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 11-15-2007, 04:21 PM   #601
CrispyCritter
Purple Ribbon Wearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: North Potomac, MD
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
Thank you for adding extra information that adds no extra value. And wrong too. If the protocol is published (which it is to those who have a need) than anyone can write the software to interface to the SDV server*.
You're wrong on two accounts. First, your message said that TiVo doesn't support SDV. My message says that TiVo can't support SDV. Very different.

Second, "the" protocol is not published in any form that TiVo can make use of. There is no single protocol common among all implementations, and there is no commitment from any one cable company not to change the protocol. There is a reason why standards are needed. Once the cable companies commit to a standard, TiVo can do something. Before then, they can't.
__________________
CrispyCritter
TiVo Roamio:Felix TiVo Premiere:Bob TiVo XL4:Fred TiVo HDXL:Sharon TiVoHD:Susan
CrispyCritter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 04:28 PM   #602
dswallow
Save the Moderatоr
 
dswallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Long Branch, NJ, USA
Posts: 49,120
TC CLUB MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
Uh, what part of 'support two-way services' are you adding extra conditions to? All of what you are adding is covered in my statement of 'support'. Why do you have a need to add unnecessary info.
It's not unnecessary info at all. Your implication is that a 2-way host device will solve the problem. That's untrue. A 2-way host device, absent any standards to communicate with the cable head-end to request switched digital video channels, is useless. And no such standard exists.
__________________
¯\_(ツ)_/¯****************
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.
dswallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 04:38 PM   #603
ah30k
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,206
Doug and Crispy,
There is what is commonly referred to as the Time-Warner spec named for the comapny that took the lead in the field. This is available to any legit company that want to interface to a headend using that spec. There is the Comcast NGOD spec which is a slight variation of the TW spec and the favored protocol of Comcast. Mot and BigBand systems follow these specs. I'm sure SA systems have one as well. Just because you can't google a spec doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

lets not get too wrapped up in the difference between an ICD and a standard.
ah30k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 04:41 PM   #604
CrispyCritter
Purple Ribbon Wearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: North Potomac, MD
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
Doug and Crispy,
There is what is commonly referred to as the Time-Warner spec named for the comapny that took the lead in the field. This is available to any legit company that want to interface to a headend using that spec. There is the Comcast NGOD spec which is a slight variation of the TW spec and the favored protocol of Comcast. Mot and BigBand systems follow these specs. I'm sure SA systems have one as well. Just because you can't google a spec doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Where did I deny internal protocols exist?

Where is the public commitment from any of these companies that they will not change their protocol?
__________________
CrispyCritter
TiVo Roamio:Felix TiVo Premiere:Bob TiVo XL4:Fred TiVo HDXL:Sharon TiVoHD:Susan
CrispyCritter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 04:45 PM   #605
ah30k
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,206
Oh, where to begin. I guess in order
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
Second, "the" protocol is not published in any form that TiVo can make use of.
yes it is, jsut because you dont have it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Quote:
There is no single protocol common among all implementations, and there is no commitment from any one cable company not to change the protocol.
Right there are about three. Life sucks get over it. Code to all three.[/quote]
Quote:
There is a reason why standards are needed. Once the cable companies commit to a standard, TiVo can do something. Before then, they can't.
Again, life sucks. code to it or sit on the sideline.
ah30k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 06:31 PM   #606
morac
Cat God
 
morac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
Again, life sucks. code to it or sit on the sideline.
And this attitude was why the FCC had to intervene to get the cable companies to commit to a standard (what is currently cableCARD) in the first place.
morac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:20 PM   #607
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Docsis

Quote:
Originally Posted by dswallow View Post
A Tuning Resolver dongle could be created that would work with any DOCSIS-compliant cable system, which most all are, and very likely all that would be using SDV would be.
I do not have the technical details of the Scientific Atlanta system, but I do not believe it is. I could be mistaken.

If both it and Motorola (and whatever other system is out there) is DOCSIS compliant, then a dongle is unnecessary for most subscribers with TiVos, which is what I have been saying all along in any case. Since the TiVo is probably just about the only device which can even make use of a USB dongle in the first place, there just is no terribly good reason to develop one. An Ethernet solution will be far simpler and cheaper.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:32 PM   #608
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Total crap

Quote:
Originally Posted by chashulme View Post
The supervisor informed me that SDV support is required to get any additional channels, and that cable card S3's would not be compatible.
That's total crap. They either lied to you, you misunderstood, or they haven't a clue. All CableCards meets the same specs, and the FCC has mandated that all CATV providers support CableCards. Indeed, all the new series of CATV STBs are CableCard based, and every CableCard works with every version of SDV. It's true the S3 does not yet support M-cards, but S-Cards work fine with SDV - you just have to have two of them rather than one. The inability of the TiVo (and every other generally available consumer device at this point) to receive SDV has nothing to do with the CableCards and everything to do with the fact the devices are one way. 'Modify the TiVo (with an external device or whatever) to handle two way communictaions with the CATV system and it will work just fine with SDV.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:40 PM   #609
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Uselesss TiVo

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
My point was why have a TiVo if the cable company is supplying the software (and TiVo isn't).
I don't know what you mean. TiVo most likely wouldn't in any case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
But an OCAP compatible TiVo that can get SDV with the cable company supplying the software seems useless.
How so? Orwellian, yes. Useless, no.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
Perhaps someday standards will arise here, but there aren't any useful ones now.
That's true, but what has that to do with your previous statements? Just becasue the proposed standard would allow the CATV company to install utilities on your TiVo whether you want them or noty and just because the user does not have the option to use a third party vendor for the software rather than the CATV company's software has nothing to do with the TiVo being useless or not.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:47 PM   #610
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Nonsense

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
It's insufficient just to support two way services. The host device also has to be running the cable company's software (there is currently no standard SDV interface, just standards for downloading software). And there is no standard modular interface at the moment, so the complete software system has to be supplied by the cable company. Why have a TiVo then?
That's nonsense. Who told you this? All that is required for basic SDV compatibility at the software level is the ability to request a particular digital stream from the SDV host. It doesn't care in the least what software generates the packet. Even interactive services only require hooks similar to TiVo's HME protocol to work. For that matter, implementing OCAP on the TiVo would not be difficult. It's just that a lot of people object to OCAP and it's Big Brother implications.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:54 PM   #611
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Oh No Cap

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
But it's impossible for TiVo to do that at the moment. There is no standard for TiVo to communicate with the cable company middleware, as they need to.
Middleware is not essential to the picture, at all, unless of course it is mandated by the FCC through OCAP or other auspice. That said, I would definitely say a middleware soulution is the way to go. I just don't want the CATV company to have control over what middleware goes into my TiVo. If I don't want a particular feature, I should be able to refuse to allow the software providing the feature to be loaded. That, or if I want to purchase / procure my middleware from someone else other than the CATV company, then that should be my right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
Once there is a standard, I agree that's the desired division. But I see no indication that the cable companies are moving to make that happen. That's why TiVo has been filing all those briefs with the FCC.
That's true.

Last edited by lrhorer : 11-15-2007 at 08:22 PM.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:57 PM   #612
ah30k
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by morac View Post
And this attitude was why the FCC had to intervene to get the cable companies to commit to a standard (what is currently cableCARD) in the first place.
I'm just tired of people claiming there is no standard and TiVo can't do anything until the standard exists and TiVo is being totally kept out of the secret world of SDV. There are specs that define what might be three possible protocols based on three implementations of SDV. Who is going to decide which one of those three should be a standard? You? Congress? Who? Tell me who? Please? The others will then go away quietly?

And, byt the way, the CableCARD is an abstraction layer that allows different standards on the back end and a common interface on the STB side. This came what, 10 years after the start of digital cable encryption hit the market.
ah30k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 07:58 PM   #613
HiDefGator
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
That's nonsense. Who told you this? All that is required for basic SDV compatibility at the software level is the ability to request a particular digital stream from the SDV host. It doesn't care in the least what software generates the packet. Even interactive services only require hooks similar to TiVo's HME protocol to work. For that matter, implementing OCAP on the TiVo would not be difficult. It's just that a lot of people object to OCAP and it's Big Brother implications.
Even if Tivo decided to somehow detect and code to multiple different specs wouldn't there still be a problem with knowing how each system was configured? It just sounds like an impossible task for Tivo to me. Certainly one that would have to be tweaked constantly every time the cable company decided to upgrade firmware, etc.

My money is on the dongle never seeing the light of day. Tivo's future is as a download to boxes that someone else installed and built. The Comcast model.
HiDefGator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:02 PM   #614
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Well... sort of

Quote:
Originally Posted by morac View Post
And this attitude was why the FCC had to intervene to get the cable companies to commit to a standard (what is currently cableCARD) in the first place.
Well, yeah, to some extent. The situations as a whole was much more complex, however. First of all, there were a lot more than a handful of different proposals with every company holding on dearly to their favorite brand. Secondy, not only was there a tug - of - war between TV manufacturers and between CATV companies, but the two groups as a whole fought against each other. Here we're talking about a much smaller number of combatants.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:05 PM   #615
mrmike
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 3,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
I'm just tired of people claiming there is no standard and TiVo can't do anything until the standard exists and TiVo is being totally kept out of the secret world of SDV. There are specs that define what might be three possible protocols based on three implementations of SDV.
Really? Care to share linkages to them? The only one I'm aware of is a proprietary spec with a $100K licensing fee on it.
mrmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:08 PM   #616
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Ok

Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
I'm just tired of people claiming there is no standard and TiVo can't do anything until the standard exists
Well, can't and unwilling are two different things. I do understand their caution. I think it may not be as safe a position as they think, but I do understand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
Who is going to decide which one of those three should be a standard?
That's the $64 question, isn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
This came what, 10 years after the start of digital cable encryption hit the market.
'Closer to 20, at least in some markets.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:17 PM   #617
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
SDV Layers

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiDefGator View Post
Even if Tivo decided to somehow detect and code to multiple different specs wouldn't there still be a problem with knowing how each system was configured?
Not at the basic level, no. More sophisticated functions like VOD, Internet browsing, etc are more complex, but at the level of watching "standard" channels it's rather simple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiDefGator View Post
It just sounds like an impossible task for Tivo to me. Certainly one that would have to be tweaked constantly every time the cable company decided to upgrade firmware, etc.
No, because remember the CATV company is in somewhat the same boat as TiVo. If they make any fundamental change to their SDV hosts, then they also have to make that change to all their STBs and DVRs. They're not going to want to break anything, so the protocols will be highly backwards compatible.

Last edited by lrhorer : 11-15-2007 at 08:23 PM.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:19 PM   #618
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
TiVo Size It

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmike View Post
Really? Care to share linkages to them? The only one I'm aware of is a proprietary spec with a $100K licensing fee on it.
While daunting to you or I, that's nothing to a company the size of TiVo.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2007, 08:26 PM   #619
ah30k
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmike View Post
Really? Care to share linkages to them? The only one I'm aware of is a proprietary spec with a $100K licensing fee on it.
I mentioned two (TW-Spec and the Comcast NGOD spec). You'll need to contact their respective owners for copies. Existence is not governed by the lack or presence of a hyperlink. If you are serious about delivering a product to market, you can get the spec.
ah30k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2007, 07:46 AM   #620
CrispyCritter
Purple Ribbon Wearer
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: North Potomac, MD
Posts: 3,637
Quote:
Originally Posted by lrhorer View Post
No, because remember the CATV company is in somewhat the same boat as TiVo. If they make any fundamental change to their SDV hosts, then they also have to make that change to all their STBs and DVRs. They're not going to want to break anything, so the protocols will be highly backwards compatible.
I thought the entire point of OCAP is to allow the cable companies to change their protocols at will. They theoretically will be able to change head end-end STB software at the same time, thus not breaking anything (except, of course, all the third-party non-OCAP devices).

If the cable companies publicly commit to not changing their basic SDV protocols, then I agree TiVo should go right ahead and implement them. But the cable companies have had every opportunity to do so, and have not; instead they are proposing dongles, which is going to cost them a lot more expense than a simple public commitment. To me, that means they expect the protocols to change.
__________________
CrispyCritter
TiVo Roamio:Felix TiVo Premiere:Bob TiVo XL4:Fred TiVo HDXL:Sharon TiVoHD:Susan
CrispyCritter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2007, 07:53 AM   #621
mrmike
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 3,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
I mentioned two (TW-Spec and the Comcast NGOD spec). You'll need to contact their respective owners for copies. Existence is not governed by the lack or presence of a hyperlink. If you are serious about delivering a product to market, you can get the spec.
Yeah, that's where the $100K came in. And with the spec being under private control by an entity with no interest in making things easier for me, what guarantee do I have that the spec won't change every 6 months? Or that "misbehaviours" would be well explained and investigated. Open specs run the world for very good reasons.
mrmike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2007, 08:43 AM   #622
ah30k
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmike View Post
Yeah, that's where the $100K came in. And with the spec being under private control by an entity with no interest in making things easier for me, what guarantee do I have that the spec won't change every 6 months? Or that "misbehaviours" would be well explained and investigated. Open specs run the world for very good reasons.
There are no guarantees the spec won't change but if it does change then Motorola, BigBand, Arris, SA and every other SDV vendor will be impacted as well causing expensive updates to fielded headends. All of these impacted vendors will put pressure on the spec owners to settle them. Open specs don't come out of the heavens on beams of sunlight. There are very heated battles over whose preferences are chosen. Eventually SDV might get there.

By the way, you mention "me" and "I" in your responses. Are you developing to this spec or just an observer with a interest in them.
ah30k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2007, 09:37 PM   #623
lrhorer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Posts: 6,872
Ocap

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
I thought the entire point of OCAP is to allow the cable companies to change their protocols at will.
Well, it's far from the whole point, but that is one benefit of OCAP, yes. By employing middleware, the basic sockets on the end terminal remain unchanged while new featuires are added to the system as a whole. In this scenario, TiVo can make just as much use of the stability of the OCAP interface on the receiver side as the CATV company's STBs. Barring a middleware solution like OCAP, however, the answer to the dilemma for the CATV company is backwards compatibility. Either way, the TiVo is very likely to be shielded by the same armor which covers the CATV company's assets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
They theoretically will be able to change head end-end STB software at the same time, thus not breaking anything (except, of course, all the third-party non-OCAP devices).
If any CATV provider is using OCAP, then there is nothing preventing Tivo from supporting OCAP. It's proprietary protocols which throw a monkey wrench into the machinery, but a proprietary protocol is as I said going to tend to be loaded with backwards compatibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
If the cable companies publicly commit to not changing their basic SDV protocols, then I agree TiVo should go right ahead and implement them. But the cable companies have had every opportunity to do so, and have not;
Up to here your point is well taken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrispyCritter View Post
instead they are proposing dongles, which is going to cost them a lot more expense than a simple public commitment. To me, that means they expect the protocols to change.
I would say this doesn't follow. A dongle is no less prone to obsolescence than the TiVo iteslf, and if the dongle is provided by the CATV company, then the CATV company is going to be responsible for keeping the dongle up to date. This means they a re either going to have to freeze their protocols (at least those availble to the dongle) or change out thousands of them nationwiode every time they change their protocols.
lrhorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2007, 11:18 AM   #624
jercra
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
There are no guarantees the spec won't change but if it does change then Motorola, BigBand, Arris, SA and every other SDV vendor will be impacted as well causing expensive updates to fielded headends. All of these impacted vendors will put pressure on the spec owners to settle them. Open specs don't come out of the heavens on beams of sunlight. There are very heated battles over whose preferences are chosen. Eventually SDV might get there.
This is right on. There are lots of vendors involved in the many aspects of SDV (SM, ERM, Client, etc) and all of them must conform to the specs currently implemented. Add in that HE techs, support orgs and engineering orgs need a consistent set of behaviors and error codes and you can pretty quickly see that there will be no rapid spec changes. It aslo bears noting that companies like Comcast and TWC do not go blindly into the future. The roadmap for SDV functionality is pretty much laid out for the next couple of years. There won't be many surprises for any SDV vendor and that would include TiVo.

Beyond any of this is the fact that Comcast and TWC are actually actively working towards a common spec, not just for SDV but for all interactive services. Once this is accomplished (and yes it will happen at the speed of cable companies) every other cable company will fall in line behind them as every single vendor will cater to those two companies. They are not doing this because the FCC mandated it. They are doing it because it is the best thing for them as it allows all vendors to develop more rapidly and more economically.

In the mean time, it's not out of the realm of possibility for TiVo to partner with another company that is very familiar with all of the various SDV specs to build a TiVo server that resides in the HE and does all of the required protocol translations for each SDV spec. This would allow TiVo to develop a single client without worrying very much about adapting every TiVo whenever a spec did actually change. This is exactly the approach that Digeo took with their Moxi STB to enable VOD.
jercra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2007, 12:39 PM   #625
morac
Cat God
 
morac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 6,530
Comcast picked Motorola to supply the hardware for SDV and BigBand to supply the software to handle communication between the headend and the set-top box at the end of last month. BigBand also supplies the software for Cablevision, Time Warner Cable and Cox Communications.

Since they were running trials in Denver, CO and Cherry Hill, NJ, and the Cherry Hill, NJ system uses Scientific Atlanta hardware, it looks like they liked the Motorola ones better (I'm guessing Denver uses Moto).

Since SA and Moto systems are not compatible (which is why you can't use a Moto cableCARD is a SA cable system and vice-versa) I'm not sure what this means for SDV in SA areas.
morac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 09:50 AM   #626
moyekj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 9,199
SDV is coming to Cox, Orange County, which means:
* 6 HD channels I already can't get (CNN HD, Discovery HD, NFL Network HD, TLC HD, History HD, Animal Planet HD)
* 4 HD channels to be launched county wide on Dec 17 I won't get (Food HD, HGTV HD, HDNet, HDNet Movies)
* Any SD and HD channels added from here on out I won't get
* Digital simulcast channels (for channels below 100) will be going away: CableCard customers will revert back to analog channels in channel map
NOTE: SDV hasn't even been deployed yet, but this is all in preparation for SDV deployment.

This also brings up an interesting point: Let's assume for a moment the tuning resolver was already available. Being a CableCard customer my lineup would still be compromised based on anticipation of SDV rollout. Those CableCard customers with tuning resolver would need special treatment for their account to make sure the channel map of regular digital cable box customers would be used instead of the normal CableCard channel map since obviously they can be (and in my case are) different.
__________________
Roamio Pro, Elite, Premiere
Cox - Motorola CableCards & TAs
Slingbox 350 via TiVo Mini & TiVo Stream for remote viewing

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.

Last edited by moyekj : 11-20-2007 at 01:41 PM.
moyekj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 11:20 AM   #627
AZrob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by moyekj View Post
SDV is coming to Cox, Orange County, which means:
* 6 HD channels I already can't get
* 5 HD channels to be launched county wide on Dec 17 I won't get
* Any SD and HD channels added from here on out I won't get
* Digital simulcast channels (for channels below 100) will be going away: CableCard customers will revert back to analog channels in channel map
NOTE: SDV hasn't even been deployed yet, but this is all in preparation for SDV deployment.

This also brings up an interesting point: Let's assume for a moment the tuning resolver was already available. Being a CableCard customer my lineup would still be compromised based on anticipation of SDV rollout. Those CableCard customers with tuning resolver would need special treatment for their account to make sure the channel map of regular digital cable box customers would be used instead of the normal CableCard channel map since obviously they can be (and in my case are) different.
This is the first I have heard that implementation of SDV may result in below-100 channels going back to analog. Is this an expected consequence of SDV's implementation or is this just a choice local to Cox Orange County?

Rob from AZ
AZrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 11:53 AM   #628
moyekj
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 9,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by AZrob View Post
This is the first I have heard that implementation of SDV may result in below-100 channels going back to analog. Is this an expected consequence of SDV's implementation or is this just a choice local to Cox Orange County?

Rob from AZ
It's an Orange County choice. Though of course I don't like the consequences, it kind of makes sense seeing as something like 50% of Cox customers are analog only and there are also digital subscribers tuning to analog channels without a digital set top box. Still I think Cox OC is being overly aggressive seeing as they just upgraded to 860MHz locally which would have been enough bandwidth to accommodate these recent additions without SDV - but I suppose they are making room for future growth...
__________________
Roamio Pro, Elite, Premiere
Cox - Motorola CableCards & TAs
Slingbox 350 via TiVo Mini & TiVo Stream for remote viewing

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.
moyekj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 12:18 PM   #629
AZrob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by moyekj View Post
It's an Orange County choice. Though of course I don't like the consequences, it kind of makes sense seeing as something like 50% of Cox customers are analog only and there are also digital subscribers tuning to analog channels without a digital set top box. Still I think Cox OC is being overly aggressive seeing as they just upgraded to 860MHz locally which would have been enough bandwidth to accommodate these recent additions without SDV - but I suppose they are making room for future growth...
Actually, I kind of like this approach, as long as it's temporary. My wife was very disappointed to hear that moving to CC's from a STB ended up reducing the number of hours available on my Tivo HD + Expander disk from 800 to 400. She was unmoved by the fact that digitally simulcast channels have much better PQ. She wanted to able to record whatever she wanted whenever she wanted. So, if we could access the analog channels again (in analog) that would be a good thing...for her. I see it as a way to get along until the 2 or 3 TB Expander disk is available.

Someone could write a book on "diskspace wars" between spouses....

Rob
AZrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2007, 12:22 PM   #630
mrmike
Custom User Title
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 3,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ah30k View Post
By the way, you mention "me" and "I" in your responses. Are you developing to this spec or just an observer with a interest in them.
I was. Licensing and development costs killed the project I was working on. Hence my slight bitterness about the subject.
mrmike 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 09:34 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |