Why Can't I Buy A CableCARD Ready Set-Top Box? 240
Al E Usse writes "Ars Technica does a write up of the problems that were not solved by the July 1, 2007 integration ban on integrated security in your cable box. The goal was to get everyone on the same page by requiring standardized technology. Just the same, the cable companies aren't really playing ball. 'The companies who make the boxes don't seem interested in selling to consumers [and] cable companies still push their own branded devices.' The article covers some deep background on the whole CableCARD mess, and concludes with the current state of the market: 'Based on June 2007 figures from the cable industry, 271,000 CableCARDs have been deployed. That's an astonishingly low number. 58 percent of all US households with a TV subscribe to cable, according to the NCTA, which means that 65 million households have at least basic cable.'"
Bullhockey (Score:5, Insightful)
This is just like (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Bullhockey (Score:5, Insightful)
That said the other issue I have is that CableCards are only allowed in approved "closed" devices. There needs to be a way that I'm allowed to install a CableCard tuner in whatever device that needs it, my personal computer most of all, without having to do it exactly the way that the industry wants me to. I'm not a pirate, I just want to be able to watch at some future time on the PC of my choice (I know many people only have 1 but I have 4 or 5 in the house at any one time all capable of displaying the content if allowed) or on a mobile device. Heck I'm even fine if they somehow figured out how to force me to watch the commercials as long as I could watch them when and where I wanted to. It doesn't seem like the lack of cablecard tuners in unapproved pc's is slowing the piracy of TV much so why spend so much effort to do it?
Re:Why not TiVo? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bullhockey (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I did. I saw it on Ars earlier. I'm responding to the the summary that blamed us for not playing ball. It blames the cable companies for not playing ball. That's BS. We'll sell you any box we provide. Do you really want to spend $1200 on an SA HD-DVR? Nobody else does, that's why we aren't selling them.
The problem is that there are no GOOD consumer devices. There just aren't. We can't help that. We aren't in the STB business.
Re:The more critical question for PVR builders (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would I want it? (Score:3, Insightful)
My conclusion is the reason you can't replace the cable company's box with your own is that no one would want to. This isn't a great conspiracy, it's just that the STB manufacturers aren't going to try to sell a product that no one wants. Why would anyone want to replace one box with another box that does the same thing? The only motivation I could envision is cost, but the rental fees for the boxes aren't usually that high.
For a consumer, using the cable card to use a better DVR or to get rid of the STB entirely is worthwhile. So, the market has responded by providing these options. However, there's no motivation for someone to choose a different basic STB than the one the cable companies provide.
Re:Try buying a TV that supports CableCard (Score:4, Insightful)
No it's not. If I had such a service (and I have no intention of doing so), I'd do what I do now with my ~70 basic cable: block out channels. Religious channels? Begone! Shopping channels? Don't see them. Ad channels? Yeah right. Golf? Get real.
By the time I had blocked out all the channels I didn't want in the first place, I'd probably be down to about the same number I have now. 200 channels? No problem.
Unless you're now going to tell me that using digital cable/set top boxes/whatever, that one can't block channels. If that's the case, then there is absolutely no way I'll be getting any such service.
Re:Well, analog is good enuf... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Try buying a TV that supports CableCard (Score:1, Insightful)
This is 2007... (Score:5, Insightful)
but oddly enough, shows work fine from bittorrent (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:FCC is useless, Congress is useless, see a pate (Score:3, Insightful)
We did that in 2006. It had no effect.
As long as the bulk of voters are easily manipulable through expensive TV ads, the ultimate loyalty of politicians will be to those who fund the expensive TV ads.
Re:Bullhockey (Score:2, Insightful)
Okay, you could sell us a $1200 SA DVR. But why are there not more companies that just make a device that is just a tuner that takes a card? Why not go to Best Buy and pick up a 3rd party box for $80 like we can a DOCSIS cable modem? Why won't you allow bidirectional devices to be manufactured and sold? Because CL and the CO's artificially hamper the possibility.
As an example, I will give a list of the issues that have arisen since TiVo has released their S3/HD line of digital cable tuners, which are, as far as I know, the only mass-consumer CableCARD tuners out there (that aren't built into a TV):
1. CableCARDS have a high rate of failure. While there can be issues with the TiVo units, yes, this has gone back since HDTV's have begun adding CC slots. The CO's response? "It's your device." No, it isn't my device. If it was my device, then why, after going through a stack of 5-6 cards, does one finally work (in any of my CC-capable devices, even?) Either the CableCARD spec is poorly designed, or they are poorly manufactured and you don't care, or you are storing them under a leaky bucket in the back of the warehouse hoping that nobody will ask for one.
2. The TiVo obeys your copying and recording restrictions, as demanded by CL and the CO's, offering the copy-once, copy-many, copy-none flags and their ilk. Many of your cable boxes do not. That means that my TiVo, as purchased, does not provide me as much service as your box does, because it follows the rules that you require, even though you do not follow them yourself.
3. VOD/PPV/SDV all require bidirectional communications between the device and the head end to handle the channel assignments. Your cable boxes can all do this, because CableCARD is capable of bidirectional communications, and so is your device. My HDTV and TiVo cannot handle these things, because they are not bidirectional, because CableLabs refuses to certify a third-party device with bidirectional communication capability.
4. So why do they have to be certified? See the initial hostility to the S3's release. There are forums filled with people who were told that the cable company would never provide CableCARDS for the TiVo at first until people started pointing out FCC regulation (with TiVo's help on 3-way calling sometimes!) that required them to allow access to certified devices, which the S3 certainly was!
5. Initially, many cable companies (and some still do) would charge over-the-top fees for the S3, because it required two CableCARDS. Their argument? "It has two tuners, it is two devices, so you have to pay an additional Digital Outlet Fee." The problem? Those same cable companies provided their own dual-tuner DVR that did not require an additional Outlet Fee.
Also, those $1200 DVR's that you could sell us? I have never seen one that wasn't slow, buggy, temperamental, and covered with ads that took up over half of my channel guide every time I tried to pick something to watch. The TiVo is a good consumer device, one that has already been hampered by the cable providers' desire to not play fair, as demanded by FCC regulation. Sure, it has its bugs, but has been a far better device than any cable-provided DVR or tuner that I've seen. And if you really want to wonder why people aren't making devices that work like your STB units, even if they are cheaper, look at the OCAP requirements for "two-way cable devices".
(The TiVo is also a hell of a lot cheaper than $1200)
Re:Bullhockey (Score:3, Insightful)