sense for us is to eliminate all analog channels besides limited (lifeline,whatever you want to call it), and go all digital. That is why a lot of cable systems are trying to roll out ADS so that they can get people boxes and get those people on the digital versions of analog channels before going AD. ADS also leads to a better PQ as well... especially on HD sets.


----------



## weathertop (Jan 24, 2003)

petew said:


> However looking at a high level it could be considered the ultimate in SDV with only the few channels being watched delivered to the premises.


Okay. Makes sense.

And after reading earlier posts in other threads, I also now understand that the speculation is that the Series 3 will likely work with AT&T's U-Verse service, provided that AT&T's STB can be controlled with IR blasters.

Thanks.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

weathertop said:


> Okay. Makes sense.
> 
> And after reading earlier posts in other threads, I also now understand that the speculation is that the Series 3 will likely work with AT&T's U-Verse service, provided that AT&T's STB can be controlled with IR blasters.
> 
> Thanks.


The S3 does not have IR Blasters and has no way of recording HD from an external STB.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

As Sully points out the S3 won't work with a U-Verses STB, however it does contain all the hardware necessary to recieve IPTV directly if ATT and Tivo were to develop software for it. 

A Series 2 would work well with U-Verse for SD programming.


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

This isn't my area of expertise but the DVR appeared interesting. Has this already been hashed over?

(from *SkyRETAILER*; "C-Band service still has 144,587 subs.")

*Motorola's Digital Set-Top Family*

_Looking to improve the digital video recorder (DVR) as a multimedia hub for consumers to access and share video recordings, video-on-demand (VOD) content, pictures and music, Motorola is debuting the company's new QIP family of products.

The new Motorola QIP6416 is a high-definition (HD) capable, dual- tuner DVR with watch-and-record capability; the Motorola QIP6200 is a single-HD tuner set-top; and the Motorola QIP2500 is a single- tuner standard-definition model.

"This latest Motorola digital video innovation provides exceptional flexibility for service providers and consumers," said John Burke, corporate VP and GM of Motorola's digital video solutions. "Service providers gain flexibility in the way they can deliver digital video to the home, and consumers can access both purchased video content and personal media such as photos and music through the set-top."

According to the company, these three new Motorola set-tops are the first to include built-in home media networking capabilities. Using Multimedia over Coaxial Alliance (MoCA) technology, the Motorola QIP set-tops can create a multimedia network using the existing coaxial cable commonly found in the home. This network is capable of transporting high-definition video, high-quality digital voice, and high-speed data to televisions, DVR, game consoles, wireless access points, and home computers.

The products are also unique because they support both the traditional quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) method used by many cable operators and video-over-IP.

Motorola said Verizon is the first customer to offer its QIP series set-tops as part of the Veizon FiOS TV service. In a previous agreement, Motorola is also providing video network infrastructure and video consumer premises equipment to Verizon's new fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) network._


----------



## TexasAg (Apr 2, 2006)

This is the DVR we use for Fios. It is horrible compared to my DirecTV Tivo unit.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

weathertop said:


> Isn't AT&T's U-Verse (aka Lightspeed) also a SDV product?


AT&T is using fiber-to-the-node and IPTV via VDSL into the home. AT&T was calling this "SDV" long before cable started using the term.


petew said:


> As Sully points out the S3 won't work with a U-Verses STB, however it does contain all the hardware necessary to recieve IPTV directly if ATT and Tivo were to develop software for it.


Without hardware based QoS it wouldn't ever be able to do it well.


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

dt_dc said:


> Without hardware based QoS it wouldn't ever be able to do it well.


Would the reciever need hardware QoS? I can understand that the VDSL Modem/router needs QoS support, but the U-verse installation comes with an integrated modem/router with the standard ATT supplied STB's connected to it via ethernet.

FWIW The standard u-verse package is 1 DVR and 2 STB's. All three units are identical except for the disk drive which is only installed in the DVR.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

petew said:


> Would the reciever need hardware QoS?


I would think that to support IPTV (well) you would want QoS all the way to the STB (certainly including the Gateway).

That being said ... yes ... cost/benefit ... you could probably get away with best effort from the Gateway to the STB(s).

Interesting to know what they (AT&T) are doing.

Verizon has QoS _available_ on their STBs for their IPTV implementation (via MoCA) although ... if they're actually using it ... or if they're just using MoCA as a bridge between CAT5 and coax ... couldn't tell ya. Verizon is only using IPTV for VOD.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

dt_dc said:


> I would think that to support IPTV (well) you would want QoS all the way to the STB (certainly including the Gateway).
> 
> That being said ... yes ... cost/benefit ... you could probably get away with best effort from the Gateway to the STB(s).
> 
> ...


Nah no QOS necessary. You have a buffer, even on a non-dvr. It ques up a minute or two of programming to account for drop outs.

On a DVR you could have as much buffer as you want. 5-10 minutes...

Kind of irritating to channel surf, but no problem for people used to time shifting..


----------



## andydumi (Jun 26, 2006)

I just got digital cable with Comcast in Nashville, and the installer guy said they have just had training for the upcoming Tivo software Motorola boxes, and they ought to be out as early as September if everything goes well. They were also informed of new upcoming training to work on some Tivo Series3 and learn how to do the two cablecard intalls and play with the menus and whatnot.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

andydumi said:


> I just got digital cable with Comcast in Nashville, and the installer guy said they have just had training for the upcoming Tivo software Motorola boxes, and they ought to be out as early as September if everything goes well. They were also informed of new upcoming training to work on some Tivo Series3 and learn how to do the two cablecard intalls and play with the menus and whatnot.


That would seem to indicate its release later than the Moto.


----------



## SCSIRAID (Feb 2, 2003)

Several of us have enquired of TWC Raleigh as to support for a pair of cablecards for Tivo series 3. 

They say they dont support Tivo of any kind and will only install cablecards in TV's.

The powers that be at Tivo may want to know about this......

TRACKING NUMBER: 88193
Inquiry: Dear TWC,

I am writing to determine TWC's position on the upcoming release of Tivo system 3 DVR's using cablecard technology. I intend to purchase a Series 3 when its available due to its superior functionality. However, I was told that TWC has indicated that it will not allow its customers to use these products and TWC will not install CableCards in them. I would like to understand this situation and determine the truth. 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Response:Thank you for contacting Time Warner Cable of Raleigh. Currently Time Warner Cable does not support or install service to TIVO devices of any kind. We are only able to install Cable Cards to Cable Card slot ready television sets.


----------



## TexasAg (Apr 2, 2006)

SCSIRAID said:


> Several of us have enquired of TWC Raleigh as to support for a pair of cablecards for Tivo series 3.
> 
> They say they dont support Tivo of any kind and will only install cablecards in TV's.
> 
> ...


You know, technically they are right. They do not "currently" install CableCards in Tivos. Sounds like they may be trying to discourage people from buying the S3 when it is released.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

SCSIRAID said:


> Several of us have enquired of TWC Raleigh as to support for a pair of cablecards for Tivo series 3.
> 
> They say they dont support Tivo of any kind and will only install cablecards in TV's.


The Series 3 TiVo is approved by CableLabs, which means they are required to install CableCARDs in them regardless of what they say. If they give you any crap just have them check the CableLabs aprroved list for TCD648250A. That's the model number for the Series 3.

Dan


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> The Series 3 TiVo is approved by CableLabs, which means they are required to install CableCARDs in them regardless of what they say. If they give you any crap just have them check the CableLabs aprroved list for TCD648250A. That's the model number for the Series 3.


Email them the PDF, or pointer thereto, for the FCC filing which includes the letter TiVo sent to cable companies.

They're required to install the CableCARDs in any approved host device, like it or not.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

SCSIRAID said:


> Several of us have enquired of TWC Raleigh as to support for a pair of cablecards for Tivo series 3.
> 
> They say they dont support Tivo of any kind and will only install cablecards in TV's.


As others have said, they CAN'T refuse to provide you CableCARDs for use in your Series 3 Tivo. They may choose not to support installation (but it will be simple enough for most people to do themselves).

I'm sure there will be a number of threads here when the S3 is released with similar stories - we'll just have to stay on top of things here at TCF and make sure S3 (and potential S3) customers know the facts and don't get swayed by cable company FUD.

We may just have to organize email campaigns to those MSOs that are providing their customers with inaccurate or misleading information. 

Nice to see how they sidestepped your question, though it's just as likely that they didn't update their "Cable Card" use template.

(You may want to edit your post to remove your email address)


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

I hope Tivo includes some sort of document (preferably, on yellow or red paper) with the Series3 that reiterates the fact that the cable company is required by law to support their box with Cablecard. Otherwise, what you're going to have is CSRs at cable comapnies saying "sorry, we don't support Cablecards with Tivo" and "return that Tivo to the store and get our DVR." Without any documentation or information to the contrary in the box, the typical customer will have no recourse, or they won't know what action to take.

If I were Tivo, I would include some document that the customer can read to (or hand to) their cable company in the event they get such a response. That way, the customer knows how to respond, i.e. "Let me read you this document. It states that the Series3 Tivo is a CableLabs certified device...and under FCC...you are required to provide a CableCard...and that the failure to do so can result in..."


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

TexasAg said:


> You know, technically they are right. They do not "currently" install CableCards in Tivos.


That's actually how I read the response. They do not currently install them , since there is no TiVo to install them in. I don't see anything sinister in that reply.


----------



## pkscout (Jan 11, 2003)

MickeS said:


> That's actually how I read the response. They do not currently install them , since there is no TiVo to install them in. I don't see anything sinister in that reply.


You must not live in a TWC area. *EVERYTHING* TWC says should be taken as a sinister reply. In case there is any doubt, this is the same company that makes it almost impossible to cancel an AOL account. I think they've been training all the TWC customer service reps on the same tactics.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

bkdtv said:


> If I were Tivo, I would include some document that the customer can read to (or hand to) their cable company in the event they get such a response. That way, the customer knows how to respond, i.e. "Let me read you this document. It states that the Series3 Tivo is a CableLabs certified device...and under FCC...you are required to provide a CableCard...and that the failure to do so can result in..."


That is an EXCELLENT idea! They are already going to have a "Instructions for the CableCARD installer" sheet - this would be a great thing to put on the other side.

If there isn't time to get it in the box, perhaps TivoPony and marketing can get one on the web site and reference it from tivo.com/cablecard.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

In a case where someone lives in a TWC territory (as I will shortly), I think the best course of action is to hold off on the series 3 until it works with SDV. If we hold off, it puts the pressure on TIVO to negotiate with TWC in order to produce a series 3 which works with SDV over cablecard.


----------



## TexasAg (Apr 2, 2006)

MickeS said:


> That's actually how I read the response. They do not currently install them , since there is no TiVo to install them in. I don't see anything sinister in that reply.


I disagree. I think they came up with a technically correct (and therefore not fraudulent) answer that would discourage their customers from buying an S3. I bet if a customer dropped the "you are required under FCC rules to support CableCards in certified devices" line, they would suddenly realize they don't do it now but will in the future when the S3 is released.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> In a case where someone lives in a TWC territory (as I will shortly), I think the best course of action is to hold off on the series 3 until it works with SDV. If we hold off, it puts the pressure on TIVO to negotiate with TWC in order to produce a series 3 which works with SDV over cablecard.


Ain't gonna happen...you'll be waiting a long time....


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Well - there is certainly no point at all in buying a TIVO series 3 if you live in a Time-Warner cable area then. Also, seeing that Time-Warner is the second largest cable company in the world, you would think that TIVO would be interested in working with TWC on some level in order to get us TIVO service as Time-Warner customers. (So far, it seems I'm stuck with DirecTV.)


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

bkdtv said:


> I hope Tivo includes some sort of document (preferably, on yellow or red paper) with the Series3 that reiterates the fact that the cable company is required by law to support their box with Cablecard. Otherwise, what you're going to have is CSRs at cable comapnies saying "sorry, we don't support Cablecards with Tivo" and "return that Tivo to the store and get our DVR." Without any documentation or information to the contrary in the box, the typical customer will have no recourse, or they won't know what action to take.
> 
> If I were Tivo, I would include some document that the customer can read to (or hand to) their cable company in the event they get such a response. That way, the customer knows how to respond, i.e. "Let me read you this document. It states that the Series3 Tivo is a CableLabs certified device...and under FCC...you are required to provide a CableCard...and that the failure to do so can result in..."


A piece of paper in the TiVo box won't change what the reps at the cable company say. The law may say that the cable company is required to provide them (with the exception of those very small operators that are exculded), but the law doesn't say they have to make it easy.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

BillyT2002 said:


> Well - there is certainly no point at all in buying a TIVO series 3 if you live in a Time-Warner cable area then. Also, seeing that Time-Warner is the second largest cable company in the world, you would think that TIVO would be interested in working with TWC on some level in order to get us TIVO service as Time-Warner customers. (So far, it seems I'm stuck with DirecTV.)


  

I was afraid of this. Comcast in Texas is turning over to Time Warner.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

BillyT2002 said:


> you would think that TIVO would be interested in working with TWC on some level in order to get us TIVO service as Time-Warner customers.


More likely TiVo would petition the FCC... the whole point of CableCARD is breaking the monopoly and allowing non-MSO's the opportunity to enter the market. Of course there's always the possibility TWC could license TiVo software much the way Comcast has. It's probably a cleaner solution and everyone makes a little money.



> I think the best course of action is to hold off on the series 3 until it works with SDV. If we hold off, it puts the pressure on TIVO to negotiate with TWC in order to produce a series 3 which works with SDV over cablecard.


From announcement to delivery, the Comcast Moto TiVo will have taken at least 18 months to develop. Whether via SDV or licensed software, I think you'll be in for a long wait...


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

My guess Dave is that it would take less time for a licensed software solution precisely because TIVO can apply the experience it has already garnered by developing the Comcast box and most likely develop a licensed TWC box slightly faster.

Nevertheless, for now anyone who lives in a TWC area should not be considering the purchase of a TIVO series 3 (as much as I hate to say it) because it will be useless with TWC very soon. TIVO definitely needs to move on this as soon as possible as TWC is the second largest cable provider. (I personally will not be a TWC customer as a result of this - even though they are taking over my area and will stay with DirecTV/NDS until a better solution is available - it's not what I want, but I'm stuck.)

I really wish a TIVO representative would step into some of these TWC and SDV discussions and give those of us who want to be loyal to TIVO some clearer direction about what they might be looking into to resolve the problem.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> A piece of paper in the TiVo box won't change what the reps at the cable company say. The law may say that the cable company is required to provide them (with the exception of those very small operators that are exculded), but the law doesn't say they have to make it easy.


True. But it could help the new TiVo customer know that the rep is wrong and that they should keep pushing to get the cable card. (Or that they should start playing CSR roulette to find someone who is willing to send out a card)

While some customers might still return the S3 rather than deal with the hassle, hopefully it will be fewer that if the S3 owners didn't and something explaining why the cable company is required to provide a cable card.

In other words, the piece of paper won't change what the cable co is saying, but it will give the customer something other that the cable companies word on what the requirements are. 
And knowing is half the battle /GI Joe.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Jonathan_S said:


> True. But it could help the new TiVo customer know that the rep is wrong and that they should keep pushing to get the cable card. (Or that they should start playing CSR roulette to find someone who is willing to send out a card)
> 
> While some customers might still return the S3 rather than deal with the hassle, hopefully it will be fewer that if the S3 owners didn't and something explaining why the cable company is required to provide a cable card.
> 
> ...


It's still going to be a big fight for a lot of peopel no matter what. Cable companies simply do not want you to use anything other than what they provide (and CHARGE for).


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Jonathan_S said:


> True. But it could help the new TiVo customer know that the rep is wrong and that they should keep pushing to get the cable card. (Or that they should start playing CSR roulette to find someone who is willing to send out a card)
> 
> While some customers might still return the S3 rather than deal with the hassle, hopefully it will be fewer that if the S3 owners didn't and something explaining why the cable company is required to provide a cable card.
> 
> ...


Or forget the stupid csr and just tell them you'd like to have your cablecard installed. Don't get into the TiVo, or whatever, explain it to the installer..


----------



## danieljanderson (Nov 19, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> Or forget the stupid csr and just tell them you'd like to have your cablecard installed. Don't get into the TiVo, or whatever, explain it to the installer..


I agree. I'm having a hard time believing that any cable company would "refuse" to activate a CableCard in a TiVo.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

BillyT2002 said:


> In a case where someone lives in a TWC territory (as I will shortly), I think the best course of action is to hold off on the series 3 until it works with SDV. If we hold off, it puts the pressure on TIVO to negotiate with TWC in order to produce a series 3 which works with SDV over cablecard.


That's not even possible! The current CableCARD specification is unidirectional. SDV requires bidirectional communication. And since the CableCARD 2.0 isn't finished yet, and is not likely to be for over a year, there is no way for ANY 3rd party device to support SDV. And until CableCARD 2.0 is finished and deployed the ONLY devices that can support SDV are the ones supplied by cable company.

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Then TIVO should wait and not release the S3 in its current form. Release it later when the details are ironed out for SDV. If it doesn't work with TWC, the second largest cable company in the world, then I'd consider that a big enough problem to halt release. Comcast (the largest) isn't going to sweat it vecause the licensed Comcast TIVO box should be available soon anyway.


----------



## davezatz (Apr 18, 2002)

BillyT2002 said:


> Then TIVO should wait and not release the S3 in its current form. Release it later when the details are ironed out for SDV.


That is funniest thing I've read all day.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Well if they do release it, then TIVO should be sure to include information at every turn that the S3 will not work with TWC systems. It's in their best interest. If enough TWC buy the TIVO S3 (and potentially enter into a limited-term contract with TIVO) only to find out that the S3 cannot work with TWC in the first place - the back lash will be bad for TIVO.


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

BillyT2002 said:


> Well if they do release it, then TIVO should be sure to include information at every turn that the S3 will not work with TWC systems. It's in their best interest. If enough TWC buy the TIVO S3 (and potentially enter into a limited-term contract with TIVO) only to find out that the S3 cannot work with TWC in the first place - the back lash will be bad for TIVO.


You do realize the number of TWC subs that are affected by this are few, right?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The problem is that CableCARD 2.0 could be 2+ years away, and TiVo's customers are demanding an HDTiVo now. Plus, even though TWC is the second largets cable provider in the US, there are still millions of people who don't have TWC and CAN use the S3 without issue. Heck even the majority of TWCs customers can use it, for now, without issue. The ONLY markets currently using SDV are South Carolina, Parts of Texas and San Diego, CA.

While I understand your concern, there is no reason for TiVo to hold back the release when there are millions of potential customers to be had.

I'm sure that once CableCARD 2.0 is released TiVo will come out with a new unit which supports SDV as well as all the other bidirectional stuff. If you're so concerned about it then you can feel free to wait for that. In the mean time I'll be happily using my S3 units. 

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Right now they are few because SDV is only in testing, but I have been told by more than one representative of Time-Warner cable that SDV will be used very soon for all digital channel delivery everywhere within their cable system.


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

The lurking SDV threat has made me decide not to transfer my lifetime, but it won't keep me from buying the unit. If nothing else I can move it to my HDTV that doesn't have a ATSC tuner.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Listen I love TIVO and want nothing more than to switch from DirecTV to TWC with a fully working TIVO S3 to record all the programming I want. What I don't want is to buy a TIVO S3 now (and potentially agree to a 1-year service agreement) and have TWC come in and put all of the digital channels on SDV bandwidth within the same year. WIth the way things are looking now - this is entirely possible. (So, staying with DirecTV for me - as much as I don't really like where DirecTV is headed either - is the only current viable option for me).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

You're kind of screwed either way. DirecTV is switching the majority of it's HDTV programming over to MPEG4, which the HDTiVo does not support. And you live in TWC country which has the always luming threat of going to SDV.

The only solace I can offer is that it is unlawful for TWC to put the HD locals on SDV, so at the very least you'll always be able to record those. And even if they get around that somehow the S3 will work for OTA HD locals just fine.

My hope is that the FCC forces the MSOs to halt deployment of SDV until CableCARD 2.0 is finished. This will do one of two things. Either put a fire under their asses so the get CableCARD 2.0 finished and deployed or make it so CableCARD 1.0 will continue to work for the majority of the country until CableCARD 2.0 is finally finished and deployed.

Dan


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Dan,
Even if FCC forces the delay of SDV until CC 2.0 you are still screwed with an S3.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

BillyT2002 said:


> Right now they are few because SDV is only in testing, but I have been told by more than one representative of Time-Warner cable that SDV will be used very soon for all digital channel delivery everywhere within their cable system.


What about their NEW system(s)?

--says me, living in Adelphia country, about to become TW country


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

cwoody222 - I'm in an Adelphia-owned system in Waterville, ME too. They are being taken over by Time-Warner and I was told by more than one person who works for Time-Warner that all digital programming will be available only using SDV bandwidth and very soon.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

davezatz said:


> That is funniest thing I've read all day.


I agree....see post #173...


BillyT2002 said:


> Right now they are few because SDV is only in testing, but I have been told by more than one representative of Time-Warner cable that SDV will be used very soon for all digital channel delivery everywhere within their cable system.


And we know how reliable THEY are....


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

ah30k said:


> Dan,
> Even if FCC forces the delay of SDV until CC 2.0 you are still screwed with an S3.


If I understand your incomplete arguement correctly, which is the FCC could only be delaying the inevitible, I have to disagree since the S3 will work with digital locals on cable, analog cable, OTA ATSC, and any non SDV digital channels.

Some wild assumptions are being made here (not specifically from ah30k) that all digital channels will be on SDV. That really doesn't make too much sense since some portion of those channels are popular enough that moving them to SDV will not provide a bandwidth benefit. Sure some HD channels are on SDV right now, but when they are popular enough they will be moved off and some other set of lower interest channels will take its place.



cwoody222 said:


> What about their NEW system(s)?
> 
> --says me, living in Adelphia country, about to become TW country


Honestly I wouldn't expect to see changes happening any time soon. I speculated that in North East Ohio where TWC, Adelphia, and Comcast reside that TWC would make all these systems equal to lessen support issues. It really would be costly to do something like that, not to mention time consuming to replace an entire cable TV distribution system. So, expect changes, but most will not be any time soon.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> ....The only solace I can offer is that it is unlawful for TWC to put the HD locals on SDV, so at the very least you'll always be able to record those. And even if they get around that somehow the S3 will work for OTA HD locals just fine....


EXACTLY!!....and for folks like me, that will ALWAYS be enough to buy the S3!


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

ah30k said:


> ...Even if FCC forces the delay of SDV until CC 2.0 you are still screwed with an S3.


That's the second funniest post I've read today.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

BillyT2002 said:


> Right now they are few because SDV is only in testing, but I have been told by more than one representative of Time-Warner cable that SDV will be used very soon for all digital channel delivery everywhere within their cable system.


According to Cable Digital News, Time Warner plans for "extending switched digital's reach to several more undisclosed cable systems by the end of this year (2006) and most of its other markets in 2007".

http://www.cabledigitalnews.com/weekly_analysis/06222006_02.html


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

ah30k said:


> Dan,
> Even if FCC forces the delay of SDV until CC 2.0 you are still screwed with an S3.


I know that, but at least there will be something that 3rd parties can use to make SDV compatible devices. As it stands now the ONLY way to get SDV channels is to use the cable companies leased box. That defeates the whole purpose of the CableCARD mandate.

Dan


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> EXACTLY!!....and for folks like me, that will ALWAYS be enough to buy the S3!


The hardware in the S3 for decoding the cable card signals drives up the cost of the S3. So basically you are going to be paying for a Cablecard/OTA HD box and getting an OTA box. That's like buying an airplane and then driving it around on the ground when you could have just bought a car.

If a company sold airplanes that couldn't fly they would go out of business real quick. Similarly a Cablecard TiVo that doesn't work because the cable company doesn't support Cablecard. won't sell.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Keep in mind - while things are indeed very murky for TWC customers - not everyone is a TWC customer. Sure, other companies are eyeing SDV as a potential boon, but most of them are sitting back and letting TWC spearhead the issues (both technical, and legal), before doing anything. 

This gives those of us *not* on TWC (and there are lots of us) no reason to be overly frightened or fudded out of purchasing a S3 - and are eagerly awaiting it. It's not all doom and gloom for much of the country.

(But there's no denying doom and gloom in TWC territory)

-Ken


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> In a case where someone lives in a TWC territory (as I will shortly), I think the best course of action is to hold off on the series 3 until it works with SDV. If we hold off, it puts the pressure on TIVO to negotiate with TWC in order to produce a series 3 which works with SDV over cablecard.


In order for the Series 3 to support SDV, it will have to support CableCARD 2.0. It's very unlikely that the Series 3 will have the hardware required to do so.

Possible it could be done with some sort of add-on, but the more likely approach is a "Series 4" later on down the road.

Buy your Series 3, get your CableCard and then sue TW for deliberately skirting the intent of the FCC mandate ...


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

I know nobody knows the actual price of an S3 yet, but if I paid for one and then a year later my cable company started also rolling our SDV, I would be very unhappy. That fear alone would keep me from buying one (or more) S3's. 

I know its not a popular strategy on this board but I'll wait for the new DVR from DTV before upgrading my pair of HR10's. I've been happy with DTV for the last 10 years, I see no reason to switch back to cable now. I can still remember why I left cable in the first place.


----------



## ellinj (Feb 26, 2002)

Engadet is reporting that Time Warner is refusing to activate the S3 boxes.

http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/26/time-warner-wont-provide-cablecards-for-series-3-tivos/


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

There are other threads here about TWC/S3/CableCARD. It sounds like a TWC rep that doesn't know what the facts are. The S3 isn't out yet, so right now no, they don't install cards in them. But it is an approved host device, and my understanding is that they MUST provide CableCARDs for them - like it or not - when they are out.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

morac said:


> The hardware in the S3 for decoding the cable card signals drives up the cost of the S3. So basically you are going to be paying for a Cablecard/OTA HD box and getting an OTA box. That's like buying an airplane and then driving it around on the ground when you could have just bought a car.
> 
> If a company sold airplanes that couldn't fly they would go out of business real quick. Similarly a Cablecard TiVo that doesn't work because the cable company doesn't support Cablecard. won't sell.


HUH? You can't buy a OTA tivo so how is it like that? It would be like buying an airplane and then driving it around on the ground because nobody makes a car....


----------



## mfogarty5 (Apr 27, 2006)

BillyT2002 said:


> cwoody222 - I'm in an Adelphia-owned system in Waterville, ME too. They are being taken over by Time-Warner and I was told by more than one person who works for Time-Warner that all digital programming will be available only using SDV bandwidth and very soon.


The people you have been talking don't know what they are taking about. What you just stated is just simply not true for the following reasons.

#1 Cable companies cannot by law encrypt the major networks like CBS, ABC, NBC and FOX.

#2 Do you even know what the purpose of SDV is? In simple terms it makes regular channels on-demand. The only channels that they would consider making SDV are lightly watched channels. There is no reason to make ESPN switched because there is a high probability that someone will always have it on.

#3 Columbia SC is one of the test areas and the only HD channel that cannot be received by a cablecard because of SDV is Universal HD.

I am a Time Warner subscriber in Charlotte NC and am concerned about SDV as you can see following the link below, but your statement is pure FUD.

It's a cable company! Since when have they done anything quickly?!? I plan on buying a S3 shortly after it is released and will give the local Time Warner hell if they go SDV.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=7956765&&#post7956765


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

mfogarty - I was talking with a few of the advanced technical support people from within Time-Warner. In every case I was told that all of the digital programming is going to use SDV by early next year. I am merely relaying what I have been told.

#1 They can still legally make the digital high-definition feeds of the broadcast networks available via SDV only. They will keep analog versions of standard-definition feeds of those same networks available for use with cablecards.

#2 Yes I know the purpose of SDV - but I have been told that the intent is to use it for all digital programming.

#3 I have been told that in the current test areas, mostly time shifted programming has been moved to use SDV (such as East coast feeds on the West coast and West coast feeds on the East coast).

Also, refer to post: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=4228232&&#post4228232.

Time-Warners switch to SDV is going to happen very quickly.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

megazone said:


> There are other threads here about TWC/S3/CableCARD. It sounds like a TWC rep that doesn't know what the facts are. The S3 isn't out yet, so right now no, they don't install cards in them. But it is an approved host device, and my understanding is that they MUST provide CableCARDs for them - like it or not - when they are out.


yes the report here in the community forum was about Raliegh TWC as well so it seems the engadget report is about the same person who posted here. Here in the community forum the poster said hew as asking the CSR ahead of the S3 release just to be ready when he finally had one.


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> HUH?  You can't buy a OTA tivo so how is it like that? It would be like buying an airplane and then driving it around on the ground because nobody makes a car....


Doesn't the DirectTV HD TiVo do OTA?


----------



## bkdtv (Jan 9, 2003)

> Doesn't the DirectTV HD TiVo do OTA?


Yes, but no DirecTV satellite = no programming information on HD locals = limited Tivo functionality.

On the Series3, guide data is delivered via Internet (modem / broadband).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

BillyT2002 said:


> #1 They can still legally make the digital high-definition feeds of the broadcast networks available via SDV only. They will keep analog versions of standard-definition feeds of those same networks available for use with cablecards.


Actually there is a mandate in place which prevents that as well. Basically it says that if they carry the digital version of a local channel then they are required to provide "in the clear" access to it for all of their customers. Which means that those channels can not be encrypted or put on SDV.

There is a slight loop hole if a particular station simulcasts in both HD and SD digital, but I have yet to hear of any cable companies exploiting that loop hole. Basically the loop hole is they are only required to carry one version of the digital channel "in the clear" so it is technically possible for them to put the SD version "in the clear" then put the HD version on SDV. However I doubt this would ever happen since the local channels would be watched so frequently that they would derive almost zero benefit from being on SDV.

Dan


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

morac said:


> Doesn't the DirectTV HD TiVo do OTA?


No, not without a satellite dish and a subsccription the DirecTV, which was the point of being able to buy a S3 for OTA only.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> That's just patently not true and a gross oversimplification. I'm getting a bit tired of posts like these. :down: The S3 will work just fine with OTA and cable regardless of what transpires with SDV.


Not to mention that not all cable companies are implementing SDV. The number of people affected by this will be small.

Remember, only a subset of TWC subscribers will be purchasing a Tivo S3. Of those, a smaller subset will be interested in channels _on_ SDV.

The whole point of SDV is to save bandwidth - it's actually a brilliant idea. Digital channels (Hi Def or not) that are less popular and more niche are broadcasted only when requested. How many S3 users will be on SDV _and_ want to record something on the SPEED channel, _and_ care enough to write the FCC complaining about it?


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

classicX said:


> Not to mention that not all cable companies are implementing SDV. The number of people affected by this will be small.
> 
> Remember, only a subset of TWC subscribers will be purchasing a Tivo S3. Of those, a smaller subset will be interested in channels _on_ SDV.
> 
> The whole point of SDV is to save bandwidth - it's actually a brilliant idea. Digital channels (Hi Def or not) that are less popular and more niche are broadcasted only when requested. How many S3 users will be on SDV _and_ want to record something on the SPEED channel, _and_ care enough to write the FCC complaining about it?


Here are some simple facts that should be accepted without argument...

1) If you subscribe to an MSO that uses SDV you will not be able to tune any channels the MSO decides to place into the SDV tier.

2) Those MSOs that are implementing SDV will have total freedom to include any channel in the SDV tier.

3) It's likely that only long-tail will be included in the SDV tier, but there will certainly be TiVo users who will want to tune those channels. You refer to how many will want to record Speed. Do realize that not only will they not be able to record them, they will not be able to tune them at all.

4)Every major MSO is considering to some degree implementing SDV.

If you think that these are non-important issues, you are living in a fantasy world.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

ah30k said:


> ...If you think that these are non-important issues, you are living in a fantasy world.


AH, yes, but these issues are only important to a *VAST* minority of potential S3 users.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Your saying that only a minority of users want to tune long-tail channels like Speed and belong to MSO systems considering SDV???

I don't think so.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Think what you want....fact is, only a smidgen of potential S3 users will EVER be affected by this. (Speed?!....come on)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

ah30k said:


> 2) Those MSOs that are implementing SDV will have total freedom to include any channel in the SDV tier.


That's not entirely true. As I said above there are some restrictions on local digital broadcasts. However any other channel is fair game

Dan


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Just what channel would they have to put in SDV for you to consider it to a problem? How about NOGGIN ?


----------



## morac (Mar 14, 2003)

Bierboy said:


> Think what you want....fact is, only a smidgen of potential S3 users will EVER be affected by this. (Speed?!....come on)


They will probably put all but the most popular channels in SDV. So if all you ever watch is network TV and ESPN you'll be fine. If you watch any other channel that doesn't have a top 20 rated show, you may end up SOL. I think that would be of importance to all potential S3 users.

Also of note, even if your cable company only puts a few channels in SDV (ones that you don't watch), who's to say they won't start adding more and more channels to SDV as time goes on. If you only plan to keep your S3 for a year or two that's fine. For me if I'm spending that kind of money I would be thinking more long term than that.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The one thing you TWC people need to realize is... this is NOT some business decision TiVo has made! It's not like they had the option of supporting SDV and just chose not to. This is a limitation of the current standard and until the next standard is finalized and deployed there is absolutely nothing they can do about it. Sure they could sit back and wait to see what happens with CC2.0, but that could still be 2+ years away. And in the mean time they're losing customers in droves to cable DVRs because there is no other option for HDTV.

I don't know about you, but I would much rather have a S3 now with the looming threat of SDV then to not have any HD options at all.

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

I agree that for someone who doesn't want to spend a lot of money for a new TIVO device which potentially will not work with what you want to record in the long term, it is best to not purchase a TIVO S3 at this point and especially if you live in a Time-Warner cable territory.

As much as I love TIVO and have been super-excited about the series 3 since I first heard about it, I will not purchase it for as long as it does not work with SDV streams.

(And, I was really hoping the stupid FCC would not approve the Comcast-Time Warner-Adelphia deal. I'm now also worried about my broadband service switching from Adelphia to RoadRunner - which I've heard is horrible).


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Dan - I don't want to see TIVO go out of business either - I have loved TIVO for years now. I couldn't watch TV any other way.

Unfortunately for me, I'm stuck with DirecTV right now as I will not switch to Adelphia just to become a TWC customer soon, and I will not switch to TWC until I can get a TIVO box which will work with cablecard and SDV. For me currently, DirecTV is the least of all the evils and I'm really not a fan of DirecTV anymore and directly blame Rupert Murdoch for that (I hope he retires soon).

I think for those of us in TWC areas, a lot of our fears about the whole TIVO S3/SDV mess could be put at rest if we could hear from someone official at TIVO about their perspective of the issue and bet a vague idea about what their plans might be down the road about it.

If TIVO were to make a statement that would basically say that they would upgrade any S3 to a unit that can record from SDV streams later (2+) years from now for a decent discount, than I'd buy one anyway - whether it worked or not.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> If TIVO were to make a statement that would basically say that they would upgrade any S3 to a unit that can record from SDV streams later (2+) years from now for a decent discount, than I'd buy one anyway - whether it worked or not.


The problem with that idea is when would they upgrade it. I personally do not believe that an S3 could be "upgraded" to work with SDV\CC2.0. Which means it will be 2+ years before the S4 comes out. By then I would have already had to live with not getting some channels for a VERY long time.

I don't blame Tivo. I think they made a poor choice but it was their only choice for doing HD today. They may sell thousand's of S3's to customers that aren't subscribed to DTV, E*, or TWC, but I probably will not be one of them.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

No business would ever make a promise like that. They have no idea how expensive it's going to be to implement a CC2.0 device or even if the CC2.0 standard will ever come to fruition. (there are talks of scrapping it in favor of a "downloadable CableCARD") Now that's not to say that they wont offer some sort of upgrade discount, I just wouldn't expect them to promise such an upgrade with so much uncertainty in the industry. 

Dan


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

ah30k said:


> Here are some simple facts that should be accepted without argument...
> 
> 1) If you subscribe to an MSO that uses SDV you will not be able to tune any channels the MSO decides to place into the SDV tier.
> 
> ...


1) You will if you have their cablebox, just not with a CC1.0 device.
2) Incorrect. Any local channels must be sent unencrypted, 100% of the time.
3) While I do realize this, at this very moment, that number of users is *0*, because there is no Cablecard Tivo on the market now. We cannot possibly know how many users "will be" affected.
4) Considering and implementing are two very different things.***

I didn't say that these are non-important issues, but face it - the number of people currently in SDV areas (compared to total number of cable subscribers) is small. While the potential for catasrophe is high, the needs of the many always outweigh the needs of the few. Understand that there are millions of people who couldn't care less about this because they only pay for basic cable, or they are perfectly happy with their cable STBs.

With an $800 projected price point (which I highly doubt, but for arguments sake I'll go with it) do you really think enough (read: millions) people will be buying S3s to cause a real problem for TWC?

Perhaps this issue will see more light when there are other cablecard certified device in these millions of homes. Right now the "cablecard only" market penetration is low. Will it increase enough with the S3's release to make TWC think twice about SDV? Doubtful. Several users here have already stated that they will not be using a cablecard at all with their Series 3s.

I agree with Dan203 - TWC will do what they can get away with, to make as much money as possible. That's capitalism. You may not agree with it, but that's why you vote. So unless our economic model changes drastically, you can COUNT on ANY public company to DO WHATEVER THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Not only do they WANT to do that, but they have a *legal responsibility* to do so.

That is not Tivo's decision. If there were a standard for SDV, wouldn't you think that Tivo would be compliant? The problem is, TWC's SDV might not be the same as Cox, not the same as Comcast, not the same as Jon's Cable Company.

***I personally think that this is one of the main reasons that the other MSOs are not implementing SDV yet. Once CC 2.0 is finally released, they may have to change out all their SDV equipment or spend more money after-the-fact to become compliant. TWC might have money to throw around like that. Others don't.

While this discussion is all well and good, there is not much we can do but write letters to OUR government, or just wait and see.

....and hope that Tivo will offer a "trade-up" - your S3 that doesn't work with your shiny new SDV for a credit towards your Series 4 purchase.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HiDefGator said:


> I don't blame Tivo. I think they made a poor choice but it was their only choice for doing HD today. They may sell thousand's of S3's to customers that aren't subscribed to DTV, E*, or TWC, but I probably will not be one of them.


How can the choice be "poor" if it was their only choice? 

Dan


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

They had a choice to not develope a product that would not work in the real world for many customers today and even more in the future. They could have spent their time and money elsewhere, like perhaps getting the comcast software ready.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

...or wotking out a licensed deal with Time-Warner. Or, heck they could have spent time trying to keep negotiating to get back in DirecTV's good graces. (I hate Rupert Murdoch and keep a picture of him pinned to the bullseye on my dart board.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HiDefGator said:


> They had a choice to not develope a product that would not work in the real world for many customers today and even more in the future. They could have spent their time and money elsewhere, like perhaps getting the comcast software ready.


Who said that development of the S3 had any impact of the release schedule of the Comcast software? The Comcast software is written for a completely different hardware platform and was funded by research money provided by Comcast. It's highly unlikely that the S3, which is a completely new hardware platform, and the Comcast software used any overlapping resources which would have caused a delay.

Plus the Comcast deal is only going to benifit people who live in Comcast territory. Which means it's going to exclude a whole lot more people then the S3/SDV problem is.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

BillyT2002 said:


> ...or wotking out a licensed deal with Time-Warner. Or, heck they could have spent time trying to keep negotiating to get back in DirecTV's good graces. (I hate Rupert Murdoch and keep a picture of him pinned to the bullseye on my dart board.)


Who says they aren't doing those things? You're talking about things which are handled by completely different departments of the company. Just because the engineering department is working on a new hardware platform doesn't mean the licensing department has stopped talking to potential partners about other deals.

You guys are acting like TiVo is run by a single person who can only do one thing at a time, and that's just not the case. TiVo is a fairly large corporation with lots of employees who are constantly looking for ways to make the company money. The S3 is only a small portion of that.

Dan


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Dan - stop it! We all know that TivoPony is the only person who does any real work around there.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

"So unless our economic model changes drastically, you can COUNT on ANY public company to DO WHATEVER THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Not only do they WANT to do that, but they have a legal responsibility to do so."

Huh? It's illegal for a cable company to choose to follow technical standards? That's certainly news to me!


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

I highly recommend anyone who cares about this issue to send an e-mail to [email protected] and blind carbon copy [email protected] on it.

Here is the e-mail that I sent: (I'm still waiting to hear back, but will post my response if I get one).

*Cablecard and SDV...*
Bill Tello
To: '[email protected]'
Bcc: '[email protected]'
___________________________________________________________

Hello:

My name is William Tello, I'm a 43 year-old software developer and I live with my wife Ellen in Waterville, Maine.

I am currently a DirecTV/NDS customer and I've owned a DirecTIVO and a standalone TIVO (with real TIVO software in them) for a long time now. I cannot rave enough about how much my wife and I love TIVO DVR(s). We no longer watch "live" television at all and have many "first run only" season passes set up to view our favorite programming.

We just purchased a Sony KD-34XBR960 widescreen high-definition television last year and we have a Hughes HR10-250 high-definition DirecTIVO receiver to run it.

The problem with DirecTV is now that Rupert Murdoch/NDS has taken over, they are moving away from DVR(s) with TIVO software built-in, in favor of their own prorietary DVR(s). Their high-definition line-up is very limited for $10.00 per month and their high-definition channels are broadcast in HD-LITE which is 1280x768p and not true high-definition which is 1920x1080i. They are also launching new satellites with Ka-Band/MPEG-4 capabilities which will not be compatible with the Hughes HR10-250 DirecTIVO DVR which I currently have. Coming this Fall, they are going to offer in my area, high-definition locals on a new DirecTV proprietary high-definition DVR (which if it based on their R15 model I hear is as buggy as many cable television provided DVR(s)). I'm not too excited about that.

Also, my area in Maine is an Adelphia territory and I've heard soon to become a Time-Warner area. At first I was excited about that; especially because I know that the TIVO Series 3 (which can record from two cablecards at once) is soon to be released and I though it would be great to use a TIVO S3 with Time-Warner cable. I thought that I would probably run one TIVO S3 with two cablecards and one TWC DVR for vide-on-demand and all of that within my A/V system.

Since then I have learned that Time-Warner is testing switched digital video in a few select markets and has plans to roll SDV out by the end of the year and then convert most (if not all) digital programming to use SDV in 2007. I have also learned that the TIVO S2 cannot record SDV programming (or even see it for that matter). I have also learned that TWC in Raleigh, North Carolina is refusing to even give cablecards to people for use in third-party devices.

I'm also aware that TIVO has filed with the FCC regarding the SDV issue and has asked the FCC to require the cable vendors to keep all original, broadcast and cable progrmming available on cablecard (and not using SDV). I really hope the FCC gets involved in this.

Anyway, I really wanted to speak with someone high-enough within the Time-Warner organization who has a knowledge of what I'm talking about and maybe can put some better perspective on it for me.

Is there any way I will be able to effectively use a TIVO S3 with TWC and still record high-definition and standard-definition, digital programming? I hope you have a better prognosis for this than what I am learning in tivocommunity.com, dbsforums.com, dbstalk.com, avsforums.com and satelliteguys.us.

So, far it looks like my best bet might be to remain a DirecTV customer, but I'm hoping that is not the case.

I won't go back to wathcing "live" television and have only three requirements for a DVR:

1. It must relibaly record all selected programming. (TIVO is about 99% - I can understand if the President addresses the nation or some other programming pre-empts my favorite programming)

2. It must reliably record only "first run" episodes of a season pass when instructed.

3. It must reliably fast-forward over commercial advertising.

I hope to hear back from you.

Best Regards,
Bill Tello
[email protected]


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> Who said that development of the S3 had any impact of the release schedule of the Comcast software?
> 
> Dan


Unless Tivo is the first software company in history to have unlimited developers at its disposal, they have to allocate resources just like everyone else. It doesn't really matter who is paying for the development time.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Again different departments. The bulk of the work done on the S3 was on the hardware side. The Comcast deal is strictly software for an established hardware platform.

Dan


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

BillyT2002 said:


> Dan - stop it! We all know that TivoPony is the only person who does any real work around there.


Stephen does a fair bit of work too, maybe one can work on Comcast and the other on the S3!!! 

Seriously, I don't understand all the *****ing about the S3. One camp is complaining vocally that the S3 took far too long to get to market. On the other hand, the other camp says that the S3 is coming out far too soon, as Tivo should have waited until they could support SDV.

There's always going to be something better coming down the pipe - at the outset, the number of people that SDV affects (or maybe effects, I can never tell the difference) is going to be small. Tivo would best be served getting something out that will work for most people ASAP, and then working equally hard to get a CC 2.0 device out whenever that spec is set in stone.

The real problem here are the cable companies, they hold most of the cards and the power, and are doing their best to lock you into THEIR solution and the FCC doesn't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up to them and make them behave.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

... which is precisely why the cable companies are for now the real losers in this. You see had Time-Warner held off on implementing SDV until TIVO vould have an SDV compatible device (2+ years from now). I would have bought an S3 as soon as it is released and switched from DirecTV to TWC. As it is now, I am staying with DirecTV until a better option becomes available for high-definition programming and so far SDV with a TWC DVR isn't it.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

True, but I'm willing to bet that your situation is rather unique - the cable companies aren't worried about attracting users like you that are making the switch for Tivo, since you're not the kind of customer they want that goes out and uses your own DVR as opposed to their own "solution"

An unrelated SDV question - in simple terms, SDV is a way to make more channels of programming available than there are RF channels to transmit them, right? Using made up numbers, they would basically be taking 10 TV shows and giving them only 5 RF channels to be broadcast on. So what happens if there are 8 people living past a distribution point that want to watch 8 of the 10 channels? It sounds like someone is going to get left out in the cold and not be able to watch what they paid for?


----------



## Dajad (Oct 7, 1999)

CableLabs approves multi-stream Cable Card:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/22/cablelabs-approves-motorolas-multi-stream-cablecard/

Let's hope the Series 3 supports this device!

Since TW is offside the legal mandate, if, as per the original post in this thread the FCC doesn't mandate that TW make their Switched digital system compliant with cable card somehow, then TiVo could probably seek an injunction to halt its use and spread. That's what I'd do if I was TiVo.

When the law says "Cable Companies must do X" and Cablecards do X but also do Y to thwart the intent of X, that is illegal! The implementation of switched digital will likely be held by the courts to be an illegal breach of the FCC mandate. That is the S3 buyer's greatest source of comfort. Once TiVo (and Microsoft and others that support Cable card 1) starts suing MSO's over this, its likely others will halt any implementation plans unitl the case is finally decided - ESPECIALLY if TiVo is successful at obtaining an early injucntion.

...Dale


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Dajad said:


> CableLabs approves multi-stream Cable Card:
> 
> Let's hope the Series 3 supports this device!


The S3 will absolutely support that device. It's designed to use either two single stream cards, or one multi-stream card. Both resulting in dual tuners.



Dajad said:


> Since TW is offside the legal mandate, if, as per the original post in this thread the FCC doesn't mandate that TW make their Switched digital system compliant with cable card somehow, then TiVo could probably seek an injunction to halt its use and spread. That's what I'd do if I was TiVo.


I really hope that's possible and that they actually do it!

Dan


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Dajad said:


> CableLabs approves multi-stream Cable Card... Let's hope the Series 3 supports this device!


 As Dan mentioned the S3 does support multi-stream. However I don't see the cable companies having much incentive to offer multi-stream versus single stream cards. Unless they charge more for multi-stream vs. single stream cards I think they would rather you pay for 2+ single-stream cards and possibly "additional outlet" fees instead. Only reason for them to obtain multi-stream cards is to offer them at a premium price compared to 2+ single-stream cards and hence really no gain from customer perspective.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Actually the reason why multi-stream cards are being developed at all is because the FCC has put pressure on the cable companies to deploy them. It hasn't gone as far as a mandate, but it's sort of a gentlemens agreement they made in exchange for getting another extension on the mandate which requires their own boxes to use CableCARDs. (which they can't really do until CableCARD 2.0 is finished) 

So once they're actually ready you should be able to get one from your cable company for the same monthly rate they currently charge for a single stream card.

Dan


----------



## ab3tx (Mar 13, 2006)

GoHokies! said:


> An unrelated SDV question - in simple terms, SDV is a way to make more channels of programming available than there are RF channels to transmit them, right? Using made up numbers, they would basically be taking 10 TV shows and giving them only 5 RF channels to be broadcast on. So what happens if there are 8 people living past a distribution point that want to watch 8 of the 10 channels? It sounds like someone is going to get left out in the cold and not be able to watch what they paid for?


Your understanding of SDV is correct, but I don't think you should be concerned. The cable operators can't afford to have their customers seeing a "One moment please, your channel is not available" message. The FCC might actually become interested in fixing something at that point! 

Everything I have read says that they are going to pool very few channels and have just slightly less paths available. For example, pool some of the lesser subscribed tiers, say, 20 channels total and have 15 paths available. Of course, nobody knows for sure until we actually see it used, but I would guess that the paths would have to be no less than 75% of the available channels, probably more. I think the important thing to remember is that most likely, the most popular channels won't even be part of the pool.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

In many of these discussions I think there is an inherent assumption that FCC has ultimate control over many aspects of how cable companies run their business. I wonder how far that power actually extends? For example, assuming that FCC has power to halt TWC from further deployment of SDV I wouldn't take for granted. If TWC thought they needed permission from FCC to do it I would think the issue would have already been dealt with. I wouldn't expect other major cable providers to stand by idly and let that happen if there is any potential future benefit of SDV for their business. Even if the FCC is not over-stepping it's authority it's likely a long drawn out legal fight would ensue. When it comes to the business of making money it's mostly a cut-throat environment so I don't see how "gentleman" agreements can work.


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Part of the appeal of SDV comes from the fact that the cable companies are required to carry a large volume of channels almost nobody watches. Some of these come from local must-carry rules (local access channels, local neighborhood news channels, college campus channels, etc...), and some from bulk deals from major providers (You can only carry ESPN if you carry these 15 other channels nobody watches). 

End result - many of these could be collapsed via SDV for a very real savings in bandwidth, without any real fear of oversubscribing. This allows cable providers to merrily accepts these channels no one watches, without taking a massive bandwidth hit on the last mile.

-Ken


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

MickeS said:


> "So unless our economic model changes drastically, you can COUNT on ANY public company to DO WHATEVER THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH TO MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE. Not only do they WANT to do that, but they have a legal responsibility to do so."
> 
> Huh? It's illegal for a cable company to choose to follow technical standards? That's certainly news to me!


Publicly traded companies (like AOL Time Warner) have a legal responsibility to their shareholders, which is to do everything they can to keep them from losing money, or in simpler terms, MAKE MONEY. A cable company that can *legally* save costs, offer more content, nickel & dime customer, while simultaneously locking those same customers into their hardware will ALWAYS do so, you can rely on it - they depend on the customers but it's the shareholders that have to be pleased, and they cater to their shareholders, who will always win over customers.

Work for a public company and you'll see what I mean.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

BillyT2002 said:


> ... which is precisely why the cable companies are for now the real losers in this. You see had Time-Warner held off on implementing SDV until TIVO vould have an SDV compatible device (2+ years from now). I would have bought an S3 as soon as it is released and switched from DirecTV to TWC. As it is now, I am staying with DirecTV until a better option becomes available for high-definition programming and so far SDV with a TWC DVR isn't it.


Sorry to burst your bubble, but a company like TWC has 100,000 other subscribers and couldn't care less about losing 100 or 200 because they won't cater to Tivo and Tivo users. Tivo just doesn't have enough market penetration to affect their bottom line. Companies like that don't even LOOK at the thousands column of their bottom line - they think in millions and billions. Until Tivo can affect enough users to make that kind of change in their profits, they won't be calling any shots, and no one will "wait for Tivo to be compliant" to roll out ANYTHING.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

moyekj said:


> As Dan mentioned the S3 does support multi-stream. However I don't see the cable companies having much incentive to offer multi-stream versus single stream cards. Unless they charge more for multi-stream vs. single stream cards I think they would rather you pay for 2+ single-stream cards and possibly "additional outlet" fees instead. Only reason for them to obtain multi-stream cards is to offer them at a premium price compared to 2+ single-stream cards and hence really no gain from customer perspective.


Very good point. I would much rather pay for 1 multi-stream card a month instead of 2 CC1 cards. Also, I think Cablevsion did away with "additonal-outlet" fees, but just in case, having only 1 MS CableCard should easily translate to there being only "1" outlet.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> So once they're actually ready you should be able to get one from your cable company for the same monthly rate they currently charge for a single stream card.
> 
> Dan


Now the question: how long from approval to manufacture to distribution-to-MSOs to consumers' hands?

Or, in other words, which will come first, the S3 or the multi-stream card?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The cable companies have comitted to deploying multi-stream cards by the end of the year. If I had to guess I'd say that the S3 will probably come out before multi-stream cards are in wide spread deployment.

Dan


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

Question: are "multi"-stream cards limited to decrypting two simultaneous streams, or is that a TiVo S3 limitation?


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Hmm. Brings up even more questions. 

If I wanted to buy the S3 as soon as it came out and have dual tuner recording, I'd have to get two CableCard 1 cards, which would be "married" to my S3. 

One of your other posts said the MS Card should be the same price as the CC1 card, so ... when the MS card comes out, is there a benefit gained by turning in the two CC1 cards and switching to a single MS card? 

If there is a benefit, would the MSO object to taking back two cards that were "married" to my S3, or can they "wipe" the cards and re-use them elsewhere?


----------



## rlcarr (Jan 18, 2003)

Welshdog said:


> Same here, I will use my S3 exactly as you have stated. We have analog cable and that is all we want. Netflix takes care of our lack of premium channels.


What exactly are the rules on the old analog tier channels going forward? I've heard rumors that (out here in Boston) RCN and Comcast are doing to drop all the analog channels (rebroadcasts of OTA stuff and your usual "basic cable" or "extended basic cable" stuff) and instead broadcast them digitally in standard definition, thus requiring the use of a set-top box (or CableCard).

Are they allowed to do that? Are there any requirements for some or any channels to stay "pure" analog?

Because if they can yank the analog tier and put everything on digital, then that (a) makes my Series 2 much less useful, (b) makes a Series 2 DT much less useful (because in both cases I have to rely on not-reliable-enough-for-my-taste TiVo controlling the set-top box), and (c) while the S3 with CableCard can handle it, if any channels I want to watch are moved to switched video, then my S3 also becomes much less useful.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

etsolow said:


> Question: are "multi"-stream cards limited to decrypting two simultaneous streams, or is that a TiVo S3 limitation?


The spec says that multi-stream cards can decrypt up to 5 streams at once. So the two tuners is a TiVo limitation.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

drew2k said:


> Hmm. Brings up even more questions.
> 
> If I wanted to buy the S3 as soon as it came out and have dual tuner recording, I'd have to get two CableCard 1 cards, which would be "married" to my S3.
> 
> ...


They're not permenantly married to your TiVo. They just get a signal from the cable company saying that it's OK to work with this device. So if you try to plug them into any other device they refuse. If the equipment changes for any reason it's easy for the MSO to update them to work with the new host.

As for swapping them out... The only down side is your MSO might require a truck roll to do it, which could cost you more then the savings from using a single card.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

rlcarr said:


> Are they allowed to do that? Are there any requirements for some or any channels to stay "pure" analog?


They are required to offer analog versions of "must carry" local channels, but that's it. Everything else can be digital if they choose to do so.

Dan


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

rlcarr said:


> Are they allowed to do that? Are there any requirements for some or any channels to stay "pure" analog?


 Don't think there are any legal requirements. From a business perspective though analog cable still represents the majority of customers (i.e. digital cable subscribers are less than 50% of total subscribers) from reports I have seen from some publicly traded cable companies. So I would think if Comcast wants to drop analog channels in some markets completely then they have to accomodate their analog only customer base and provide set top boxes for free. More likely I would say the plan is to drop a few less popular analog channels and make them available only via digital cable but keep a core base of analog channels in the basic lineup.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> They're not permenantly married to your TiVo. They just get a signal from the cable company saying that it's OK to work with this device. So if you try to plug them into any other device they refuse. If the equipment changes for any reason it's easy for the MSO to update them to work with the new host.
> 
> As for swapping them out... The only down side is your MSO might require a truck roll to do it, which could cost you more then the savings from using a single card.
> 
> Dan


Thanks. In my case, Cablevision *does* require "professional installation" at $49.95 for a CableCard device. Each cable card is $1.25 a month, so if the MS card is the same price, it would take over three years to recoup the cost of a second $49.95 installation just to swap cards!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

For me installation is $37 and $1.50 per card, so it would take me 2 years to recoupe the installation charge.

I think if you plan on getting a S3 right away then you should plan on getting 2 cards and sticking with them. I don't think there is any performance difference between using one multi-stream card vs two single stream cards so it shouldn't matter.

Dan


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> For me installation is $37 and $1.50 per card, so it would take me 2 years to recoupe the installation charge.
> 
> I think if you plan on getting a S3 right away then you should plan on getting 2 cards and sticking with them. I don't think there is any performance difference between using one multi-stream card vs two single stream cards so it shouldn't matter.
> 
> Dan


That's probably what I will do. Since I have to PAY them to come to my house to install the cards, they'll be carrying the SA-8300HD box out the door with them when they leave. (And I'll end up saving $14.01 a month by turning their crappy box in!)


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

drew2k said:


> That's probably what I will do. Since I have to PAY them to come to my house to install the cards, they'll be carrying the SA-8300HD box out the door with them when they leave. (And I'll end up saving $14.01 a month by turning their crappy box in!)


 Wow, that's a pretty strong confidence level that the S3 will work without issues. I plan on keeping my cable co. DVR along with the S3 for at least a couple of months. With all the reports of TVs having issues with CableCards I don't have much confidence things will be glitch free with S3 & CableCard - at least at first.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

I think the only reason cable companies are trying to do this is so they can sell you DVS's - Digital Video Servers. The idea is to have one "master cable box" that can record all your shows (limited by hard drive performance), and also display live video to other "slave" boxes around the house. In this case, 5 streams = 2(?) channels being recorded + 3 others free to be tuned on the unit itself or slave units.

I wonder if that made sense....


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

ah30k said:


> If you think that these are non-important issues, you are living in a fantasy world.


Issues, yes. Important, Eh. I don't feel that way. All Cable MSOs are considering *something*, SDV is one of the many options. I'm not going to worry about what may happen someday, maybe, possibly. For that matter I could end up moving for unknown reasons and have a completely different cable MSO with different plans.

They are not important to me in my decision to by an S3. They're something to be considered, but are minor to me, because there is no reason to expect Charter, my cable MSO, is going to install SDV in my area soon. And, as it stands, MOST of what I watch is on analog cable anyway. So much so that I have a cable box I disconnected months ago on my main TiVo while shuffling things, and I still haven't reconnected it.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> They are required to offer analog versions of "must carry" local channels, but that's it. Everything else can be digital if they choose to do so.


At least until 2009 IIRC, when analog locals go away.


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

megazone said:


> At least until 2009 IIRC, when analog locals go away.


You are correct. The big debate now is whether or not cable companies can (without permission of local broadcasters) convert the digital broadcast into an analog signal. If they are allowed to do this, then "lifeline" cable subscriber-ship will boom. So local programing on analog cable is a big unknown for 2009 the last I heard.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

moyekj said:


> Wow, that's a pretty strong confidence level that the S3 will work without issues. I plan on keeping my cable co. DVR along with the S3 for at least a couple of months. With all the reports of TVs having issues with CableCards I don't have much confidence things will be glitch free with S3 & CableCard - at least at first.


I never claimed I was moving to the S3 because I felt it would work without issues. I'm moving to the S3 because it's a TiVo that records HD and can replace my Cablevsion box. I'm counting on the S3 to do everything I want, but if for some reason there is an "issue", well, see my sig ... I have a few "backup" options.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

classicX said:


> In this case, 5 streams = 2(?) channels being recorded + 3 others free to be tuned on the unit itself or slave units.


Actually the CableCARD is not needed for playback or transfer of recordings already on the host device. The way CableCARD works is the card negotiates a set of keys with the host device. It then decrypts the incoming stream using the cable companies propritary encrypt keys and re-encrypts it using the keys negotiated between it and the host. The host then accepts the video stream, decrypts it and re-encrypts it again using it's own propritary (but approved) encryption system. If it worked the way you suggested then the S3 would need a minimum of 3 CableCARDs to function. One for each tuner and one for playback of prerecorded content. I would also need additional cards for MRV and TTG transfers.

Dan


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

drew2k said:


> Very good point. I would much rather pay for 1 multi-stream card a month instead of 2 CC1 cards. Also, I think Cablevsion did away with "additonal-outlet" fees, but just in case, having only 1 MS CableCard should easily translate to there being only "1" outlet.


My Cablevision bill arrived today, and it has an "additonal-outlet" fee


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

megazone said:


> Issues, yes. Important, Eh. I don't feel that way. All Cable MSOs are considering *something*, SDV is one of the many options. I'm not going to worry about what may happen someday, maybe, possibly. For that matter I could end up moving for unknown reasons and have a completely different cable MSO with different plans.
> 
> They are not important to me in my decision to by an S3. They're something to be considered, but are minor to me, because there is no reason to expect Charter, my cable MSO, is going to install SDV in my area soon. And, as it stands, MOST of what I watch is on analog cable anyway. So much so that I have a cable box I disconnected months ago on my main TiVo while shuffling things, and I still haven't reconnected it.


Thanks, Mega, for concurring. Sure, they're issues. But not important to most of us who will purchase the S3. This Chicken Little mentality is getting old.


----------



## JohnBrowning (Jul 15, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> I highly recommend anyone who cares about this issue to send an e-mail to [email protected] and blind carbon copy [email protected] on it.


So exactly who are these people you recommend emailing and why the subterfuge of the blind carbon copy? I just got a letter in the mail yesterday from Time-Warner indicating that they are taking over from Comcast here in Plano, TX. My first email is to our city's Cable TV Commission.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Actually the CableCARD is not needed for playback or transfer of recordings already on the host device. The way CableCARD works is the card negotiates a set of keys with the host device. It then decrypts the incoming stream using the cable companies propritary encrypt keys and re-encrypts it using the keys negotiated between it and the host. The host then accepts the video stream, decrypts it and re-encrypts it again using it's own propritary (but approved) encryption system. If it worked the way you suggested then the S3 would need a minimum of 3 CableCARDs to function. One for each tuner and one for playback of prerecorded content. I would also need additional cards for MRV and TTG transfers.
> 
> Dan


I wasn't suggesting that it needs the card to decode recorded content. I was simply saying that these servers could eventually have 5 tuners - which would allow it to tune channels for recording (say, 2), while still allowing the rest (3) to be tuned to watch live TV, other than what is being recorded or already recorded. And I wasn't talking about the S3 at all.

Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

JohnBrowning said:


> So exactly who are these people you recommend emailing and why the subterfuge of the blind carbon copy? I just got a letter in the mail yesterday from Time-Warner indicating that they are taking over from Comcast here in Plano, TX. My first email is to our city's Cable TV Commission.


There is no subterfuge to the blind carbon copy, I'm just really that passive aggressive that I like to ensure someone above a person is following up on the person I make an inquiry to. I do the same thing at work. When I send an e-mail which I determine I really want a follow-up to, I always BCC the manage of that person as well. In almost every case, I get a response from the person I e-mailed. My own managers have grown to expect this of me. Everyone who knows me knows that I'm very passive aggressive and somewhat obssesive compulsive which works well for me as a software developer, but sometimes doesn't work out so well for me in my own personal life.

Glenn Britt is the C.E.O. of TWC and Joan Gillman is in charge of advanced receivers and associated technologies at TWC.


----------



## etsolow (Feb 8, 2001)

The subterfuge is that you are including the person's manager without telling them. Why not CC: the manager so everyone is clear about what's going on?


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

I said I'm passive aggressive, not just plain aggressive. I can't make that concept much simpler.


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

terryfoster said:


> You do realize the number of TWC subs that are affected by this are few, right?


I disagree, this is growing very fast in almost all TW areas. I live in a small Rochester, NY market and we already have UniversalHD on SDV and analog Boomerang. Our market is in the process of listing all SDV channels on their website to help explain this. But it for sure is growing and growing fast.


----------



## Gene S (Feb 11, 2003)

classicX said:


> Sorry to burst your bubble, but a company like TWC has 100,000 other subscribers and couldn't care less about losing 100 or 200 because they won't cater to Tivo and Tivo users. Tivo just doesn't have enough market penetration to affect their bottom line. Companies like that don't even LOOK at the thousands column of their bottom line - they think in millions and billions. Until Tivo can affect enough users to make that kind of change in their profits, they won't be calling any shots, and no one will "wait for Tivo to be compliant" to roll out ANYTHING.


This is true, but SDV doesn't just affect future S3 owners. It breaks any current cablecard devices. There is already a script in place at my TWC for a CSR to explain what channels you will not be receiving when you request a CC for a Digital Cable ready TV.
As I stated before, if too many channels get moved to SDV, I'll cancel that "tier." Local HD will be in the clear. TWC will lose money and I'll tell them exactly why.


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

BillyT2002 said:


> There is no subterfuge to the blind carbon copy, I'm just really that passive aggressive that I like to ensure someone above a person is following up on the person I make an inquiry to. I do the same thing at work. When I send an e-mail which I determine I really want a follow-up to, I always BCC the manage of that person as well. In almost every case, I get a response from the person I e-mailed. My own managers have grown to expect this of me. Everyone who knows me knows that I'm very passive aggressive and somewhat obssesive compulsive which works well for me as a software developer, but sometimes doesn't work out so well for me in my own personal life.


I love it when people think that by admitting they have a personality disorder somehow that makes everything ok.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Welshdog said:


> I love it when people think that by admitting they have a personality disorder somehow that makes everything ok.


The difference between me and those people to whom you refer though is that although I'm perfectly willing to admit what you refer to as a personality disorder (I don't necessarily consider it as such - it's just part of what make me who I am), I basically don't care if it makes it OK for you or anyone else. (When it comes to other people - who are not me - I can be an apathetic bastard - thank you very much).


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

BillyT2002 said:


> The difference between me and those people to whom you refer though is that although I'm perfectly willing to admit what you refer to as a personality disorder (I don't necessarily consider it as such - it's just part of what make me who I am), I basically don't care if it makes it OK for you or anyone else. (When it comes to other people - who are not me - I can be an apathetic bastard - thank you very much).


I suspected as much.

No matter where you go, there you are.


----------



## JohnBrowning (Jul 15, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> There is no subterfuge to the blind carbon copy, I'm just really that passive aggressive that I like to ensure someone above a person is following up on the person I make an inquiry to. I do the same thing at work. When I send an e-mail which I determine I really want a follow-up to, I always BCC the manage of that person as well.


I'll simply call B.S. on that! BCC, unless using it for your own file, is a very dishonorable move! If you feel it necessary to copy person B on a email to person A, the honorable thing to do is do it in the clear. What is to be gained by hiding? Its a particularly onerous manuver on a Microsoft Exchange system because a "Reply to All" will also copy the BCC recipients and the person sending the reply doesn't even know it! We once had a particular individual in my office who liked to BCC lots of folks. Nobody trusted him and this was one of the reasons. I would not be surprised if your co-workers feel the same about you.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

JohnBrowning said:


> I'll simply call B.S. on that! BCC, unless using it for your own file, is a very dishonorable move! If you feel it necessary to copy person B on a email to person A, the honorable thing to do is do it in the clear. What is to be gained by hiding? Its a particularly onerous manuver on a Microsoft Exchange system because a "Reply to All" will also copy the BCC recipients and the person sending the reply doesn't even know it! We once had a particular individual in my office who liked to BCC lots of folks. Nobody trusted him and this was one of the reasons. I would not be surprised if your co-workers feel the same about you.


Not always the truth - I had a boss who would BCC us (his minions) on replies and email chains that were happening between him and the real muckety mucks. It was a great job of keeping us informed of what was going on in the organization, and really "empowered" us to get the job done. (I usually hate the use of the word empowered, but it's the best I could come up with).


----------



## danieljanderson (Nov 19, 2002)

Back to the subject at hand..... 
If having SDV means that I can't record TRIO or LOGO or The Horse Racing Channel, I'll be just fine with a S3.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

JohnBrowning said:


> I'll simply call B.S. on that! BCC, unless using it for your own file, is a very dishonorable move! If you feel it necessary to copy person B on a email to person A, the honorable thing to do is do it in the clear. What is to be gained by hiding? Its a particularly onerous manuver on a Microsoft Exchange system because a "Reply to All" will also copy the BCC recipients and the person sending the reply doesn't even know it! We once had a particular individual in my office who liked to BCC lots of folks. Nobody trusted him and this was one of the reasons. I would not be surprised if your co-workers feel the same about you.


If you're doing your job in the first place, then you'll have nothing to worry about when I BCC your manager on an e-mail inquiry I send to you. And guess what... I don't or wouldn't care what you think about it my friend or whether you trusted me or not. I've got a job to do. Usually I'll work with anyone I have to, to get it done. I'm also always polite and cordial to everyone I come in contact with at work whether I like you or not or whether you like me or not. However, I'm not there to make friends. I'm there to get work done and that's why I've been successfully employed for a long time and well compensated to boot.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

Great to know that cold, heartless greed is alive and well in Maine.


----------



## Dajad (Oct 7, 1999)

BillyT2002 said:


> There is no subterfuge to the blind carbon copy, I'm just really that passive aggressive that I like to ensure someone above a person is following up on the person I make an inquiry to. I do the same thing at work. When I send an e-mail which I determine I really want a follow-up to, I always BCC the manage of that person as well. In almost every case, I get a response from the person I e-mailed. My own managers have grown to expect this of me. Everyone who knows me knows that I'm very passive aggressive and somewhat obssesive compulsive which works well for me as a software developer, but sometimes doesn't work out so well for me in my own personal life.
> 
> Glenn Britt is the C.E.O. of TWC and Joan Gillman is in charge of advanced receivers and associated technologies at TWC.


Sounds like a hell of a recipe for making everyone you work with, other than you manager, a life-long enemy! There's nothing PASSIVE about your aggression here. You are actively, purposefully and intentionally stabbing your co-workers in the back. Your managers may find your strategy useful, but they certainly won't respect you for it.

...Dale


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

I disagree - I would want my manager to know what I was doing and who I was doing it for. That way, if what Billy wants me to do conflicts with what my boss wants me to do, he can set me straight. If there is no conflict, then I still want the boss to know that I'm actively working on something.

I guess that all of this could be accomplished without the blind, but it sounds like the people he works with regularly know anyways, so it isn't a big deal. And if not, then screw 'em - it isn't my job to make sure you do your job, I'm just making it easier for you boss to do that.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Dajad said:


> Sounds like a hell of a recipe for making everyone you work with, other than you manager, a life-long enemy! There's nothing PASSIVE about your aggression here. You are actively, purposefully and intentionally stabbing your co-workers in the back. Your managers may find your strategy useful, but they certainly won't respect you for it.
> 
> ...Dale


I am very well respected where I work, precisely because my managers know that when I have a job to do, I will always get it done. The end product will always be what they wanted and it will be done on time. I work both fast and smart. It is rarely the case when I need information from anyone else, but occasionally I might need to know something about something which I was not involved in, in the first place. When this occurs, I get the information I need. I almost never have to send another e-mail. My co-workers do not hate me as for the most part we are friends and usually people look to me for information and not the other way around. I haven't made any enemies that you speak of. (Or, at least not any that still work for the company I work for.) Most people just reply to my e-mails with the information I'm looking for - so it really hasn't been an issue in the eight years I've been with this company. I get more information, faster by doing things my way, then I ever did when I wasn't using BCC. My manager has also told me that she appreciates being in the loop for this kind of information and she also appreciate that by not directly copying her, people won't feel nervous about neglecting the question or not providing good information. Yet we still all know what is going on.

I'm not stabbing anyone in the back. (In 43 years, I've never killed anybody and I plan to keep it that way.) However, like I said I work to get a job done and if you are going to be an obstacle to me, you will be removed. It's really as simple as that. If my managers don't respect me, then they sure keep compensating me well for what I do. So if disrespect equates to more money - I'll take it.


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

Come on, enough already. Let's get back to the topic at hand of this thread. You can agree to disagree on this BCC item. I think the right intentions were attempted here and everyone should email TW executives to express our anger with SDV. This for sure has really upset me and my local TW (because I pushed the issue) just updated their website. I don't like at all the statements that all digital channels will be SDV rendering 1.0 cablecards until 2.0 standard useless, for any new channels and some past ones. http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

sure looks like TWC is not banking on having to use a cable card 1 by the deadline but will do something proprietary anyway.

although it really looks like they are banking on that deadline from the FCC being pushed back further


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

since we're totally off Topic I'll chime in.

When I get a BCC concerning one of my reports. I call them in to my office and say:
"ya know John- it looks like Billy is trying to screw you by implying you aren't doing your job with this BCC he sent me. You should really watch your back around that guy." 

Of course if my reports couldn't be trusted and needed me to follow up on them all the time, maybe I'd enjoy being BCC'd but generally I get rid of those ones way before it becomes an issue.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> sure looks like TWC is not banking on having to use a cable card 1 by the deadline but will do something proprietary anyway.
> 
> although it really looks like they are banking on that deadline from the FCC being pushed back further


Post in another thread from someone in Texas in the test area- said they called TW CSR and CSR said that the only thing on SDV currently was the sports pacakges like Extra Innings, Center ICe, league pass, etc.

So looks like CURRENTLY not a factor UNLESS people want a sports pack.

I would guess they would keep it that way untill CC 2.0 is a done deal and handles SDV. At that point I *GUESS* unidirectional CC devices like the Series 3 Tivo might be limited as to new content- sort of like new MPEG4 HD content from Directv wont work on their older boxes....

just speculation on my part.


----------



## jeffrypennock (May 18, 2006)

MichaelK said:


> Post in another thread from someone in Texas in the test area- said they called TW CSR and CSR said that the only thing on SDV currently was the sports pacakges like Extra Innings, Center ICe, league pass, etc.
> 
> So looks like CURRENTLY not a factor UNLESS people want a sports pack.
> 
> ...


It was me that made that post. http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=308919&page=2&pp=30 And I don't think we are a test area because they aren't doing anything weird with our channel line-up. I think we're part of TWC's nation-wide roll out of SDV capabilities which they're not exactly sure what they're going to do with yet besides deliver VOD content.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

thanks for clarifying.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> Post in another thread from someone in Texas in the test area- said they called TW CSR and CSR said that the only thing on SDV currently was the sports pacakges like Extra Innings, Center ICe, league pass, etc.


Check out the TWC Rochester CableCard page ...
http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

From the Rochester CableCard page



> Digital Cable Packages and prices include 1 digital box. Customers can purchase a Cable Card for $3.00 / mos.


Does this mean you must take their cable box in order to get the cable card? Or does it mean you can substitute the card for the box? Sounds like they want to make you rent the box regardless and then charge you an additional $3 to get the card.


----------



## greenstork (Apr 5, 2006)

Bierboy said:


> Think what you want....fact is, only a smidgen of potential S3 users will EVER be affected by this. (Speed?!....come on)


Just because you couldn't care less about Formula 1 racing doesn't mean that others don't TiVo it every other weekend on Speed.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

dt_dc said:


> Check out the TWC Rochester CableCard page ...
> http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


I wouldn't be too upset about losing those channels if I lived in that area. However I'm sure there are people who will be.

Dan


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Welshdog said:


> From the Rochester CableCard page
> 
> Does this mean you must take their cable box in order to get the cable card? Or does it mean you can substitute the card for the box? Sounds like they want to make you rent the box regardless and then charge you an additional $3 to get the card.


I thought the FCC told cable to keep the cards under $2?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Check out the TWC Rochester CableCard page ...
> http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


dt_dc

what's YOUR opinion of the possibility of the FCC allowing this to go on for a while without cablecard 2.0 deployed in the real world?

I suspect they will use the ability to delay box deployment mandates for new and aimproved technologies to overlook it.

Curious if you think there is any stopping it?


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

dt_dc said:


> Check out the TWC Rochester CableCard page ...
> http://www.timewarnercable.com/rochester/products/cablecard.html


I'd be mad about the Universal HD channel.

In this case, what does digital simulcast mean?


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> I wouldn't be too upset about losing those channels if I lived in that area. However I'm sure there are people who will be.
> 
> Dan


From *Time Warner Rochester*:

*Services you CANNOT get with a CableCard

*As of January 2006, any new digital services added will NOT be available with a CableCard

Adult On Demand 
Boomerang, digital channel 534 
Caller ID on TV 
Digital Simulcast 
Free On Demand 
here! 
Howard Stern On Demand 
Interactive & Enhanced TV services 
Interactive Program Guide 
Movies On Demand 
Pay-Per-View 
Premiums On Demand 
Seasonal Sports Packages 
Sleuth-digital channel 331 
Showtime Comedy-digitial channel 940 
Starz Comedy-digital channel 955 
Universal HD 
NY Legislative Channel 
News 10 NBC Weather*

A lot of people (who don't own up to it) watch porn. Free "On Demand" and PPV are also popular. And then there's the "Stern gang". Regardless of whether I used them, I'd want access to these services.

At least Time Warner Rochester is upfront about their policies; like it or not!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

But OnDemand and PPV are NEVER available via CableCARD, so that's to be expected. The only thing unusual on that list are the half dozen digital channels, including one HD channel.

Dan


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Everyone should have known from the very beginning that the on-demand and other interactive channels would not be available. The only really new issue popping up is allocation of broadcast channels to SDV (Boomerang, Seasonal Sports, Slueth, Showtime and Starz Comedy, UNversal HD and any new channels on-line after whatever date they stated).


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

ah30k said:


> Everyone should have known from the very beginning that the on-demand and other interactive channels would not be available. The only really new issue popping up is allocation of broadcast channels to SDV (Boomerang, Seasonal Sports, Slueth, Showtime and Starz Comedy, UNversal HD and any new channels on-line after whatever date they stated).


Seasonal Sports _is_ PPV so that item isn't new. I believe their "any new digital channel" statement is a bit assuming of them, but possibly true.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

DCIFRTHS said:


> I'd be mad about the Universal HD channel.
> 
> In this case, what does digital simulcast mean?


not positive but I belive comcast intends to take the ENTIRE analog tier and duplicate it digitally.


----------



## SCSIRAID (Feb 2, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> not positive but I belive comcast intends to take the ENTIRE analog tier and duplicate it digitally.


TWC in Raleigh has done that. The Cablecard is tuning the analog versions... not the digital simulcast (which the STB is tuning). So Cablecard doesnt get the benefit of the digital transmission (which can be either good or bad).


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> But OnDemand and PPV are NEVER available via CableCARD, so that's to be expected. The only thing unusual on that list are the half dozen digital channels, including one HD channel.
> 
> Dan


True!

My point is that I'd never subscribe to digital cable without getting at least one digital STB regardless of whether I needed Cable Cards as well.

Here we get a standard STB included with any digital tier, and for a flat $10. monthly, a hi-def dual tuner MS based Motorola DCT 6412 adds a cable DVR STB without an additional outlet fee.

(Gotta' go; FedEx just delivered the *LG LST-3410A* I've been expecting, as I was typing this post! A NEW TOY to check out!!!!)


----------



## cherry ghost (Sep 13, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> But OnDemand and PPV are NEVER available via CableCARD, so that's to be expected. The only thing unusual on that list are the half dozen digital channels, including one HD channel.
> 
> Dan


You can still order PPV over the phone with CableCard, correct?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I believe so. However I don't have a CableCARD device so I can't say for sure.

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

cherry ghost said:


> You can still order PPV over the phone with CableCard, correct?


On my cable system, yes you can.

On cable systems that used SDV for PPV ... no, you wouldn't be able to.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> dt_dc
> 
> what's YOUR opinion of the possibility of the FCC allowing this to go on for a while without cablecard 2.0 deployed in the real world?
> 
> ...


It's no different from digital cable channels on analog cable-ready devices ... or VOD on digital cable-ready devices ... on (some new service) on interactive digital cable-ready devices ...

There are certain things the current level of 'cable-ready' devices can't get ... hopefully those will be adressed in the next. That will _always_ be the state of 'cable-ready' ... unless cable stops deploying anything new.

FCC won't do anything unless it impacts 'availability at retail'. Ie, if suddenly you couldn't get a digital cable-ready device at retail (ie, manufacturers stopped making them ... or retailers stopped carrying them ... because presumably people wouldn't buy them for whatever reason) ... the FCC would get involved.

But if there is 'availability at retail' of digital cable-ready devices (whether or not they can or can't get certain services) than the FCC is doing what Congress told it to do and doesn't have the power to do any more.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

DCIFRTHS said:


> In this case, what does digital simulcast mean?


Digital Simulcast is ... they take any analog channels and simulcast a digital version. Ie, if there's an analog version of a channel (for grandpa's 1980 Magnavox) then they also add a digital version of the channel to the lineup (for the cable company's own STB for example). The end-user usually doesn't even know it's there ... ie, the cable company box will just map whatever the channel number is to the new digital channel.

My cable company (Cox Fairfax) just recently implemented (mostly) digital simulcast. There's still a few analog-only channels (shopping networks, CSPAN, a few others) but most of the standard cable channels (MTV, CNN, Discovery, ESPN, etc) are simulcast analog and digital.

The digital simulcast channels are nice and clean ... takes up less space on DVRs ... look the exact same live as when played back on DVRs ... etc. etc. etc.

Definate advantages to the digital simulcast channels.

Of course, if SDV is used for digital simulcast ... then any unidirectional cable-ready products will only ever be able to access the analog versions of those channels ... and won't have access to the digital versions.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

... and if the system has full digital simulcast, they can deploy all digital set top boxes. All digital STBs are MUCH cheaper that analog/digital.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

TiVo Troll said:


> My point is that I'd never subscribe to digital cable without getting at least one digital STB regardless of whether I needed Cable Cards as well.


My sentiments exactly. Comcast includes one standard or HD STB with their digital tier, which I'll probably use in conjunction with my S3 (if I get one).

I find that right now, because I have the ability, I am frequently recording two shows at once, and would like to watch a third.

And if you want PPV or On Demand this is what you'll have to do anyway.


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

TiVo Troll said:


> (Gotta' go; FedEx just delivered the *LG LST-3410A* I've been expecting, as I was typing this post! A NEW TOY to check out!!!!)


(Bummer! It's apparently got a b.o. HD.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Huh? 

Dan


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

What is "big old Hard Drive", Alex?


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

TiVo Troll said:


> ("b.o. HD")


(It appears as if the HD is bad. Everything works except for DVR functions which when selected bring up a "DVR is initializing" pop-up which disappears and nothing happens. LG's CS confirmed that the HD is probably in bad order.)


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

TiVo Troll said:


> From *Time Warner Rochester*:
> 
> At least Time Warner Rochester is upfront about their policies; like it or not!


Dan they are only up front about this because I pushed the issue to Corporate a few weeks ago and had a conference call with the President of the Rochester office. I opened a BBB Online issue when I discovered I couldn't get UniversalHD via CableCard and that their website didn't accurately explain the services I wouldn't receive as a customer. My biggest problem is that this precedent has now been set and any future HD channels will likely also not be able to be viewed via CableCard.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

At least you got them to do something about it. Do you know if they've put up similar pages for the other markets using SDV?

Dan


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> At least you got them to do something about it. Do you know if they've put up similar pages for the other markets using SDV? Dan


I don't believe so and was impressed to get the urgent response, letter, credit, and changes to their website that I did after escalation of my issue. What this did validate is SDV is a very real thing that effects all TW market operations, not just as a test in some markets as many threads have indicated.


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

TiVo Troll said:


> At least Time Warner Rochester is upfront about their policies; like it or not!


So is TWC Austin

http://www.timewarnercable.com/austin/products/cablecard.html


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

No mention of SDV in the Austin web site.


----------



## Frankenstien (Feb 8, 2006)

TWC in Charlotte lists similar info as Austin.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

The issues with CableCard and PPV and OnDemand aren't an issue for me. I would have had those same issues with Comcast, and I was OK with that. If I wanted to take advantage, I could always get a cable box and just watch that stuff live (no reason to TiVo OnDemand stuff, and PPV stuff, if I ever got any, would probably be sporting events, and I really don't TiVo those either). I already watch a lot of stuff live anyway, so that was a plausible method anyway. That, or getting a CableCard for the [future] TV.

The troubling thing is the SDV. It's very clear TW will go forward with this in all markets. Some say it's only "new" channels, but that still means stuff that I won't be able to TiVo that I may want to TiVo with a Series 3. I can't figure out why people say this makes them feel better about TW. For me, it only confirms my valid fears about them.


----------



## drew2k (Jun 10, 2003)

The online information Cablevision provides about CableCards is pure crap, and theres no mention of SDV anywhere. The CableCard info is only available by searching their "Answer System" FAQ, so it's spread across a dozen topics. 

I just called to find out about the availability and cost of CableCards and found out the online pages are also outdated. It's not $1.25 per month as stated online, it's $1.50. There's also an "answer" that discusses "current talks under way now in 2004" regarding two-way communication. There's no mention online of installation costs, but it's $46.95 for as many cards installed in that visit. 

Anyway, I just wrote to them to confirm the cost and have them bring the CableCard "answers" up to date, and asked them to consider creating a dedicated CableCard page like Rochester and Austin TWC provide. (I gave them the links posted in this thread.) 

I also asked in the email if they had any schedule on when multi-stream cards will be available and the cost. I'm sure they haven't even thought about it yet, but I had their "ear" so I thought I'd ask. 

While I was on the phone asking some basic questions about CableCard, the agent claimed she had never heard of SDV and that with CableCard all I would lose would be PPV and On-demand. 

(She also tried to sell me the Cablevision VOIP service, which requires a $20 installation fee. I asked if I ordered the CableCards and had them installed at the same time as the VOIP service what the cost would be. You guessed it: $46.95 + $20 = $66.95, even if the same technician does both installs. What a rip off!)


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

drew2k said:


> What a rip off!)


LOL Why do you sound so surprised?

Besides, I'd go with a cheaper third party VOIP that you can take with you if you happen to move out of CableVision's area.


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

Honestly, I think cable companies could give out cablecards if they want to, and charge an even higher fee if you take cards from them and can't give them the info they need to authorize the card.

1) Customer inquires about Cablecards.
2) Customer is told: it's $46 for a truck roll to install as many cards as you need, or you can take the cards and install them yourself.
3) If you (the customer) cannot get the proper information to the phone authorization people and we have to do a truck roll, it's $56.

Joe Schmoe who doesn't know anything about his CableCard device opts for the cheaper initial truck roll. Edward Nigma, the master of all technology, takes the cards at no installation cost and sets them up himself.

Provided your CableCard device comes with instructions on how to GET the proper information, problem solved.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Even better would be for them to set up a website where the user can simply type in the numbers needed into a simple form. I think there are only like 3 numbers they need... the serial number from the card, the ID of the host device and some sort of key that is negotiated between the two. If they could do that, and make authorization near instant, then they wouldn't even have to pay a phone tech to enter the numbers for you.

Dan


----------



## m_jonis (Jan 3, 2002)

I'm not so sure that a CC 2.0 device will be able to do SDV (even if it were available today). From what I've read, all the cable co's want to use OCAP to do SDV. And part of the OCAP implementation is "control" over the interface. So I doubt that even if the Series 3 did have CC 2.0 "today" that the cable companies would let the Tivo interface utilize OCAP (since they want control over what/how it functions).

I think that's one of the reasons why Verizon is proposing a different "implementation" of how to do "SDV" that doesn't utilize OCAP (I believe that SDV can be accomplished via 3 methods, 2 of which use OCAP and the third is basically IPTV).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That whole portion of CableCARD 2.0 hasn't been agreed upon yet, and that's why CC2.0 isn't finished yet. The cable companys want to require OCAP and the CE companies want to agree on a simple communication protocol that will allow them to design their own interface around the bidirectional features.

That being said SDV is really not much different then VOD. So if a box can support one, which CC2.0 is supose to allow VOD, then it should be able to support the other just fine.

Dan


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

Frankenstien said:


> TWC in Charlotte lists similar info as Austin.


I think you will find that Rochester is the only one with the info related to SDV. I'm sure other markets will catch on but what you show in Charlotte & Austin is the same page we had in Rochester before I raised this issue and they were forced to make some changes.

I suspect Corporate is providing a new web template page on CableCard's that all markets will adopt sometime soon.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Frankenstien said:


> TWC in Charlotte lists similar info as Austin.


TWC of Syracuse, Albany, and 5 other cities in NY show this same exact page. It looks like the same generic page is used for most cities. It seems to be tailored to the "Cablecard for Dummies" audience.

The only exception is TWC of Rochester, which explictly lists the exact channels you can't get. If I were in other cities, I wouldn't count on that Cablecard web page being 100% accurate. I'm sure each city will have a different SDV lineup -- the only way to find out is to do cdp1276 did (except maybe don't use the BCC in the e-mail  ).


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> It's no different from digital cable channels on analog cable-ready devices ... or VOD on digital cable-ready devices ... on (some new service) on interactive digital cable-ready devices ...
> 
> There are certain things the current level of 'cable-ready' devices can't get ... hopefully those will be adressed in the next. That will _always_ be the state of 'cable-ready' ... unless cable stops deploying anything new.
> 
> ...


interesting article i found at nytimes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/03/t...rss&adxnnlx=1152219119-a7vK4sXcQoV+rmGrZSrkiw

basically says cablecard is dying. That the market is moving backwards.



> Frustrated by the lack of consumer interest, many television manufacturers have sharply cut the number of CableCard-ready models. According to Richard Doherty, an analyst with the market research firm the Envisioneering Group, 80 percent fewer television models with CableCard are available this year than in 2005.


so it looks like cable's refusal to actually support cablecard and also to create a real open 2 way spec is certainly affecting the magic 'availibility at retail' that the FCC is supposed to promote. WHo knows at what point the FCC steps in to do anything about it , but it seems clear that cable certainly isn't helping the technology to succeed and maintain a retail presence.

here's another real encouraging nugget about a real 2-way spec:



> "Whether it is 2007, 2008 or 2009 when key points are agreed upon, is hard to say," said Phil Abram, Sony's vice president for TV marketing.


the FCC stinks....


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

CableLabs just issued a new draft of the CC2.0 spec yesterday, only two months after the last draft was issued, so it looks like they might finally be making some real progress. Then again even if they finalize the spec in two months, the manufacturers have to develope the relevent equipment and the MSOs have to deploy it, so we're probably still a year or more away. (it took a little over a year from finalization of the spec to deployment for CC1.0)

Dan


----------



## cmaasfamily (Jan 26, 2006)

So with my second cablecard TV arriving next week are we saying that cablecard is dying? (or being MURDERED??) 

Love the first one (look ma! no boxes, no wires!), looking forward to the second and to S3. 

Will those (very few, apparently) of us with cc1 devices be left hanging in a few years or will they continue to work (albeit without 2-way, which I'm not interested in) for a reasonable future time?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> CableLabs just issued a new draft of the CC2.0 spec yesterday, only two months after the last draft was issued, so it looks like they might finally be making some real progress. Then again even if they finalize the spec in two months, the manufacturers have to develope the relevent equipment and the MSOs have to deploy it, so we're probably still a year or more away. (it took a little over a year from finalization of the spec to deployment for CC1.0)


CableLabs still hasn't released the OCAP 1.1 specs which is what manufacturers are really interested in ...


----------



## kdmorse (Jan 29, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> CableLabs just issued a new draft of the CC2.0 spec yesterday...


Does it mandate OCAP?

-Ken


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

cmaasfamily said:


> Will those (very few, apparently) of us with cc1 devices be left hanging in a few years or will they continue to work (albeit without 2-way, which I'm not interested in) for a reasonable future time?


The CC2.0 spec is backward compatible, so your TV will continue to work in it's current capacity for quite some time.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

kdmorse said:


> Does it mandate OCAP?


Yes. 

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

dt_dc said:


> CableLabs still hasn't released the OCAP 1.1 specs which is what manufacturers are really interested in ...


Is OCAP 1.1 supose to allow the manufacturers to control the UI of advanced services like VOD?

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> Is OCAP 1.1 supose to allow the manufacturers to control the UI of advanced services like VOD?


Hard to say until the spec is release ... 

http://www.cedmagazine.com/toc-xod/2006/20060606.html
http://blog.cabledigitalnews.com/index.php?id=491
etc.

Resource contention and software upgrades are two of the bigger issues.

As to VOD, SDV, IPTV, and other two way services ... I dunno, OCAP 1.1 is supposed to be "better" and "closer to what CE manufacturers want" ...

But, how close that is ... we shall see ...

I don't think well see a spec that will "allow the manufacturers to control the UI of advanced services" ...

Perhaps a spec that will "allow the manufacturers to better interact with the UI of advanced services" ... might be a better way of wording it.

But anyway, it's speculation untill it's released / debated / etc.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

forgive my laziness to read it all myself (it took me forever to read the cablecard 1 standard when it bothered- that's some DRY reading-LOL) , but does the cablecard 2.0 standard basically define the hardware and says to see the OCAP standard for software rules?

If that how some TV manufacturers are creating CC2.0 sets for the holidays?

WOuld it be possible for Tivo to built a series 3.5 TODAY with the correct harware for 2.0 but just get it certified 1.0 and then at some later date put the correct software on it to go 2.0 and 2-way?


----------



## classicX (May 10, 2006)

MichaelK said:


> forgive my laziness to read it all myself (it took me forever to read the cablecard 1 standard when it bothered- that's some DRY reading-LOL) , but does the cablecard 2.0 standard basically define the hardware and says to see the OCAP standard for software rules?
> 
> If that how some TV manufacturers are creating CC2.0 sets for the holidays?
> 
> WOuld it be possible for Tivo to built a series 3.5 TODAY with the correct harware for 2.0 but just get it certified 1.0 and then at some later date put the correct software on it to go 2.0 and 2-way?


Short answer: no, because 2.0 is not finalized, so they wouldn't know what to build.

And CC2.0 defines more than just hardware. OCAP is what they are currently arguing about. The cable companies want to control the user interface, the third party manufacturers want to be able to write their own interfaces with a standard API for VOD and PPV.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVo could technically build a CC2.0 compliant device today, since the hardware portion of the spec is set. However there is no chance the Series 3 will be CC2.0 compliant since since it was approved by CableLabs before the final CC2.0 hardware spec was even issued. Also the extra hardware required to be CC2.0 compliant would be completely useless, and thus a dead expense, until the cable companies actually deployed CC2.0 PODs, which could still be years off.

Dan


----------



## Welshdog (Jan 4, 2005)

I know Firewire was mentioned way earlier in this thread. I wonder if this is what we can expect?

http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...a_uwb_delivers_optimal_whole_home_networking/


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Unlikely. That's a new technology which is designed to distribute FireWire throughout a house using your existing coaxil cable. It sounds like it works similar to HomePNA in that it works on a frequency which is not used by the cable company because it only survives over short distances. The Series 3 will not have a FireWire port at all.

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Welshdog said:


> I know Firewire was mentioned way earlier in this thread. I wonder if this is what we can expect?
> 
> http://www.macsimumnews.com/index.p...a_uwb_delivers_optimal_whole_home_networking/


There's lots of different ways to distribute Firewire output around a house. The above article is about 1394 over coax.

Then there's HomePNA (mentioned by Dan above), Moca, others ...

All similiar, but slightly different.


----------



## amjustice (Mar 9, 2006)

I dont know if anyone posted on this but engadget has an article that says TWC is now backtracking and will support the series 3 http://www.engadget.com/2006/08/07/twc-apologizes-tivo-series-3-cablecard-fudge/


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> TiVo could technically build a CC2.0 compliant device today, since the hardware portion of the spec is set. However there is no chance the Series 3 will be CC2.0 compliant since since it was approved by CableLabs before the final CC2.0 hardware spec was even issued. Also the extra hardware required to be CC2.0 compliant would be completely useless, and thus a dead expense, until the cable companies actually deployed CC2.0 PODs, which could still be years off.
> 
> Dan


I'm sure the current series3 doesn't have the needed hardware- I was wonder ing about a series 3.5...

I could be wrong (now I have to stop being lazy and go find and read the darn spec...LOL) but from reading threads such as this I'm under the impression that CC2.0 vs 1.0 hardware just requires more memory (which hopefully TiVo has- if not it could sure speed things along), more power in the processor (again TiVo likely already is good enough but hell, notch it up if need be), a DOCIS modem (not a bad thing to add for anyone on cable. Let the TiVo be the internet gateway instead of having to connect to it) and firewire- which would make plenty of folks happy to have.

So I dont think the hardware would HAVE to needlessly sit fallow or anything. It might not get used to it's full potential but it wouldn't be worthless without CC 2.0

I guess it is kind of pointless for TiVo though if the 2.0 cards wont get deployed for years. But maybe the FCC actually does somethign and sets a meaningfull deadline and TiVo can start adding the hardware anticipating the future.

I'd gladly pay a significant premium if i knew that the hardware was compatible with future standards. Originally I planned to buy 2 series3's the day they came out and jump to cable. Now that I am educating myself more and finding out the potential future issues (PPV/VOD would be nice but not needed, but Switched video would p___ me off if it had certain channels) I plan to buy just one to start and see see what goes on after that. UNless the price is very low I'm not sure I will risk buying 2 right away. On the other hand I'd pay 2-300 more if I knew just software changes would be needed to enable CC2.0 at some later date.

Obviously to each his own and others have differnt opinions, but that's my thoughts for now.


----------



## cdp1276 (Mar 25, 2003)

BillyT2002 said:


> I highly recommend anyone who cares about this issue to send an e-mail to [email protected] and blind carbon copy [email protected] on it.


Bill or anyone else that had planned to follow this advice and send an email to these two TW executives you will be waiting for a response for a very long time as they didn't get the email. You have the email addresses wrong Bill and I'm surprised you didn't notice the NDR in your email after you sent your note. The correct email addresses are:

[email protected]
[email protected]


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Well, then both addresses work for them, because when I sent my e-mails to the addresses I listed: [email protected] and [email protected], I got an almost immediate phone call from a Time-Warner executive. I did not get an NDR with the addresses I used. So, either both the addresses I listed and the addresses you listed: [email protected] and [email protected] are correct (or the ones I used, at least were correct), or Time-Warner has quickly changed the addresses. I suspect the former and not the latter.

I have no intentions of following up any further with Time-Warner as I'm very satisfied that they called me at all and that they provided me with correct information as to their intentions with switched digital video (which I already listed within this thread) and I'll be buying a TIVO series 3 when it finally becomes available and using it with Time-Warner cable service (and shutting off DirecTV).


----------



## Joe Smith (Aug 1, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> interesting article i found at nytimes:
> 
> basically says cablecard is dying. That the market is moving backwards.


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-6107359.html?tag=nl.e550

The cable industry suffered a blow on Friday when a federal appeals court upheld the Federal Communications Commission's mandate requiring cable operators to distribute a technology called CableCards, which will allow digital cable subscribers to get rid of their cable set-top boxes.

The court's decision should move cable operators a step closer to finally offering a service that allows consumers to simply plug a card into a device to get cable TV service.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

without 2-way cablecard resolved I'm not sure what the court opnion means.

In theory come July 1 next year if you call your cable company to lease a box they are supposed to hand you a cablecard box.

Well without 2-way cablecard resolved- how the hell is that going to happen?

Cable is going to hand out boxes that cant order PPV or VOD? That AINT going to happen.

There is a clause in the law requiring 3rd party boxes that says the FCC can isssue waivers if new technology is coming. Guess what cables argument to the FCC will be come June? (actually it will be march since the law says the FCC has to rule in 90 dyas if I recall). 

I see a "compromise" where cable hadns out cablecard boxes for one-way service and the same old proprietary boxes for 2-way services "untill the new 2-way cablecard technology matures".

John Q public: "hi cable monopoly- I want to get a box for my HDTV."
Cable CSR " well would you like an open standard box that wont allow PPV, VOD, IPG, or anything else or would you like our proprietary box and have those features availible"
JQP "how much?"
CSR "Both boxes cost the same- but for the one-way box with the limited functionality you also have to pay us $2 a month for the card to operate it"


how do you think such a conversation would end?


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

nevermind march- looks like cabel already has made the argument that 2-way cards are an emerging technology that needs another dealy.

from the same article:



> Now, the cable companies and their lobbying group, the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, are asking for the deadline to be extended yet again. Earlier this week, NCTA and Comcast filed waivers with the FCC to exempt certain low-end set-top boxes from the ban. Furthermore, they asked the FCC to push the ban deadline to the end of 2009.


and further cable said:



> "We are encouraged by the court's observation that cable's progress on downloadable security 'may moot this entire controversy' and that the FCC was reasonable to delay the integration ban in light of the 'evolving nature of that technology,'" Neal Goldberg, NCTA general counsel, said in a statement. "Cable's progress on a downloadable security solution is the exact basis of the deferral request NCTA filed earlier this week with the commission which, if granted, would save consumers millions of dollars every year."


so they might just be jumping past 2-way cablecard and arguing that downloadable security is the end game we should all wait for...

Cable is evil...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Actually the hope is that this deadline will push through the CableCARD 2.0 standard. It's mainly the MSOs who have been draging their feet on CC2.0. If this deadline holds then the CC2.0 standard will most likely get finished up and deployed just in time for the deadline. (the hardware portion of the spec was finalized in April, so they've had plenty of time to have boxes built using the right hardware)

Dan


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

wow - i hope so- that would be awesome. 

So I can dream for a 2-way tivo series 3.5 next fall....


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

MichaelK said:


> wow - i hope so- that would be awesome.
> 
> So I can dream for a 2-way tivo series 3.5 next fall....


Probably not. TiVo put a lot of R&D into the S3, there is no way they're going to replace it that soon. We're probably going to have to wait at least a year after CC2.0 is deployed before we see anything from TiVo to take advantage of it.

Dan


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> Probably not. TiVo put a lot of R&D into the S3, there is no way they're going to replace it that soon. We're probably going to have to wait at least a year after CC2.0 is deployed before we see anything from TiVo to take advantage of it.
> 
> Dan


very true on the R&D but adding in hardware for CC2.0 is not that radical a redesign. maybe TiVo puts out a premium Series 3 that can do VOD along side the 1 way CC 1.0 Series 3. Then the original sereis 3 can just kind of fade off like the 140 did. Still a very functional box but not the same as a 240 or the cheaper made 540


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The difference is that there is nothing the 140 can't do that the 240 or 540 can. The Series 2 units are indentical with regard to functionality. They just have different parts lists that make them do certain things faster or slower then on another.

A S3 that supported CC2.0 would have significant functionality difference and really couldn't quietly replce the current S3 unit. It would have to very obviously marked as version 2.0 or something, or there would be major consumer confusion.

Dan


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> A S3 that supported CC2.0 would have significant functionality difference and really couldn't quietly replce the current S3 unit. It would have to very obviously marked as version 2.0 or something, or there would be major consumer confusion.
> 
> Dan


agreed on that. It would be a major difference and would have to be clearly marked. Series 3.1 and series 3.2 come to mind.

anyhow I do wonder about what the future of cable card has in store but if I had HDTV already and was dying with a cable DVR I would be in line for this series 3 as well.


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

MichaelK said:


> without 2-way cablecard resolved I'm not sure what the court opnion means.
> 
> In theory come July 1 next year if you call your cable company to lease a box they are supposed to hand you a cablecard box.
> 
> ...


No ... lack of a two-way agreement does not impact cable.

If the integration ban date holds (big if) ...

And if the two-way negotiations are still on-going (likely) ...

Cable is still perfectly cabable of deploying boxes that use CableCard for security and can still access VOD, iPPV, SDV, and other two-way services.

They even have several options ...

1) Motorola and Scientific Atlanta make the exact same boxes they are making now ... but replace the integrated security with CableCard.

Nothing tricky about it. Scientific Atlanta and Motorola have even shown off such boxes. Now, you couldn't move these boxes from cable system to cable system and have them (fully) work. They'd work just like existing cable boxes in that they (and the software on them) would be tied to a particular cable plant. Such a system isn't great for CE companies. They can't sell a box that will only work on one cable system. But, it works just fine for cable plants and their existing suppliers. They buy a few thousand boxes that work on their cable system with their hardware and their software. Just replace the integrated security with CableCard and you've met the integration ban.

Now, these boxes would be a little more expensive than existing boxes that use integrated security. But ... them's the breaks.

2) Deploy boxes that use the existing two-way standard and OCAP 1.0 (and CableCard).

CE's problem with OCAP is that it doesn't give them flexibility. It basically relies on OCAP software from the cable company to provide any advanced functionality. Well, cable doesn't have this issue / problem. They are more than happy to use OCAP 1.0 and have cable-provided software provide all the advanced functionality. They can start rolling out OCAP / CableCard boxes today if they want to.

Now ... whether cable would go with 1 or 2 depends on the status of all the OCAP software / guides / DVR software / etc. that people are working on. Cable is just now gearing up for OCAP so ... whether they go the existing 'native' route (1) or OCAP (2) would depend on whether all their OCAP initiatives were in a deployable state.

Anyway, there is not much about the integration ban that will hurry the two-way negotiations.

There are some impacts ... the main one being cost. Basically, once the two-way negotiations are done the cost of cable boxes that don't use integrated security may come down a bit for the cable companies.

The main impacts of the integration ban would be:
1) Making sure multi-stream cards are available and supported
2) Ironing out some (but definiately not all) of the CableCard glitches (mostly firmware related) since cable would be using them too


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Thanks DT_DC that post clears up a lot for me.

My one question - does the FCC regulation require access to cable functions like VOD or does it just speak to access to the digital stream ?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

ZeoTiVo said:


> My one question - does the FCC regulation require access to cable functions like VOD or does it just speak to access to the digital stream ?


Which FCC regulation? 

The 'integration ban' that was being discussed doesn't address VOD (or channels) or anything ...

It just requires cable operators to stop deploying boxes that use 'integrated' security ... and start deploying boxes that use a 'separable' security mechanism ... and make the interface specs available (to manufacturers) and security hardware available (to customers). Ie ... CableCard.

There's nothing specific to VOD or PPV or channels or SDV or IPTV or Karaoke-on-Demand or guide software or anything else ...


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> Probably not. TiVo put a lot of R&D into the S3, there is no way they're going to replace it that soon. We're probably going to have to wait at least a year after CC2.0 is deployed before we see anything from TiVo to take advantage of it.
> 
> Dan


there ya go ruining a man's dream-LOL

Seriously- I'd think it's evolutionary rather then revolutionary to add the extra memory, docsis modem, and firewaire port that would make a CC1 device into a cc2 device. Not a replacement but soup up what they have.

I would *GUESS* that creating a 2-way device would make people feel a bit better that they have a more future proof device for their 500-800 purchase.


----------



## MichaelK (Jan 10, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Which FCC regulation?
> 
> The 'integration ban' that was being discussed doesn't address VOD (or channels) or anything ...
> 
> ...


I think ZEO is referncing the section of the law that says:



> `(a) COMMERCIAL CONSUMER AVAILABILITY OF EQUIPMENT USED TO ACCESS
> SERVICES PROVIDED BY MULTICHANNEL VIDEO PROGRAMMING DISTRIBUTORS-
> The Commission shall, in consultation with appropriate industry
> standard-setting organizations, adopt regulations to assure the
> ...


If I understand correctly the FCC decided the best way to make that happen was to seperate the security form the box and then force cable to use cablecards also so that technology could mature faster and wind up in retail. The regulations the fcc made with the ban and deadlines were to make the above section of the law happen- IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY.

So i think the Law says that third party boxes found at retail must be able to allow John q public access to :


> multichannel video programming and other services


So what does "multichannel video programming and other services " mean? Does that encompass VOD and interactive stuff?

PS- thanks for 'splaining how they could still do VOD and use cablecard...


----------



## aine (Dec 23, 2003)

I'm one of the unfortunate customers of Time Warner San Diego. I use one of their SA STB with my TiVo Series2. Like everyone else, I've been waiting for the Series3 for years.

I may be in a state of denial about what I have just read, but after reading through this long thread, am I correct to say that the Series3 is going to be completely useless to me as a Time Warner Digital Cable subscriber in San Diego, and that I should put it out of my mind? Is it true that I will not be able to receive any digital (SD or HD) channels using the Series3, only analog or OTA, and that I must stick with my Series2 until both TiVo and TWC implement CC2.0 years from now?

Tell me it isn't so (cringe). Did TWC San Diego essentially make the TiVo Series3 useless in northern San Diego (TWC "territory")?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

No, that is NOT true! The ONLY channels which you will not be able to receive on the S3 are the ones which use SDV technology. I have no idea which channels those are in your area, but you should be able to call the local cable office and ask them which channels you will not be able to receive using a CableCARD. (should only be a dozen or so of the lesser watched channels)

Dan


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> you should be able to call the local cable office and ask them which channels you will not be able to receive using a CableCARD


You may also want to ask about whether you'll be getting the digital simulcast version of channels or just the analog versions with CableCard. Digital simulcast channels are becoming increasingly popular candidates for SDV.


----------



## aine (Dec 23, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> The ONLY channels which you will not be able to receive on the S3 are the ones which use SDV technology


OK, thanks for the clarification. I can probably live without a "dozen or so" hopefully lame-o channels of course. When the Series3 comes out, I will definitely be calling them (TWC San Diego) to ask which channels I won't be able to receive using a CableCARD.
I guess I was focusing on your earlier comment:


Dan203 said:


> Unfortunately one cable company, TWC, is testing a new technology, SDV, in 3 markets (TC, SC and San Diego) which breaks ALL CableCARD equipment. At this time there is NOTHING that TiVo, or any other CE manufacturer, can do to work around that technology because a standard for doing so does not exist. So all they can do is work with what is available for now or wait for the CableCARD 2.0 standard to be completed and deployed, which according to industry insiders could be 2+ years away.
> 
> So if you want to record digital cable and HD, and you don't want to use your cable companies DVR the Series 3 TiVo is your ONLY option. And for the majority of people, who are not in those TWC markets, it will be a viable alternative.


I assumed from that last sentence that for those of us who ARE in one of those TWC markets, Series3 is NOT a viable option. Now, my understanding is that it's viable, i.e. the Series3 is usable, just that I won't be receiving a small number of lesser-watched channels.

My worry is that TWC will decide to switch more and more channels over time -- e.g. regional sports channels showing your favorite college team, special interest channels, etc. -- and every time they do this, I would lose another channel on the TiVo.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It's possible that if you watch a specific specialized channel you could lose it to an SDV switch over. However SDV provides no benifits when used on popular channels, so you shouldn't ever have to worry about losing any of the main stream cable channels or your local channels.

Dan


----------



## petew (Jul 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> It's possible that if you watch a specific specialized channel you could lose it to an SDV switch over. However SDV provides no benifits when used on popular channels, so you shouldn't ever have to worry about losing any of the main stream cable channels or your local channels.
> 
> Dan


The group of channels that might move to SDV that are more likely to impact you are HD versions of popular cable channels such as EPSN-HD since HD takes up alot more bandwidth and is not yet mainstream.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> It's possible that if you watch a specific specialized channel you could lose it to an SDV switch over. However SDV provides no benifits when used on popular channels, so you shouldn't ever have to worry about losing any of the main stream cable channels or your local channels.
> 
> Dan


Yes. Even though TWC would LOVE to switch almost everything over to SDV in order to minimize bandwidth, they can't touch the basic tier. That would mean that people who currently do not use a set-top box would suddenly have to rent one, and that would upset a lot of people.

But people who want to buy a series 3 are high-end consumers. They tend to watch specialized channels or premium channels. And they tend to like the HD verisons of these channels as well. Unfortunately, all of these channels are candidates to be switched over to SDV. The other 99% of TWC's high-end customers already have a set-top box, so there is no impact to them.

It seems like TWC is using the test markets to find out exactly how many channels they can switch over to SDV before a significant number of their customers get upset. At that point, they will have found the "magic SDV lineup" and would then deploy that lineup in markets where bandwidth is scarce. But since I'm not a TWC president or VP, I could be way off.

I'm not even a TWC customer -- I have DirecTV and Verizon DSL (with FIOS available). I'm the reason TWC is deploying SDV in the first place. So I apologize in advance for screwing up your S3 experience.


----------



## MickeS (Dec 26, 2002)

BobCamp1 said:


> Yes. Even though TWC would LOVE to switch almost everything over to SDV in order to minimize bandwidth, they can't touch the basic tier. That would mean that people who currently do not use a set-top box would suddenly have to rent one, and that would upset a lot of people.


Why would they want to switch those popular channels in the first place? It would provide no benefit to them.


----------



## m_jonis (Jan 3, 2002)

MickeS said:


> Why would they want to switch those popular channels in the first place? It would provide no benefit to them.


Sure it would. It would force all their consumers to rent an STB from them for an extra $7.95/month (or whatever).


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

m_jonis said:


> Sure it would. It would force all their consumers to rent an STB from them for an extra $7.95/month (or whatever).


The MSOs really don't earn much from the rental fees. They barely cover the cost of the STBs and probably take a loss. As we can clearly see from TiVo, there is not much green to be had from that.

The real reason they want you to have STBs is that they want to control the user experience and get their hooks into you for other revenue generating services such as VOD, PPV, Multi-Room, and other services coming down the pike.


----------

