CableCard OEM Restriction Lifted!!!

[wayner]

I prefer using the a(nalog) hole solution to having to deal with the DRM implemented by a(ss)holes.

And it is unlikely that Sage will get the Cablelabs certification required for this.

[stanger89]

For the love of Pete, Search people Search. This is I think the 12th thread started about this in TWO DAYS!!!!!

[reggie14]

In their defense, people might legitimately expect to find the discussion about cable card tuners in the hardware forum. A fair number of these merged threads started there.

[MeInMaui]

Originally Posted by stanger89

Maybe 6 months ago I'd have agreed that cablecard was "game changing" news, but since my HD PVR has been so reliable for the last few months, frankly I don't see what I'd gain with a "direct recording" system.

I completely agree with this statement. The HD-PVR + cable box gives me the same functionality as a cablecard tuner now. I think the advantages that a cablecard tuner would provide are in monthly costs (renting cablecard(s) vs. renting multiple cable boxes) and simplicity of the setup. My server is in the garage so the clutter of multiple boxes and associated wiring isn't a problem. The tradeoff is the DRM that is introduced.

So the question for me is: Would it be worth introducing DRM to the system in order to save about $5 - $10 a month (for a 2-tuner solution) and reduce clutter on a shelf in my garage? It might, especially if I wanted to the capability to record more than 2 simultaneous streams (then the cost savings would improve significantly vs. renting 4 cable boxes). But the point is that the cablecard solution is not a game changer or even extremely compelling in light of the working HD-PVR solution that we have now.

In the end, if SageTV did add cablecard support I would probably switch for the ability to record 4 simultaneous streams at the reduced cost (it wouldn't be worth it to me for 2).

Aloha,
Mike

[Brent]

Originally Posted by MeInMaui

My server is in the garage

wow! Doesn't it get hot in a garage located in Hawaii?

[evilpenguin]

Originally Posted by MeInMaui

In the end, if SageTV did add cablecard support I would probably switch for the ability to record 4 simultaneous streams at the reduced cost (it wouldn't be worth it to me for 2).

+1. I would normally shy away from hitching my entire setup to the mercy of the cable industry's whim's, but that Quad-Tuner Cable Card has an undeniable *awesome* quality. If only that thing came in network tuner form... which, now that Hauppauge is getting in the cable card game, it's just slightly within the realm of possibility that Silicon Dust could be working on something too. Oh well, only CES will tell...

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

+1. I would normally shy away from hitching my entire setup to the mercy of the cable industry's whim's, but that Quad-Tuner Cable Card has an undeniable *awesome* quality. If only that thing came in network tuner form... which, now that Hauppauge is getting in the cable card game, it's just slightly within the realm of possibility that Silicon Dust could be working on something too. Oh well, only CES will tell...

Actually the ati cards at least are reconized as network tuners and i have used a lan usb adapter on one in the past. I am hoping cetons external model will be reconized the same way.

[sjrx0213]

Looks like there's a real split here. Put me down as hoping this will lead to SageTV supporting a CableCard solution.

Here's what I wish the cable companies would do that'd make it so much easier for HTPC users: Separate the CableCard from the tuner and allow a single CableCard to be used as a dongle on the HTPC. Tie it to a MAC address on the PC if need be. Just create a USB dock for the CC and let folks with existing digital tuners continue to use them. Personally, I don't care about DRM, since I'm not using any of the recorded material outside of my home.

That would open up the possibility for my HDHRs to stay viable and even max their capability by allowing me to access the whatever HD streams I'm getting by using an STB. And I wouldn't have to use any STBs. I'd even be willing to pay to cable co a little more for the capability (as long as it's less than rental for multiple STBs).

I know I'm dreaming, but what the heck.

[PLUCKYHD]

Originally Posted by wayner

I prefer using the a(nalog) hole solution to having to deal with the DRM implemented by a(ss)holes.

And it is unlikely that Sage will get the Cablelabs certification required for this.

Yeah but hd-pvr hole will get closed I believe but who knows when. For me like Mike said it comes down to rental fee of four boxes is hard to swallow let alone getting four hd-pvrs working and all the cabling. On cable line into a single tuner with four feeds is enticing at the least. Plus the drm is going to be laxed on more than people think.

[thomaszoo]

If I were given the option today to trade my HD-PVR for even the 4 tuner cable card solution the answer would be no. I have had a few glitches with it, but nothing that I haven't been able to work out or around.

With cable card it sounds like I would have to give up the use of my Sage extenders (not a chance) and for the DRM'd recordings I would lose probably all flexibility there. Does anyone know if commercial skip could process a DRM'd recording?

Wayne

[Brent]

Originally Posted by thomaszoo

With cable card it sounds like I would have to give up the use of my Sage extenders (not a chance)

They (SageTV) would need to get Playready licensed on the HD200's in order for it to work on the extenders. Possible yes. Probable? who knows.

and for the DRM'd recordings I would lose probably all flexibility there. Does anyone know if commercial skip could process a DRM'd recording?

Nope. But those without DRM could be.

[stuckless]

Originally Posted by thomaszoo

Does anyone know if commercial skip could process a DRM'd recording?

That would be a "NO". The commercial skipping software would have to licence the DRM in order to read the original file, and honour all the special drm flags. But, you'd probably still have the high tech 30 second skip option as long as the media isn't flagged as non skip.

[wayner]

Originally Posted by PLUCKYHD

Yeah but hd-pvr hole will get closed I believe but who knows when. For me like Mike said it comes down to rental fee of four boxes is hard to swallow let alone getting four hd-pvrs working and all the cabling. On cable line into a single tuner with four feeds is enticing at the least. Plus the drm is going to be laxed on more than people think.

Here in Canada CableCard has not been an option as cable companies will not give them to their customers and no one is forcing them to do so. The one positive we have is that you can buy cable boxes, not just rent. I own all of my boxes as you can buy an HD cable box for $99 if you look for sales.

[toricred]

If my local cable company were even close to a reasonable option then I'd want to see Sage implement this. As it is I think I'd have a pretty good argument that our local cable company has to be the worst in existence. You'll pry my DirecTV receivers from my cold dead hands.

[MeInMaui]

Originally Posted by Brent

wow! Doesn't it get hot in a garage located in Hawaii?

My wife runs her business out of the garage. It has a dedicated split ductless AC unit that runs 24x7. The perfect place for a server.

Aloha,
Mike

[reggie14]

I've had pretty good experiences with Comcast in Rockville, MD, and Mediacom in Ames, IA. The only time I had had a big problem was when I was renting a townhome in Gaithersburg, and the landlord and Comcast kept arguing over whose fault it was that Internet access didn't work. Cable TV worked fine (it was just analog TV). While I do occasionally have problems with Internet access dropping, TV has been pretty reliable. That's more than I can say for my mom's DirecTV and Dish Networks service over the years, which have had problems in bad weather. So, if I was going to change anything, I'd change Internet service providers, not cable TV. But, since the only other option for me is much slower DSL (at higher cost), that's a non-starter.

A week ago I probably would have written about how important I think cable card is for Sage's long-term future. It's still probably too, but I have to say I've been pretty happy with my new HD-PVR. It's been much better than I expected. Video quality, channel changing speeds (using firewire), reliability, etc., have been much better than I expected. Commercial skipping and Placeshifting support isn't as good on H.264 videos compared to mpeg2, but that will probably change over time. Given the option I'd probably rather use cable card with "reasonable" DRM restrictions than HD-PVR (extender support required, comskip & placeshifting would be nice bonuses), but the HD-PVR is still a pretty good alternative. Actually, I'm in pretty good shape as it is. Most of my HD channels come in over firewire, with my HD-PVR serving as a backup.

[toricred]

In my case the problem is with the local Comcast. I live in a relatively small town and they take advantage of it. Our DSL speed is higher than anything that Comcast will offer. With their best receivers every analog station, especially the local stations when they were analog, have very grainy, snowy pictures. The receivers don't have firewire active at all and the base price is triple what it is in a town just 30 miles away. If I lived in a bigger city and could use firewire for channel changing and maybe recording I might be interested. As it is my satellite has only dropped out one time in the 6 years I've been with DirecTV and only twice in the previous 4 years I was with Dish Network.

My 4 HD-PVRs work great with my DirecTV receivers using optical audio. I just don't see this being a big win for Sage if they get it, but I'm really, really prejudiced against cable.

[panteragstk]

I'm going to point out a few things.

First. Cable has been around longer than any other pay TV provider. The way cable TV is brought to our houses is very dated. Granted it is reliable for the most part, it isn't ideal.

Second. Satellite TV is newer than cable, but suffers from line of sight issues as well as weather issues. It has more HD channels depending on the market. However, certain markets don't get local channels.

Third. Fiber optic based IPTV is going to be the future of TV. ATT and Verizon are doing a great job so far. Granted their HD offerings aren't as much as the satellite companies, but I'll get into that later. When IPTV really matures we will be able to choose the angle that we watch football from among other things. With Verizon's 50mbit connection we now have the ability to stream blu-ray quality video (if it existed since blu-ray is 45mbit). Now, they aren't exactly making good use of that bandwidth, yet.

The facts: all TV providers are getting crap for over-compressing their video. I've sold many video services and none compare to OTA (most of you know this already). Why do you think the whole analog shut off thing occurred? Because TV providers realized that their bandwidth wasn't adequate to provide us with high quality HD channels (keep in mind that cable and satellite send all channels at once and the box decodes the one you want to watch. Very inefficient). IPTV only tunes the channel you are watching which allows for more bandwidth for a given channel which should lead to a quality increase.

The point of all of this is to say this seems to be the last cry for cable providers to stay alive or on top of a given market...Us enthusiasts. We drive technology. What we adopt early shows up later for the mainstream. I never would have thought that dvr's would become commonplace. All of the old providers are scared that they will become obsolete. Dish and Directv have talked of merging. That and the fact that the cable providers will eventually become ISP's only is scaring the crap out of them. They have to find a way to stay alive and this is a start. The way we view TV shows is going to change and they know it.

My $.02 worth.

[Fuzzy]

I disagree with your assesment that cable is inadequate for modern television distribution. Currently, most cable companies use a small fraction of their bandwidth for digital television transmission (thus the need to switch to full digital). There is no technical hurdle preventing them from carrying MORE hd than satellite. Many cable companies are already using fiberoptic for they main trunks, not just fios or u-verse... they just don't market it as such. Some markets have aging, and poorly maintained cable systems, thus the poor signal quality, but this is a reflection on that company, not on CATV as a technology.

If you are talking about bandwidth saturation, I believe cable is actually in a much better position than satellite. Satellite has the unfortunate position of ultimately being required (by market demands) to offer every market's local channels in it's bandwidth. Sure, spot beaming helps minimize some of the impact of this, gruopingit to a regional level, but nowhere near to the extent that cable's ability to focus on a single market does.

Cable TV also has huge advantages once the signal gets into the home. Because of it's simpler splitting/distribution system, it is much better suited to having a drop in every room, and is the main reason all new homes are pre-wired with CATV installs. (I have never seen a new home pre-wired for satellite).

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by panteragstk

I'm going to point out a few things.

First. Cable has been around longer than any other pay TV provider. The way cable TV is brought to our houses is very dated. Granted it is reliable for the most part, it isn't ideal.

Not so much around here

The facts: all TV providers are getting crap for over-compressing their video. I've sold many video services and none compare to OTA (most of you know this already).

Maybe that used to be the case, but it's not so much any more. OTA providers are getting to be almost as bad as cable and Sat. Here's what we get OTA:

• ABC
  • HD - 13.8Mbps
  • Sub - 4Mbps
• CBS
  • HD - 14Mbps
  • SD - 4Mbps
• FOX
  • HD - 14.5Mbps
  • SD - 3.5Mbps
• NBC
  • HD - 12.6Mbps
  • Sub1 - 2.8Mbps
  • Sub2 - 2.8Mbps

• PBS
  • HD - 11.2Mbps
  • Sub1 - 3.5Mbps
  • Sub2 - 2.8

Why do you think the whole analog shut off thing occurred? Because TV providers realized that their bandwidth wasn't adequate to provide us with high quality HD channels (keep in mind that cable and satellite send all channels at once and the box decodes the one you want to watch. Very inefficient).

If you're talking OTA, that's not really correct, the digital transition for broadcast happened because the government wanted to free up spectrum. HD was just a side effect, a way to sell it.

IPTV only tunes the channel you are watching which allows for more bandwidth for a given channel which should lead to a quality increase.

The same applies to SDV (Switched Digital Video) on cable. But I think we're naive if we think it will lead to increased quality.

The point of all of this is to say this seems to be the last cry for cable providers to stay alive or on top of a given market...Us enthusiasts. We drive technology.

That's just the thing most people don't understand, enthusiasts really don't drive technology. It's the mass market that drives technology, enthusiasts just buy in early and buy the few targeted niche products geared towards us.

If enthusiasts really drove things whole-house DVR systems would be common place. There'd be common solutions for legally building DVD and Blu-ray libraries. We wouldn't have Pan & Scan DVDs. Networks wouldn't crop and P&S movies for TV. SACD and DVD-Audio would be alive an well.

Make no mistake, while there are products targeted at enthusiasts, it's the masses that drive things. The real money in the market is in the selling millions of products to the masses, not thousands or tens of thousands to the enthusiasts.

What we adopt early shows up later for the mainstream.

We really have very little say in what becomes mainstream. The format war should be clear evidence of that. HD DVD really should have won, at the point where Warner abandoned HD DVD, HD DVD was winning, but politics got involved and everybody got behind the format that looked to have better financial potential.

I never would have thought that dvr's would become commonplace.

Why? It's a natural extension of the VCR. And DVRs are still only in 1/3 of households.

All of the old providers are scared that they will become obsolete. Dish and Directv have talked of merging. That and the fact that the cable providers will eventually become ISP's only is scaring the crap out of them. They have to find a way to stay alive and this is a start. The way we view TV shows is going to change and they know it.

My $.02 worth.

IPTV is neat technology, and it probably has a place in the future, but I'm not so confident that it will just wipe out everyone else.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

I disagree with your assesment that cable is inadequate for modern television distribution. Currently, most cable companies use a small fraction of their bandwidth for digital television transmission (thus the need to switch to full digital). There is no technical hurdle preventing them from carrying MORE hd than satellite.

Actually there is, at least with the current model, the limitation is the coax line into the house, it can only carry so much. Without a major tech overhaul they're limited to the current approximately 125 RF carriers, with about 36Mbps each.

Satellite on the other hand has a similar, per-coax limitation, but their technology allows them to look at more than one "provider". DirecTV is up to I think 5 satellites with ~30 transponders per satellite. They've got enormous bandwidth.

Of course SDV with fiber trunks basically eliminates those limitations from cable.

Cable TV also has huge advantages once the signal gets into the home. Because of it's simpler splitting/distribution system, it is much better suited to having a drop in every room, and is the main reason all new homes are pre-wired with CATV installs. (I have never seen a new home pre-wired for satellite).

That was true in the days of analog and clear digital, but in the future where everything on cable is encrypted digital, that advantage is basically eliminated. In a future of encrypted digital, and SDV, the only install difference between cable and Sat is the type of "splitter" required.