New HD TiVo and Cable Incompatibilities

Lauren Weinstein writes "The rapid deployment of Switched Digital Video (SDV) by cable companies can cause major problems for buyers of the new HD TiVo, preventing any access to some channels."

Comments

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[Animats]

Huh?

Control

[Leftist Troll]

These devices have been crippled by the cable industry's obsession with controlling their content.

They need to give up and accept that no matter how hard they lock it down, someone's going to post torrents of all their hit shows. They might as well give us a functioning solution to decode their content, instead of the joke that is CableCard.

Re:Control

[Pentavirate]

This actually isn't due to the cable companies' greed. There are several layers of software on a cable box. There's the firmware, Guide programming (ie TV Guide), and any additional software features like VOD software on top of that. The cable company doesn't write any of it. It's the incompatibility of the software that's the issue. For things like VOD and PPV and now SDV, third party companies provide video servers, the servers that interact directly with the set-top boxes and software that is on each set-top box that does all of the communication back and forth. CableCard 2 is a mandated standard on how this communication must take place so that other cable boxes with the cards can be used in lieu of the cable companies boxes. CableCard 2 covers VOD and PPV but SDV is new and so it doesn't cover it.

Cable companies aren't implementing SDV just to make it difficult for companies like TIVO. SDV is a tremendous way to better utilize the available bandwidth. SDV allows a cable channel in a network segment that isn't getting watched to not be broadcast until someone tunes into the channel. This makes channels completely dynamic instead of being associated with a specific frequency. This will allow cable companies to use a fraction of the bandwidth to provide channels than they use now. They can then use that extra bandwidth for additional channels or broadband.

I was a set-top box developer for one of these third party VOD companies and I was associated with the SDV demo we put together to pitch to some cable companies. Since there is no standard, we do it the best way we know how that works with our system. So there really isn't a conspiracy here. Just companies trying to do business as cost-effective as possible with standards and governmental organizations just trying to keep up.

Re:Control

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you for this info - this makes a lot of sense, amongst the FUD!

More background from TivoCommunity

[voidstin]

here.... seems like there's still a transition period where channels are being offered in both SDV and analog

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.ph p?t=357703

Re:More background from TivoCommunity

[cadfael]

More correctly, what you are talking about is Digital Simulcast, where the same info is being forwarded in a single 6 MHz analog channel and digitally inside a multiprogram transport stream (MPTS...) for digital reception on another 6 MHz channel. sdv is about switching services on and off as people watch them, ergo recovering bandwidth in your digital modulator space.

Oh no

[Joseph1337]

But the porn channels... why!?

if we had a tough FCC,

[jay2003]

they'd stick to guns on the CableCARD mandate and shut down cable systems that were not compatible with 3rd party devices. With a credible shutdown threat looming, this problem would get fixed in less than a month. I know it will never happen due to the huge campaign contributions politicians get from cable companies.

I'm not convinced the cable companies are doing themselves an favors. I'm unlikely to upgrade from my old analog cable if can't have an HD Tivo. Cable companies seem to think HD is a form of crack people cann't live without but I'm doing just fine on analog.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[svendsen]

Come on you know you NEED cable and HD and everything else they sell. I've come to the realization that nothing on TV is worth what is being charged. I just dropped all my HBOs, Showtimes, digital cable, boxes, etc. for plain old standard cable (76 channels at a rip off price of $50).

The funny thing is the lady on the phone kept saying she didn't understand why I didn't want all this great stuff.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[a_nonamiss]

Amen, brother! How long have we been talking about freeing up the analog spectrum? Why is this taking so long? It's because the FCC has no intention of shutting anybody down.

It's the old axiom "all work expands to fit the amount of time allotted to its completion." If the FCC keeps wringing its hands and telling broadcasters/cable companies to get it together "or else..." it's never going to get done. Mostly, the cable companies are coming up with newer and better ways to take as many rights away from consumers as they can. Believe me, if we give them in infinite amount of time, they'll come up with more and more ways they can restrict us. That's why CableCARD 2.0 was started before CableCARD 1.0 was even deployed.

The FCC should (but will never) set out a mandate and stick with it. Faced with the prospect of losing 100% of their revenue, cable companies will be quick to come up with solutions to these problems.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Anonymous Monkey]

Yeah, when I had cable I watched five different programs. Good Eats, Iron Chef, Stargate. Right now it would be nice to get Dr Who, Good Eats, Iron Chef, Feasting on Asphalt, Mythbusters, and reruns of some old shows every now and again would be cool. Quite honestly, if I had to pay a few bucks to download them, and they had adds, it would still be a better deal than cable.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Alcimedes]

Or just get all your broadcast channels in HD over the air for free. Or get a satellite. There are definitely options at this stage in the game. I'm on the phone canceling my account with Comcast as we speak. They didn't want to give me an HD DVR unless I was paying for one of their $50+ a month cable plans. Basic broadcast channels are fine for me, and now I'm getting them for free over the air.

Sure I'm paying Tivo, but they're offering me DVR service, and I'd rather Tivo gets my cash than Comcast anyway.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[LWATCDR]

That is pretty much what Apple is hoping with the AppleTV , Sony is hopping for with the PS3, and Microsoft is hoping for with the 360, and Google with YouTube.

When will we see the first direct to iTunes TV show?

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[hurfy]

lol, i promised not to give the cable co any money after trying cable internet and getting a 12K speed test ... 8 years and counting :)

I decided a couple years back i might get cable if i saw an ad that actually said how much it costs...they don't. 6 months is not relevant if i will have it for years and years. Even one telemarketer couldn't tell me what if would cost after the promo.

Just not worth the $55+extras it takes to get to a tier i would want. All i really want is SciFi (duh) and Speed (to get something besides nascar or the occasional condensed race they show on network)

Between OTA, netflix, and trading DVDs with a friend i have plenty to watch.

So glad i haven't got into the HD scene yet, still letting them sort it all out :)

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Anonymous Coward]

"When will we see the first direct to iTunes TV show?"

I know if it's on iTunes when I will see it... never ever.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Anonymous Coward]

We have a "tough FCC", that's what started this entire mess. The FCC is trying to force cable companies to implement a government-mandated technology instead of allowing the free market to come up with standards on its own.

As anyone who has ever seen government regulation at work expected, the FCC's mandate is creating a huge mess. It's creating more problems for users, requiring cable providers to increase costs and therefore increase prices, while accomplishing nothing.

The FCC doesn't force cell phone companies to allow just any phone to run on their network, yet it's trying to do the equivalent to the cable companies. Why? What does the customer gain from that?

A less stable network and a higher cable bill.

If the FCC would just drop this, there would be no problem.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Amouth]

and i would get an iTV if it had composit or svid out.. sorry but not everyone has an HD tv .. and nore do we want to pay for one.>

also a build in dvd rom for movies would be nice but not required....

oh .. and please kill iTunes already

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[d0rp]

When will we see the first direct to iTunes TV show? Hopefully it won't be long.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[ivan256]

Mythbusters has jumped the shark. It happened right around the time they built that sign which says "Warning: Science Content".

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[planetralph]

Try over the air HDTV. Antennas still work and work great with HDTV. www.antennanweb.org will tell you what stations you can get. I didn't upgrade cable to HD when I got an HD TV, but I got an antenna and its working out great for network HDTV content. With an HD Tivo box I would have plenty of content at hand, so I wouldn't need cable's 100 stations. My kids don't want me to cancel their Nick and Disney channel, but if Comcast jacks their rates up after my 1 year trial is over cable is gone. Ralph

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[The Mad Debugger]

I will agree that there were some weak episodes lately.. but last night's, with Jamie shooting an oven door with a shotgun, etc, was awesome.

I haven't given up hope yet. 'sides, there's still Dirty Jobs.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[ivan256]

I wish somebody would start uploading torrents of the mythbusters episodes with the myths un-shuffled. (Like they were in the first season)

I'd rather watch one myth end to end instead of having them jump around and spend a third of the time on recaps.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[LWATCDR]

"oh .. and please kill iTunes already"
Not going to happen. Most people seem to like iTunes. I am not a huge fan but people do seem to like it and it is how they sell their stuff.
I want iTunes for Linux and for Apple to make iTunes fit into Windows and or Linux better.
Right now it looks like a Mac app running on a windows box.
Which it is

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Osty]

Just not worth the $55+extras it takes to get to a tier i would want. All i really want is SciFi (duh) and Speed (to get something besides nascar or the occasional condensed race they show on network)

You're in for a big surprise with Speed. While they do occasionally have other races, many of them are shortened (the big endurance races, obviously, but they also shorten other races that you wouldn't expect) and there's not a whole lot of them. The bulk of Speed's programming consists of NASCAR races and related shows. If you don't like NASCAR, Speed is mostly going to be a waste of your money.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Anonymous Coward]

$50? I went with the "local HD channels" option for $12 for my HDTV. You have to ask for it to get it since it's not listed as a normal package. I get about 12 HD channels and some other standard-def channels. I still watch DVDs more than anything...

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[antdude]

Why even have cable? Why not over the air (OTA) unless you're way too far? I don't have cable and satellite TV services.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[bommai]

Exactly. Cable is way overrated. Especially since OTA-HD looks so good. You have so much freedom with it. It works with Sony HD-DVRs, built-in tuners from HDTVs, HD-Tivos, USB TV tuners, network TV tuners like HDHomeRun, PCI card tv tuners, plenty of software to record to HDs. No broadcast flag. No mess no fuss. Just need to live in a place that is close enough to the towers to get HD broadcasts. http://www.antennaweb.org/ is your friend

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[svendsen]

Ya but the channels I do watch require cable (comedy central, sci fi, cnn). So not quite out of the woods with cable (but getting very close)

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[antdude]

Well, you could always download these days. [grin]

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Fujisawa Sensei]

Spoken like a true Comcast stockholder.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[squiggleslash]

Well, the FCC has dragged its feet enforcing a congressional mandate requiring that cable companies use an interoperable standard. The government most certainly never mandated the technology, the cable companies were most certainly allowed (required, indeed) to come up with the standards themselves. CableCARD is a CableLabs invention.

As far as the FCC and cellphone companies analogy goes, the word is "quite". Other countries, notably Europe, have required cellphone companies to cooperate on standards and allow the use of third party equipment that conforms to those standards to be used by their customers. The result is that the European mobile phone market is infinitely more vibrant than the US, where two "competing" standards, only one of which is open, make it harder for third party manufacturers to produce phones that aren't "approved" by the network operators.

And what does the customer gain from the FCC enforcing the government's mandate over interoperability? Choice. The ability to use equipment that's not designed according to the narrow wishes of the cable industry.

The main issues are the FCC dragging its feet, and the congress's exclusion of the satellite operators from the mandate. The fact is neither the FCC nor the legislature have done enough.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[general_re]

Or just get all your broadcast channels in HD over the air for free. Or get a satellite. There are definitely options at this stage in the game. I'm on the phone canceling my account with Comcast as we speak. They didn't want to give me an HD DVR unless I was paying for one of their $50+ a month cable plans. Basic broadcast channels are fine for me, and now I'm getting them for free over the air.

Sure I'm paying Tivo, but they're offering me DVR service, and I'd rather Tivo gets my cash than Comcast anyway. Just to let you know, Comcast is very much organized on a regional basis, and some regions are, to put it mildly, dumber than others. Around here, Comcast will happily sell you a DVR to go along with your $14.95/month local-only, limited-basic package. YMMV.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[An ominous Cow art]

This isn't on iTunes, but it is only available only on the web:
Sanctuary

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[biggyfred]

Bust out the rabbit ears. Seriously. My custom built year old mythtv box connected to HD rabbit ears has more than paid itself off. Cut the cord entirely.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[GeePrime]

See, by shuffling the shows, that fills 1/3 more time. This way, the networks have to pay Jamie, Adam, et. al. less. therefore maximizing profits. Let me put it in a way for /. readers to understand better :)

1. play myths "shuffled"
2. Spend more time on recaps, decreasing amount of actual content.
3. ???
4. PROFIT!

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[ivan256]

They're always bitching about how they don't have time to show all the footage, and to go to their website to see the rest. Here's the real scoop:

1. Play the myths "shuffled"
2. People have to watch the entire show instead of just the 1/3rd of the show with the good myth they're actually interested in.
3. ??? (Ratings stay flat for the hour instead of having a peak in the beginning)
4. Piss everybody off because the show sucks now.... But the advertisers are "happy", so PROFIT!

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[antdude]

Also, OTA HD is better than what you get via cable and satellite I believe.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[glitch23]

The funny thing is the lady on the phone kept saying she didn't understand why I didn't want all this great stuff.

And did you give her a good reason that she could pretend she was putting into your customer notes so that supervisors can read your reasoning? Assuming she would record the notes, if you don't give a good reason for canceling those items then you basically did it for nothing (other than saving yourself some money of course).

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Rakarra]

OTA-HD looks great.. as long as you have signal. If it gets a little stormy, or a little foggy, or the tree out in front sways a little, or someone runs through the room and throws off the perfect alignment of your antenna, then you're SOL. I live across the bay from Sutro Tower in SF and I get pretty good reception when the rabbit ears are perfectly aligned. Of course, this means that they have to stay in the only large southwest-facing window, and you'd better not TOUCH the blinds at any point when the HD DVR might be recording, since that will mess with the signal. And oh, you'd better hope the signal is 100% clean, because if not MythTV will choke on it. I love MythTV for SD cable recordings, but it likes non-broken streams, and only non-broken streams. A glitch in the recording signal makes MythTV freak out in a state it doesn't recover from unless you save position, exit the stream, and then restart from the saved spot. I've gotten so sick of messing around with this sort of thing and having to scan the recording signal to see what exact angle works best that I'm considering dumping it all for an HD tivo.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[bommai]

My brother lives in Southern San Jose and he put up an outdoor antenna on a mast on his roof. He gets about 25 channels in HD reliably. He has a eyeTV Hybrid connected to his iMac 24" as well as a Sony HD-DVR. Both work great. I have a similar setup in Kansas City and I get about 8 channels in HD.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Amouth]

it isn't that i hate it.. it is jsut that it is the only way to get content onto the itv.. i think this is unneeded..

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[LWATCDR]

Unneeded? Well maybe I don't have an iTV but Apple is all about the interface. They want it to be as easy and as consistent and possible.
What I hate about iTunes is I find it very hard to organize my music. I would like to have the options of expanding the list by artist or album much like I can on my iPod. I find creating play lists to be be not that easy to do. And once you get enough music in your iTunes it is a bit of a mess to work with.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[konohitowa]

I know it will never happen due to the huge campaign contributions politicians get from cable companies.

Out of curiosity, how much do the cable companies contribute to politicians [say.. broken down by company and politician]. Or is this just another example of common "knowledge"? Like - for example - the rich not paying any taxes while simultaneously getting the biggest tax cut.

On a final note, I completely agree that the FCC needs to stick to the mandate. I'm sitting here with a TiVo 3 dual tuner with 2 cable cards in it. I'm gonna be mighty pissed if it stops working. It was obnoxiously expensive.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Dun Malg]

The FCC doesn't force cell phone companies to allow just any phone to run on their network, yet it's trying to do the equivalent to the cable companies. Why? Because cable companies operate in geographical monopolies, you idiot turd. Customers have only two choices for cable TV: take it or leave it. Cell phones, you have your choice of 3-6 providers. Seriously, are you really that dumb?

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[wiggles]

Your problem is you have rabbit ears. You need to upgrade to a higher gain, permanently mounted antenna.

I installed one in my attic, and the difference in reception capabilities was dramatic. Thou shouldst go here for further antenna assistance.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[Rakarra]

Oh yes, I'm certainly familiar with Antennaweb. Unfortunately it's pretty tricky for me to install an antenna where I currently am.. first because trees along the sidewalk will block the signal, and secondly since I don't want to install a permanently-mounted antenna at a place I'm only going to be staying at for another 8 months or so.

Re:if we had a tough FCC,

[wiggles]

Unlike Satellite, antennas don't require line-of-sight. I have mine installed in my attic. My only suggestion for the temporary problem you have is to try to find one that's easy to remove when you're ready to go. There are a few compact, relatively high-gain UHF antennas out there...

This is normal

[Anonymous Coward]

Every new technology has this growing pains stage. Give it a few more years and things will be honkey-dorey.

Re:This is normal

[Anonymous Coward]

Give it a few more years and we'll be waiting indefinitely for CableCard 4.0, which will be touted to do everything CableCard 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 are supposed to do.

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[Anonymous Coward]

What can't understand the long run on sentences some people type I can't believe your not with times you needto figure out comprehension abit even words missing will do.

You know what works almost as well as Cable? OTA.

[SuperKendall]

Think about getting a receiver for over the air HD. It's fewer channels, but usually the signal is less compressed than it is with cable, and you can do almost anything with the incoming signal.

That works to fill all your live TV needs, then for series that would normally be on cable buy them on ITMS or elsewhere.

---> Kendall

Preemptive Counter Flame

[Anonymous Coward]

No doubt there will be countless "TiVo Sucks" comments. Usually by people who believe that building their own MythTV box (costing more than the price of an HD TiVo and 3 years of service) is better than paying a monthly or annual subscription to TiVo.

Here's the rub. TiVo is powered by Linux. Every time you tell someone to build a MythTV instead of buying a TiVo, you're re-enforcing the argument that companies cannot be successful and use open source software. That's right. You always sit there as armchair CEO's and wax poetic about how running or selling open source software can be profitable... that companies can have a successful business model by selling services (i.e. Redhat). And yet when a company comes along with a service plan, using Linux as their OS, and selling an awesome product... you say that only a fool would pay subscription fees and try to spin your own.

Thanks a lot folks.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[Anonymous Coward]

nd yet when a company comes along with a service plan, using Linux as their OS, and selling an awesome product... you say that only a fool would pay subscription fees and try to spin your own. Actually, that only happens when that company takes the GPL2 by the word, and not the spirit, and prevents people from compiling their own kernel for their Tivos. The GPLv3 is specifically designed to prevent "tivoization".

Can you point to anything Tivo has given back to the community? Any kernel blackbox, libc, whatever patches that came from them?

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[morgan_greywolf]

Yeah, but building a MythTV or Freevo box gives you a lot more flexibility. Don't know about Myth, but Freevo has the ability to be an entirely client-server architecture, where you can have one box be a record server, and another box be a player, etc. This allows you to have HTPCs in every room of the house and watch anything you want anytime you want, without having to pay for a bunch of cable boxes. Plus, a MythTV or Freevo box is DRM free and you have commercial skip (as unreliable as that is), etc. And with Myth or Freevo, you can watch all those movies you downloaded from BitTorrent or from a website in Antigua. l)

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[grasshoppa]

Ok, but here's the counter argument; MythTV and TiVo are two completely different products, each serving different needs. So while yes, myth does end up more expensive, you get far more for your money.

In my specific case, I couldn't live without MythVideo. I have tons of videos stored on the thing, all accessible from the click of a button. Instead of having to hunt down the DVD, plop it into the machine and navigate the fucking ads and menus, I just click a button and watch the video. Last I heard, TiVo can't do that.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[morgan_greywolf]

Oh yeah, and I paid a whopping $10 for the hardware in my Freevo box -- the $10 was for the TV capture/video card from a garage sale. The rest of the computer was a throwaway.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[hjames]

And the cablecard plugs in where on that Myth box?

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[jollespm]

Actually, you can with a Series 2 TiVo. You have to have a Windows based computer to run the TiVo Desktop software (the Mac version won't stream, yet) and you dump your video files to a specific folder in mpeg2 format. Then, on the Tivo you can browse the host computer and pick what you want to watch. Depending on file size/resolution you can watch as is streams or wait a bit to cache enough of the file on the TiVo.

I've never used any of the Myth stuff, so I can't say if it's any easier or harder.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[Galaga88]

Even better, with TiVo.net, it'll transcode non-MPEG2 files on the fly and stream them to your TiVo, so the issue of converting files beforehand is moot. There's a similar plugin that'll handle all your non MP3 music as well.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[MrDoh1]

So how many judges rule on the spirit of the law and not the words of the law? I'm betting not many, and if they do, their ruling likely won't stand anyway. While I would whole heartedly agree that in many cases, the spirit of the law could potentially be a better way to do it and lead to a more sane ruling, that's not the way it was designed to work in this country. Sit on a jury sometime and listen to the judges instructions. You don't go by the spirit of things, you go by what's written in front of you there in black and white.

What's Tivo given back? How about some credibility to Linux in the eyes of the common man? See... it can be used for something other than a headless server in a dark back closet somewhere. Isn't anything that gets the Linux name out in the public view, especially in a main stream product a good thing? How many people had never heard of Linux before they got their Tivo? I certainly know several.

It always seems like the hardcore Linux fans want it both ways. It has to start somewhere you know and Tivo would likely have been a good place to start.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[Anonymous Coward]

"No doubt there will be countless "TiVo Sucks" comments."

So far, yours is the only one.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[jedidiah]

No, I believe that buying a standard PC and putting better software on it is better than using the Tivo & lifetime membership that I already own.

I get more features, better codecs, better responsiveness, unmatched (by Tivo) multiroom feautures, desktop support for my OS of choice and unlimited storage.

This is true for ALL of the other available options, not just MythTV.

All of the other commercial competitors to Tivo make it look anemeic.

They always have actually (replaytv).

The only edge that Tivo has is the benefit of colluding with the cable DRM cabal. Now that advantage seems limited. This whole notion of encrypting in-home cable signals just seems to be a great big fiasco in general.

If the FCC had any sense, that's what they would have banned. They would have specified accessabilty though unencrypted QAM for all available HD channels. Let access to cable TV signals go on as they had before. Then no one would be at a disadvantage and none of these shenanigans would be possible.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[jedidiah]

>> You have to have a Windows based computer to run the TiVo Desktop software

That kind of makes it a non starter.

OTOH, there is a VAIO media center that includes a DVD jukebox.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[Jerf]

Galleon is supposed to be able to do the same thing on anything that can run Java, but I've never tried the video viewing as my TiVo is on a Wireless B network, and streaming any video to or from it is basically impossible on that setup.

I can confirm the MP3 streaming works from a computer to a TiVo.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[jollespm]

Oh, I agree it's a major limitation and PITA. I've got a Mac and I have to run a virtual machine to get it to work. I'm hoping TiVo gets their act together and offers a native Mac solution sometime before I upgrade to the next best thing. At least I can stream photos and music from the Mac.

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[CamoCoatJoe]

How many people had never heard of Linux before they got their Tivo? How many TiVo users have no idea that they're Linux users?

Re:Preemptive Counter Flame

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, they do typically rule on the letter of the law rather than the spirit, and it's IMO wrong. I was taught in my Political Legal Education classes (and corresponding Mock Trial events) that judges are supposed to rule on the spirit of the law. This was drilled into our heads over and over again. They explained the reasons behind this and gave examples to let us decide for ourselves which would be a better decision: spirit or letter, and we all (students) agreed with each other most of the time; it was extremely rare that letter was the better decision. This was public school btw.

Sit on a jury sometime and listen to the judges instructions.

Yes, jurys should go by letter, judges should go by spirit. Big difference.

Re:You know what works almost as well as Cable? OT

[Anonymous Coward]

OTA HD signal is actually better than cable in almost all cases. However, I can't get Discovery HD without cable. Well, I actually get it through DirecTV, but it's the same thing for the sake of this particular argument.

That's not the only problem...

[rbf2000]

I've had the TiVo HD pretty much since the first week it came out. I've had a dual tuner TiVo in one form or another for the past few years so I was really excited when the new TiVo HD came out. However, I've been less than impressed with it.

I love the TiVo software, it beats Comcast's DVR hands down, but there are technical limitations. For instance, there is a lot of random artifacting that occurs on digital channels. Even more annoying is the fact that the audio will drop out randomly at times. I'm told it's a problem with the Scientific Atlantic cableCARDs that I am using.

I've also been told that it should be fixed via a firmware upgrade, but the whole point of TiVo is that it is easy an intuitive, but when you have the audio dropping out, the picture pixelating, and now not being able to get channels at all, it would seem as if TiVo may be losing their edge. Of course, most of the problems are because of the Comcast, which is unfortunate, but I'm hoping everything will clear up when I switch to Verizon FiOS at the end of next month.

Re:That's not the only problem...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got a series3 with Comcast digital plus with HD and haven't seen any artifacts. You may have a bad unit or a bad cable card. Try having Comcast replace the CC first and if that doesn't work, talk to TiVo.

Re:That's not the only problem...

[wavedeform]

The artifacts are a known HD TiVo problem that should be sorted out with the next upgrade. Series 3 TiVos (which are also HD) do not exhibit this.

Reason: Cable Card 2.0 standards dispute

[philam3nt]

This has been well known in the Tivo/Windows MCE/Non-Locked-in Cable-Box community for some time, and was blogged on engadget, which has a fantastic summary at Engadget: Cablecard 2.0 is ready . However, knowing most of you won't RTFA:

At this point you should be asking, what is stopping TiVo or Microsoft from creating two-way, multi-stream CableCARD devices? The answer is, some CE companies are not happy with the certification specification that CableLabs has decided on. As we previously discussed, the point of contention is the OCAP requirement...

...to put it in layman's terms, this would cut out the middle man, -- where the middle man is your cable company. With OCAP, TiVo couldn't deploy their software on a two-way host device without the cable company's approval, so the concept of going to the store and buying a TiVo that works anywhere wouldn't exist unless every cable company agreed to distribute and support TiVo's OCAP software -- this is how the long-awaited Comcast and TiVo agreement is going to work. The same might also be said for Vista Media Center, Microsoft would have to develop an OCAP VM in Vista Media Center and then work with each cable company to get them to deploy their user interface...

...In the end, we hope that the FCC steps in and requires CableLabs to certify two-way devices that do not require OCAP.

Charles doublerebel.com

The cable co really cares about the 3 HDTivo users

[glrotate]

NOT.

All cablecards are 2 way

[Anonymous Coward]

always have been - what you're not allowed to do is sell a 2-way box without a whole lot of cruft you don't want that give the cable company more control of your TV - like OCAP

CableCards

[iPaige]

Even when cablecards follow the standard it's a botched job 90% of the time. Here, read this article on OCUR. http://www.maximumpc.com/article/ocur Microsofts own lead for the program couldn't assist in getting the cablecards working. Shipped by two of the best PC manufacturers in the business, and due to the backwards ass way it's setup, completely unusable on arrival, or with aide from the cable company / microsoft / whomever wants to try. If that's the future of Media Center PC's, I'd rather just get downloadable content.

If we had a smart government

[DogDude]

If we had a smart government and populace, the government wouldn't have anything to do with cable TV. It's not a public utility, it's not using public property like the phone company, and it's in no way necessary to anybody's well being (I'd say it's actually detrimental). Why do you thing further government intervention into private business is a good thing?

Re:If we had a smart government

[bcattwoo]

It's not a public utility, it's not using public property like the phone company

Really? Do you have some sort of fancy cable-less cable company that doesn't rely on public rights-of-way and utility easements to get its product to its customers?

Re:If we had a smart government

[MrDoh1]

"...it's not using public property like the phone company"

So those cable lines hanging all on the telephone and power poles, and all those buried along side the roads and highways, those running in sewers and running under roads and sidewalks aren't using public property? So you don't consider right of ways and telephone/power poles, etc. public property? Then what public property are those other utilities that you mentioned using?

Re:If we had a smart government

[wavedeform]

Tell me why it's not using public property like the phone company? Where I live, it's run on the same pole as the phone line. Cities cede monopolies to the cable companies in exchange for their wiring of the city. Sounds more or less like a public utility to me.

Because of this monopoly the FCC stepped in to dictate that cable companies couldn't abuse their monopoly by only renting their own gear to consumers. The FCC mandated that the cable companies come up with a solution to letting consumer electronics companies make equipment to interoperate with cable. The cable companies hate this idea, but they were forced by the FCC, for the benefit of the consumer, IMO.

The solution that CableLabs, the cable cartel R&D arm, came up with was the cable card. They immediately started trying to to torpedo cable cards, however. I have a Series 3 TiVo that uses a pair of cable cards. I have had several problems with my cable cards. Each time it involved my cable company rolling a truck to my house to diagnose the problem. Each time the installer would call the head office and read some number off of my screen. Each time the problem was some data entered incorrectly in their database. The most recent time was the cable company turning on a stricter version of copy protection. Each time the installer complains about TiVo, or CableCards in general. Each time I point out that it is really a problem with their back end. Because the cable cartel does not really want to support third party equipment on their system, the support for third party equipment is bad. Go figure.

To me this is a good example of government trying to do the right thing, in the right way. They don't dictate a solution, they state the problem that needs to be solved, and they leave it up to the private industry to solve the problem. The solution is pretty simple from a tech perspective. The bummer is that the private industry involved is really greedy, and never wanted to do the right thing by the consumer. Switched video is a win-win for the industry. They don't have to invest too much in infrastructure, and they break existing CableCard devices in the process, thereby increasing their equipment rental income. Score!

I wish the FCC would stand firm on this one. I think that they did have the consumer in mind, and they should hold the cable companies' feet to the fire.

Re:If we had a smart government

[coryking]

At least here in Washington State, the city elects a "cable franchise" that is granted access to use the city's cable infrastructure. The city has an oversight board composed of citizens whose task is to make sure the cable company isn't screwing people.

If you wanna change the system, at least here in Washington, your best bet is to lobby your city government.

Re:If we had a smart government

[Anonymous Coward]

Why yes, I do!

Re:If we had a smart government

[CrankyFool]

Oh, good point. Dish Network doesn't in fact use utility easements. This is a good argument in favor of considering not making Dish Network comply with the CableCard standard.

Oh, wait, the CableCard mandate applies only to CABLE companies already.

Re:If we had a smart government

[StikyPad]

Ha-ha!

Re:If we had a smart government

[Pentavirate]

Skyview Cable

There are alternatives to cable.

When will people ever learn?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just use a freaking VCR! Why do people fall for these "redundant technologies" (as I call them) which simply do what the older, "obsolete" stuff has been doing for decades?

I guess there's a sucker born every minute.

Re:When will people ever learn?

[dingleberrie]

Redundant implies that it does the same thing. A standard TiVo provides a different featureset and is used in a different manner than a VCR.

By your example, a computer is redundant to a typewriter, so assuming you are not one to fall for "redundant technologies," who did you give your comment to to get them to post it?

Re:When will people ever learn?

[Anonymous Coward]

I gave it to a carrier pigeon, you fool! How else do you think it arrived?

Yes, I am the original poster. Hopefully my message won't get mangled during transit.

Re:When will people ever learn?

[Kirby]

Yeah, I hear some people are using this new Linux thing, but Windows 3.1 works just fine!

Seriously, there's a substantial gap between features between the two devices, including:

* Ability to record high definition on the TiVo (VCRs are very poor quality, which is easily noticeable, especially on modern televisions). Ability to record good quality of non-high def shows as well. The new boxes even record 5.1 sound.
* Ease of repeated recording of favorite shows
* Ability for device to know the difference between first run and rerun
* Ease of delete without subsequent quality loss
* Not taking up valuable space with stacks of videotapes
* Ability to auto-record based on keywords (Particularly nice for sports fans), directors, actors, and such.
* Auto-fill of space with shows you like. Seems small, but I _always_ have two or three Simpsons and Buffys sitting around, so I don't end up watching Home Improvement on a slow Sunday when I want to veg.
* Ability to record two things at once.
* Ability to watch something recorded while recording up to two live shows.
* Ability to pause, rewind, and fast forward 'live' tv. Very nice if the phone rings, or if nature calls!
* Ability to auto correct for schedule changes. No more losing track of a show when Fox moves it to Saturdays, or miss the last 10 minutes of Lost because it's a 70 minute episode! This is not a small feature. Tivo has an excellent track record at being on top of this kind of thing.

Now, there are downsides, mostly in the cost department, but if you consider television to be a hobby, I highly recommend tivo. (If you think TV is a waste of time, and are reading this thread, well, is trolling really a better use of time than tv? Honestly.) Other DVRs provide most of these features, and are better than a VCR, but Tivo still has the best featureset. Hopefully, they'll work out these cutting-edge-technology stumbles in a way that's good for current consumers. (But I've had the original HD box for almost a year and never had any problems.)

Re:When will people ever learn?

[lubricated]

What's this VCR you speak of?

Re:When will people ever learn?

[Anonymous Coward]

The original poster is back again, and I don't care if anyone calls me a luddite. :)

Yeah, I hear some people are using this new Linux thing, but Windows 3.1 works just fine!

And I still run Win 3.x (actually WfW 3.11) on some older boxes. Even on some much "newer" ones, like a Pentium 3. Yeah, I'm crazy but I enjoy doing this since I can tweak Win 3.x to death. Of course it's not the only "OS" I stick on there. I enjoy having a test partition to mess around.

Seriously, there's a substantial gap between features between the two devices, including:

* Ability to record high definition on the TiVo (VCRs are very poor quality, which is easily noticeable, especially on modern televisions). Ability to record good quality of non-high def shows as well. The new boxes even record 5.1 sound.

Almost all of my TVs are from the 70s and 80s. I don't think I'll notice.

* Ease of repeated recording of favorite shows

Every menu-driven VCR does this. Only my really old VCR from 1980 or so is tough to set up since it involves switches and buttons.

* Ability for device to know the difference between first run and rerun
* Ease of delete without subsequent quality loss

I'll give you those points.

* Not taking up valuable space with stacks of videotapes

Some of us like having them on removable media. They're easy to lend to people, easy to swap between TVs, easy to trade, and VHS tapes are dirt cheap to buy.

* Ability to auto-record based on keywords (Particularly nice for sports fans), directors, actors, and such.
* Auto-fill of space with shows you like. Seems small, but I _always_ have two or three Simpsons and Buffys sitting around, so I don't end up watching Home Improvement on a slow Sunday when I want to veg.

Again, I'll give you those points, even though they don't apply to someone like myself who watches few shows, mostly news.

* Ability to record two things at once.

Who doesn't have 2 VCRs?

* Ability to watch something recorded while recording up to two live shows.

I have multiple cheap TVs side by side. Not a problem here.

* Ability to pause, rewind, and fast forward 'live' tv. Very nice if the phone rings, or if nature calls!

I can see that being handy. Granted, it only takes me a press of the Record button if it's something I don't want to miss. I use commercial breaks for when "nature calls", though. :)

* Ability to auto correct for schedule changes. No more losing track of a show when Fox moves it to Saturdays, or miss the last 10 minutes of Lost because it's a 70 minute episode! This is not a small feature. Tivo has an excellent track record at being on top of this kind of thing.

Sounds handy. In the past I had given up on some shows that moved around too much. I just ended up losing interest anyway trying to find them, and most of the time, shows that move end up getting canceled.

Overall, yes I see a few points that could be handy to someone like myself, but I cannot justify the cost, especially on a continuous basis for what few shows I do watch. Some of my co-workers in IT try to convince me to upgrade, but none of them have ever given a compelling argument. You have given the most valid points so far out of any of them.

When 2009 rolls around, my old TVs will still work fine for watching my VHS collection, plus I can always play my video games. :) Perhaps I'll "upgrade" at some point in the future, but I'll let you early adopters work out the bugs for me. :)

Cable companies just want CableCARD to die

[stox]

They didn't want it from the get go, and they are going to do anything to insure that it dies. How dare the FCC tell them how to do business.

Re:Cable companies just want CableCARD to die

[Ertman]

CableCard is a stop-gap solution. It DOUBLES the cost of a low-end cable set top box. That sucks. Almost all of the cable companies were begging the FCC to let them develop DCAS, the Dowloadable Conditional Access System. Some smaller cable companies have received permission to ignore CableCard entirely. You wouldn't need a special card to insert into your set top box of choice with DCAS, you would be able to download a software module that does the conditional access. This only adds a small cost to each box. (Although it makes certification of the entire box a pain, since you have to have a secure computing platform now...)

But the FCC said "sorry, time's up", so consumers get CableCard today, while the proper (DCAS) solution will replace it in about 2 years.

Everything US Sucks.

[twitter]

We've let greedy companies take us for a ride, but others places have not been as ridden. We've got third rate broadband and second rate cable, despite having invented the internet and being the headquarters of the major content providers. On second thought, the suck you feel is because we have those headquarters.

Re:Everything US Sucks.

[WhiteWolf666]

Huh?

Most of these 3rd party digital tuning solutions suck, quiet frankly. Anything that is sold as an add-on for the PS3 is not going to have much market uptake.

The real "long-term" solution to this stuff is IP video, not switched. Content providers *should* go online, and you should have IP boxes that hook up to your TV to access the stuff. Locally cached content should play the same as remote content.

And we're getting there in the U.S. You can go to ABC.com and watch most of the latest shows (unfortunately, they just switched to a currently windows only Flash plugin, but I suspect thats going to change in the near future with H.264 support in Flash). Many other pieces of software support Mac and Linux (Miro, Vuez, Flash, Helix) all of these play HD just fine, and most are just a hair away from being accessable on every brand of game console.

Why? Because all they require are processing power and an IP. And sufficient bandwidth.

Bandwidth is another issue, but some of the providers in the U.S. are finally doing the right thing, and going big. Verizon is in decent shape, and compares well, worldwide. RCN's service is not bad, either. Even Comcast is tolerable, particularly in areas where it competes with Verizon, RCN, and similar next-gen solutions. Sprint's got a nationwide all-you-can-eat (gaming, servers, video) EVDO RevA network, and is deploying WiMax nationwide in the next 6 months.

The only really big laggard is AT&T, and those executive will be first against the wall when the broadband revolution comes.

Hell, it's even become a major discussion in congress.

Either way, however, I don't think the future of commercially distributed video lies with integrated networks, with moderately open end points. I think the future of commercially distributed video must lie with sending content online; the missing parts are a)content provider's approval (this is a problem worldwide), and b)easy to use hardware.

I would *love* to see a 3rd party "cable" provider that plugged into your internet connection, and served up the standard "extended basic" fare.

That would be *cool*.

cablecards and company-provided STBs

[Icculus]

Weren't all the cable companies supposed to be using CableCards in their own new set top boxes by now? How are they handling this problem with those units?

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[Overzeetop]

They use custom pre-release versions which work with their boxes. Just because TiVo won't make 100 custom boxes that only work with specific systems isnt' their fault, right? And deploying switched digital before the offical spec is complete is no big deal, right?

If you want my opinion, the FCC should forbid any content provider from selling or leasing end-user equipment, and requiring that all providers use a common specification (we do it for OTA, why not cable?). As for my OTA comment - the FCC fucked that up, too. We should be watching 720p, period. If it weren't for all those mama's boy TV manufacturers who were so damned afraid of losing their interlaced teddy bears, we'd have been much better off.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[Darthnice]

They do 2 things. First, the CableCard is still used for decryption of the signal and use some proprietary mechanism to request switched channels. Second, they tape the CableCards in the slot so that it is always married to the same box. The proprietary mechanism for channel selection is what breaks 3rd party support for switched video.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[_xeno_]

In my case, Comcast replaced it with a used box. At least I get the channels I'm supposed to now.

I really want to just ditch my cable box and replace it with a TiVo Series 3. But until this whole CableCard mess is sorted out, I'm not really willing to.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[daveywest]

Weren't all the cable companies supposed to be using CableCards in their own new set top boxes by now? How are they handling this problem with those units? I work for a small cable company. Here's what we put on our price sheet if you just want to rent the M Card: "M Cards are compatible with CableCARD 1.0 certified hosts. Third party devices may require software updates or firmware upgrades to enable all supported functions." I can't see why anyone would want just the card. Our box/card combo has on-screen programing guides. If you use your own box or plug the card into the TV, you don't get any of that information. Just like the rest of the free market, we offer a superior product to entice our customers away from using something else.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[Anonymous Coward]

(Noted that you work for a small cable company, which is probably not Comcast or the like; this is a general response to their implementations -- if yours is somehow better, more power to you. Your cable company should expand and make billions with a better product)

Because traditionally your on-screen programming guides have been slow, unwieldy, and at least with the ones that I've seen, contain more and more dead space used for invasive advertising. Cable-company provided STB's are also notorious for missing recordings, scheduling problems, etc. The TiVo, in general, has provided a fast, responsive interface that WORKS, and they provide the scheduling guide. Their inserted advertising, that I have seen so far, has consisted of:
1. An item or two on their main menu you can select for more information.
2. An indication during a commercial for a TV show allowing you to hit a button and schedule a recording of the next airing.
3. A pop-up *during a recorded advertisement for a product* that can take you to more information (generally their current menu ad sponsor, with a URL or two) on that product.

Note that none of this gets in your way of setting up a recording, or even changing channels to what you want to see. Did I mention out the *SLOW* part of the STB's provided by cable companies (SA and Motorola boxes). Then there are the televisions with their own built-in TV Guide implementations that, at least from the ones I've used, are STILL faster and less cumbersome than the cable company's STB interface.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[revengebomber]

We should be watching 720p, period. If it weren't for all those mama's boy TV manufacturers who were so damned afraid of losing their interlaced teddy bears, we'd have been much better off. And what about those of us with 1080i CRT sets? Not everyone wants to settle for an LCD or plasma.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[evilviper]

As for my OTA comment - the FCC fucked that up, too. We should be watching 720p, period. If it weren't for all those mama's boy TV manufacturers who were so damned afraid of losing their interlaced teddy bears, we'd have been much better off.

I'm not quite sure what your complaint is.

Despite interlacing artifacts (spacial/temporal aliasing), it gives the best of both worlds. You have 1080p/30 resolution with low/slow motion, and 60fps during fast motion.

I would very much like to see 1080p become standard instead of interlaced, but I certainly wouldn't like downgrading to 720p just to avoid the interlacing.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[Overzeetop]

The problem is that there are 18 different (ATSC) acceptable formats, and the result was years of delay and tons of poor products. I don't have any problems with sports on film, and that's only 24fps. Interlacing is a crutch of television technology, and the inabilityof 1950s technology to get horizontal refresh rates high enough to do progressive scanning. The problem is that the FCC decided to let the decision made by someone else - and the result has been two decades of poor results.

I'd prefer they chose 1080p/60 back in the 90s, but I'd be just as happy with 720p/30 or 720p/60. I can't tell the difference on my 125" projection setup, to be honest, though there are those with larger screens and better eyes who can do so - especially when they watch their favorite test patterns. Still, there is absolutly no reason for interlaced video today - it's not how the cameras work anymore, and there is sufficient horsepower in dedicated chips to decode 60 frames per second. Higher frame rates are nice, but not at the expense of the deinterlacing gymnastics that has to be done on the back end.

Re:cablecards and company-provided STBs

[evilviper]

The problem is that there are 18 different (ATSC) acceptable formats, and the result was years of delay and tons of poor products.

The different possible resolutions and frame rates certainly didn't cause any delays. Once you've implemented the highest, the rest are simple. And for high definition, there's really only 2 formats (720p/1080i).

I don't have any problems with sports on film, and that's only 24fps.

Your poor vision shouldn't be the basis for video standards.

Interlacing is a crutch of television technology, and the inabilityof 1950s technology to get horizontal refresh rates high enough to do progressive scanning.

That was the original reason for it. However, I've listed the other attributes it has, which make it relevant and desirable even with progressive displays.

The problem is that the FCC decided to let the decision made by someone else - and the result has been two decades of poor results.

Still, I have NO IDEA what "poor results" you are trying to refer to.

Still, there is absolutly no reason for interlaced video today

I've already described the reasons for interlaced video today.

and there is sufficient horsepower in dedicated chips to decode 60 frames per second.

Funny. You were complaining about how long it took for ATSC to gain traction in your previous sentences, yet you want to force them to an even higher-end standard, which would have delayed things a few years more.

Also, the CPU power may be there (now), but the bandwidth certainly isn't. There's no way you're going to convince the FCC to allow TV stations several more MHz of bandwidth, and you're certainly not going to get much traction convincing people that their 1080 TV sets should be downgraded to 720, just because you don't happen to like interlacing.

And you'd be taking a bigger hit on movies, forcing the resolution way down to 720p, yet still only having 24fps, so wasting more than half of the potential.

Higher frame rates are nice, but not at the expense of the deinterlacing gymnastics that has to be done on the back end.

No deinterlacing needed. The majority of HDTV sets support 1080i natively (which is why it's used). And for flat screens that can do 1080p@60fps, it's just a matter of line-doubling to get an equally perfect picture. It's only the very cheap/low-end flat-screen that get screwed by interlacing, but that's because they can't really do 60fps to begin with, so they lose quite a bit with 720p also.

DRM?

[PPH]

From the article:

The stumbling blocks to the required two-way communications for supporting SDV natively on TiVo devices apparently have been cable company demands that certain of their (cable company) control software be running on the associated TiVo units themselves (something that TiVo has been unenthusiastic to permit)

It appears that this might be an attempt by the cable companies to get stuff like DRM software installed on consumer's equipment.

Re:DRM?

[spectro]

IMHO right there is where the FCC should get tough with cable companies. The mandate says they must provide a POD (cablecard) and this POD contains all the information required to access the subscribed channels. Requesting control over the software in the host device is overstepping the mandate. I think Tivo gave up and signed a deal with Comcast to get the certification. If I were Tivo I would have put out a press release that would've slashdotted causing a massive outcry to the authorities/congress forcing the FCC to step up.

On the other hand, the deployment of SDV is just rendering these tivos obsolete, unless there is a way to fix it through firmware they must be scrambling to build the Series 4.

Re:DRM?

[powerlord]

On the other hand, the deployment of SDV is just rendering these tivos obsolete, unless there is a way to fix it through firmware they must be scrambling to build the Series 4.

Well ... the nice part about the HD TiVos (and Series 3), is that they also include the ability to tune Over The Air, so they aren't exactly Obsolete.

There has also been speculation that a back-chanel communication mechanism could be worked out (via the TiVo's internet connection), if the Cable Companies were willing.

A Series 4 might be in the works, but for that to happen, there would have to be an agreed upon way of handling the bi-directional communication, otherwise all it could hope for would be a piggy-back device like the Series 2, but with HD inputs, and the Cable Companies would just screw them by making sure the "do not record" flag is always set.

Open source cablecard device?

[spectro]

This is a little OT but...

The big problem with cablecard is manufacturers will not build devices with it because of the certification requisites. What if a manufacturer such as pcHDTV or SiliconDust adds a pcmcia slot to one of their models and just advertises it as a "programable POD module"?. They leave it to the open source community to come up with the implementation (maybe cablecard compatible) and flash it to the device to get it to work. The certification part is going to be hard and take lots of legal arm-wrestling but it is possible.

In the alternative we just create an alternative POD protocol that can be used for small cable operations or even encrypted OTA services (how many 1080i channels can you stuff in each available UHF frequency?, I bet Mark Cuban would be interested)

Re:Open source cablecard device?

[cadfael]

(as usual, in a cable discussion, I put my flame proof underwear on....)

Its a little more interesting than that. I am actually a Cable guy who does design for products in MSO (cable company) networks. You are essentially facing two folks who hold the keys to the kingdom, SA and Motorola. The DRM (conditional access in our world, or CAS) is proprietary. FCC mandates that the CAS be separable (as of July this year). Moto and SA complied by providing CableCards. They did not mandate that the two way services be supported (a friend pointed this out to me the other day...very important distinction). TIVO is neither SA or Moto, so they don't entirely get the same access to the secrets of the inner workings of the cable cards (and thus, have issues supporting a two way host; ergo, no video on demand or SDV support). They also need to support OCAP (don't even think about getting me started on this). The open source community is welcome to read the specs for building a device that would talk to a cable card, but getting the technical help to make it work (either with Moto or SA or with CableLabs) would be problematic. One way is not really that hard, so I think that is doable.

Certification is a economic issue (and a large one at that). So where it is nice to put a POD interface in, getting it to work is another thing (plus you need to think about supporting SCTE 55-1, SCTE 55-2, or DSG for the return path...)

FYI, in a typical network, channels in North America are 6MHz wide (either over the air or on a cable plant). Typical encoding for a standard def signal is 3.75 mbps, and a typical QAM channel (256 QAM) has a data rate of 38.810720 mbps, so you get about 10 streams per 6 MHz channel. HD can run up to 19 mbps (really, really rare), so you could fit two (or three if they decrease the bit rate down and thus drop the quality) per channel. Over the air ATSC uses 8 VSB for their modulation, and I don't offhand recall what the bit rates are for that.

Re:Open source cablecard device?

[r_jensen11]

If you can't watch DVD's in the US while running Linux because of the DMCA, there's not a chance in hell that this would fly.

On behalf of all owners of MythTV, SageTV...

[coryking]

I would like to take this minute to extend my middle finger to both the FCC and every single person who works or owns stock in the cable and media industry. You people created a mess with this HDTV stuff and you all should be ashamed of yourself.

At the present time, I *CANNOT* purchase a device that allows me to record shows I currently record in Hi-Def using my SageTV. Worse, I cannot even prove that last claim because there is no definitive list of channels the my local cable company broadcasts in the clear. Even worse is that there is no promise that the cable company will suddenly flip the switch and deny my access to any given channel.

You will note that as a customer and a citizen of my region, I am willing and able to purchase:

• $1,500 for a LCD Hi-Def TV
• $1,000 in computer upgrades
• Up to $10/mo more in cable fee's

It is with great regret and much pain that I announce today that I will not be spending that money. Unless I can record my favorite shows on the History Channel or Discovery Channel in hi-def, I will never purchase or upgrade my existing television equipment. I will never upgrade my cable plan and should the cable plan I subscribe to become unavailable, I shall cancel the plan and throw my equipment out the window. I can only hope the City, who selects our fine cable company (Comcast), will send a garbage truck to pick it up. Please have it noted this is not a "protest" or a "boycott" but a simple economic decision. It is not worth investing in new television equipment unless I can reliably insure that I can record my favorite shows in Hi-Def.

As a citizen of my region and customer of of my cable company this is my only demand:
Allow my computer to record unmolested hi-def content that has the same quality and capability as those who lease cable owned set-top-boxes or those who own Tivo's

Let it be known, as an advocate of home-brew systems, this shall be my plan:

• Create a community website that lists what channels are currently in the clear for a region
• Provide a user friendly guide to understanding "hi-def" including terms like "QAM" and "5c"
• Provide a user friendly guide to constructing systems that can record and play back hi-def content.
• Provide resources for citizens to lobby their cable company and local government.

I shall hope by providing a platform for such discourse, we as a community and pressure our government and cable industry to provide us the same access to our favorite shows as those who currently enjoy them.

Thank You.

Re:You know what works almost as well as Cable? OT

[boskone]

I dumped cable after my internet (with too much lag to be effective on XBL) plus cable tv was $140. I went to DSL (slower, but less latency) for $35/month and OTA HD tv with a series 3 tivo. its' great. There are a few shows I kind of miss, but with a DVR, there's still enough on. I also wanted to get off the couch more, so i'm saving about $100/month and have gotten some free time back. I might do netflix in the winter.

Screw TV.

[Anonymous Coward]

The great thing about TV is that you sit down, press a button, and watch. I can't believe how much time, money, effort, and bitching you guys devote to something whose sole purpose is to rot your brain.

I'm actually looking forward to 2009, or whenever my old mono analog set goes dark. I'll ship it off to China or some other third-world shithole to be recycled by naked starving children and that'll be that. I'll use the space where the TV is now to put in another bookcase, or maybe a nice fucking plant.

Have fun whinging about how your HD this doesn't work on your Tivo that or that your CableCARD is the wrong polarity and won't let you upload Gundam to your iPhone or whatever.

(And no, I won't be downloading that shit off the net either. That's even more pathetic.)

Re:Screw TV.

[jedidiah]

Of course you think that TV is drek.

You have no real idea of what is on. You have this remarkably narrow view of it based on whatever you can manage to find surfing at some random instant in time.

PVRs turn broadcast TV into TV on demand. You can take everything of value or interest in a week or a month and aggregate it presenting it in one nice easy to browse package.

You can even have the computer look for things you would never consider looking at based on what your interests are.

aim at foot, pull trigger

[voidstin]

You'd think that with downloadable TV (appleTV, revision3, democracy, youtube, etc, etc) becoming a real threat, cable companies would actually want to embrace products people love. I have DirecTV and am stuck with the HR20 for HD. It is awful. I'm thinking that 60 bucks a month could go much further on Netflix and iTunes...

It's not like it's going to take a lot to get customers to ditch time warner and/or comcast.... these companies are reviled.

To the Early Adapters...

[Toonol]

Thanks to all of you who are cutting edge, purchasing all these incompatible devices under the spectre of still-evolving standards. When I, and the rest of the world, follow in your footsteps three years from now, the process will be smooth and error-free because of your trials and tribulations.

Seriously, I'm grateful for you guys. You take it on the chin so we don't have to.

Re:You know what works almost as well as Cable? OT

[MbM]

Agreed. All you need to recieve over the air HD is a UHF antenna and a digital tuner.

I bought a device called an HDHomerun just for this purpose. It's an inexpensive dual tuner reciever for unencrypted digital content; streams content over ethernet to any computers on the lan. Now my only concern is harddrive space; storing the shows in their original quality can take 6G per hour -- not that I'm complaining, it's noticably better than the pixelated crap my (analog) tivo produces.

This sounds fishy

[Wesley Felter]

Just because a cable box is required to support OCAP doesn't mean that it has to only support OCAP, right? So TiVo should be able to build a box that has the native TiVo GUI and also allows users to view OCAPlets through a menu option. Maybe we should call it OCRAP.

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[wavedeform]

If CableCARDs don't work well, it's the Cable Cartel's fault. CableLABS is the cable industry's R&D outfit. They came up with CableCARD to satisfy the FCCs mandate that third-party equipment be interoperable with the cable system. The consumer is being shafted by a combination of the cable industry's greed, and the FCCs unwillingness to stand up to them.

And how do to you propose to get that content?

[Alzheimers]

Who's network will be distributing that content? Hint, for a lot of broadband users, it's their cable company.

With net neutrality in contention and backbone infrastructure reaching capacity, how far is it of a stretch to assume that you won't see some kind of throttling of video content from a provider who's also trying to sell you their video service on the same wire? For ordinary people who just want their video to look good and get delivered when they want it, once their AppleTV or Netflix or whoever's selling downloadable content turns ugly then they'll blame those companies, not their cable company.

I think the battle between the telcos and VOIP was nothing compared to the bloodbath we're going to witness. The cable companies have the FCC in their pockets. Who do you have?

Re:And how do to you propose to get that content?

[voidstin]

Sure, but it isn't the only option. And not even an attractive one to me. Speakeasy is much more customer friendly, and FiOS is loads faster. That monopoly may not be all it's cracked up to be, esp if Google starts lighting up dark fiber. My speakeasy DSL is slow as hell since I'm far from the CO, but my AppleTV content still looks great. As long as it's not streaming (ie, not breaking news or sports), customers will not care. Price and Ease of Use matter much more than quality anyway. (see Crappy + Free, ie Youtube). Hell, Cuban has been talking about FedExing hard drives full of HD content around, and only downloading the DRM key.

I agree it's going to be a bloodbath though. But if its Google/Apple vs. Telcos vs. Cuban vs. TW/Comcast, it's not going to be a walk in the park for the cablecos. Look at the leverage Apple has on the music industry...

Re:And how do to you propose to get that content?

[Alzheimers]

It's not the only option for some people, but it is for a lot. Even in major cities, sometimes the only choices are DSL and Cable. Satellite's high latency and poor upstream capacity isn't much of an option, and can be very expensive. And now with cable companies offering voice service, and telcos offering tv channels, a lot of people are going to consolidate for deals like the "Triple Play", not shop around a-la-carte.

And I'm sure the major media companies are keeping a *very* close eye on Apple. There's no way in hell they want to give Apple that same kind of leverage in the video industry, and since many of them own the very infrastructure that will be delivering the content it's going to be very interesting to see how it all plays out. It's kind of like watching two lions fighting over a wounded animal, except we're the wounded animal.

except

[Alzheimers]

Except you could have written that same statement 10 years ago, and you'd still waiting...

Re:except

[jedidiah]

Not quite.

In the history of television, the current situation is unique. You have content providers trying to get in the way of the end users. That problem didn't exist before. So standards were simple and accessable and any one could exploit them.

Infact, I use a 20+ year old video standard to get the most out of my current new fangled HDTV because I am not interested in any funny business. I don't want anything hijacking or screwing around with my video signal.

Save 4 bytes and increase clarity

[belg4mit]

"any access to some channels" => "access to some channels"

Who The Devil Wants Them?

[Vengance Daemon]

The whole digital TV, Blu-Ray, HD DVD, TiVO, and cable TV mess just makes me tired all over. I am watching less and less TV these days because the quality of programming just stinks. There is no cable news channel that isn't, as Scott Adams said in another context, "nuttier than squirrel poo" - they all cover the celebrities and the Nancy Grace outrage of the week type of junk; and the broadcast networks have totally been taken over by accountants with seemingly no artistic sense whatsoever.

Why all of these goofs want to make it MORE difficult to watch TV is beyond me. Dorothy Parker wrote a great poem called "Parable For A Certain Virgin" that really sums up my feelings about DRM and the MAFIAA nonsense very well.

Re:You know what works almost as well as Cable? OT

[CharlieHedlin]

Even better, the HD TiVo includes an over the air reciever.

I have a series 3 TiVo and live in Time Warner's SDV test market. I dumped their video service and went OTA as a result of SDV.

On the other hand, this is really old news.

The answer to your query lies a few pages prior...

[Anonymous Coward]

Or just click the following link: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=27786 7&cid=20332349 ;)

Nothing New

[Cramer]

Nothing new to see here. SDV has been a problem for 3rd party cable hardware from the get-go. Tivo owners have been in this mess since the Series 3 was released A YEAR AGO. The only thing that's changed is the price for the Tivo HD... it's now cheap enough for some of the village idiots to aford one.

As for the BS comments w.r.t. cablecard requirements... SDV isn't part of those requirements. And wouldn't matter if it did. All the products on the market (and there are things other than tivo's that cannot support SDV, btw) are UNIDIRECTIONAL devices. There are no certification paths for bidirectional devices. (partly because there's no set standard because the cable companies keep changing their mind.) SDV is 100% unnecessary. Cable companies have plenty of capacity if they drop analog cable entirely or even start using the parts that no longer carry stations. (TW/Raleigh has room for ~40 HD stations above the analog broadcasts. That number goes up every year as they reduce the analog tier.)

The reason SDV exists -- and, btw, it was created by Time Warner and Scientific Atlanta -- is to subvert the cablecard mandate and attempt to push back the "integration ban" that took effect (finally) July 1. It's the difference between "spirit" and "letter". However, as SDV is linked in the UDCP license, there may yet be a loophole to their loophole. But I'm pretty sure no cableco will go along with it -- they're doing a bang up job keeping cablecards from working properly in the first place.

Re:Nothing New

[pabster]

Chee, call me shocked and stunned. Could cable be looking to cut out those nasty Tivo boxes that only get them $2 a card revenue instead of $16 per digital box? Pay no attention to the monopolies behind the curtain. Nothing to see here, move along.

Re:Nothing New

[Cramer]

Some places charge far more than that. And there's the "additional outlet" fee charged for each card even when they're in the same device.

Re:Nothing New

[kb7oeb]

Cable companies have plenty of capacity if they drop analog cable entirely or even start using the parts that no longer carry stations. (TW/Raleigh has room for ~40 HD stations above the analog broadcasts. That number goes up every year as they reduce the analog tier.)

Do you understand those "empty" channels are where those digital services are transmitted?

Re:Nothing New

[Cramer]

No they aren't. Digital cable is in the 250MHz above the 750MHz range of analog cable. There are technical reasons for that, but they disappear when analog cable is shutoff. There have been numerous articles written about this from all over the country. So, your individual milage may vary. For TW/Raleigh, they're all in the upper 250MHz band; I've looked.

Re:Nothing New

[kb7oeb]

The end of 750 Mhz is analog cable channel 117, my local cable system starts digital on 67 ~480Mhz and currently ends on 113 ~727Mhz with some empty channels in the range. I know my system is not unique so I would be interested in your technical reasons.

Re:Nothing New

[Cramer]

54-796MHz is the analog band. Give or take. It properly goes all the way to CH137 @ 858MHz, but I've never known anyone to go above CH125. And I've never seen a TV that would go higher than 125.

The "technical reason" is simply to keep the different systems from steping on each other. Analog cable broadcast gear can be quite old. However, I stand corrected... I just rescanned and see TW/Raleigh is now broadcasting digital as low as CH78 -- 10 to 16 stations per channel, btw; analog broadcasts go up to CH76. (125 used to be the EBS channel. It doesn't appear to be there anymore.) The last time I looked, there was nothing below CH100 -- the last published lineup change was 1/23/07. Cablemodems are taking some of those channels as well; my modem is currently locked @ 609MHz (~ch88.)

The point is, they have plenty of "capacity", if they would just use it. There's over 150 channels below 1GHz. Packin' a dozen stations each... But they are simply too greed oriented. They'll do everything they can to make you keep giving them as much money as possible. Plus, they're pissed at the FCC for forcing them to eat their own dog food -- they designed the cablecard but they refuse to use them and go out of their way to make sure they don't work.

Re:Nothing New

[kb7oeb]

I've haven't seen an analog set go past 125 either but all the QAM tuners I've seen scan up to 135

Re:You know what works almost as well as Cable? OT

[FullMetalJester]

I only wish NESN was OTA. Guess if I want my Red Sox fix I'll have to keep coughing up for the pusherman.

The tech just hasn't stabilized yet

[jollyreaper]

This isn't just a matter of being lazy and bittorrenting, it's also a matter of practicality. The technology is not yet mature enough for anyone to be buying the new TV's and playback devices with their DRM and shortcomings. Well, maybe you can get the TV but you'll want to play the content, conveniently ripped, from your computer. The odds are still too high that you'll pay too much and wind up with hardware that isn't compatible. The HD-TV encodes of current broadcast television look great on my laptop as well as my desktop. It might not look as good on a 42 or 60 inch screen but I also don't have one of those. 42 would be the right size for me but I'm still waiting untl the price drops another few hundred bucks. I know the price point will hit $500 eventually, I can wait. :)

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[Pentavirate]

The problem is standards always have trouble keeping up with the latest and greatest. Whenever you have something new and improved that gives competative advantage, the standard won't cover it. CableLabs don't control SDV. They control the guide and tuning. That's covered under CableCard 1. Third-party companies provided software for the set-top boxes for advanced features like VOD. Now because of CableCard 2, CableLabs is requiring the third-party software to conform to the standard. Now SDV is out and third-party companies are providing that. After a while CableLabs will come out with CableCard 3 which will cover that, I would imagine. Standards always trail the bleading edge.

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[wavedeform]

Your argument is certainly correct as far as it goes, but it ignores the fact that CableLABS is really an extension of the cable cartel. The cable cartel wants to roll out SDV because it's cheaper for them to do than to build out more bandwidth. The "latest and greatest" in this case is a cost saving measure for the cable cartel. It may be expedient for them, but it is not good for consumers who have invested in CableCARD capable equipment. They could move the PPV and VOD over to switched video and I wouldn't care. My cable system has lots of channels allocated for various PPV sports events that are great candidates for switched video.

You mention "competitive advantage" (well, technically you mention "competative advantage", but I quibble). Who are they competing against? It's a rare city where there is more than one cable company. Satellite TV? DVD rental?

I would much rather have a slightly stale standard than a moving target when it comes to consumer electronics.

Excellent

[SuperKendall]

I did not know they also had an OTA receiver included, but that makes a huge amount of sense. Great to know!

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[Pentavirate]

You mention "competitive advantage" (well, technically you mention "competative advantage", but I quibble). Who are they competing against? It's a rare city where there is more than one cable company. Satellite TV? DVD rental?

The competitive advantage I was speaking of was in bandwidth. It behooves any company to utilize its resources to the best of its abilities. There's no point in waisting the bandwidth to carry a station that is only being watched by a few when it could use that bandwidth to provide to internet customers for a premium fee. You're right that this doesn't solve all bandwidth problems but replacing infrastructure isn't fast or cheap so they need to stay competitive in the mean time. If they don't use the mean time to increase their bandwidth as well, then they're shooting themselves in the foot. They may not be competing directly with other cable companies in most markets (though in some markets they are: see skyview cable), but they compete with the telecom companies providing telephone and internet and maybe TV (ie Verizon FiOS) and they compete with other WISPs type ISPs for internet (ie Utopia and Blue Zone) and they compete, as you said, with Satellite TV and DVD rentals. So if cable companies don't keep up, they'll be left behind.

I'm not saying I love cable companies. I actually don't. That's why I don't purchase services for cable companies. I think they provide crummy services for high prices. Nevertheless, there are real legitimate reasons behind their actions that don't necessarily involve, "Let's screw the consumer!"

Re:Even in cable systems that don't have SDV

[wavedeform]

Nevertheless, there are real legitimate reasons behind their actions that don't necessarily involve, "Let's screw the consumer!"

Well, that may not be the goal, per se, just a lucky side effect. It's no secret that the cable companies fought tooth and nail against letting the users of their service connect third-party equipment. It seems to me as if they're using this technical issue (bandwidth) as a lever to pry the CableCARD ready consumer electronics off of their cable system.

I think that there's a big difference in being competitive, and being profitable. It may eat into profits for a while to stay competitive. So be it. The cable industry seems like it want to have it both ways. To my way of thinking, if they are granted regional monopolies, they should be required to comply with the spirit of the FCC ruling.

Why buy TiVo?

[Enderandrew]

People are upset that TiVO is telling you what you can and can't do with the hardware, and last time I checked the big 3 cable companies (Comcast, Cox and TimeWarner) all offered DVR service with their cable box.

With Cox, I pay $5 a month extra for a DVR box as opposed to my normal box. I don't buy any hardware, and $5 a month is far cheaper than paying for TiVo service. I've had a HD DVR box for 4 years, and I've replaced it three times. Each time it hasn't cost me a penny, since Cox is responsible for it. A few years back when I was looking, if I had to buy a box it would have been $600-$700 a pop, and I'm sure glad I don't have to pay to replace those.

Re:Why buy TiVo?

[spaceboytom]

Why use a crappy cable co DVR with a slow interface that crashes constantly? You said yourself you had to replace it 3 times. I have 3 tivos, my original series 1 is over 7 years old and still working strong. Tivo is a superior product and justifies a premium. If you ever had one then you can not use anything else and be completely satisfied. It's much like an iPod vs generic mp3 player. BTW, My TivoHD cost me $264 at best buy. Hardly a big expense when most HD setups are easily >>> $2K. And my net monthly cost went DOWN by $7/month because cable co charges $6.95 for box plus $7 for DVR service. Now my service cost for my tivoHD cost $6.95/month plus no additional cost for cable card. For me it was a no brainer whe the Tivo HD came out. SBT

Re:Why buy TiVo?

[NateTech]

How well does "Season Pass" work on your Cox DVR? (In other words, everything I've read says that it doesn't.)

Re:Why buy TiVo?

[Enderandrew]

Works fine. We have about 15-20 shows set to record the entire season at any given moment, but most of that is for my wife. I watch about 4-5 shows myself.

We can specify first run, repeats, whether to pick it up from multiple channels, HD only, save X number of episodes before deleting, delete when necessary for space, etc.

The only thing TiVo has that I wish Cox had on their remote was the 30-second skip button.

Re:Why buy TiVo?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's apparent to me that you haven't spent a lot of time using a Tivo before, and I'm not trying to berate you or anything here.

However, Tivo's season pass system is vastly superior to the Cox DVR. Here's one example that I'd experienced myself with Cox's DVR which made me miss my Tivo terribly.

Say I have season passes set up to record two programs, Show A at a higher priority than Show B. Firstly, the Cox DVR doesn't even *have* priorities that you can sepcify, but even if it did this shortcoming would still exist: Let's say that Show A conflicts with Show B and both are set to record first showings only because I'm already caught up in the programs. (For the purpose of this illustration, assume the second tuner is busy doing something else and isn't available.) With the Cox DVR, Show A would be recorded just as with a Tivo, and Show B would be skipped due to the conflict.

Now let's say Show B comes on again at a later time, such as 6 hours later as on Discovery. The Cox DVR will quite happily NEVER record Show B because it is no longer tagged "First Run" after literally the First Showing. The Tivo however is smart enough to realize that it didn't record it during its first run, and will simply record the next available showing where no recording conflict exists. Something Cox's DVR is simply not capable of.

And I won't even go into the Cox DVR's tendency in my experience to just randomly forget I'd told it to record certain programs one week, or entirely. Or the fact that I'm not able to find a list of programs I've told it to record once the show is obsolete and no longer being run. The list goes on and on as to why people love Tivo over any of the cable company provided DVRs.

If your Cox DVR is working adequately for you, then that's good. But there are quite a few people who can't stand them after having tried a Tivo for a few weeks.

This is about money plain and simple

[jonwil]

Basically the cable companies have a proposal for 2-way cablecard that uses OCAP (a java variant)
to handle all 2-way communications including SDV, Pay-Per-View, Video On Demand, full program guide info and interactivity.

The device makers (who put cablecard slots in their devices) have another proposal that implements most 2-way features including SDV, PPV, VOD and program guide via a standardized interface with OCAP and programs downloaded from the cable company being only used for interactive content. This is good for the device manufacturers since they don't need a JAVA VM in their device.

The cable companies want to force OCAP down everyones throat because they want to be sure that every device that does 2-way cable can do their nice fat moneymaking interactive games and such.

Gee..is'nt the GPLv3 supposed to fix that?.Duck...

[Danathar]

At the Risk of starting another heated discussion....

"People are upset that TiVO is telling you what you can and can't do with the hardware, and last time I checked the big 3 cable companies (Comcast, Cox and TimeWarner) all offered DVR service with their cable box."

Isn't that EXACTLY what the FSF is complaining about? That if you are using software under the GPL license, the spirit of the GPL (both licenses and codified in v3) is that the user should be able to control the software running on their hardware (when their hardware is using software licensed under the GPL)?

People would not be complaining if TIVO corp had not tried and succeeded in finding a loophole that violates one of the main points the FSF believes in (and consequently the spirit of the FSF's license)

You can disagree and say you think v3 of the GPL is less free. No prob, but it's the FSF's license and loopholing it, knowing that your loopholing violates their (the FSF's) intentions is wrong.

What would a TIVO be like if that loophole had not existed?

Why Not Free to IntraHouse Broadcasting

[Anonymous Coward]

Not everyone has Verizon FIOS, but wouldn't it make sense for those who do to have free access inside their house? The FIOS box on the outside of the house is completely addressable. All of the subscribed channels could be activated or not at that box. Then everything inside the house could use analog or QAM. And hey, while we're at it, why not some decent QAM channel assignments.

I would love to see this happen, but I agree with many of the predecessors commenting on this issue, I don't think the FCC cares to do what is its job, and make sure that we have good solid standards that accommodate the consumers needs. No one is trying to say that we don't want the cable companies to get their money. But the FCC doesn't have to sit idol while we are locked into custom hardware only the cable companies control. We just want balance.

And remember, outside the US, you are seeing much more accommodation of consumers needs. That is the real tragedy.

America, what happened?

Re:Gee..is'nt the GPLv3 supposed to fix that?.Duck

[Enderandrew]

The FSF foundation is based on software, not hardware. The GPL v3 is a software license that seems more fixated on hardware issues than anything else.

The main proponents who are upset at TiVo are people who were hacking the TiVo hardware to avoid paying the monthly subscription, which I don't understand. Just build a MythTV box or something. TiVo released the source, and their profit model was based on a monthly subscription fee. They obeyed the law, probably brought more attention to the GPL, saw the merit of open-sourced software, and tried to make money as a business. I don't think any part of that is evil.

I believe the GPL v3 will be a HUGE turn-off from any corporation who wants to consider open-source software.

Which is more important for the FSF's goals, people getting free TiVo by hacking it, or the spread and perception of open-source software into the corporate world?