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

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: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.

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

[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.

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?

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: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.)

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: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*.

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.