Another Monopoly going down?

[destrekor]

I understood perfectly. What I pointed out was that even when cable-ready analog service allowed people to just plug in the cable wire for multi-channel DVR, DIY HTPC DVRs did not take off. Non-DIY Sony GigaPocket, TiVo, and XP MCE before that didn't stave of the provider-issued DVR boxes either. built one for me, sure, but everyone else seemed to get stuck in the mentality that DVR was supposed to be a service from your content provider.

Because it's a million times easier, in the eyes of a layman. Do you expect the layman to build a PC for any purpose, let alone integrating hardware and software for DVR functions?
They don't build PCs now for any function. They have a hard enough time with computers as it is.

This isn't difficult to figure out. We are not the average population, if it requires an ounce of effort beyond going to the store, don't expect it to be commonly adopted.

 

[StrangerGuy]

Because it's a million times easier, in the eyes of a layman. Do you expect the layman to build a PC for any purpose, let alone integrating hardware and software for DVR functions?
They don't build PCs now for any function. They have a hard enough time with computers as it is.

This isn't difficult to figure out. We are not the average population, if it requires an ounce of effort beyond going to the store, don't expect it to be commonly adopted.

Even as an enthusiast I would *very* much want my own PC to work effortlessly day in day out, let alone the average joe who view PCs as a cumbersome overcomplicated box and for good reason.

 

[destrekor]

We already have those without the DVR function. A Roku or an Apple TV is basically a HTPC for the masses.

If a system is put in place to replace the cable box it will be these set top boxes that benefit, not anything with an x86 chip in it.

Correct. I think DIY will draw more attention than it has in the past, but will be thoroughly out sold by the likes of the Rokus of the world. For obvious reasons. True x86 box-store ready boxes will surely exist for those who want a little more, but ideally ARM chipsets are increasing wonderfully, able to handle a fair bit of transcoding.
I do expect x86-driven Roku-likes, using Atom or similar CPUs. For a DVR, live transcoding and recording, perhaps multiple streams recording, a little more oomph may be necessary.

I'm excited, and really hope the FCC proposal is implemented as is. The potential for new hardware and software is excellent, and badly needed in the DIY/PVR space.

 

[destrekor]

Even as an enthusiast I would *very* much want my own PC to work effortlessly day in day out, let alone the average joe who view PCs as a cumbersome overcomplicated box and for good reason.

It can be done with the right hardware/software combo. I haven't been using mine due to present circumstances, but I had it working wonderfully on Windows 8 w/WMC. Looking forward to getting it up again this summer, along with the NAS media server I'm going to build.

Sent from my D6708 using Tapatalk

 

[CZroe]

Because it's a million times easier, in the eyes of a layman. Do you expect the layman to build a PC for any purpose, let alone integrating hardware and software for DVR functions?
They don't build PCs now for any function. They have a hard enough time with computers as it is.

This isn't difficult to figure out. We are not the average population, if it requires an ounce of effort beyond going to the store, don't expect it to be commonly adopted.

What are you smoking? How is CableCARD or any modern alternative supposed to be "a million times easier" than plugging a coax cable into a cable-ready DVR was back then (pre-MCE2005 SD analog-only DVR days)? The closest you get is ClearQAM, which does not support expanded basic (except the local cable co my brother worked for who appeared to be misconfigured for years). I specifically pointed out that it didn't take off before or after they opened it up for DIY, so being open wasn't a factor.

Speaking of pre-configured DVR HTPCs, Somy eventually ditched GigaPocket and got on the MCE bandwagon with the coolest stuff. I really wanted one of those Sony XL2 HTPC with the 100-disc FireWire DVD changer that could daisy chain with three others and it even supported CableCARD (older XL1 did not).

 

[destrekor]

What are you smoking? How is CableCARD or any modern alternative supposed to be "a million times easier" than plugging a coax cable into a cable-ready DVR was back then (pre-MCE2005 SD analog-only DVR days)? The closest you get is ClearQAM, which does not support expanded basic (except the local cable co my brother worked for who appeared to be misconfigured for years). I specifically pointed out that it didn't take off before or after they opened it up for DIY, so being open wasn't a factor.

Speaking of pre-configured DVR HTPCs, Somy eventually ditched GigaPocket and got on the MCE bandwagon with the coolest stuff. I really wanted one of those Sony XL2 HTPC with the 100-disc FireWire DVD changer that could daisy chain with three others and it even supported CableCARD (older XL1 did not).

I guess I wasn't clear enough... I was referring to cable company DVRs being that much easier compared to DIY solutions.

 

[lupi]

waaaahhhhbbbaaallaaannccee


http://arstechnica.com/information-...cs-set-top-box-plan-is-a-technical-nightmare/

 

[destrekor]

waaaahhhhbbbaaallaaannccee


http://arstechnica.com/information-...cs-set-top-box-plan-is-a-technical-nightmare/

I read that this morning.

I imagine similar complaints were fielded when CableCARD was launched. OMG we're gonna have to re-do everything! We're actually going to have to work a little extra harder! The world will fall apart in the process!

Ugh - I hate the cable industry and lobbying power they have.

 

[Linux23]

waaaahhhhbbbaaallaaannccee


http://arstechnica.com/information-...cs-set-top-box-plan-is-a-technical-nightmare/

basically because it affects their bottom line, it's not technically possible, yet they got it working on a Roku and Samsung TV's (2015 models only).

in a nutshell this is about control and the bottom line and I hope the FCC nails their asses to the wall and pass this proposal.

 

[lupi]

It's all about money. It will cost them something to comply and then the compliance will eliminate a golden parachute revenue stream. Technology behind the suggested requirements are a non issue.

 

[Darwin333]

I might actually consider some of the cheaper cable packages but once you add in all the absurd equipment rental fees it darn near doubles the cost per month. Fuck them.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Its moving forward with some minor modifications.

While a likely win for consumers, the new proposal also takes into account earlier criticisms from major cable companies. In February, the FCC had introduced its “Unlock the Box” proposal, which would have required cable providers to let third-party apps access their content. Under the new rules, cable companies will just need to provide a free app to consumers can play using other devices to connect to their TVs

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/tech...le-set-top-box-for-good/ar-AAiI0iA?li=BBnbfcL


Comcasts response:

“While we appreciate that Chairman Wheeler has abandoned his discredited proposal to break apart cable and satellite services, his latest tortured approach is equally flawed. He claims that his new proposal builds on the marketplace success of apps, but in reality, it would stop the apps revolution dead in its tracks by imposing an overly complicated government licensing regime and heavy-handed regulation in a fast-moving technological space. The Chairman’s new proposal also violates the Communications Act and exceeds the FCC’s authority. It perpetuates many of the concerns that led hundreds of Members of Congress, content creators, diversity and civil rights organizations, labor unions, and over 300,000 individuals to object to his original flawed approach, including problems with privacy, copyright protection, content security, and innovation. Heavy-handed government technology mandates have a long history of failure. The Chairman’s approach would likely meet the same fate, while causing real damage to the thriving apps marketplace and real harm to consumers.”

Yup a heavy handed Government is going to make my free (no monthly charge) offer worse. Sounds legit good thing I can keep paying $15 per month for my boxes that are slow to start up, slow to search with, one runs pretty hot and the other will add another $5 to my bill if we go HD. That's a great deal instead of dealing with the evil Gobermint.

 

[jpiniero]

Well, it'd do you no good if Big Cable goes under. PPV is a big part of their profits.

 

[lupi]

Not sure I would label that "minor", depends on how the requirement takes effect. If I can't connect the incoming hardwired cable to something I am able to own to get hardwire quality speed/visuals, then we're moving backwards. Streaming quality is just above mediocre for most things at the moment so have no desire for TVIP unless the entire backbone gets a massive improvement.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Well, it'd do you no good if Big Cable goes under. PPV is a big part of their profits.

Big cable would never go under unless some completely new format arrives that changes everything.
They can compete without hidden box fees just fine.

-or-
Big cable could make PPV work with their app or they could sell a box with an acceptable markup or they could make their rental fees more affordable.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Not sure I would label that "minor", depends on how the requirement takes effect. If I can't connect the incoming hardwired cable to something I am able to own to get hardwire quality speed/visuals, then we're moving backwards. Streaming quality is just above mediocre for most things at the moment so have no desire for TVIP unless the entire backbone gets a massive improvement.

I'm guessing this is where the "heavy handed" regulation comes in.
As I said if you don't like it keep paying for your box(es).

 

[Sonikku]

Well, it'd do you no good if Big Cable goes under. PPV is a big part of their profits.

Don't worry about poor ol' telecoms. They make enough profit off having an internet monopoly to ensure good times even if their TV market goes to the shitter.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Its moving forward with some minor modifications.



http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/tech...le-set-top-box-for-good/ar-AAiI0iA?li=BBnbfcL


Comcasts response:



Yup a heavy handed Government is going to make my free (no monthly charge) offer worse.

In the 21st century a kodi tv box, around $40 on amazon, is the in thing and they've even got it for your pc which is free. For service providers the money is in value added services presented in packages.

 

[destrekor]

Not sure I would label that "minor", depends on how the requirement takes effect. If I can't connect the incoming hardwired cable to something I am able to own to get hardwire quality speed/visuals, then we're moving backwards. Streaming quality is just above mediocre for most things at the moment so have no desire for TVIP unless the entire backbone gets a massive improvement.

Yup, this new version is completely backwards, and undoes everything the FCC set out to do in the first place.

Big Cable gets to create their own apps and set their own rules? Great, that's... I guess that gets rid of the box. Woohoo. But what if you want DVR? HA, back to the box for you!

I hate to say it, but I hope CableCARD sticks around for the longhaul then. It too is a half-assed approach, but at least it means we can use our own hardware and software. This proposal was to be a software-based CableCARD replacement. Instead, if you want to use your own hardware and software, then you still are stuck with ancient half-broken technology that still cuts out numerous services.

Yay... progress.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Yup, this new version is completely backwards, and undoes everything the FCC set out to do in the first place.

Big Cable gets to create their own apps and set their own rules? Great, that's... I guess that gets rid of the box. Woohoo. But what if you want DVR? HA, back to the box for you!

I hate to say it, but I hope CableCARD sticks around for the longhaul then. It too is a half-assed approach, but at least it means we can use our own hardware and software. This proposal was to be a software-based CableCARD replacement. Instead, if you want to use your own hardware and software, then you still are stuck with ancient half-broken technology that still cuts out numerous services.

Yay... progress.

Software needs to be free, I'd bet we'll see it in other boxes that can be a DVR. This isn't perfect news but for me its not bad news. We have one digital & one analog converter box. We pay $15 per month. The rate for the boxes when we started was $6. Buying a roku or something similar, adding an app and saving $180 (about $200 with tax)per year sounds pretty good to me. I could finally justify HD for the bedroom box too.

 

[destrekor]

Software needs to be free, I'd bet we'll see it in other boxes that can be a DVR. This isn't perfect news but for me its not bad news. We have one digital & one analog converter box. We pay $15 per month. The rate for the boxes when we started was $6. Buying a roku or something similar, adding an app and saving $180 (about $200 with tax)per year sounds pretty good to me. I could finally justify HD for the bedroom box too.

Agreed, it is at least a great start and beneficial for many.

The main dislike I have for it comes down to: you'll likely have some great software from the big players, Comcast, TWC, etc. But those of us on small regional providers, ugh, we're going to get shafted hard. The big players will likely, but reluctantly, provide software for any new DVR-specific devices. Better than nothing, but I expect zero support, ever, for DIY methods. And it'll be interesting to see how this roles out: for standard cable companies, will they be creating IPTV software? Or will there be a networked tuner box that allows these apps to get TV? In this case, IPTV would suck for cable owners, because that would require the data stream travel down the data broadband "pipe" whereas regular cable channels use separate dedicate bandwidth on the cable line. So if you just want to watch TV, you'd be hurting your broadband connection or risk lousy stream connections (dependent upon any QoS settings, of course).

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Big cable cos already offer their own apps and have for some time. Some also already allow 3rd party access to their content; at least Comcast does with Tivo.

And this change doesn't kill the mandate for 3rd party boxes.

Let's not get all emo, gents.

 

[Elixer]

If we want to be honest here, the only reason the Cable Co. wants people to use their devices is so they have a guaranteed source of income, that isn't factored into the rates they advertise.
The FCC should nail them on the misleading rates.

The problem most people have is the OTA signal is still crap unless you live in a big city.

The app thing is far from anything that people who have their own PVR systems in terms of user friendliness, and functionality.
I know Charter/Spectrum has their own app, and it is really limiting, they force you to watch commercials, and you can't skip ahead easily, and it is also full of bugs.

 

[zerocool84]

If we want to be honest here, the only reason the Cable Co. wants people to use their devices is so they have a guaranteed source of income, that isn't factored into the rates they advertise.
The FCC should nail them on the misleading rates.

The problem most people have is the OTA signal is still crap unless you live in a big city.

The app thing is far from anything that people who have their own PVR systems in terms of user friendliness, and functionality.
I know Charter/Spectrum has their own app, and it is really limiting, they force you to watch commercials, and you can't skip ahead easily, and it is also full of bugs.

I don't live far away from a large city area and literally only get 6 OTA channels with only one a national network because there are large hills between me and where they are broadcast from.

 

[BUTCH1]

well, I understand the car and battery fee for owners, when you pay for a service like....getting a new battery and new tires, but for rentals. That is new.

I wonder if there is some sort of explanation for this? Is it that the rental companies pay a greatly increased fee for this in maintaining the fleet, and it's simply a cost they pass on to customers?

I can see how they'd rather the customer blame the evil government for taxes! rather than just nudge that cost into the rental fee. But it's something every business does and something we, as Americans, expect I guess. Most countries, you just have a purchase price. That's it. For whatever reason, we have to know ever damn cent that we are paying and where it is going on every piece of paper that most of us never read anyway.

It just chaps my ass that I have to pay more for internet, (modest 14.4 service)+3 boxes and 1 160gb DVR@ $169/month. Every month I have to call ATT-uverse and threaten to bring all their crap back over to the local ATT store and call Bright-house back so they will knock $20 off the bill. I told the last rep I'm paying $30/month less for power and they are running an entire house-hold including AC. Americans pay the HIGHEST amount for internet/TV in the WORLD and get the crappiest service to boot.