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. mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,409
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Yours is about the 500th post I've read suggesting a class action. You should do a search of all TiVo Community forums for the phrase "class action"--I'll bet that all of the people who've suggested it here would make a significant class if they bound together :). They're due to start distributing the Tuning Resolver solution sometime in the second quarter of this year; we should wait to see if they fail to make this deadline or if they try to unreasonably profit from our being forced to use the TR before considering suit.
     
  2. bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,403
    44
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Well, I wouldn't be surprised if the tuning resolver doesn't make that June 30 date. However, you cannot even begin to expect any lawyer to take the idea of a class action lawsuit seriously until a few months after that. Even then, it is going to be hard to establish standing. At this point, consumers have been given nothing in return for consideration that would establish standing for them as plaintiffs. TiVo's device is doing what it should. The cable company's service is doing what it should. Unless the FCC acts against the cable companies, there is no viable avenue there.

    So the only even quasi-rational approach is to sue the FCC.

    Good luck.
     
  3. logicman1

    logicman1 New Member

    153
    0
    Jan 10, 2008
    Carmel, NY
    Lawyers get paid by the hour. I don't necessarily see "speed up" fitting into the equation.
     
  4. Elementalism

    Elementalism New Member

    6
    0
    Feb 25, 2008
    Well today was the first I had heard about SDV. I havent noticed anything on Charter in the Albertville area of Minnesota. But hopefully the dongle will be out before they decide to implement anything.

    TiVoHD is great so far!

    btw does this change deny access to people who rent DVR's from the cable company? Are the cable companies going to have to replace each DVR to work with SDV?
     
  5. MichaelK

    MichaelK New Member

    7,308
    1
    Jan 10, 2002
    NJ
    Curious-

    Can you explain further?

    Is there a home run fiber from each node then to the head end? Or is there like a single fiber broken into bands and each node gets delivered a segment?

    I guess it works the same for SDV as they do internet? But I wouldn’t know how that works either.
     
  6. MichaelK

    MichaelK New Member

    7,308
    1
    Jan 10, 2002
    NJ
    Likely the cable company dvr’s with their built in 2-way communications for vod and ppv and the like can get software updates in the middle of the night to work just fine.

    mahybe some old first generation units wouldn't be able but even that I doubt.
     
  7. Elementalism

    Elementalism New Member

    6
    0
    Feb 25, 2008
    I didnt read through the entire thread but what is stopping the cablecards in the Tivo's from doing the same? When i browse the options of the Cablecard one of the them is "two way communication" which is disabled. But i am assuming it should be something that can be turned on?
     
  8. mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,409
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Your assumption is wrong. Neither TiVo S3 or TiVo HD is physically capable of two-way communication

    You didn't just not read through the entire thread, you apparently failed to read the first post. It's a very carefully composed introduction to this issue (the definition of a FAQ) and it says exactly what I just said under the bold heading "What does this mean for Series 3 and TiVo HD?". If you're interested in this topic, you should go back and read it thoroughly. If you have questions after that, we'll be happy to try to answer them :).
     
  9. Rayd8tor

    Rayd8tor New Member

    19
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    San Antonio,Tx
     
  10. Firekite

    Firekite New Member

    63
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    San Antonio, TX
    Bah! I just did the same thing.

    We'll see. Someone please report back regarding the results, whether all those channels are really being denied to CableCard users.

    How is that even legal? :mad:
     
  11. mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,409
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    It's legal, or rather it's not prohibited by any regulation. This stuff started being deployed over a year ago in various markets (mostly by TWC) and there have been copious complaints to the FCC by people who post here, to no avail. It's also difficult to figure out what cable providers will do to compete with the mountain of HD channels being offered by satellite without resorting to the use of SDV, leaving you with two choices: no SDV and no more new HD channels, or new HD channels via SDV that you can't directly access with unidirectional CableCARD devices.

    You guys are very late to this party. Someone first noticed the encroachment of SDV in your area last April and there was a discussion of it in this thread.

    Take heart, though--the cable industry and TiVo have promised a solution that will enable current TiVo S3 and TiVo HD models to access SDV channels called the "Tuning Resolver". This is an external device which will be connected on the cable between the wall and TiVo and additionally connected to TiVo via USB. It's expected to become available sometime in the 2nd quarter of this year (which will start next month). We can only wait and see.
     
  12. bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,403
    44
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Everything the FCC has done has made it clear that the separable security mandate was directed solely to benefit consumer electronics makers, providing many the ability to enter a market that previously was closed to them. Every time folks try to cast the separable security mandate as something directed to benefit consumers, the reality of how the FCC has enforced it (or not) belies such assertions. The FCC has provided a competitive market for consumers through other means (really, through their fostering of the satellite suppliers).
     
  13. Firekite

    Firekite New Member

    63
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    San Antonio, TX
    That may be, but until fairly recently there was no HD TiVo offering, and when they were introduced, they were prohibitively priced, so I've been stuck with the god-awful Scientific Atlanta junk. I wouldn't have bothered switching to TiVo if it had just remained god-awful but functional. After the second 8300 DVR continued to have fairly constant audio stuttering and loss, I've given up. A friend of mine just got a Series 2 TiVo, and it seems to be fantastic (except no HD), so I've ordered a Series 3 and hope this mythical dongle arrives post-haste. As I've just now (as in yesterday) started digging into it, I've just now discovered all the BS associated with it.

    And yes, Bicker, you've been a constant advocate for the cable companies and dismiss criticisms of the way they've handled their customers and the distinct lack of respect involved. I pay $191 every month to TWC for my phone, cable, and internet, and I specifically expect to NOT be bent over and sodomized for it if I dare to pay for and use superior hardware. Whether the FCC intended to benefit consumers or not is really beside the question when cable companies are violating the spirit (and sometimes the letter) of the law. Even if, as you claim, the separable security mandate were directed solely to benefit consumer electronics makers, I'm fairly certain that TiVo is EXACTLY one of those consumer electronics makers that shouldn't be strong-armed out of the market by the cable companies, replaced with their own proprietary, drastically inferior hardware. The FCC, as usual, has done a terrible job of protecting the consumer, We The People they're supposed to be serving watching out for in the first place, and arguments that they've provided a competitive market by artificially bolstering the satellite providers is neither relevant to the discussion and the problem nor even accurate in the first place. DTV prevents the use of TiVo altogether, and the only cable service provider is TWC, which has of course hamstrung the use of TiVo and such by a) making it a tremendous pain in the rear to use CableCARDS and even charging for their use (a fairly small amount, sure, but the use of their set-top box is free, and we're saving them even that) and b) switching to a different technology that prevents CableCARDS from being able to receive all the channels we as consumers pay to receive, and they've yet to provide any remedy or relief.

    So yes, you can continue to being an advocate for the FCC and cable companies and continue to insist that we're all being unreasonable for expecting to receive some basic level of cooperation and the channels we've paid for, but it's likely you'll continue to be wrong.
     
  14. bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,403
    44
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    If they are, then prove it. I don't mean that argumentatively; I mean it literally. If what they're doing is a violation, get some entity, which is generally acknowledge in our society to be authoritative, to agree with you. That's the mechanism to effect change. I understand completely why you may be reticent to try -- because you figure it will be a waste of time, but (and this is the point I've been trying, but perhaps failing, to make) the fact that it will be a waste of time means that what they're doing isn't a violation. All of us here want things to be better for us TiVo owners. We wouldn't be here otherwise. However, that doesn't make our desires actuality. :(

    This is the first really good point made in rebuttal to something I've posted in this thread, recently.

    Guess who has standing to pursue the point you've made with the authorities: That's right: TiVo. The ball is in their court. We have no choice but to defer to their discretion with regard to how to pursue this, because they're the ones with standing.

    That isn't true. The FCC is required to balance the needs of consumers and business, not favor consumers.

    That would only be true if the FCC was supposed to favor consumers. They're not.

    I'm interested in seeing your explanation of this. The statements that followed didn't seem to follow up on that assertion.

    And applying the separable security regulation to DBS would obviate that concern.

    WHOA!!!! I'm definitely NOT an advocate for the FCC. If anything, the opposite!

    And that's not even completely accurate; I'm an advocate for reality -- how things are. I don't mind change, but I object to folks fostering expectations in themselves or others that things are or necessarily must be different from how they really are. I'm not sure, but I think I could be very politically flexible, with regard to many things, basically being "okay" with however things go, within certain parameters, because I see the benefits each way has to offer, so my advocacy is not towards the left or the right but rather, explicitly, towards the middle.

    However, I'm not wrong. That's the point. I'm talking about reality, and every day you don't get what you want the truth of what I'm saying is underscored.
     
  15. Breadfan

    Breadfan New Member

    110
    0
    Jan 7, 2008
    Fort Smith, AR
    Shouldn't we at least get some kind of discount? As far as I can tell the ONLY difference on my cable bill is they deducted the box/DVR rental fee and added the CC fee. I'm paying the same price for programming as someone able to get more channels than I can.
     
  16. JimboG

    JimboG New Member

    521
    0
    May 27, 2007
    San Diego, CA
    There's a third option. Cable companies could kill off analog channels and add far more linear HD channels without rate shaping or degrading those new HD channels. Comcast killed off almost all analog in Chicago and a Liberty Media-owned cable company in Puerto Rico did the same thing over a year ago.

    The coming death of analog over the air television gives the cable companies ample cover to go all digital. If granny doesn't want to buy a new digital TV at Wal-mart, she will need a box of some kind. It could be a digital OTA box with $40 government subsidy, a leased digital box from the satellite company or a leased digital box from the local cable company. There really isn't any justification for wasting >450 MHz on crappy analog channels.
     
  17. moyekj

    moyekj Well-Known Member

    11,269
    83
    Jan 23, 2006
    Mission...
    Some cable companies are actually using the fact that they still carry analog channels as a competitive advantage over Satellite. The fact that you can split the signal multiple times and easily distribute around the house without needing set tops at each end point is still pretty compelling. They have a very large customer base using lifeline or basic cable that do not subscribe to digital services, so they don't want to risk losing them either. Finally, once the analog OTA broadcasts cease to exist, they hope to pick up previously OTA analog only customers.
    So there are some pretty compelling reasons for them to keep analog channels . IMO what they should do is to starting cutting out the least popular analog channels and eventually end up with a smaller core of analog channels which are the most popular ones.
     
  18. mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,409
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    When I said that you were late to the party, I meant the "TiVo users complaining about SDV" party. You guys were asking people in San Antonio to test their inability to receive TWC SDV channels on TiVo and report back here when that was confirmed a year or more ago. Old, old news that you're just now waking up and reading about. The people who participate in this thread are well aware of what's going on (as are TiVo and the other CE vendors and the FCC).
    It should be pointed out that TiVo has been trying to deal with this. They and other CE vendors got together with the cable industry and concocted the Tuning Resolver solution which will enable TiVo and any other unidrectional CableCARD device with upgradeable firmware and an unused USB connection to tune SDV channels (if it materializes, which many here endlessly speculate that it will not). A group of other CE vendors proposed a broader solution to the FCC called "Digital Cable Ready Plus" which would give light-weight access to a set of interactive services, specifically SDV, VOD and IPPV. "DCR+" would not help current TiVo S3 and TiVo HD owners, however. The cable industry and TiVo countered by proposing the use of the Tuning Resolver device, which they're going ahead to produce and offer without waiting for the FCC to rule on DCR+, using the fact that it takes the FCC nine months to a year to make a ruling on anything; if they implement the Tuning Resolver soon enough, it'll be being distributed before the FCC can render a decision on whether to require the development of DCR+.

    Cable has been promoting a standard for interactive services involving Multi-stream CableCards (M-Cards), bidirectional host communication and a Java execution profile called OCAP (OpenCable Applications Platform). This "CableCARD V2" solution, collectively labelled "<tru2way>", is pretty costly to add to a device, prohibiting its implementation in low-cost televisions and STBs, which is why the CE OEMs have proposed DCR+. However, given DCR+, the CE OEMs have little incentive to implement <tru2way> in many products (or any, for that matter), which screws with the cable industry's plans, big time.

    The National Cable and Telecommunications Association likes to point out that of the many millions of unidirectional CableCARD devices shipped, only a tad over 300,000 owners have chosen to use CableCARDs (the cable industry's own unsubtle discouragement of the their use has more than a little to do with that). It's less than 1&#37; of all cable subscribers, and they're clearly willing to risk losing them all. (Note that TiVo Series3 and TiVo HD users are a subset of that fraction of a percent of cable subs). In the past model year, very few CE OEMs have elected to put CableCARD slots in their products, so as an issue support of CableCARDs in unidirectional host devices never became very important and its relevance is rapidly diminishing.
     
  19. Firekite

    Firekite New Member

    63
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    San Antonio, TX
    No, that's not quite right. I was asking to verify that the list of SDV channels they were given was accurate, that they really couldn't access those channels that were alleged to be SDV in our specific area.

    Currently my SA DVR is connecting out via HDMI to my Onkyo receiver, and from there the out is connected to my TV. Why wouldn't TiVo offer the option to receive the HDMI signal in the same way so that a generic set-top box would work for tuning via IR like some of the old-school setups? I understand you may lose the ability to tune to two channels at once, but still, even that would work in general, would it not?
     
  20. mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,409
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    OK--still, it's old news and if you really want confirmation, you should probably start a new post or re-open this one. It is not on topic in this thread.
    HDMI is an uncompressed high-volume transfer protocol (a 1080i image is something like 1.5 gigabits/sec or more, about 100 times as much information as is coming into the cable box for the displayed channel). Raw, this information would fill a 500GB drive in about 40 minutes and it would be challenging to stream it onto and off of an HDD at those speeds. Encoding it (back) into MPEG at that rate can be done but would be expensive. Some of it is also encrypted (if it was protected in its orignal MPEG form), and there is no protocol to authorize recordng encrypted HDMI. Essentially, it's not intended to be recorded. It's greatly preferable to have a CableCARD or CableCARD-like system with built-in access to SDV and other interactive services, which is what <tru2way> is. Unfortunately, TiVo HD and TiVo S3 were too early to incorporate the emerging <tru2way> standard, though TiVo apparently has an upcoming product that will be compliant. So, for the interrim, a Tuning Resolver device is planned to give TiVo S3, TiVo HD and possibly other unidirectional CableCARD devices the ability to tune SDV channels.
     

Share This Page