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. Apr 7, 2008 #1341 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,407
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Personally, I think that it's extremely cool that there's some consideration of speculative recording was built into the Tuning Resolver design. Without it, I'd have been perfectly comfortable with TiVo being forbidden to record its suggestions from channels presented as SDV (of course, I don't use automatic recording of suggestions--I already watch far, far too much TV without TiVo's help--so it'd be no skin off mine :D).

    As TiVo and the NCTA have claimed, TiVo was intimately involved in the design of this thing, and if in nothing else, it shows in the inclusion of that feature.
     
  2. Apr 7, 2008 #1342 of 2401
    MichaelK

    MichaelK New Member

    7,308
    1
    Jan 10, 2002
    NJ

    what you said
     
  3. Apr 7, 2008 #1343 of 2401
    HDTiVo

    HDTiVo Not so Senior Member

    5,556
    0
    Nov 27, 2002
    But what if "intimacy" with cable meant taking it up the === a couple of times? :eek:
     
  4. Apr 7, 2008 #1344 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,407
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Though it doesn't involve the use of TiVo, you might be interested in this new product from Hauppage--it makes MPEG4 high-definition recordings from high-definition component video. It will record audio from either optical S/PDIF or stereo RCA; I'm assuming that for the former you'll get full 5.1.

    Hollywood's nightmare of losing stuff through the "analog hole" continues :D.

    Again, it's not TiVo, but it's something :).
     
  5. Apr 7, 2008 #1345 of 2401
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,924
    1
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    You are assuming several things:

    1. Revenues for the content will be derived from advertising.
    2. The content will be expensive to produce
    3. The content will all be based upon profits for the content providers
    4. Producing content requires commercial backing.

    To which I reply:
    1. This is already a markedly downward trend. Most of the HD channels and a significant number of SD channels on the local CATV lineup bear no advertising. It wouldn't surprise me for the number of available premium channels to exceed 200 before long. Since the cost of delivering additional content is plummeting so fast, there's really no reason not to do so.

    2. The prices of video gear are dropping like a stone. It wouldn't surprise me if within 10 years more than 90% of the available programming is produced by sources other than networks and movie studios, including amateur, organizational, and enterprise sources. Here in San Antonio there are already several large enterprise video producers, and in fact a couple are customers of mine. As of yet they are not ordinarily producing any content for CATV distribution, but that's very likely to change in a hurry.

    3. A great deal of content right now is already produced for reasons other than directly obtaining profit from the content. A modest amount is even being already distributed on CATV systems. Here in San Antonio, there are public access, government access, educational access, and several religious access channels. I expect such venues to grow markedly as the cost of delivering the content drops to the point where even an individual of moderate means can afford to produce their own channel without recompense. I also expect the number of enterprise offerings to soar, delivering everything from sales channels ala QVC to employee and customer informational videos for small to large businesses.

    4. While this is largely true right now, the cost of producing content has already fallen well within the reach of middle class individuals, and with SDV, providing a path for even personal content on the CATV system can eventually be within the reach certainly of small organizations and clubs, and perhaps some day within the budget of even an individual middle-class amateur videographer. One day there may be a Miketys channel on your local CATV system, just as many people (like me) now have websites. I expect the UI to access to them will be virtually indistinguishable from a web browser of the day, or in fact it's likely a single browser will do both.

    I'd bet real money in ten years there won't even be 20 linear programming channels. There will likely be some number of regular schedules - after all there are some advantages for both the CATV provider and the subscriber for having some scheduling, especially with a DVR.

    No, not useless, just of less utility, particularly during "prime time". Being the norm doesn't mean it is universal. As I mentioned above, there are still efficiencies and advantages to be gained on both sides to maintaining schedules for some programming. If any content has a high likelihood of being received by more than 1 receiver per node, then that content willl be well served by having a regular schedule attached to it, even if it is also available via VOD.

    Yeah, that could happen. As consumers, we have to make sure it doesn't happen. On the other hand, with most of the program content not being commercially derived, what would be the point? Note that even now, my local CATV provider has essentially VOD services for every major broadcast channel.

    Yes, but the tuning resolver is at best a temporary stop-gap. I'm talking about ten years down the road, give or take.
     
  6. Apr 7, 2008 #1346 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,407
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Okay--if you're thinking 10 years down the road, then it's impossible to disagree. The speed of technological advancement is such at this point that it's difficult to rule out any possibility.
     
  7. Apr 7, 2008 #1347 of 2401
    MichaelK

    MichaelK New Member

    7,308
    1
    Jan 10, 2002
    NJ
    for years and years- maybe decades the pundits have been talking about thousands of cable channels becoming a reality for many of the same reasons. True cable channels have limits that dont exist int he world you describe. But we have't gotten anyplace near 1000 channels so I just dont see things changing that extremely that fast. But maybe I'll owe you a beer in 10 years and I'll be shown wrong yet again - LOL
     
  8. Apr 7, 2008 #1348 of 2401
    dswallow

    dswallow Save the ModeratŠ¾r TCF Club

    51,038
    50
    Dec 3, 2000
    Long...
    I think what you're seeing in the way of viral video -- the YouTube's and the videocasts and even the Bittorrents -- are exactly what have become the "thousands of channels." We simply had the technology to bypass the idea of a fixed, linear arrangement of those channels in favor of an on-demand model.
     
  9. Apr 7, 2008 #1349 of 2401
    Firekite

    Firekite New Member

    63
    0
    Mar 11, 2008
    San Antonio, TX
    Like that you don't have a horse in this race?
     
  10. Apr 8, 2008 #1350 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,401
    44
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    Yes, all the sucky stuff will follow that model. All the good stuff will continue to follow the profit-driven model.
     
  11. Apr 8, 2008 #1351 of 2401
    vstone

    vstone New Member

    1,235
    0
    May 11, 2002
    Martinsville...
    This assumes that VOD is assumed to be "good enough." It may be, but I try to stay away from it, being used to the Tivo's instant response and the 8 second replay.

    There will always be some live events: sports, some news events. OTOH, maybe the 215 major awards shows will disappear.
     
  12. Apr 8, 2008 #1352 of 2401
    bicker

    bicker bUU

    10,401
    44
    Nov 9, 2003
    Georgia
    The goal typically would be to satisfy the 90% of the folks, incurring 50% of the cost, instead of the 100% of the folks, incurring 100% of the cost.
     
  13. Apr 8, 2008 #1353 of 2401
    hsfjr

    hsfjr (no subject)

    27
    0
    Apr 13, 2002
    SDV-land...
    Happpened to hit a earlier part of this thread while googling "tuning resolver" and refound the information that "tuning resolver" had been renamed to "tuning adapter" so googled again... found this...

    http://www.opencable.com/downloads/oc_interop_0408.pdf

    Haven't read it yet... and I'll probably leave it to the more knowledgable folks to debate... but I LOVED the title...

    (Edit: Shoot!... scrolled thru it... nothing useful except it may exist and I want to know the results of the event...)
    [And too bad the name may be "adapter" now, because there are too many unrelated results in google...]
     
  14. Apr 8, 2008 #1354 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,407
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    Interesting. I remember that someone posted that in a conversation with a knowledgeable-seeming cable provider CSR, he'd been told that Tuning Resolver had been relabelled "Tuning Adapter". I wasn't going to start calling it that until I got more proof (knowledgeable-seeming cable provider CSRs are often full of it, but in rare instances they know whereof they speak :)). Okay--Tuning Adapter it is.

    If they're having an interoperability testing event this week, they've got to be pretty frickin' close to manufacturing and distributing these things. You don't schedule these things randomly--they know that people with both Tuning Adapter and compatible UDCP products have fully-fleshed prototypes that they believe are ready to go. I am encouraged :).
     
  15. Apr 8, 2008 #1355 of 2401
    jrm01

    jrm01 New Member

    2,619
    0
    Oct 17, 2003
    Pittsburgh
  16. Apr 8, 2008 #1356 of 2401
    mikeyts

    mikeyts Stream Warrior

    2,407
    3
    Jul 10, 2004
    San Diego,...
    The only place that I've seen that "second quarter of 2008" estimate stated was in this press release, issued jointly by TiVo and the NCTA in November. I don't know how long that support article has been up.
     
  17. Apr 8, 2008 #1357 of 2401
    JohnnyO

    JohnnyO Crimper

    325
    1
    Nov 3, 2002
    Twin...
    Interesting... There are a few email addresses in the document. I wonder who's got the cajones to contact them at the end of the week and ask them "so ... how'd it go?"
     
  18. Apr 8, 2008 #1358 of 2401
    hsfjr

    hsfjr (no subject)

    27
    0
    Apr 13, 2002
    SDV-land...
    And some other points I haven't mentioned along the way to various posts...

    1. The 'original' news break (Nov07?) on the dongle mentions that someone already had a prototype at the time... I think some are forgetting that detail.
    2. Somewhere along the way, in some thread or another, someone mentions not hearing anything from the ScientificAtlanta side of the world... but they were mentioned in the 'original' news, and it did seem all were committed to the project... but I do agree that not much from them since...
    3. I also think that the picture that was associated with the Feb08 news has also been mis-interpreted. Digging back, I think the picture was only there because it mentioned the item in the article as "about the same size"... which has now lead to speculation of re-purposing the container, etc. - I don't actually care about the size. The comparison only leads me to belive it is more likely a horizontal item, rather than a vertical one, or a "dongly" item hanging behind something else[TiVo]. Given how it communicates out either of its "ends," it doesn't seem that it would need line-of-sight from any remote, so one could drywall it up inside the wall and just pass the wires out if one felt like doing so.

    That's probably the posts I found again today...
     
  19. Apr 8, 2008 #1359 of 2401
    hsfjr

    hsfjr (no subject)

    27
    0
    Apr 13, 2002
    SDV-land...
    Well, maybe more informative than I initially thought... It pretty much says "hey everyone, bring your stuff here and let's get it working..."

    They called for Mot and SA equipment...
    Gotta assume there was at least two TiVo boxes there... [edit: changed assumption of 'at least one' to 'at least two' since I'd think they'd show up with at least one each of Series3 and TiVoHD...]

    On this, I'd have to agree [with other posters in some threads somewhere] that TiVo can't/shouldn't supply 'exact' dates since they won't have any control of the hardware manufacturing.
     
  20. Apr 8, 2008 #1360 of 2401
    classicsat

    classicsat Astute User

    17,877
    0
    Feb 18, 2004
    Ontario Canada.
    There is no reason to believe the unit would be no different in size to the DCT700, since it has to have a certain degree of smarts in it. If I were Motorola, I'd build it into the same case, unless there is reason not to.

    Since it is an active cable provided device, you likely should not bury it into the wall. You can probably tuck it in back of your TiVo or other UDCP device.
     

Share This Page