TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Series3 HDTV DVRs
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-13-2007, 06:28 PM   #811
ADent
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 2,099
What's up with 47CFR76.640? It seems to require CableCards (ie PODs) to work. Is this not sufficient or are there other rules?


http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...7cfr76.640.pdf
ADent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2007, 06:50 PM   #812
mikeyts
Wireless Wiseguy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 2,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADent View Post
What's up with 47CFR76.640? It seems to require CableCards (ie PODs) to work. Is this not sufficient or are there other rules?


http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2...7cfr76.640.pdf
Yeah, but it doesn't require that any particular set of services be available using them. For instance, they know that you can't access VOD services with unidirectional CableCARD hosts and now you won't be able to access services presented as SDV with them either. They're linear channels, but initial access to them is becoming by interactive request only.

By the way, you can find the CFRs in HTML on a .gov site, here.
__________________
Mike Scott

"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
" -- hookbill
mikeyts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 02:17 AM   #813
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,858
TiVo Suggestions

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
Because that's what fits within the SDV model.
Nonsense. The TiVo handling suggestiohns is no different than adding a few extra people ot the house, each with their own TV. The extra amount of recording done by the average TiVo user's box is not going to be significant. SDV is capable of handling tens of thousands, and eventually millions of channels. TiVo useage is a drop in the bucket, even when there wind up being multiple Sereis 3+ TiVos per node. As it is now, I doubt if 1 in 10 nodes has a Series 3 box hanging on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
Service providers should be allowed to block any device that is designed in such a way as it contributes to undercutting the SDV model itself.
The TiVo doesn't do that, suggestions or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
TiVo. TiVo isn't the center of the world. None of TiVo's subscribers are the center of the world.
Until they are, they are going to have zero impact on SDV implementations. Should they ever become so, then the CATV provider is going to have to cater to their needs in exclusion of all else, or risk losing the bulk of their customers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
Mass-market service providers provide service to a customer base, not to just one customer, and it is perfectly normal to impose service delivery constraints that contribute to an efficient mass-market service delivery model.
Oh, of course, but that has no relevance to this situation. Enacting the guidelines you suggest is much like FedEx charging people who live in the very middle of the block more because it costs more to drive to the middle of the block than near a corner. Sure, it impacts only 1 person in 10, but it's a ridiculous notion which fails to assess the amount of money actually saved by not driving the extra 1000 feet. Putting silly restrictions on the TiVo's capabilities won't reduce the load on the SDV system by any significant amount, even if every house had TiVo.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 02:35 AM   #814
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,858
Get real, folks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
What's needed, and may or not be available or even doable with the SDV designs out there, is for suggestions to have a second class status
It's neither needed nor desirable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
What can really skew SDV are these folks who have 5 or 6 Tivos (or 5 or 6 cable DVRS, for that matter), most of which are left on all of the time.
The number of these users is statistically completely insignificant. Not only that, but unless the user has a large family with very diverse tastes and each one programs their own TiVo, or unless the user goes to ridiculous lengths to make sure the suggestion profile is different on every Tivo, all six TiVos are going to wind up recording pretty much the same things in suggestions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
These installations could wreck havoc in a few specific SDV neighborhoods. Does cable company planning data account for a few of these?
No, because it's a ridiculously far-fetched scenario, which will have a negligible impact on the system even if it were to come about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
Before you that is outlandish, consider what it will cost them to add an SDV neighborhood to their system just to make one or two Tivo folks happy.
Oh, good heavens!! A single node can handle well over 400 simultaneous videos. One or two, or ten, or fifty cantankerous TiVo users on a node won't overload the system, and it's going to be a very, very long time before one person in ten owns a Series 3 TiVo. As to the cost, it was about $5000 per node, last I heard. It may be much cheaper now.

Folks, you're stirring up a tempest in a teacup! Once everyone in the U.S. has enough cash laying around to purchase a shuttle ride at a cost of over $1 million, NASA is going to have trouble filling all the requests for shuttle rides, too. I'm sure they are quaking in their boots.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 05:29 AM   #815
bicker
Gruff
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 9,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
Nonsense.
Your saying so doesn't make it so, and your assertions don't make sense:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
The TiVo handling suggestiohns is no different than adding a few extra people ot the house, each with their own TV.
SDV is based on reasonable projections of usage. It is unreasonable to expect thousands of homes to have a few extra people in the house twenty four hours a day, seven days a week continually watching two television programs at the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
SDV is capable of handling tens of thousands, and eventually millions of channels.
But only a limited number at a time, within a head-end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
The TiVo doesn't do that, suggestions or not.
I explained how TiVo without the suggestions limitation I outlined, does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
Enacting the guidelines you suggest is much like FedEx charging people who live in the very middle of the block more because it costs more to drive to the middle of the block than near a corner.
Not it isn't. There is no analog to SDV in FedEx's world. FedEx is analogous to Pay Per View: They charge for every single box individually. In order for there to be an analogy, FedEx would have to have a service by which you pay a monthly fee for whatever you want to ship, (or perhaps in an a la carte world pay a monthly fee for unlimited shipping to a specific state). Then, the analogy to the SDV limitation I mentioned would be FedEx not allowing an AUTOMATED process, that has nothing to do with the shipments you actually INTENDED to ship, creating packages to be sent in addition to places you've sent things before. Ludicrous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
Folks, you're stirring up a tempest in a teacup!
I disagree. We've learned the hard way in our high-tech world that if you leave a door open, you'll come to regret it in short order. Technology is moving forward way too quickly to not take prudent measures. For all we know, MCE will catch on in 2011, and everyone will have four tuner units sitting in their living rooms. We simply cannot know what will happen next year, much less five or six years down the line. And once you open a door, it is very expensive to close it, from a PR standpoint. Over and over again we see this company or that being bashed here in the forums for taking prudent measures to react to changes in consumer behavior. "But we've always been able to do it in the past..." Blech.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 05:48 AM   #816
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
A Tivo isn't capable of flooding a switched video system because it can only record two programs at a time. No more than the cableco's own DVRs. Now if you had a DVR that could record 100 channels at a time, then there might be a problem.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 09:03 AM   #817
vstone
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Martinsville, VA
Posts: 1,223
I delete most, but occasionally find something I really enjoy, usually on a channel not requented.

I take that you advocate just turning off suggestions permanently?
vstone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 10:08 AM   #818
MichaelK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
The addition of more cable HD channels, many as a replacement for existing SD channels (think 11 HBO channels, if you include both coasts), will likely push more and more channels into SDV status. As more people watch more HD programming, the programs that they watch in common may diverge significantly and may not necessarily be on a small group of channels. We HD folk will not be watching the same 10 HD channels, we'll be watching (fill in the blank) and those people who watch the shopping channels 24/7 will watch the HD shopping channels. And since cable actually gets paid to carry these, who knows if they'll end up as SDV? Wouldn't want to have to explain to the shopping channel folk that customers were locked out of channel during the big cubic zirconium sale!

A "no suggestions from SDV channels" rule could end up meaning only suggestions from whatever ends up in the new (digital) basic tier.
in the end most people HD or SD are watching a small portion of the availible channels. It's just a fact. Even with HD- the majority of HD watched probably comes from the big 4 networks. Then the top tier cable nets like HBO and ESPN. THen after that it's all split up. The big 4 are not going to be SDV anytime soon- its debatable if ever it would be legal. Once HD reaches critical mass then EPSN and HBO HD are not going to be SDV either. Someone would always be on one of those so there would be no point to move them from linear. After that wealth HD, bug watching HD, weather HD, shoppin HD, are all likely going to be watched by a tiny percentage of people at any one time and so SDV would work for them.

At some point HD becomes "normal" tv and sd is the oddball and more HD channels would go linear while SD could get pushed to SDV.
MichaelK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 10:13 AM   #819
bicker
Gruff
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 9,117
I don't think so. The "oddball" will always be the niche interests, whether it be SD or HD.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 10:20 AM   #820
MichaelK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 7,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
.... We've learned the hard way in our high-tech world that if you leave a door open, you'll come to regret it in short order. Technology is moving forward way too quickly to not take prudent measures. For all we know, MCE will catch on in 2011, and everyone will have four tuner units sitting in their living rooms. We simply cannot know what will happen next year, much less five or six years down the line. And once you open a door, it is very expensive to close it, from a PR standpoint. Over and over again we see this company or that being bashed here in the forums for taking prudent measures to react to changes in consumer behavior. "But we've always been able to do it in the past..." Blech.

I think lrhorer's points were that as long as tivo's or MCE devices are a tiny percentage then it's like buying rides on the shuttle.

If we get to the point that everyone needs a ride on the shuttle then it's a different situation.

If as you hypothesize everyone has a 4 tuner SDV ready DVR in their house than the answers get pretty easy- move everything to SDV except the handful of legally mandated channels that have to be in the clear, split the nodes to make them 250 houses and force everyone to use SDV ready equipment. If everyone has a 4 tuner SDV dvr in their house then most tv's likely will already be hooked to SDV ready stuff.

the problem comes in when you are trying to build a system that works for SDV AND keeps the legacy people happy by keeping many of the channel in linear form. Once you get to a point where the legacy people are not a priority it's no problem to get SDV to work with a lot of nine's in it's uptime.

with the digital transition, the lack of cable card acceptance, the looming move to OCAP, the number of people with legacy non SDV ready tuners is going to just keep droping all the time. It's sort of like Directv's move to MPEG4 from MPEG2 for HD- it's really not that big a deal, new services only availible with the newer technology just natural move people to the new platforms.
MichaelK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 12:10 PM   #821
bicker
Gruff
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 9,117
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
I think lrhorer's points were that as long as tivo's or MCE devices are a tiny percentage then it's like buying rides on the shuttle.
See my comments about "opening doors".

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
If we get to the point that everyone needs a ride on the shuttle then it's a different situation.
At which time lrhorer will change his argument to, "It's always been this way..."

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
If as you hypothesize everyone has a 4 tuner ... DVR in their house than the answers get pretty easy-
You must be using the word "easy" in a manner I'm not familiar with.

You're also inserting words where they don't belong. I didn't say ANYTHING about a "4 tuner SDV ready DVR". There is no such thing available for sale to the market today, and there is no reason to believe that Microsoft and its partners, for example, are even working on a version of MCE and accompanying hardware that would qualify. So for the rest of this message, I'll be editing out the term SDV ready where you've added it erroneously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
move everything to SDV except the handful of legally mandated channels that have to be in the clear,
Resulting in a massive PR hit, as tens of thousands of customers start complaining that they suddenly lost a significant amount of their service.

They're already going to be losing some service as things are, without what you're suggesting, but at least it won't be as draconian as the wholesale move necessary to accomplish what you're advocating, plus cable will be able to roll it in more slowly, spreading the much smaller hit over a much longer period of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
split the nodes to make them 250 houses and force everyone to use SDV ready equipment.
Resulting on both a lot of extra cost (which I'm sure YOU don't want to pay for), and a significant PR hit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
If everyone has a 4 tuner ... dvr in their house then most tv's likely will already be hooked to SDV ready stuff.
As edited, that is patently untrue, given that there is nothing ensuring that anything will be SDV ready other than equipment provided by cable companies and the TiVo S4.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 05:04 PM   #822
vstone
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Martinsville, VA
Posts: 1,223
Well, as much as I like the Tivo, I think the analog expanded basic tier's days are numbered. I do not expect it to last until FEB 2012 like basic broadcast.

i expect the appearance of HD version of (name a channel) will be used as an excuse to jettison the SD version. Duplicate carriage of a given channel is just not worth it. About a third of my expanded basic tier already has HD versions (although we don't yet have them). As more people get HDTV sets, they will want USAHD or whatever in place of SD, folks will get cable boxes, the number of folks wanting USASD on their primary TV will decrease dramtically, etc. The end result will be more folks using SDV in the form of cable boxes. Secondary household TV sets that do not use cable boxes are the wild card in this scenario. If cable companies mandate cable boxes for analog receipt of locals (and they can) they can dump a bunch of sd channels and dump the SD versions and move the HD versions to SDV is they aren't already there.

As regarding a 4 tuner SDV DVR. The specs for DVR hard drives say they support 10 simultaneous HD streams (don't say 720P or 1080i) and i have seen reference to a 10 tuner DVR. This would have sense for a home video server for high end clients.

To assume MS isn't working on a solution for MCE is very strange. MCE 2005 has some features that Tivo doesn't support. Locking down the options and equipment can make for a more stable PC.

Having started selling the Home Windows server (which already has a Tivo addon available), they could easily start building a home video server with MS STB's and run SA and MOTO out of business (since neither of these seems very interested in providing a decent UI).
vstone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2007, 10:56 PM   #823
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
Well, as much as I like the Tivo, I think the analog expanded basic tier's days are numbered. I do not expect it to last until FEB 2012 like basic broadcast.

i expect the appearance of HD version of (name a channel) will be used as an excuse to jettison the SD version. Duplicate carriage of a given channel is just not worth it. About a third of my expanded basic tier already has HD versions (although we don't yet have them). As more people get HDTV sets, they will want USAHD or whatever in place of SD, folks will get cable boxes, the number of folks wanting USASD on their primary TV will decrease dramtically, etc. The end result will be more folks using SDV in the form of cable boxes.
You seem to be saying that switched video will be used more if analog is dumped, but at least in the short run, it's just the opposite. Switched video and dumping analog are alternative ways of expanding usable bandwidth. Most cablecos seem to believe that switched video is the less expensive option.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 12:59 AM   #824
morac
Cat God
 
morac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
You seem to be saying that switched video will be used more if analog is dumped, but at least in the short run, it's just the opposite. Switched video and dumping analog are alternative ways of expanding usable bandwidth. Most cablecos seem to believe that switched video is the less expensive option.
Actually switched video is the more expensive option. Dumping analog is actually very cheap to do, but it is highly likely to piss off analog cable customers. As the number of analog only cable customers goes down, you'll most likely see more cable companies dumping analog completely, but in the meantime, SDV is the lesser of 2 evils for them since the only ones it currently hurts are cableCARD users.
morac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 05:15 AM   #825
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by morac View Post
Actually switched video is the more expensive option. Dumping analog is actually very cheap to do, but it is highly likely to piss off analog cable customers.
It's not cheap. The cheapest set top box is something like $80, and most TVs will need one, not just the "primary" TV. It doesn't only affect analog-only customers (and those are still 50%). Plus installation costs.

If the channels are sent unencrypted, then most recently made TVs could receive them. That would reduce the costs some.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 08:45 AM   #826
bicker
Gruff
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 9,117
True, but there is no requirement that STBs be provided for free.

If you totally discount the costs associated with losing customers because you take away unencrypted analog channels, then doing so is indeed the lowest cost option. However, you cannot legitimately ignore those costs, and they are substantial. That's why more and more you'll see MSOs making the decision that SDV is the lowest cost approach.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 01:45 PM   #827
vstone
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Martinsville, VA
Posts: 1,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
You seem to be saying that switched video will be used more if analog is dumped, but at least in the short run, it's just the opposite. Switched video and dumping analog are alternative ways of expanding usable bandwidth. Most cablecos seem to believe that switched video is the less expensive option.
I agree about the short run, since it will take a while to manufacture and install the new equipment, especially the neighborhood headends.
vstone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 01:52 PM   #828
vstone
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Martinsville, VA
Posts: 1,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
It's not cheap. The cheapest set top box is something like $80, and most TVs will need one, not just the "primary" TV. It doesn't only affect analog-only customers (and those are still 50%). Plus installation costs.

If the channels are sent unencrypted, then most recently made TVs could receive them. That would reduce the costs some.
People moving to HD are at least somewhat liklely to be using a digital cable box now. Giving them a new HD cable box may free up a lot of non-HD cable boxes, many of these are SDV capable (I wouldn't hazard a guess about how many). these already paid for cable boxes could be used to support the analog SD TV sets that will remain sprinkled around in many houses and offices.
vstone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2007, 08:01 PM   #829
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
True, but there is no requirement that STBs be provided for free.
A cableco can (and probably should) charge for STBs, but then it would have to lower the base price to compensate. So the cost is still there.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2007, 05:23 AM   #830
bicker
Gruff
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Burlington, MA
Posts: 9,117
True, and while it isn't required for them to provide any STBs for free, if they go all-digital, a lot of us believe many of them will provide at least the first STB for free ("included").
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
bicker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 02:17 PM   #831
brettatk
If I Only Knew
 
brettatk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Smyrna, GA
Posts: 10,039
This may have been posted, but I did not read the entire thread. So forgive me if it has.

Good News if it's true. Just read Charter may employ SDV early as next year. I hope this thing is available if they do.

http://www.eetimes.com/rss/showArtic...etimes_newsRSS


Edit: Although this post is obviously not worthy to some people, I felt this article gave some updated information on the topic that I did not get from reading previous posts. I never said or made it seem like I was introducing a new topic.

Last edited by brettatk : 12-18-2007 at 08:08 AM.
brettatk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2007, 02:59 PM   #832
mikeyts
Wireless Wiseguy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 2,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by brettatk View Post
This may have been posted, but I did not read the entire thread. So forgive me if it has.

Good News if it's true. Just read Charter may employ SDV early as next year. I hope this thing is available if they do.

http://www.eetimes.com/rss/showArtic...etimes_newsRSS
Apparently the correct response to this type of post-old-news-without-looking at all in this forum is "you smeeked" . We've been discussing this upcoming "tuning resolver" device in this and other threads for months.
__________________
Mike Scott

"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
" -- hookbill
mikeyts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-2007, 09:56 PM   #833
OrangeKid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 56
Cox Las Vegas SDV?

Does anyone know if Cox Las Vegas has started using SDV? A number of new HD channels have been introduced over the last few weeks and I cannot receive them on my Tivo S3. Before having a tech come over I would like to be sure that it is not an SDV issue.
OrangeKid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2007, 11:27 AM   #834
jercra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
It's not cheap. The cheapest set top box is something like $80, and most TVs will need one, not just the "primary" TV. It doesn't only affect analog-only customers (and those are still 50%). Plus installation costs.

If the channels are sent unencrypted, then most recently made TVs could receive them. That would reduce the costs some.
Keep in mind that this is one of the reasons that companies like Comcast choose companies like Motorola as their sole SDV vendor. They are also their primary STB vendor. Motorola is able to offer bundled pricing to help absorb some of the cost of all the new STBs required so long as Comcast chooses only them as the SDV vendor.
jercra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 01:10 AM   #835
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,858
SDV parameters

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
Your saying so doesn't make it so, and your assertions don't make sense: SDV is based on reasonable projections of usage.
Not fundamentally it isn't no. It's true there is an expectation of a certain penetration in a neighborhood, and it's true deviations from that expectation by something like an order of magnitude would produce significant network congestion. In fact, this would be a problem for the CATV users more than the CATV company, but we'll let that pass for the moment, and assume the CATV company would have a heart attack if even one customer complained of blockages. The projections of which you speak are completely instantaneous and time-independent ones. The model takes no note of what time of day or for what period of time the system is in use. It is entirely based upon the metric of how many simultaneous streams there are at peak useage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
It is unreasonable to expect thousands of homes to have a few extra people in the house twenty four hours a day, seven days a week continually watching two television programs at the same time.
It is even more unreasonable to assert there are going to be hundreds of TiVos on each node all recording different things on that node 24 hours a day. It just won't happen. What happens across town and how many TiVos are distributed throughout the city is irrelevant. It is unique recordings from a particular node which impact the SDV model, and only at that node. The odds of having hundreds of Series III TiVos on a single node are vanishingly small until TiVo has sold on the order of 100 millions units. Don't hold your breath. The impact of Series II TiVos is vanishingly small.

Not only that, but your assertion that all the TiVos will be recording completely independent content on both tuners 24 hours a day is nonsense. First of all, one would have to really, really work to get the TiVo to record anything 24 hours a day, unless one simply set up a 24 hour recording schedule on both tuners. No one in their right mind would do such a thing. I have three TiVos wth fairly extensive recording bases, and the three put together don't record more than twelve hours a day, and a significant amount of that is duplication.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
But only a limited number at a time, within a head-end.
There's no theoretical limit. There are practical ones, but they are huge. More importantly, the point you are missing is it is not any more of a load on the SDV system at the headend to have a million receivers watching a channel than to have 1. It is only unique content which adds extra load to the system, and that load metric is entirely instantaneous. Watching 24 hours a day is no more of a load on the system than watching for 1 microsecond and then shutting down. If anyone on any receiver anywhere in the server realm is watching a program, then adding 100,000 additional receivers to the realm watching the same program doesn't add a single, solitary, even remotely miniscule bit of load to the headend system. Quite to the contrary, the big load on the SDV system will not be TiVos and the like, which will all be recording at regularly scheduled times, no matter how many millions there might be. The big load on the system will be human watchers who employ things like VOD and Video Rewind. These users cause the system to have to produce a totally unique program stream used by no one else anywhere in the city.

Let's put it this way. Suppose the CATV system in question provides a schedule of 2000 channels in a city the size of San Antonio, with roughly 250,000 subscribers, or about 600,000 viewers. At peak viewing times, how likely do you think it is there is not at least one person out of 600,000 watching every one of those channels live? If the headend can handle all 2000 channels at peak viewing time, then it can handle it continuously, 24 hours a day.

The simple fact is, with or without suggestions, the TiVo and similar devices reduce the load on the SDV system by eliminating significant use of VOD and
Video Rewind, streaming the content from the servers when lots of other people are obtaining the very same content and saving it on the local hard drive rather than calling it up uniquely at some later time from the server. Perhaps it would be better to say they tend as much to level out the load, as reducing it. Either way of looking at it, it's good for the CATV server farm because their peak loads are diminished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
I explained how TiVo without the suggestions limitation I outlined, does.
Your explanation is nonsense. It either stems from a very significant lack of understanding of how a switched broadcast network works, or else you are just blowing smoke. Here are the simple facts:

1. The number of TiVos in the network is far too small to have a statistically significant impact on the network utilization and will remain so for quite some years. I wish everyone had a Series III TiVo, but the fact is not one in 500 people does.

2. The actions of any DVR system tend to REDUCE the load on the CATV system because it is based upon scheduled events. During peak loads, the odds of there being a single scheduled channel not being watched al least one place in the city is vanishingly small, and adding the TiVo to the list of "watchers" doesn't impact the headend servers in the least.

Will the TiVo increase the server load at 04:00 in the morning? Surely, but who cares? The load at that time is very small anyway, and if the servers can handle the load at 19:00, then they can handle the extra load at 04:00. The fact the user will be somewhat likely to watch the 04:00 recording off the local hard drive at 19:00 rather than select a VOD offering or use Video Rewind when he gets up to go to the bathroom only makes things better.

I'm sorry, but the next portions of your post are just poorly conceived and badly thought-out nonsense. If you can't see the analog between singling out people in the middle of the block by a delivery service on whose operation the customers in question have negligible additional impact and singling out CATV subscribers who have at worst a negligible negative impact on CATV service delivery, then I truly don't know how to debate you on it. I'll try to make it simple for you. Even if every house on the system had ten multi-stream TiVos all recording suggestions 24 hours a day, the additional load on the headend servers would be manageable with only a modest increase in the number of servers. The impact to the individual nodes would be somewhat greater, but by cutting the number of subscribers per node, this also could be handled. Unless everyone in the United States goes out and buys a TiVo in the next six months, they'll be able to handle the increasing load.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
I disagree. We've learned the hard way in our high-tech world that if you leave a door open, you'll come to regret it in short order.
'Not if it's a closet door, and this is one awfully friggin' small closet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
Technology is moving forward way too quickly to not take prudent measures.
I think you need to look up the word "prudent". If your notion is prudent, then spending a few billion dollars to prevent an aerial invasion of Flagstaff, Arizona by the Haitian Air Force is downright essential.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
For all we know, MCE will catch on in 2011, and everyone will have four tuner units sitting in their living rooms. We simply cannot know what will happen next year, much less five or six years down the line.
Did you bother to read what you just wrote before posting it? In order to prevent possible unpredictable problems with a system in the unforeseeable future we need to apply a patch which has no positive impact to the system either now or then, but does negatively impact a related system which has no negative impact now or any foreseeable one in the future?

Dude. Get a grip.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bicker View Post
"But we've always been able to do it in the past..." Blech.
You seem to have a truly tangled understanding of business. A business - any business - has only one purpose. It must provide its customers with valued goods and services for which the customers are willing to provide renumeration. That's it. If any aspect of that purpose becomes "inconvenient" for the business, then they can and should shut their doors, or have them shut for them. The customer is the sole reason the business exists. If the consumer base wants chocolate cake then the baker darned well better make chocolate cake, no matter how allergic to chocolate the baker might be or how much more difficult it might be than yellow cake.

Right now TiVo users are a small fraction of the subscriber base. If they remain so then their impact on the CATV system will remain negligible. If they become a large fraction of the subscriber base, then the CATV providers will have to allow for whatever impact those user's equipment may have. If not, they will find themselves losing customers in droves. In this case, however, even in large numbers the use of TiVo suggestions will not ever have a devastating impact on the CATV system.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 01:25 AM   #836
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,858
Riding the shuttle

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
I think lrhorer's points were that as long as tivo's or MCE devices are a tiny percentage then it's like buying rides on the shuttle.

If we get to the point that everyone needs a ride on the shuttle then it's a different situation.
Well, yes, but the point is it's a silly thing over which to be concerned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
If as you hypothesize everyone has a 4 tuner SDV ready DVR in their house than the answers get pretty easy- move everything to SDV except the handful of legally mandated channels that have to be in the clear, split the nodes to make them 250 houses and force everyone to use SDV ready equipment. If everyone has a 4 tuner SDV dvr in their house then most tv's likely will already be hooked to SDV ready stuff.
No, no, no. You guys are making this way too complicated. The SDV metric is a simple one. The number of channels a CATV system can deliver is logarithmically inversely related to the number of receivers on a node. 'Double the number of channels, and the number of receivers per node must be reduced slightly. This is done by lighting up an additional pair of fibers, planting a new node somewhere in the neighborhood, and moving houses from several nodes onto it. It's a significant investment, but not vast. Conversely, increasing the number of receivers per node (by having multiple receivers in a DVR) will prevent the CATV company form delivering quite as many channels, but only a very small amount, and that number is still considerably greater than the number of channels there are.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 01:42 AM   #837
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,858
Cost of SD

Quote:
Originally Posted by vstone View Post
Well, as much as I like the Tivo, I think the analog expanded basic tier's days are numbered. I do not expect it to last until FEB 2012 like basic broadcast.

i expect the appearance of HD version of (name a channel) will be used as an excuse to jettison the SD version. Duplicate carriage of a given channel is just not worth it.
Hang on a minute. First of all, SD != analog. An analog channel uses up 6MHz of bandwidth. The same 6MHz slot used for a digital stream can easily carry 6 - 8 SD streams or 2 HD streams and an SD stream, depending on the encoding and how much the CATV provider rate shapes the streams. The point, however, is even if every carrier were used for HD to its maximum extent, there still is room for half as many SD channels as HD channels, and not to deliver at least 1 SD channels for every 2 HD channels is a complete waste of bandwidth. SD feeds won't be going away any time in the near future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelK View Post
About a third of my expanded basic tier already has HD versions (although we don't yet have them). As more people get HDTV sets, they will want USAHD or whatever in place of SD,
Yes, but encoding HD content is not trivial or cheap, adn neither is recording it. It's going to be a while before every source will be capable of delivering HD content.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 03:34 AM   #838
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by jercra View Post
Keep in mind that this is one of the reasons that companies like Comcast choose companies like Motorola as their sole SDV vendor. They are also their primary STB vendor. Motorola is able to offer bundled pricing to help absorb some of the cost of all the new STBs required so long as Comcast chooses only them as the SDV vendor.
Switched video doesn't require new set top boxes (maybe new firmware), so I'm not sure what you mean.

Cable companies take care not to obsolete their enormous investment in STBs. Video on demand, for example, was implemented in a way compatible with legacy set top boxes.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 04:26 AM   #839
Luke M
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
No, no, no. You guys are making this way too complicated. The SDV metric is a simple one. The number of channels a CATV system can deliver is logarithmically inversely related to the number of receivers on a node. 'Double the number of channels, and the number of receivers per node must be reduced slightly. This is done by lighting up an additional pair of fibers, planting a new node somewhere in the neighborhood, and moving houses from several nodes onto it. It's a significant investment, but not vast. Conversely, increasing the number of receivers per node (by having multiple receivers in a DVR) will prevent the CATV company form delivering quite as many channels, but only a very small amount, and that number is still considerably greater than the number of channels there are.
Theoretically, a rich guy could set up a monster DVR (or multiple DVRs) to record every single channel. In that case, switched video doesn't save any bandwidth regardless of service area size.

In general, if one atypical user can consume as much resources as a large number of typical users, then it creates some tension for a flat rate pricing system.
Luke M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2007, 04:47 AM   #840
mikeyts
Wireless Wiseguy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 2,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke M View Post
Theoretically, a rich guy could set up a monster DVR (or multiple DVRs) to record every single channel.
Recording every single one of hundreds of channels, all the time; nooooo, nothing suspicious about that . I think that the cable system and their content providers would discretely have that guy whacked and his "giant DVR" would burn down in a fire of mysterious origins .
__________________
Mike Scott

"
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
" -- hookbill
mikeyts is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVoŽ is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |