End of QAM tuners ?

[reggie14]

Well, maybe the end of Clear QAM isn't that far off after all... EngadgetHD linked to a news report about Cable Vision's request to encrypt the basic tier (i.e., local broadcast networks). I find it interesting, although not unexpected, that the current commissioners on the FCC are so consumer-friendly (arguably, advocate-friendly might be a better term) on Internet issues (e.g., net neutrality), but not so much on TV issues. It will be interesting to see what they do.

You can see the public notice on the FCC's news releases page. Like always, the FCC is requesting public comments. The public notice has instructions for how to send in a comment. Note that comments sent via e-mail will not be treated as official comments, but there are web-based comment tools that you can use.

If the FCC grants this waiver, they'll probably have to grant a waiver whenever any cable company asks for one. So, hopefully that doesn't happy. I'll submit a comment. Hopefully Sage see's this and submits one as well. I'm sure comments from businesses explaining how this will hurt them and their customers will be treated a bit more seriously than comments from concerned citizens.

[reggie14]

I know people have been at work all day, but I'm still surprised no one else has commented on the Cablevision waiver request. It seems like this is a pretty big deal. Probably many of you are able to just switch to OTA to get your local networks, but I'm sure I'm not the only one in an apartment building where I can't easily receive OTA signals.

[Beefcake550]

yeah, me too. I really hope Charter doesn't get any bright ideas from Cablevision. I also hope cablevision gets denied.

If it does get granted and Charter does it to me, you can be sure that I will be thoroughly pissed off enough to jsut get another DirecTV receiver and HD-PVR pair and never look back.

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by Beefcake550

yeah, me too. I really hope Charter doesn't get any bright ideas from Cablevision. I also hope cablevision gets denied.

In general, I think there's little reason for cable companies to push for encrypting the basic tier, but I also think there's little reason for cable companies to not encrypt the basic tier if someone else breaks the ice. As more and more local network affiliates charge cable companies carriage fees maybe cable companies will look to extract more money out of basic tier customers. That will make them feel like they need to lock it down with more protections.

[Fuzzy]

I haven't heard about any local broadcasters charging cable companies for carriage rights, and I don't think they have a legal basis to do so. There might be a fee they charge for some of the direct data lines involved, but that is not necessarily a requirement (they could still use/remodulate the OTA feed, like the old days).

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I haven't heard about any local broadcasters charging cable companies for carriage rights, and I don't think they have a legal basis to do so. There might be a fee they charge for some of the direct data lines involved, but that is not necessarily a requirement (they could still use/remodulate the OTA feed, like the old days).

http://www.kcci.com/money/10915854/detail.html

[reggie14]

I was in Ames when that happened! We lost Fox for several weeks.

Local network affiliates can force cable companies to retransmit their broadcasts, under the FCC's "must-carry" rule. But, if an affiliate wants to charge the cable company, they can no longer force the cable company to carry it. Where it gets a little sketchy, in my opinion, is that cable companies generally can't go to out-of-market affiliates, because network affiliate agreements forbid them from selling outside their market. So, when Sinclair decided it was going to use Mediacom as a test case, Mediacom couldn't try to carry the Fox affiliate in Omaha (or wherever the next closest non-Sinclair Fox affiliate is).

[nyplayer]

I just got my notice as of 11/10/2009 Clear Qam will be going away from Portland OR. Comcast. My digital TV will reguire a DTA and I am not sure what I will be doing with my HDHomerun tuners... Or Sage for that matter.

[evilpenguin]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

I just got my notice as of 11/10/2009 Clear Qam will be going away from Portland OR. Comcast. My digital TV will reguire a DTA and I am not sure what I will be doing with my HDHomerun tuners... Or Sage for that matter.

Yeah, i'm up in Seattle and I got the same notice.

My original plan was to cancel Cable and just use OTA HD and PlayON, but it turns out I can't get FOX at my place so that's a problem.

But, now my theory is that if I cancel my cable but keep my internet after the shut-off date they won't be putting filters on the lines anymore so you'll still be able to get Local HD over ClearQAM.

[hufnagel]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

Yeah, i'm up in Seattle and I got the same notice.

My original plan was to cancel Cable and just use OTA HD and PlayON, but it turns out I can't get FOX at my place so that's a problem.

But, my theory is that if I cancel my cable but keep my internet after the shut-off date they won't be putting filters on the lines so you'll still be able to get Local HD over ClearQAM.

hey if that works great. personally if Comcast decides to pull clearQAM i'm just ditching TV all together. I might try OTA but I doubt it. Wish we had a way to tell comcast "here's how much $$ you're going to lose if you do this through canceled accounts" to let them know it's a bad idea. Just give the people what they want... most channels on clearQAM and stop trying to screw us out of every penny.

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

I just got my notice as of 11/10/2009 Clear Qam will be going away from Portland OR. Comcast. My digital TV will reguire a DTA and I am not sure what I will be doing with my HDHomerun tuners... Or Sage for that matter.

Can you provide some more details? I don't think Comcast usually advertised expanded basic channels in clear QAM, so I'd be surprised if they sent out notices saying they're encrypting those. And, I haven't heard anything about Comcast encrypting basic tier channels (i.e., local broadcast networks), so I assume that notice wasn't referring to those. Locals should stay available in clear QAM, at least for now.

[nyplayer]

Originally Posted by reggie14

Can you provide some more details? I don't think Comcast usually advertised expanded basic channels in clear QAM, so I'd be surprised if they sent out notices saying they're encrypting those. And, I haven't heard anything about Comcast encrypting basic tier channels (i.e., local broadcast networks), so I assume that notice wasn't referring to those. Locals should stay available in clear QAM, at least for now.

After November 10,2009 any TV without a digital device will only be able to receive channels 2-31. I believe this makes the HDHomerun a paperweight unless I use OTA>

Will I need equipment if I have a digital TV with a QAM tuner?

At the completion of the digital upgrade, customers will need equipment on all TVs to receive any channels above the Limited Basic level of service—of course, this is now the case with most video providers, including our satellite and phone competitors. We’re encouraging all customers to avoid any service interruptions by installing and using the equipment provided by Comcast or purchased from their electronics retailer, like a TiVo or CableCardTM enabled device.

[mwareman]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

I just got my notice as of 11/10/2009 Clear Qam will be going away from Portland OR. Comcast. My digital TV will reguire a DTA and I am not sure what I will be doing with my HDHomerun tuners... Or Sage for that matter.

It's worse than that...

The DTA is *only* standard def. If you want HD on your digital TV - you'll need to rent a full cable box..
Personally - my HDHomeRuns are going to OTA reception. I'm going to catalog if the couple of channels I continue to record from cable are worth the fee.

Now: If Silicon Dust could build DTA functionality into a HDHomeRun like product...

[hemicuda]

Vote with your wallet I say (but the wife trumps all where TV is concerned)

[mwareman]

Originally Posted by hemicuda

Vote with your wallet I say (but the wife trumps all where TV is concerned)

Here... here... ;-P

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by mwareman

Now: If Silicon Dust could build DTA functionality into a HDHomeRun like product...

To some extent, that's exactly what the HDHR is. The problem is that the HDHR can't, and never will, decrypt scrammbled digital channels. It works great when cable companies don't encrypt the channels. And that's almost what would have happened, if the FCC didn't grant the DTAs the waiver.

[coryking]

I'm Comcast Seattle, we've gone digital but I still get ClearQAM on about 70 channels (i.e. the "basic cable" lineup). Here is hoping it stays that way.

[sic0048]

Originally Posted by nyplayer

After November 10,2009 any TV without a digital device will only be able to receive channels 2-31. I believe this makes the HDHomerun a paperweight unless I use OTA>

It won't make it a paperweight. But it will still continue to only be able to pass on unencrypted QAM stations. That is all it is doing now, and it will continue to do so in the future.

Now Comcast is going to start encrypting 98% of their digital channels (where as now they don't encrypt many (or any) at all). So your HDHR will not be able to record any of the channels that begin to be encrypted. You should still get your local HD channels after the switch.

[soapbox]I'm tired of people saying this is the death of QAM, or that the HDHR is now a worthless device. Just because Comcast is going to start encyrpting their digital channels doesn't change QAM or HDHRs use. The rest of the country has already experienced the encryption of 98% of their digital cable stations. You are just late to the party - consider yourself lucky you went this far. But it isn't the end of the world for QAM or the HDHR.[/soapbox]

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by sic0048

[soapbox]I'm tired of people saying this is the death of QAM, or that the HDHR is now a worthless device. Just because Comcast is going to start encyrpting their digital channels doesn't change QAM or HDHRs use. The rest of the country has already experienced the encryption of 98% of their digital cable stations. You are just late to the party - consider yourself lucky you went this far. But it isn't the end of the world for QAM or the HDHR.[/soapbox]

I mostly agree with you, but at the same time I think it is the case that for some people, the HDHR is going to become nearly useless. A while back I was debating buying an HD-PVR to supplement my firewire recording and prepare for the upcoming digital switch. Then I found out that Comcast, in my area, had most of the expanded basic SD lineup, and some non-local HD channels, available in clear QAM. So, I immediately bought an HDHR. Not long after I found out the FCC waived the separable security requirement for DTAs. Knowing that I'd lose QAM at some point, I ended up buying an HD-PVR the next time it went on sale. I probably wouldn't have bought the HDHR if I had known the FCC was going to grant that waiver.

So, while I wouldn't say the HDHR is useless, I do think people ended up buying them that wouldn't have if they knew comcast was going to encrypt the expanded basic lineup. Many might do what I did, and buy an HD-PVR. And if they don't record a lot of stuff, one HD-PVR might have been all they needed.

[gplasky]

When I originally bought the HDHR it was because I could receive the locals over my cable in HD. I can also do OTA but I don't get all the stations that I can with cable. (Although I haven't tried lately.) Today I get 92 channels over my cable with HDHR. If it goes back to just locals again I haven't lost amything. I have 1 cable box and 1 HD-PVR for any of the other channels. I may need to get another HD-PVR and cable box if I start running into conflicts. But I don't really see that happening.

Gerry