SDV Adapter Progress

Discussion in 'TiVo Series3 HDTV DVRs' started by britdiver, Apr 14, 2008.

  1. May 10, 2008 #61 of 290
    ZeoTiVo

    ZeoTiVo I can't explain

    25,527
    2
    Jan 2, 2004

    Advertisements

    Seemed to me readng the post that Cablevision was not at all good with loosing a 26 year customer. Sure one customer as a singular case does not negate everything else but it should wake them up that they need to get the "SDV dongle" out there or loose some good customers that were otherwise very solid on staying with cablevision. Customers will put up with a lot but not having access to channels is not one of them
     
  2. May 10, 2008 #62 of 290
    bizzy

    bizzy New Member

    707
    0
    Jan 20, 2004
    San...
    I am sure someone at Cablevision has done at least a quick analysis of how many customers they have using cablecards; and come to the conclusion that almost any additional engineering resources dedicated to cablecard issues would be a waste of money.

    For large MSOs cablecard-using customers are a marginal and almost negligible population. If you want to get angry about it, blame the impotent and crooked FCC, not the cable co that is simply reacting to the market.
     
  3. May 10, 2008 #63 of 290
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,933
    10
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Nonsense. They can choose whatever bit rate they like.

    There is no "should". For a given quality of signal, MPEG-4 encoding generally enjoys much higher compression ratios. It's that simple.

    Both MPEG-2 and MPEG-4 are compressed. There wouldn't be any point to either if they were not. How much is at the discretion of the entity doing the compression. Generally speaking, a higher compression will require a much greater amount of CPU resources and will result in decreased quality.

    The fact it is smaller means it is more compressed, period. The fact MPEG-4 generally can produce a very similar video quality at higher compression ratios does not change the fact. Uncompressed 1080i digital video is close to 3Gbps, no matter how it is encoded. That includes MPEG-2 and MPEG-4.

    The use of the prefix "re" suggests you are talking about recoding the video. Any time video is recoded, it's quality is going to suffer some. This is true no matter what the coding scheme or how much compression is employed at any point along the way. Increasing the amount of compression of a virgin stream will also result in a decrease in quality, again no matter what the coding scheme and quite apart from any recoding.

    I have no idea what you think is meant by "pure" in this context. Since neither MPEG-2 nor MPEG-4 are lossless, at some point of compression an MPEG-4 video is going to look worse than the same video encoded as MPEG-2 at a given (reasonable) bit rate. Generally speaking, this point lies somewhere between 25% to 50% of the MPEG-2 bit rate, depending upon the content.

    I would be shocked if they are sending their MPEG-2 streams at a lower bit rate than their MPEG-4. They would look much worse, if so. If they are sent at a higher bit rate, then they are less compressed, not more, no matter how they look. If they are sent at the same bit rate their their compression is precisely identical. MPEG-2 video sent at the same compression ratio as MPEG-4 will generally look much worse, unless the compression is quite moderate.

    The situation was never unclear to me. I'm not sure why you think you could clear it up for me.
     
  4. May 10, 2008 #64 of 290
    lrhorer

    lrhorer Active Member

    6,933
    10
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I don't want it to, either, but that's not the point. Since each tuning resolver is going to work only with one particular type of equipment, how could a retail outlet be established for the devices? A resolver which works in New York City many not work in Albany. For that matter, a resolver which works on the west side of Chicago may not work on the east side. In fact, there are two different cable companies available in my neighborhood; Grande and Time Warner. A dongle which works on TWC is very likely not to work on Grande, so if I switch from TWC to Grande I'll need a new dongle. Actually, since I have 3 TiVos I'll need 3 new dongles. It's true there are a limited number of protocols out there, but there are more than one. What happens when the consumer pays, say, $75 for a dongle and then two months later has to move and he needs a different dongle? Can you imagine what happens when a clueless sales clerk at Best buy tries to sell a clueless customer one of these devices? Worse yet, what about internet sales?

    The only reasonable answeris to have the CATV companies be responsible for distribution of the dongles. That this may allow them to gouge us on the price is an unfortunate fact.
     
  5. May 11, 2008 #65 of 290
    AbMagFab

    AbMagFab What happened, TiVo?

    3,638
    0
    Feb 5, 2001

    Advertisements

    No, the only reasonable answer is that the dongle be standardized like cable modems. I can go out and buy a cable modem from BB or CC. There's no reason why the dongle can't behave the same way.

    Except, of course, because cable companies are myred with their monopolistic past, and still don't understand that they should be treating customers like clients.
     
  6. May 11, 2008 #66 of 290
    ah30k

    ah30k Well-Known Member

    2,493
    157
    Jan 8, 2006
    There are at least three competing technologies for SDV. Which one would you choose to be the standard? Or, who do you think should pick the standard?
     
  7. May 12, 2008 #67 of 290
    ASW

    ASW Member

    30
    0
    Jan 18, 2007
    FCC sent a card saying not within their jurisdiction. Nothing from NJ as of yet.
     
  8. May 12, 2008 #68 of 290
    jrm01

    jrm01 New Member

    2,619
    0
    Oct 17, 2003
    Pittsburgh
    Huh?? What cable modem have you ever seen there (except for TiVo HD)?
     
  9. May 12, 2008 #69 of 290
    ah30k

    ah30k Well-Known Member

    2,493
    157
    Jan 8, 2006
    Do a search, there are three cable modems on the BB web site. Two from Mot and one from Zoom. Also, the TiVo HD is not a cable modem. I think you may be confused.
     
  10. May 12, 2008 #70 of 290
    jrm01

    jrm01 New Member

    2,619
    0
    Oct 17, 2003
    Pittsburgh
    You're darn right I'm confused. I read "cable modem" as "cablebox". Time for more coffee.
     
  11. May 12, 2008 #71 of 290
    classicsat

    classicsat Astute User

    17,877
    1
    Feb 18, 2004
    Ontario Canada.
    The reason is because the Tuning Adapters are not cable modems, but what amounts, to the cable side, a cable box.

    Yes, they could have made a retailable "open" box that would download the firmware and whatever identifies it to a particular platform and provider, but the fact is they haven't. Doing that would take a few years of development.
    Modding an existing cable box platform is almost turnkey.

    The current (small picture) situation of having to get a TA from the provider has little to do with their monopolistic business practices. It has to do with competing technology providers doing things different enough to need different hardware.

    It does in the greater picture though, with them not coming up with a better universal two way and security scheme earlier.
     
  12. May 12, 2008 #72 of 290
    AbMagFab

    AbMagFab What happened, TiVo?

    3,638
    0
    Feb 5, 2001
    That's my point. There's no reason why they can't agree to a standard, which if they didn't think like monopolies, they would.

    But they don't.

    I couldn't care less which one they pick. Just pick one so CES devices can incorporate it.

    They managed to do it with DOCSIS, but they failed with SDV.
     
  13. May 12, 2008 #73 of 290
    sfhub

    sfhub Well-Known Member

    2,883
    486
    Jan 6, 2007
    Sounds like the same pre-conditions as DCAS but they say they can get that working. If there is a will there is a way. It could involve an automatic bootstrap that downloads the SDV specific code when the resolver is plugged in. There just happens to be no will in this case.

    Saying it can't be done technically will be disputed. Saying they aren't doing it, there will be no dispute.
     
  14. May 12, 2008 #74 of 290
    sfhub

    sfhub Well-Known Member

    2,883
    486
    Jan 6, 2007
    It is true there are many things they could do.

    IMO they just said this is a one off solution for TiVo so let's just spend the minimal effort on it to get it up and running.

    Even though they are treating like a general solution for many devices from a spec and testing standpoint, realistically managment realizes there will probably be no other devices using this adapter because the newer devices will concede to cable's way to access the system and older devices won't (or can't) get updates to use the resolver.

    It is also good for cable's reputation to be able to point out that they came out with a generic solution to address SDV concerns and are behaving as a good citizen.
     
  15. May 12, 2008 #75 of 290
    ZeoTiVo

    ZeoTiVo I can't explain

    25,527
    2
    Jan 2, 2004
    the SDV dongle is really just a stopgap though. Seems like tru2way is being pointed out as the real solution and is being worked as a common standard. I would rather cable companies come out with a SDV adapter faster rather than spend time in standards bodies meetings.
     
  16. May 12, 2008 #76 of 290
    slimoli

    slimoli New Member

    358
    0
    Jul 29, 2005
     
  17. May 12, 2008 #77 of 290
    AbMagFab

    AbMagFab What happened, TiVo?

    3,638
    0
    Feb 5, 2001
     
  18. May 12, 2008 #78 of 290
    AbMagFab

    AbMagFab What happened, TiVo?

    3,638
    0
    Feb 5, 2001
    tru2way (at least my understanding of it) is a horrible solution. Basically saying "go ahead an manufacture a box, and we'll download whatever UI/system we want on it"?

    That's not a standard.
     
  19. May 12, 2008 #79 of 290
    ZeoTiVo

    ZeoTiVo I can't explain

    25,527
    2
    Jan 2, 2004
    I agree - would have been nice for something less involved but that is not what is.
    The Series 4 will not be what you describe as TiVo is working out a way to have the download UI part for the PPV/VOD only - which seems fair since it is the cable companies stuff and not TiVo's anyway.

    Still tru2way is gaining a lot of traction as the standard acros cable companies and since it handle SDV issues internally and allows for interaction with cbale company and access to their PPV/VOD - having a standard (of whatever sort) is MUCH better then the old standoff that left us with one way cable cards and SDV hassles.
     
  20. May 12, 2008 #80 of 290
    slimoli

    slimoli New Member

    358
    0
    Jul 29, 2005
     

Share This Page

spam firewall

Advertisements