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. Nov 4, 2007 #521 of 2401
    jlib

    jlib Lean Forward

    1,063
    0
    Nov 21, 2002
    Carmel...
    If a cable system axes the analog bandwidth won't they then have more than enough freed bandwidth for all the HD channels that are available?
     
  2. Nov 4, 2007 #522 of 2401
    pmiranda

    pmiranda New Member

    669
    0
    Feb 12, 2003
    Austin, TX
    Yes, but they'd rather piss off the few people using cablecards than the large number of people they've sold on cable as a no-box-required solution to getting dozens of channels, compared to satellite/U-verse (always requires a box per TV) or even broadcast (handful of channels now, box required after analog broadcast goes away).
     
  3. Nov 4, 2007 #523 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,390
    2
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    The FCC has passed a measure to disallow cable to "axe the analog bandwidth" (or at least some of it) until 2012, three years after the over-the-air analog shutdown. For at least at least the basic tier, they're being forced to convert the digital transmissions into analog and put that on the wire. This is to allow the 60% or more of television viewers in this country who use cable some time to adjust and continue to use any legacy analog televisions they might have with cable.

    Even without the FCC's dictates, cable really can't afford to suddenly stop analog. The fact that some part of their service works by just plugging an old television into a wire is an advantage for them; without it, they'll doubtlessly lose a significant number of subs.

    In the meantime, DirecTV is boasting that they've already added 70 new HD channels and will add another 30 by the end of the year. If they don't respond in kind, cable will lose (other) subs. Although I'd love to hate SDV and call it a unnecessary, nefarious plot by cable to screw me and other unidirectional CableCARD equipment users over, there really doesn't seem to be any other way for them to remain competitive.
     
  4. Nov 4, 2007 #524 of 2401
    dswallow

    dswallow Save the ModeratŠ¾r TCF Club

    50,979
    32
    Dec 3, 2000
    Long...
    Still, there's almost no reason to have to remove the entire analog selection in order to make enough room for the HD channels. Most cable systems could easily recover as much as 60-70 analog channels and still be leaving 25-35 channels available for analog retransmission. And since there's really on 50 or so HD channels in existence (sorry, just can't count Voom), plus applicable regional broadcast stations and sports networks, there's no need to remove even half that many analog channels at the moment.
     
  5. Nov 4, 2007 #525 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,382
    43
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Note that the measure you refer to explicitly stated that cable could either convert the digital transmissions into analog at the head-end, and pass them along to customers as analog signals in the coax OR pass them along to customers as digital signals in the coax, and convert them to analog via a STB. The regulation didn't even explicitly require that the STB be specifically affordable. That FCC decision was generally recognized as a rare win for cable.

    Though they've done exactly that, in Chicago.
     
  6. Nov 4, 2007 #526 of 2401
    morac

    morac Cat God

    8,964
    25
    Mar 14, 2003
    NJ
    That's just one city out of all the places cable serves. It's basically a drop in the hat if you count all the cable subscribers in the U.S. It could be an experiment or maybe Comcast determined that there were a low number of analog cable users there.

    I'm assuming in other areas analog cable is more prevalent. The only reason my parent's got a cable box is because their TV broke and they bought an HD TV and got the box so they could get the HD basic channels (they don't subscribe to digital cable). In my area you could still get HBO without a converted box until about a year ago when they moved it to digital only.
     
  7. Nov 4, 2007 #527 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,382
    43
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    One of the largest cities in the country. If they can do it there, they can do it anywhere.

    Anywhere.

    Don't assume.
     
  8. Nov 4, 2007 #528 of 2401
    morac

    morac Cat God

    8,964
    25
    Mar 14, 2003
    NJ
    Yes, but they haven't. As of right now, it's just one city. Get back to me when they start switching over more areas.
     
  9. Nov 4, 2007 #529 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,382
    43
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Get back to me when they stop deploying SDV.
     
  10. Nov 4, 2007 #530 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Maybe. Maybe not. First of all, just because it is one of the largest cities in the U.S. does not necessarily mean the penetration in that market is correspondingly good for the CATV provider in question. It doesn't mean it isn't either, of course. I for one just do not know. It could be the provider in question has a comparatively low revenue share in Chicago. I know it's true for our company. We make more money in many other comparatively smaller US cities than we do in Chicago.

    Secondly, the fact they have done it in Chicago does not necessarily mean they have been successful doing it in Chicago. Maybe they have, and maybe they haven't. I just don't know, so I won't assume.
     
  11. Nov 4, 2007 #531 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Until the CATV companies all convert to a single SDV standard, I doubt the tuning resolver will get off the ground, and even if it does it's not going to help a large percentage of TiVo users unless they develop more than 1 resolver.
     
  12. Nov 4, 2007 #532 of 2401
    CharlesH

    CharlesH Member

    1,061
    1
    Aug 29, 2002
    Sacramento...
    I think most people wouldn't begrudge the cable companies deploying SDV IF they had made a solution like the tuner resolver available concurrently with their SDV deployment.
     
  13. Nov 4, 2007 #533 of 2401
    CharlesH

    CharlesH Member

    1,061
    1
    Aug 29, 2002
    Sacramento...
    That was the reason that I understand why the resolver would be obtained from your cable company. I wouldn't think the hardware would be any different for the various SDV protocols; they would just have to have the appropriate firmware in it to map from a generic protocol over the USB, to the specific SDV protocol over the cable.
     
  14. Nov 4, 2007 #534 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I don't know about most, but I do know there are many which cannot. San Antonio is one of them. The analog selections in San Antonio only go to channel 72. They could recover perhaps 30 analog selections, allowing about 60HD channels. The thing is, SDV allows thousands of "channels". Every VOD or Video Redo selection is a separate "channel",and deploying VOD and Video Redo on a broad scale requires SDV.
     
  15. Nov 4, 2007 #535 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I'm afraid you think wrong. The hardware for the two main systems, Scientific Atlanta / Cisco and Motorola are incompatible. Although somewhat similar, the two are different at the hardware level, not just the software level. There are no doubt others, although the number is definitely limited.
     
  16. Nov 4, 2007 #536 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Most people don't care one way or the other, since the issue does not impact them. Indeed, most are unaware there is even an issue. It is quite unfortunate for us TiVo owners, but nonetheless true that most CATV subscribers don't care whether TiVo users are left in the cold, or not, and the revenue impact from disgruntled TiVo users is relatively small. Our only silver lining lies in three facts:

    1. Although comparatively small, the revenue tied to our activities may not be considered trivial. The CATV companies aren't going to bend over backwards for us, but if meeting our demands doesn't cost them too much time, trouble, and money, they may be willing to acquiesce. The margin may be thinner, but as long as it isn't zero - or worse negative - they may well be willing to consider our requests.

    2. Although small in number and in total represented revenue, TiVo users tend to represent the top end of the monetary pyramid, and no company wants to alienate rich clients, no matter how little revenue they may generate. They are, after all, the ones who do the investing, and they control much more capital individually than the less affluent individuals. Everyone knows biting the hand which feeds you is a really bad idea, but biting the hand which houses you is also not a really good one.

    3. As a group, I think TiVo users tend to be vocal, and we all know which wheel gets the grease. Although of relatively low impact to the CATV company's revenue stream, from a PR perspective alienating TiVo users may not be considered the smartest move they could make, and keeping us happy and quiet has some very real value in it. We just should not overestimate that value.
     
  17. Nov 4, 2007 #537 of 2401
    HiDefGator

    HiDefGator New Member

    1,851
    0
    Oct 12, 2004
    You need to be a bit more specific. It is only HD Tivo owners who are being left out in the cold and that is a very small number compared to all Tivo owners.
     
  18. Nov 4, 2007 #538 of 2401
    pmiranda

    pmiranda New Member

    669
    0
    Feb 12, 2003
    Austin, TX
    That must be why you need to specify which system you have when you buy an S3... oh wait, you don't! Must be those standards they use...All that the SDV needs to do is provide the standard transmit hardware called for in the cablecard spec for a 2-way host, and the differences between systems is either software or completely handled by the cablecard. The hardware is trivial but I'm sure the testing and qualification is not.
     
  19. Nov 5, 2007 #539 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,382
    43
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    True, but that won't necessary affect whether or not they actually deploy SDV... they've made no assurances to that effect. Folks should be prepared for SDV to be deployed in their area, without a tuning resolver offering available.
     
  20. Nov 5, 2007 #540 of 2401
    ntrainer

    ntrainer New Member

    24
    0
    Apr 28, 2004
    OK, I understand (basically) what's going on with our TiVo box, given this discussion: we're in Cox's N.Va. (Fairfax) area, and now that they've gone to switched digital signals, we're losing an enormous amount of functionality. BTW, we haven't just lost the signals that another poster mentioned would be SDV; we've lost all of the HD channels, HBO... every single channel over 102 seems to be grey. In addition, for some reason NBC -- not HD, basic NBC, channel 4 -- is also not being processed by our Series 3.

    Needless to say, this is frustrating enough that I'm trying to think of SOME temporary fix. I don't see any really suggested in this forum. Should I give up on HD and just go back to having a cable box? Is the cable box even compatible with the Series 3 TiVo? Is my problem related to the fact that I have one of the earlier Series 3 boxes? If so, would it be fixed by getting a box that's fully compatible with the M CableCards?

    :mad:
     

Share This Page