TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-07-2011, 09:06 PM   #211
windracer
joined the 10k club
 
windracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: St. Pete, FL
Posts: 11,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Some of you may already know me as Ispgeek here and other communities on the web however effective today my username will change to BHNtechXpert.
Welcome!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
You are correct. Jailbroken iPads will not be able to use the App.
Too bad. Apple's draconian app store policy at work, I'm guessing.
__________________
840~Roamio Pro (TA, MoCA) + two A92~Minis, 758~Premiere XL4 (TA, MoCA)
S/old: 746~S4, 658~HDXL, 648~OLED S3, 565~TX20, 230~S2, 140~S2

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
windracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2011, 12:14 PM   #212
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
I'm thinking more on the need to preserve DRM in general. A jailbroken device has the potential to have other things also broken if ya know what I mean.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 06:33 AM   #213
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Interesting. Another reason NOT to get an iPad. Silly me--I didn't realize that iPads were another ATT only product or that they required jailbreaking.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 09:25 AM   #214
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Interesting. Another reason NOT to get an iPad. Silly me--I didn't realize that iPads were another ATT only product or that they required jailbreaking.
Hi There...

They aren't only an AT&T product anymore and jailbreaking is only required if you want to have full control over your iPad. That said I'm not an Apple fan (I'm a PC kinda guy) so it's not in my future. Looking forward to an Android hopefully this year.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 10:00 AM   #215
windracer
joined the 10k club
 
windracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: St. Pete, FL
Posts: 11,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
I didn't realize that iPads were another ATT only product or that they required jailbreaking.
Not to get too off-topic, but you might be confusing jailbreaking with unlocking. Jailbreaking allows you to install apps and tweaks that aren't in the Apple-approved App Store. Unlocking is what lets you use a device that is locked to a particular carrier (like AT&T) on any carrier.

In this particular case, Brighthouse is preventing their new app from running on a jailbroken iPad, presumably because they don't want the content (that I'm paying for anyway) getting off of the iPad via some jailbreak app.
__________________
840~Roamio Pro (TA, MoCA) + two A92~Minis, 758~Premiere XL4 (TA, MoCA)
S/old: 746~S4, 658~HDXL, 648~OLED S3, 565~TX20, 230~S2, 140~S2

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
windracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 10:06 AM   #216
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Windracer it isn't us that's worried about what you do with that content...It's the content owner. Nothing would make us happier than to be able to offer you cross platform connectivity to all the products we offer no matter where you are and eventually that day will come.

We're kind of at a crossroads right now with technology and everyone is worried about getting their fair share. These issues will work themselves out eventually trust me...it's in everyones best interest to move in that direction. It will take time so patience is something we'll all have to hold onto at least for now.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 10:36 AM   #217
windracer
joined the 10k club
 
windracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: St. Pete, FL
Posts: 11,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Windracer it isn't us that's worried about what you do with that content...It's the content owner. Nothing would make us happier than to be able to offer you cross platform connectivity to all the products we offer no matter where you are and eventually that day will come.
I'm not trying to start an argument here, but if that were true BHN wouldn't have the CCI byte set on all the digital channels that prevent me from moving recordings from one TiVo to another in my own home, even though they allow that with their own "whole home DVR" solution. I know that can't be the content providers requiring that since Verizon and even Comcast don't always have those copy-protect flags on.
__________________
840~Roamio Pro (TA, MoCA) + two A92~Minis, 758~Premiere XL4 (TA, MoCA)
S/old: 746~S4, 658~HDXL, 648~OLED S3, 565~TX20, 230~S2, 140~S2

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
windracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2011, 11:14 AM   #218
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by windracer View Post
I'm not trying to start an argument here, but if that were true BHN wouldn't have the CCI byte set on all the digital channels that prevent me from moving recordings from one TiVo to another in my own home, even though they allow that with their own "whole home DVR" solution. I know that can't be the content providers requiring that since Verizon and even Comcast don't always have those copy-protect flags on.
The Whole Home DVR does not move recordings anywhere. They stream from the host DVR. I think the bigger question is why hasn't Tivo come up with a method of streaming for it's customers? For what they charge you would think this would be on the A list of customer requests. As for what other providers do in the way of securing content I obviously can't comment on that.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 12:30 PM   #219
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Sigh, such annoyances. Thanks WR! I want to be able to share even HD content between TiVos!

I just replaced my old BH modem, and the new one is a Netgear CGD24G with WiFi. I use a Linksys 54GS for TiVo and all my WiFi stuff. The BH Netgear came with no instructions or information and I had to peel off labels to discern exactly what model it was. I'm presuming that the WiFi on this is fairly useless to me and that the only way I can use this modem/router is as a modem. Correct?
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 01:51 PM   #220
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Sigh, such annoyances. Thanks WR! I want to be able to share even HD content between TiVos!

I just replaced my old BH modem, and the new one is a Netgear CGD24G with WiFi. I use a Linksys 54GS for TiVo and all my WiFi stuff. The BH Netgear came with no instructions or information and I had to peel off labels to discern exactly what model it was. I'm presuming that the WiFi on this is fairly useless to me and that the only way I can use this modem/router is as a modem. Correct?
Why would the Netgear wireless be useless? It's the functional equiv of the 54GS.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2011, 02:22 PM   #221
windracer
joined the 10k club
 
windracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: St. Pete, FL
Posts: 11,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
The BH Netgear came with no instructions or information and I had to peel off labels to discern exactly what model it was. I'm presuming that the WiFi on this is fairly useless to me and that the only way I can use this modem/router is as a modem. Correct?
I guess it depends. If you can get into the web interface of the router you should be able to configure it to take over for your Linksys box. Assuming Brighthouse hasn't changed any of the defaults, you should be able to login and then change it to your liking. I found this, maybe it will help:

http://support.netgear.com/app/answe...--product-faqs
__________________
840~Roamio Pro (TA, MoCA) + two A92~Minis, 758~Premiere XL4 (TA, MoCA)
S/old: 746~S4, 658~HDXL, 648~OLED S3, 565~TX20, 230~S2, 140~S2

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
windracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 07:31 AM   #222
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Hey, WR, thanks. I'll give it a looksee.

Are your channel 10 and 1010 out this morning? Not that I need to watch Power Rangers, but wondering why they're not on.

Meanwhile, I noticed that 123 (BBCA) is gone . . . moved and, presumably, accessible only with a TA (that prevents MRV).
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 07:39 AM   #223
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Why would the Netgear wireless be useless? It's the functional equiv of the 54GS.
BHN, There's no way I would know that it's the functional equivalent of 54GS (but thanks for the info). And it wasn't identifiable, nor did it come with instructions or booklet. I really appreciate information and helpfulness (see WindRacer's posts and MO) and a kinder tone would be more effective as Bright House's outreach.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 07:40 AM   #224
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by windracer View Post
Not to get too off-topic, but you might be confusing jailbreaking with unlocking. Jailbreaking allows you to install apps and tweaks that aren't in the Apple-approved App Store. Unlocking is what lets you use a device that is locked to a particular carrier (like AT&T) on any carrier.

In this particular case, Brighthouse is preventing their new app from running on a jailbroken iPad, presumably because they don't want the content (that I'm paying for anyway) getting off of the iPad via some jailbreak app.
Interesting and thanks, WR.
M
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 09:43 AM   #225
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
The Whole Home DVR does not move recordings anywhere. They stream from the host DVR.
Which limits the content to residing on the DVR. That is unacceptable:

1. The DVR is frail. The ability to deploy RAID is minimal or non-existent. My servers have more than 20 terabytes available fault tolerant storage, each, and counting. How many DVRs can make that claim?

2. The storage capabilities of the DVR are limited. Adding a single external drive is pretty pathetic when it comes to expanding a system, and doing so makes the system even more frail, not less. What's more, multi-drive arrays are bulky and usually rather noisy. The storage really needs to be elsewhere than in the living room or theater. If the DVR were able to store its content on a network drive, then that would be something. 'Not everything, but something.

3. There is no way to back up the content. Every night my primary server backs up any new material to the backup server via rsync. The entire contents of the backup server are archived to off-line hard drives on a regular basis. If the DVR supported backups, that would also be something.

4. There is no way to edit the content. I pad every recording in an attempt (sometimes unsuccessful ) to insure the entire program is recorded. That results in a lot of wasted space, so I trim every program to length. The very few which have commercials have them removed. Then I convert the MPEG2 content to h.264, which takes up less space and transfers much faster. None of that is available on any DVR of which I know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
I think the bigger question is why hasn't Tivo come up with a method of streaming for it's customers?
They have, but the question is not "bigger". It is largely moot. A streaming solution allows MRV or some variant, but it does not allow TTG. That is unacceptable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
For what they charge you would think this would be on the A list of customer requests. As for what other providers do in the way of securing content I obviously can't comment on that.
That's a cop-out. The fact is the content providers are not for the most part demanding that the CATV systems protect the content, and some (Mark Cuban, for example) are pushing hard for the CATV systems NOT to protect the content. The law specifically states that the CATV system and only the CATV system is responsible for the decision to set the CCI byte. Certainly, it is possible for a content provider to require as part of their contract agreement for the CCI byte to be set, but such contracts are not in evidence. Implying they are is nothing but a sleazy attempt to deflect the issue and make the company look as if it is not implementing capricious and arbitrary policies that negatively impact the customer when in fact the opposite is the case.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 10:10 AM   #226
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Windracer it isn't us that's worried about what you do with that content...It's the content owner.
The content owners have no say whatsoever (well, not supposedly - it is the MPAA that is driving most of this behind the scenes). No CATV provider has any contracts with the movie studios. The content providers have no official say in the matter, either. The CATV system and ONLY the CATV system has the authority to set the CCI byte or pass it on to the consumer from the content provider.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Nothing would make us happier than to be able to offer you cross platform connectivity to all the products we offer no matter where you are and eventually that day will come.
Not if the CATV companies have their way. CableLabs is comprised of CATV system representatives and only CATV system representatives (allowing that to be the case was another one of the utterly stupid moves on the part of the FCC). No one can read the CableLabs specs, even perfunctorily, and not realize the CATV companies do not wish the customer to have any control whatsoever over the content or the terminal equipment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
We're kind of at a crossroads right now with technology and everyone is worried about getting their fair share. These issues will work themselves out eventually trust me...it's in everyones best interest to move in that direction. It will take time so patience is something we'll all have to hold onto at least for now.
Right, Virginia.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 10:25 AM   #227
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Meanwhile, I noticed that 123 (BBCA) is gone . . . moved and, presumably, accessible only with a TA (that prevents MRV).
The TA has nothing to do with MRV, whatsoever. The CCI byte is part of the MPEG2 bitstream, and can be set to values other than 0x00 on any broadcast video irrespective of the delivery mechanism. The TA, OTOH, does absolutely nothing to the bitstream of any video. The TA's only function (only capability, for that matter) is to overwrite the channel map on the CableCard. This allows video streams to be mapped to any timeslot on any QAM carrier on the CATV spectrum based upon requests from the UDCP (in this case, a TiVo). In short, this means the TiVo, using the upstream modulator in the TA, can request Power Rangers from the headend. The headend responds to the TA, saying something like "Channel 123 is at 672 MHz, timeslots 01 - 05". The TA then overwrites the entry for 672 MHz, timeslots 01-05 on the CableCard, and the CableCard instructs the tuner to tune in 672 MHz. Meanwhile, at the headend, the video server system has started to send the content to the QAM modulator for 672MHz feeding the node that serves your house. The bitstream form the tuner starts coming in to the CableCard, and it splits off the timeslots and decrypts the content, sending it on to the device's video processor. That is SDV, and nothing in the entire process has anything to do with the CCI byte.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 10:32 AM   #228
windracer
joined the 10k club
 
windracer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: St. Pete, FL
Posts: 11,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Are your channel 10 and 1010 out this morning?
Nope, they're working.

Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Meanwhile, I noticed that 123 (BBCA) is gone . . . moved and, presumably, accessible only with a TA (that prevents MRV).
Yeah, it looks that way. I can get it on my TiVo with the TA, but not on the other ones anymore. You wouldn't have been able to MRV that channel even before it was SDV, though, since it was in the digital range (above 99).
__________________
840~Roamio Pro (TA, MoCA) + two A92~Minis, 758~Premiere XL4 (TA, MoCA)
S/old: 746~S4, 658~HDXL, 648~OLED S3, 565~TX20, 230~S2, 140~S2

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
windracer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2011, 11:11 AM   #229
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
Which limits the content to residing on the DVR. That is unacceptable:

1. The DVR is frail. The ability to deploy RAID is minimal or non-existent. My servers have more than 20 terabytes available fault tolerant storage, each, and counting. How many DVRs can make that claim?

2. The storage capabilities of the DVR are limited. Adding a single external drive is pretty pathetic when it comes to expanding a system, and doing so makes the system even more frail, not less. What's more, multi-drive arrays are bulky and usually rather noisy. The storage really needs to be elsewhere than in the living room or theater. If the DVR were able to store its content on a network drive, then that would be something. 'Not everything, but something.

3. There is no way to back up the content. Every night my primary server backs up any new material to the backup server via rsync. The entire contents of the backup server are archived to off-line hard drives on a regular basis. If the DVR supported backups, that would also be something.

4. There is no way to edit the content. I pad every recording in an attempt (sometimes unsuccessful ) to insure the entire program is recorded. That results in a lot of wasted space, so I trim every program to length. The very few which have commercials have them removed. Then I convert the MPEG2 content to h.264, which takes up less space and transfers much faster. None of that is available on any DVR of which I know.


They have, but the question is not "bigger". It is largely moot. A streaming solution allows MRV or some variant, but it does not allow TTG. That is unacceptable.


That's a cop-out. The fact is the content providers are not for the most part demanding that the CATV systems protect the content, and some (Mark Cuban, for example) are pushing hard for the CATV systems NOT to protect the content. The law specifically states that the CATV system and only the CATV system is responsible for the decision to set the CCI byte. Certainly, it is possible for a content provider to require as part of their contract agreement for the CCI byte to be set, but such contracts are not in evidence. Implying they are is nothing but a sleazy attempt to deflect the issue and make the company look as if it is not implementing capricious and arbitrary policies that negatively impact the customer when in fact the opposite is the case.
I fullly expected this response (albeit not so wordy ) and my only response to you is this. I realize you want all these things but the reality is these programs are not yours to do with as you please (nor are they ours). I also realize that you want to move the recordings around your network as you see fit and that for the most part would fall into the honorable intentions category but this is actually where the problems begin...the intentions quickly go from honorable to less than honorable because the next thing ya know they end up on a usenet server somewhere...now that's not to say that you do that BUT enough do where it has become a problem.

All of the above considered your frustration and efforts should be directed at the content providers and the rules they set forth for us to rebroadcast the material to you. Then and only then will things change. In the meantime you can continue down the path of blaming cable providers for this, that and the other thing in preventing this but it just isn't so despite what you may have read, been told or have concluded and your frustration and efforts in that direction are wasted.

In the meantime I have passed on your frustrations and I want you to know that it isn't that we don't care...we have rules and contracts we have to follow too.

Last edited by BHNtechXpert : 11-13-2011 at 11:35 AM.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 07:22 AM   #230
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
I fullly expected this response (albeit not so wordy ) and my only response to you is this. I realize you want all these things but the reality is these programs are not yours to do with as you please (nor are they ours). I also realize that you want to move the recordings around your network as you see fit and that for the most part would fall into the honorable intentions category but this is actually where the problems begin...the intentions quickly go from honorable to less than honorable because the next thing ya know they end up on a usenet server somewhere...now that's not to say that you do that BUT enough do where it has become a problem.

All of the above considered your frustration and efforts should be directed at the content providers and the rules they set forth for us to rebroadcast the material to you. Then and only then will things change. In the meantime you can continue down the path of blaming cable providers for this, that and the other thing in preventing this but it just isn't so despite what you may have read, been told or have concluded and your frustration and efforts in that direction are wasted.
Please, we have enough to deal with, with BHN and it's general, TiVo-uninformed personnel.

If you are here to troubleshoot our problems constructively, and give us technical help, that's great -- we can use a troubleshooter here and someone within BHN who is TiVo savvy.

But if, as it appears, you are here with BHN political motivation to tout the BHN line . . . that PR effort isn't going very well.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT

Last edited by megory : 11-20-2011 at 07:54 AM.
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 07:23 AM   #231
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Chennel 33 TNT out in South Pinellas Tier

Channel 33 has been out since about 2 am. Anyone else? I was recording all the Law and Orders for the upcoming week of few shows (I record on 33 so I can transfer via MRV--something, as we all know, BHN prevents from HD stations such as 1238 on its system). When I turned TV on, noticed the recordings have a black screen, althouth they're recording! Grrr.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT

Last edited by megory : 11-20-2011 at 07:41 AM.
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 09:24 AM   #232
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
Called BHN and apparently this is a county-wide downage. 1237 is fine (go figure) but, I wanted to record on my large storage TiVO and transfer PRN. So, I guess I'm SOL.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 10:14 AM   #233
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Please, we have enough to deal with, with BHN and it's general, TiVo-uninformed personnel.

If you are here to troubleshoot our problems constructively, and give us technical help, that's great -- we can use a troubleshooter here and someone within BHN who is TiVo savvy.

But if, as it appears, you are here with BHN political motivation to tout the BHN line . . . that PR effort isn't going very well.
Suggestion one...let's dispense with the flaming and sarcasim shall we (you modified your post but I saw the troll comments)? I'm here to help, have a long standing track record in doing just that (feel free to verify) and in the meantime what can I do for you?
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 10:16 AM   #234
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
Channel 33 has been out since about 2 am. Anyone else? I was recording all the Law and Orders for the upcoming week of few shows (I record on 33 so I can transfer via MRV--something, as we all know, BHN prevents from HD stations such as 1238 on its system). When I turned TV on, noticed the recordings have a black screen, althouth they're recording! Grrr.
This issue with Chan 33 has been resolved...
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 01:31 PM   #235
megory
Advanced TiVoOligan
 
megory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BH, South Pinellas, FL
Posts: 1,282
I'm waiting for you to be helpful. This is OUR forum and if your only contribution is to put down TiVo, you are easily ignored.
__________________
M-Card No TA. HD3TiVo-1TB (1350a); 2DT
megory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 01:34 PM   #236
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
I realize you want all these things but the reality is these programs are not yours to do with as you please (nor are they ours).
That is not the point. There are certainly laws against copyright infringement, and I am not suggesting they be violated. The simple fact is, however, the majority of TiVo users out there ARE able to move their recordings around as they see fit. The majority of MSOs do not copy protect their broadcasts. That is a fact, and one you are ignoring.

By the way, they don't belong to the content providers who you claim are pushing for this, either. They belong to the content owners - usually a studio. Exactly why people who don't own the content should be allowed to dictate what the end user's equipment can or cannot do with the content is a real puzzle, to me. A car dealer cannot sue you if you violate the patents on an automobile, nor in any other way prevent you from doing so. Why should the wholesaler (the content provider) or the retailer (the CATV system) have any say whatsoever in the matter? (Yes, I know it's because that's what the law says.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
I also realize that you want to move the recordings around your network as you see fit and that for the most part would fall into the honorable intentions category but this is actually where the problems begin...the intentions quickly go from honorable to less than honorable because the next thing ya know they end up on a usenet server somewhere...now that's not to say that you do that BUT enough do where it has become a problem.
The issue is not some hypothetical problems, but whether Brighthouse and certain other MSOs are copy protecting their broadcasts due to contractural obligations, or simply as a matter of policy and then attempting to deflect the perceived responsibility for the decision to the content providers. After all, the customer does not buy directly from the content provider, so what does it matter if they think the content provider is an @%^@$$%?

In the following, I am going to use the term "you" to refer to the CATV systems in general or Brighthouse Networks specifically, not you, personally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
All of the above considered your frustration and efforts should be directed at the content providers and the rules they set forth for us to rebroadcast the material to you.
First of all, my only frustration is being lied to. I don't suffer from the problem in the least. I'm not a Brighthouse customer, and I have no issues with the CCI byte. I have severe issues with anyone who lies in an attempt to deflect blame for anything.

Secondly, most of the content providers have publicly stated they have no such restrictions set forth in their contracts, and as I already mentioned, a number of them have specifically stated they do not wish to have their content protected. Again, Mark Cuban is a good example. So either they are lying, or you are. Which is it? The fact the majority of CATV systems are not copy protecting their broadcasts strongly suggests the latter.

I can freely move all the content in my house around any way I choose. I could even, if I so chose, copy the content to DVDs and start selling it on the street. It would be illegal to do so, and the copyright owners could rightfully have me thrown in jail if I did. Neither you nor the content providers could, however, because it is none of your business. For some reason, the FCC doesn't realize this and for some bizarre reason thinks it has some responsibility to the broadcast industry, and must protect their perceived interests, real or imagined.

For the record, I do not ever copy content to DVDs or distribute them on the street, for money or otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Then and only then will things change. In the meantime you can continue down the path of blaming cable providers for this, that and the other thing in preventing this but it just isn't so despite what you may have read, been told or have concluded and your frustration and efforts in that direction are wasted.
These are the indisputable facts:

1. You claim to have contractural obligations.
2. No such obligations are in evidence. (Feel free to point to some.)
3. Every CATV system in the country has similar contracts with the very same providers as Time Warner, Frontier, Brighthouse, etc.
4. The majority of MSOs do not copy protect their content.
5. There is no law requiring you to enter into a restrictive contract.

These facts add up to some strong conclusions:

1. At the very least, you are not acting as an advocate for your customers.
2. Either you are lousy negotiators, acquiescing to contractural restrictions the majority of MSOs are not countenancing, or...
3. You are lying through your teeth, and there are few or no such contractural obligations guiding your policy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
In the meantime I have passed on your frustrations and I want you to know that it isn't that we don't care...we have rules and contracts we have to follow too.
There is one and only one rule you have to follow, and that is the FCC regulations which clearly state that you, and only you, have the responsibility for deciding whether or not to set the CCI byte, to reset it, or to pass through the content provider's settings. 'Not a very restrictive rule, for you, is it? The statement, however, is typical of the obfuscation we regularly encounter. It suggests, without actually stating as fact, there are multiple regulations at play, suggestively from multiple sources. The rule (singular) is clearly spelled out in the so called "Plug-N-Play" FCC ruling of 2003, pulled from the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998.

As to the vague insinuation your hands are tied by contractural agreements, why should we believe you? Because you say so? Because there is no way you would ever attempt to deflect responsibility for internal policy by suggesting there are external influences tying your hands?

I used to work for an MSO (Time Warner). One reason I quit was because their strategy for just about everything was to come up with some arbitrary and capricious policy and then lie through their teeth to try to deflect blame. By the reports I continue to get from sources within the organization, this problem has not gotten any better. We never could believe a single word that came from any exec's mouth back then. Why should it be different now?

Last edited by lrhorer : 11-20-2011 at 01:54 PM.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 02:04 PM   #237
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHNtechXpert View Post
Suggestion one...let's dispense with the flaming and sarcasim shall we (you modified your post but I saw the troll comments)? I'm here to help, have a long standing track record in doing just that (feel free to verify) and in the meantime what can I do for you?
Your point is well taken, but then so is his. Let me say that I sympathize with you on a personal level. As a semi-official BHN representative, your hands are tied by the party line. Mine would be, as well, if I still worked for Time Warner. Since I do not, however, I am free to remark on what sleezy, slimy, lying SOBs they are. Their problem is, however, their protestations to the contrary are just one more lie in a very long string of lies, and far from appeasing the public, just yet more firmly demonstrates what lying a$$-wipes they are.

As to any technical advice or help you may offer your customers, they should indeed be grateful, not abusive.

Last edited by lrhorer : 11-20-2011 at 02:19 PM.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 02:26 PM   #238
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by megory View Post
I'm waiting for you to be helpful. This is OUR forum and if your only contribution is to put down TiVo, you are easily ignored.
I suggest you lighten up. First of all, I haven't seen him put down TiVo, yet, with the exception of one off-hand comment which I addressed. It appears, however, we have the ear of at least one industry insider with possibly some means of communicating up the chain of command. I suspect his communications channels are limited, but still they have more clout than any civilian resource. Certainly it is a far better resource than some minimum - wage drop-out or pennies-an-hour Asian contractor manning a CSR line.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 10:59 PM   #239
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
Your point is well taken, but then so is his. Let me say that I sympathize with you on a personal level. As a semi-official BHN representative, your hands are tied by the party line. Mine would be, as well, if I still worked for Time Warner. Since I do not, however, I am free to remark on what sleezy, slimy, lying SOBs they are. Their problem is, however, their protestations to the contrary are just one more lie in a very long string of lies, and far from appeasing the public, just yet more firmly demonstrates what lying a$$-wipes they are.

As to any technical advice or help you may offer your customers, they should indeed be grateful, not abusive.
Correction...official, not semi-official... that said lets address the obvious perception problem that you have with BHN. I don't know what made you feel this way but I would love to hear your story and do whatever I can to address your concerns. To be honest I've heard a lot of feedback...yours however is not common so it's important for me to know what the heck happened. If this isn't the place feel free to private msg me and I'll pass my contact number and we can talk or whatever feels best for you.
BHNtechXpert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2011, 11:13 PM   #240
BHNtechXpert
Registered User
 
BHNtechXpert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
I suggest you lighten up. First of all, I haven't seen him put down TiVo, yet, with the exception of one off-hand comment which I addressed. It appears, however, we have the ear of at least one industry insider with possibly some means of communicating up the chain of command. I suspect his communications channels are limited, but still they have more clout than any civilian resource. Certainly it is a far better resource than some minimum - wage drop-out or pennies-an-hour Asian contractor manning a CSR line.
Quoting from your post above...

I suspect his communications channels are limited, but still they have more clout than any civilian resource.


Not so fast there sparky You would be surprised (shocked actually). So before bounding my hands trust me when I say I have the ability and communication channels (as you put it) to address anything you can think of assuming of course it can be addressed.

Certainly it is a far better resource than some minimum - wage drop-out or pennies-an-hour Asian contractor manning a CSR line.

The ONLY time you will speak to someone overseas is IF you end up with the RR National Help Desk over a software issue (meaning not BHN related). They handle these issues however are not contractors to BHN but actually support Roadrunner. Depending on how you answer the questions from the IVR (or don't answer them) you will be routed to the best possible destination for your question. If you are routed to the wrong people simply ask to be transferred to your local office.

You of course do have another option and that is to reach out to me directly and I will make sure you are taken care of. In most cases within minutes...there are no bounds to what I can do so feel free to try it sometime. So if you post a question to me between 8am and 12am expect a response back quickly except for holidays and Sunday...it might be an hour or two...
BHNtechXpert 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 10:08 PM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |