Tivo - Cable or Satellite
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Joined
·
11,563 Posts
If you are asking for a HD Tivo that will work with both DirecTV and cable...that machine doesn't exist. The new HD Tivos use a CableCard to unscramble the cable signal. Cable is required by the FCC to support these devices, but unfortunately (IMHO) satellite operators are exempt from this requirement. This means that no one can manufacturer a HD device that will work with both cable and satellite.butlertl said:
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
Both the Tivo Series 3 and TivoHD (Built around the same platform as the Series 3) will work with Cable.
There is NO Tivo HD model that will work with Directv. The older HR10's are a Directv unit running Tivo Software, but their life expectancy is coming to a close as Directv moves from Mpeg2 to Mpeg4.
There is NO Tivo HD model that will work with Directv. The older HR10's are a Directv unit running Tivo Software, but their life expectancy is coming to a close as Directv moves from Mpeg2 to Mpeg4.
Too bad the satellite "double standard" exists and they don't have to meet the CableCard requirements. It would be great to have a device to use with any cable or FioS provider, or DirecTv/Dish. Lots of flexibility. Only thing I worry about with the TivoHD is getting stuck with cable for years.
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
What Double Standard?
Directv (Sat Provider) tried to get on the Cablecard Program and was denied. So blame the FCC.
Directv (Sat Provider) tried to get on the Cablecard Program and was denied. So blame the FCC.
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
It was in the DBS Forums somewhere. Let me see if I can find it. (The links where on one of my other Systems currently stripped down).
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
Heres a little I found:
"Satellite companies unfairly exempted: Cable companies argue that, although section 629 of the Telecom act applies to all multichannel video program distributors, Direct broadcast satellite (DBS) services have been exempted from requirements for a separable security access device. This is claimed to provide an unfair advantage to DBS companies such as Directv and Dish Network."
The exemption is from the FCC themselves.
Also:
The FCC lays out exactly why DBS was exempted in their original report and order ... specificially on pages 26-28. Search for document 98-116 (in field 2. DA/FCC Number).
Here is the link, but unfortunatley it is no longer valid:
FCC Link
Here also is a discussion on this very site:
TCF Forum
"Satellite companies unfairly exempted: Cable companies argue that, although section 629 of the Telecom act applies to all multichannel video program distributors, Direct broadcast satellite (DBS) services have been exempted from requirements for a separable security access device. This is claimed to provide an unfair advantage to DBS companies such as Directv and Dish Network."
The exemption is from the FCC themselves.
Also:
The FCC lays out exactly why DBS was exempted in their original report and order ... specificially on pages 26-28. Search for document 98-116 (in field 2. DA/FCC Number).
Here is the link, but unfortunatley it is no longer valid:
FCC Link
Here also is a discussion on this very site:
TCF Forum
Joined
·
2,702 Posts
The link provided only gives the reasons that the FCC exempted the satellite companies.
It doesn't shed any light on whether the sat companies tried to get onboard with CC and were denied by cable labs (Wolford's claim) or whether the sat companies applied for a waiver to the cable card mandate and were given it (dylanemcgregor's claim, and what I understood as "conventional wisdom").
Since it is the FCC that is justifying the sat companies exemption, I would tend to think that lends weight to the latter theory, myself.
It doesn't shed any light on whether the sat companies tried to get onboard with CC and were denied by cable labs (Wolford's claim) or whether the sat companies applied for a waiver to the cable card mandate and were given it (dylanemcgregor's claim, and what I understood as "conventional wisdom").
Since it is the FCC that is justifying the sat companies exemption, I would tend to think that lends weight to the latter theory, myself.
Joined
·
2,462 Posts
Ok, as pointed out by GoHokies... that's not the same thing as your previous statement. It sounds more like the FCC gave them the exemption rather than their (D* or E*) willingness to be part of CC on their own.
I do believe that it is time for the FCC to lift said exemption. The satellite companies should no longer be exempt and customers should be given the right to choose. I want to be able to take my S3 to the company that provides the best content and service.
I do believe that it is time for the FCC to lift said exemption. The satellite companies should no longer be exempt and customers should be given the right to choose. I want to be able to take my S3 to the company that provides the best content and service.
wolflord11 said:
Joined
·
11,383 Posts
The Series 3 hardware is stuck with cable and OTA though. It could do IPTV, I suppose though.magnus said:
Were satellite to come with some cablecard like separable access standard, the Series 3 would still be limited in not having a satellite tuner. A new platform with satellite tuners (instead of or as well) will have to be deployed for some satellite "cablecard" to work.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
