1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

SDV FAQ

Discussion in 'TiVo Series3 HDTV DVRs' started by bdraw, Jul 3, 2007.

  1. Sep 3, 2007 #341 of 2401
    GoHokies!

    GoHokies! O2->CO2 Converter

    2,657
    0
    Sep 21, 2005
    KFME
    Thanks for the heads up, post updated.

    Was out in the woods camping all weekend, so I'm trying to get caught up.
     
  2. Sep 3, 2007 #342 of 2401
    classicsat

    classicsat Astute User

    17,877
    0
    Feb 18, 2004
    Ontario Canada.
    No, but it is close. That is in fact the sort of system I have available with my satellite provider (Starchoice), after their Essentials package.

    I however chose their "cable classics" package, which is their basic tier and mostly cable channels that were around before the Great Canadian 2001 Channel Expansion. And most of the post 2001 channels can be added individually (after their Essentials package)
     
  3. Sep 3, 2007 #343 of 2401
    vstone

    vstone New Member

    1,235
    0
    May 11, 2002
    Martinsville...
    Cable copnaies actually get paid to carry some shopping networks. That's why they often end up the the basic local channel only tier. I assume that ShopNBC is also in that category.
     
  4. Sep 3, 2007 #344 of 2401
    FoxFireX

    FoxFireX New Member

    40
    0
    May 8, 2002
    San Antonio, TX
    Not to interrupt the ongoing discussion, but just another note from San Antonio. We're getting additional SDV burn that they haven't put on their web site yet. ESPN2 HD (125) was added some months back, but is SDV only, and not marked as such. And just recently, ESPN Classic was moved from the analog tier to digital (channel 256) and guess what? SDV. So I've now lost access to a channel I used to receive. TWC and the FCC have now both received nastygrams. :)
     
  5. Sep 4, 2007 #345 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Well, yeah, sure, as long as they do offer each channel (other than must-carry channels) as a separate billable item, there is nothing wrong with also offering bundles.
     
  6. Sep 4, 2007 #346 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    References, please.

    Neither am I. All CableCards are 2-way, and always have been. Even Single Stream cards (S-Cards) are 2-Way. I repeat, it is the host which supplies layer 1 and 2 support for interworking. If the host is 2-Way, then 2-Way communications are supported. Note no host is currently officially CC 2.0, but there are plenty of 2-Way proprietary boxes.

    No, you're just talking out of your hat.

    Tell that to Time Warner Cable. They've distributed several tens of thousands of Scientific Atlanta and Pace Digital Terminals and DVRs with CableCards in them. Every single last one is 2-Way.

    Since every CableCard ever produced, including the very first one off the production line of any company, can handle 2-Way transactions, this is patently false. The fact they are peddling such services using ordinary CableCards pretty much bows this theory all to pieces.

    Since no such animal has ever existed, it would be extremely difficult to despise it and at best foolish to try.

    Here you've taken a left turn from ignorance into the edges of irrationality. There is no such thing as a 1-Way CableCard, but even if there were, it would not allow TiVo or anyone else to do anything more than a 2-Way card. I think yoiu are getting CableCard specs mixed up with OCAP. OCAP has been proposed (but not approved) as part of the CC 2.0 specification, but OCAP in its essence relates ot the HOST specifications, not the CableCard, and there is absolutely nothing whatsoever about 2-Way communications either in the host or the CableCard which requires OCAP.

    That is a different issue, but it is precisely the opposite of what you said above. According to you, the CATV companies want 2-Way services (which is true, actually), but now you claim they don't. Make up your mind.

    That is yet a third issue, not in itself directly related to the other two.

    I suspect they could not care less, at least in this context, but CC 2.0 and OCAP have absolutely nothing to do with this issue, even if they do. Neither OCAP nor CC 2.0 address the User Interface.

    Of course there are a lot of overlapping interests involved, but separating them out for a moment, the CATV companies per se don't really care if you can copy to an offline device - it's no skin off their nose. It's the motion picture industry who dislikes that aspect and who is pushing so hard for DRM and DHCP. They have a lot of clout with CableLabs, and in fact those strictures are part and parcel of CC 1.0. Again, the fact almost all the non CC certified DVRs supplied by the CATV companies do allow the user to copy the material (usually over firewire) argues definitively against your statement. Even CC 1.0 devices like the Series III and the TiVo HD do not allow digital copies of the content unless its DRM bits are unset. Once again, that pretty much blows your theory all to pieces.

    While the CATV companies might like for that to be true, there is nothing in CC 2.0 or even in OCAP which will prevent it. If ratified, their devices will have to pass the same OCAP restrictions and specifications as everyone else's box.

    They don't need one way services from the CATV company or anyone else. There is not a single person on this planet who has an actual need to watch television programs, nor anyone on the planet who could not do very well without a TV. That said, consumers DO want them, your protests notwithstanding. I have a close friend who is a video nut and is thrilled with the features of the TiVo. He came over just yesterday and we worked on some issues with Galleon and my Series III TiVos. He was extremely impressed with the capabilities, and was very close to the verge of buying a TiVo, but he isn't, because it does not yet handle VOD, and his wife and daughter would rebel if they could not have VOD. (BTW, many of the VOD chanels here in San Antonio are free.)
     
  7. Sep 4, 2007 #347 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    The Scientific Atlanta Explorer 8300C, 8300HDC, 824C, 8240HDC, 4250C, 4250HDC, 4240C, and 4240HDC, for starters. Then there's also the Motorola DCH-100, DCH-3200, DCH-3416... really, do I need to go on?
     
  8. Sep 4, 2007 #348 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    By the way, exactly what is it about On-Line Banking, Interactive Opinion Polls, Elections, Online Gaming, Web Browsing (including watching missed episodes of their favorite programs a few months later), being able to access broadcasts in three or four dozen different languages from as many different countries, being able to watch home movies from their Aunt's 70th birthday across the country, Video Conferencing, getting one's medical results from the lab, being able to host one's own televison show, watching channels individually dedicated to knitting, pottery, woodworking, gardening, and a hundred other hobbies, watching chanels dedicated to civil engineering, electrical engineering, criminal law, civil law, neurosurgery, internal medicine, and a hundred other professions, and all of a thousand other specialties which could be broadcast with SDV should the consumers not want?

    With SDV, the local Radio Control Aircraft club could put up - say - $50 a month to provide the content and then each member of the club could pay $4 a month to have the channel, and then any content put onto the server is automatically available 24 hours a day to the members. 'Same for the Oil painting Club, etc, and for thousands of different clubs or professional organizations. Every modestly sized or larger company in town can have their own channel delivered to their employees. Again, what should they not want?
     
  9. Sep 4, 2007 #349 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Yes, but it seems since the facts completely contradict Skylab's opinions, he avoids them as much as possible. Frankly, I'm not quite sure what points he is trying to argue, since as you say he tends to flip back and forth. What he seems to be completely failing to understand is the CableCard is a separable security device which sits between the transceiver and the video output device. The transceiver does all the communications (both ways) at the RF level. The CableCard only handles encription and messaging to the host device. It tells the host device what to do based upon information in the digital stream sent to it by the transceiver. It does not transmit any RF signals itself, but in order for it to function at all, it must be able to take data from the host and send data back to the host. All CableCards are 2-Way.
     
  10. Sep 4, 2007 #350 of 2401
    vman41

    vman41 Omega Consumer

    9,324
    10
    Jun 18, 2002
    They don't want the cable company as gatekeeper. Give us a simple fat pipe to the internet and let the cable companies offer those services with no advantage over anyone else.
     
  11. Sep 4, 2007 #351 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,382
    43
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Though the individual channels and the bundles would be the same price, of course.
     
  12. Sep 4, 2007 #352 of 2401
    bdraw

    bdraw Member

    465
    4
    Aug 1, 2004
    Tampa, FL
    Technically those aren't OpenCable 2.0 devices (formally CableCARD 2.0), since they don't use OCAP user interfaces.

    They changed the name for good reason, everyone gets the card and the standard confused. The CableCARD hardware isn't changing, only the spec is.
     
  13. Sep 4, 2007 #353 of 2401
    ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    The question was not asking for 2.0 boxes but two-way 1.0 boxes.
     
  14. Sep 4, 2007 #354 of 2401
    skylab

    skylab New Member

    20
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    You have just proven my point. All the devices cited above are only available for lease from a cable company. There are no navigation devices available to purchase in the marketplace that offer "two-way" services like sdv using cablecard 1.0. My point is that cable is trying to force people to lease their boxes rather than purchasing navigation devices on the marketplace by using sdv to deliver what has always been "one-way" programming. Its really not that hard of a concept. If you love cable so much then buy some stock and I've got a bridge to sell you.
     
  15. Sep 4, 2007 #355 of 2401
    ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    This is something that can be argued in a civilized manner

    It is when you muddy the water with incorrect statements such as saying that CableCARDs are one-way and saying other people are wrong when stating they are two-way.

    Could you please refer me to a single post in this thread that says someone (or even hints at it) loves cable? Please?

    Why when we point out that you are wrong do you accuse people of being cable-lovers?
     
  16. Sep 4, 2007 #356 of 2401
    skylab

    skylab New Member

    20
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    Wow, someone needs to pull their head out of the sand. Cable wants to be the sole provider of how you and I view programming -- everything from where we choose to watch to when.

    Go over to the avsforum and read how cable has essentially disabled firewire ports with respect to both copying programming 5c "copy freely" directly to a comptuer and to recording 5c "copy once" programming to DVHS.

    Read up a bit at http://www.eff.org/IP/pnp/cablewp.php, "who killed tivo2go," it might answer a few questions for you.
     
  17. Sep 4, 2007 #357 of 2401
    sfhub

    sfhub Active Member

    1,270
    0
    Jan 6, 2007
    DVHS isn't DTCP certified and thus can't copy any 5c encrypted programming. This isn't the fault of the cable company. The content copy protection flags are controlled by the content providers. If the cable company is changing the flags incorrectly, then your beef would be with the cable company, otherwise your beef is with the studios who came up with this scheme.
     
  18. Sep 4, 2007 #358 of 2401
    skylab

    skylab New Member

    20
    0
    Jul 25, 2007
    DVHS can record 5c protected content. I have numerous 5c "copy once" recordings on dvhs.

    Yes, cable companies have problems with mismatched flags.

    Cable also rolled out a passport firmware upgrade back on 06' that disabled firewire output to PCs for recording 5c "copy freely" content. This is well documented in the avsforums.
     
  19. Sep 4, 2007 #359 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Now that I come closer to agreeing, but it's a far cry from there to saying, "No 2-Way Services". Actually, IMNSHO, what should be ratified is someting like the following: The Host lists all available middleware available for transaction management, including all available OCAP software approved by the local CATV and available from them. The user then has the choice of which products he wishes to load and which ones he specifically does not want to load or wishes to unload. On the other side of the coin, the CATV provider should not be bound to support any non-OCAP applications. Indeed, I wouldn't even have too much of a fit if it specified they did not have to provide technical support (as opposed to service) for any device bearing non-OCAP products. That way, if the user is having problems and he wants to call the CATV company to help, the CATV company coud require he must first disable all non-OCAP utilities to prove the issue is not caused by faulty non-OCAP software. After all, there is no reason the CATV company should bear any financial responsibility for the user loading software which breaks the system.
     
  20. Sep 4, 2007 #360 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I never said they were. Skylab asked someone to list at least one CC 1.0 device which provides 2-Way communication. Oh, BTW, some of the Motorola boxes do support OCAP. NHone of the SA boxes do.
     

Share This Page