Comcast Offers Glimpse of Flash Strategy
April 21, 2009 | Jeff Baumgartner

Flash players may be coming to a tru2way cable set-top box near you someday, but just don’t expect the first implementations to carry Web TV fare from the likes of YouTube Inc. , Hulu LLC , and Fancast.

Instead, expect to see some some widgets and other simple Flash-based applications that can be embedded into an MSO's interactive program guide (IPG).

Cable's interest in running Flash in the set-top has run hot and cold in recent years, but the topic heated up again yesterday when Adobe Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: ADBE) announced a spate of partners -- including Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) and Broadcom Corp. (Nasdaq: BRCM) -- that aim to bring Flash to digital televisions, set-tops, and Blu-Ray players. (See Adobe Extends Flash.)

For cable, this opens the possibility of carrying Internet video into the home via something like a hybrid QAM-IP set-top with a Docsis 3.0 cable modem.

"There might need to be some modifications of the tru2way [specification], but all the hooks are in there to make Flash video playback possible" in Java-based tru2way set-tops, says an exec with a vendor that develops tru2way middleware.

But don't get too excited, Web TV fans. That's not what Comcast has in mind.

"We do want to see this [Flash] ship on actual set-top boxes," Comcast senior vice president and chief software architect Sree Kotay tells Cable Digital News. But he envisions Comcast starting out with more "lightweight" apps that can be embedded with the IPG, such as email readers and weather widgets.

Getting even to that point will take a while. Comcast is busy in 2009 getting base tru2way architecture deployed in the first place. The addition of Flash could be as much as 24 months away, Kotay says.

At the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) show in Las Vegas this week, Comcast is demonstrating a Flash player optimized for the TV set and integrated with a tru2way-based box running on Broadcom chips. All the demonstrated applications are embedded into the Comcast IPG. The MSO is also showing off a version for the Enhanced TV Binary Interchange Format (EBIF) platform.

The goal is to show "how tru2way enables Flash integration and how you can develop parts of your application in Flash and parts of it in Java," Kotay says. He says Flash adoption will give the MSO access to a broader development community and open up chances to deliver content and applications across platforms.

Full article at:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=175545

There's a tru2way box near me?

Reporter Benderoff wrote "coincide", not "because of" or "necessitated by" or "required by" so I think he deserves more credit than you are giving him. The Sun-Times reporter, unlike Benderoff, did imply that the changover was mandated by law.

Going “All-Digital” – Tons more HD and a Faster Internet
Derek Harrar, SVP GM Video, in Network and Operations 5/1/09

DTAThere was a lot of discussion yesterday on our first quarter 2009 earnings call about Comcast’s “All-Digital” project. We generally refer to this program as “Project Cavalry.” You might be wondering exactly what it is. Project Cavalry is our plan to give customers tons more HD choices, a faster Internet and more On Demand. How do we get there?

http://www.comcastvoices.com/assets/dta.jpg

The cable industry has provided analog television service from the inception of cable TV. Analog delivery enables a cable-ready TV to receive 60-70 channels without any equipment. Over time, the industry has migrated to digital delivery. Similarly, the government is requiring digital delivery for broadcast channels on June 12 in the Digital Transition, although that only relates to ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, PBS and Univision. Project Cavalry involves cable channels, including ESPN, TBS, A&E, etc. Regardless, it is clear that the video world is going digital. Doing so offers much improved picture quality and, with a Comcast set-top box, compelling two-way services such as Video On Demand and an interactive guide.

The real catch, however, is that analog delivery takes up more space on our network than digital delivery. For every analog channel, we can deliver 10-15 standard definition Digital channels or 2-3 HD channels. Today, approximately 2/3 of our network capacity is dedicated to delivering analog video. However, 72% of customers have digital service. By moving about half the analog channels to digital, we open up an incredible amount of capacity to bring dramatic product enhancements to customers. Half the channels remain in analog, meaning that 20-30 channels including all the broadcasters can still be viewed without any equipment on their cable-ready TVs.

Our solution is to provide a free digital service upgrade to move our “Expanded Basic” tier of analog customers to Digital. With no change to their monthly bill, we provide 8-10 additional channels, 40-50 music channels, all-digital picture quality and sound, an interactive guide and access to thousands of choices of Video On Demand. That offer includes digital equipment for three TVs at no charge. We chose that because the average U.S. home which has 2.7 TVs. Digital customers also get some free equipment and more channels including over 100 HD channels if you subscribe to HD service. Internet customers get doubled speeds. Remaining bandwidth can be used for increased international channels, even more HD, even faster Internet, etc. As mentioned, everything described happens at no additional charge.

Key to this offer is a new device we developed called a Digital Transport Adapter, or DTA (one is pictured at the top of the post). DTAs are small devices designed to replicate one-way analog service in digital. Unlike a set-top box, you can’t use On Demand or an interactive guide on a DTA, but digital channels look crystal clear in digital quality. If you want to receive more than the 20-30 analog channels mentioned above, we will provide you with a DTA on your TV when we go “all-digital” in your neighborhood. These devices are very small and were designed to be easily hidden behind your TV if you don’t want to see it. The free equipment Project Cavalry provides Expanded Basic customers includes one full-featured set-top box and two of these smaller DTAs.

The program is called Project Cavalry, since executing it requires us to touch nearly every home we provide video service to. The Comcast Cavalry sweeps into your neighborhood and works closely with you to provide great service and get you through it. In fact, it’s not very intrusive and to date approximately 75% of customers have self-installed their new, free equipment without needing anyone from Comcast to visit their home. The good news is that once you do, you’ll start seeing substantial product improvements almost immediately.

Since launching Cavalry late last year, we have deployed over a million of these DTAs in our footprint. In fact we deployed a million faster than Google sold a million of their G1 phones. It’s a fast moving program, driven by customer demand for great product improvements at no charge. Right now, Cavalry is underway in Portland, Seattle, the Bay Area, Chattanooga, Augusta, Philadelphia, the DC/Beltway area and Atlanta. Expect it to roll through your neighborhood sometime before the end of 2010.

http://www.comcastvoices.com/2009/05/going-all-digital-tons-more-hd-and-a-faster-internet.html#more

Comcast's $1B Bandwidth Plan
April 30, 2009 | Jeff Baumgartner


Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) expects to shell out $1 billion for an "all-digital" project that will enable the MSO to reclaim 40 to 50 channels of analog spectrum and free up room for Docsis 3.0, a broader video-on-demand (VoD) library, ethnic programming fare, and more than 100 linear hi-def channels.

That's according to Comcast cable division president Steve Burke, who spent a good chunk of this morning's earnings call describing and defending the MSO's big bandwidth-reclamation strategy. (See Comcast Posts Q1.)

That strategy, called Project Cavalry, is "one of the most important projects for us this year," Burke said. "This project is going to deliver more additional bandwidth than any improvement we've ever made."

The moves allow Comcast to recapture up to 300 MHz of spectrum, more than it got when the MSO upgraded 500 MHz plant to 750 MHz. "We estimate the total cost of about $1 billion is less than 10 percent of what a physical rebuild would cost us historically, and we can complete it in a fraction of the time," Burke said, noting that the investment will be spread out over 2009 and 2010.

But Comcast's definition of "all-digital" is a bit wide of the truth. The company intends to leave a programming tier of 20 to 30 channels in analog. About 14 percent of Comcast's customers take its analog service today, and roughly 72 percent have already made the leap to digital.

Depending on the customer's current level of service, the MSO is giving away a number of simple, $30 digital terminal adapters (DTAs) to ensure that secondary TVs customer homes can continue to receive and display programming in the expanded basic tier once it's moved to digital. (See slide 10 in this PDF.) Burke estimates that Comcast will need to deploy about 20 million digital devices for the transition. (See Comcast Seeds Digital Shift With Free Boxes.)

In addition to the cheap DTAs, Comcast is trying to keep costs in check with self-installation kits that curtail the need for pricey truck rolls. The MSO estimates that about 75 percent of customers so far have elected the self-install option.

Comcast already has the project underway in areas such as Portland, Ore., Seattle, and the Bay Area, and is starting to tee it up in its Atlanta, Philadelphia, and Baltimore markets. By the end of the quarter, Comcast had completed the job in about 5 percent of its footprint. (See Comcast 'Cavalry' Rides Into NoCal , Comcast Expanding 'All-Digital' Domain , and Comcast Sends In the All-Digital 'Cavalry'.)

"The results in Portland have been encouraging enough that we are looking at speeding up our rollout to over half our footprint by the end of this year," Burke said, adding that the conversions have given a 20 percent-plus return on investment so far.

During the call, an analyst asked Comcast why it has favored going all-digital over other bandwidth management strategies, such as switched digital video (SDV) or moving to 1 GHz. It's all about timing, ease of deployment, and, of course, the almighty dollar.

"I want to spend as little as possible. I want to have the minimal intrusion on the customer experience. When you analyze all those variables, and you can get a digital adapter for around $30… it all points to going all-digital," Burke explained.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=176164&site=cdn

Thomson Gains More Traction With Comcast
Nets deal for home gateways, ships DTAs
By Glen Dickson

French conglomerate Thomson, which announced a major deal in July 2008 to provide Comcast with low-cost digital set-tops known as Digital Transport Adaptors (DTAs), has won more business from the U.S. cable giant.

The company announced that it will provide Comcast with advanced cable gateway devices to support next-generation broadband Internet and voice services. Comcast expects to start deploying the Advanced Cable Gateways in the third quarter. Thomson already supplies Comcast with traditional voice and data modems.

"Thomson's highly innovative Advanced Cable Gateway devices are a central part of our roll-out of enhanced digital communications services," said Comcast CTO and EVP Tony Werner in a statement. "Comcast Thomson's gateways add functionality and features beyond that of traditional offerings. The new device will enable Comcast to offer a whole new level of services to our subscribers. We will thus not only be improving the phone services within the home, but expanding the visual experience beyond the TV and PC."

Thomson said that Comcast will soon be deploying its DTAs as a low-cost way to convert analog homes to digital service, and that it is currently working on the second generation of DTA, which will be smaller than a PDA.

http://www.broadcastnewsroom.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=808074&afterinter=true

Tru2way's Retail Forecast: Cloudy
August 18, 2009 | Jeff Baumgartner


Tru2way is poised to provide major U.S. MSOs with a common platform to develop and deliver a bevy of interactive services, but its ability to spawn a substantial retail market for advanced TVs and set-tops remains questionable, a new Light Reading Cable Industry Insider report finds.

"The future of tru2way retail devices is cloudy," Craig Leddy -- author of the report, "Tru2way Troubles: Is Cable Losing Out to Telcos on ITV?" -- writes. (See Tru2way at a Crossroads.)

That forecast emerges soon after six major MSOs linked to a memorandum of understanding (MoU) originally negotiated with Sony Corp. (NYSE: SNE) confirmed that they failed to hit a key headend-readiness deadline of July 1. This came less than 18 months after Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) chief Brian Roberts touted tru2way's retail potential at the 2008 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. (See No Penalties for Missing Tru2way Date, MSOs to Miss Tru2way Date , and CES: Roberts Declares Open Season.)

"While MSOs need to demonstrate a good-faith effort to meet federal guidemarks and terms of the MoU, it is unclear whether consumer demand will drive significant sales of tru2way HDTV sets, if the only advantage is to remove a cable set-top box," Leddy notes.

He adds that consumer electronics manufacturers have shown only "lukewarm enthusiasm" toward the idea of retail tru2way products, with many TV makers opting instead to deliver interactive applications and over-the-top video services from the likes of Amazon.com Inc. (Nasdaq: AMZN) and Netflix Inc. using on-board high-speed broadband connections and specialized software.

Panasonic is the exception, having led the way with two tru2way-certified HDTV sets, sold in tandem with Comcast in limited retail pockets of Denver, Chicago, and Atlanta. These efforts hit a snag when Circuit City went belly-up; its store in Highlands Ranch, Colo., was one of the few outlets around Denver that sold the Panasonic sets. (See Tru2Way in Atlanta and Denver, Chicago First to Get Tru2way TVs.)

Since then, Paul Liao, a tru2way champion at Panasonic, has since left to become CEO of CableLabs , showing that cable's pursuit of retail angles is far from dead. (See Liao Puts the CE in CableLabs.)

But if MSOs are unable to advance a longer-term retail strategy, "tru2way likely will become a solely cable enterprise that is focused on interactive applications delivered to next-generation cable set-top boxes, or new devices that are developed through deals that largely are initiated by MSOs," the report suggests.

Most of the box makers hoping for near-term tru2way headway appear to be going the direct-to-MSO route. Some of the cable box newcomers on that list include Advanced Digital Broadcast (ADB) , EchoStar Corp. LLC (Nasdaq: SATS), and Funai Electric Co. Ltd. (OTC: FUAIY). (See Funai Makes Tru2way Play , EchoStar Slings Its First Tru2way Set-Top, and EchoStar: No Cable Sale Guarantees .)

Digeo Inc. , a company with cable ties, does have a retail box, but it's not using tru2way. TiVo Inc. (Nasdaq: TIVO) has yet to announce a product or a distribution strategy for tru2way. (See Digeo Flips Switch on SDV, Multi-Room and Digeo HD-DVR Enters Retail Waters .)

Sluggish support for tru2way at retail could help to resuscitate DCR+, a tru2way alternative favored by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) , and one that "has not been officially declared dead yet," Leddy points out. (See Two-Way Battle Reaches FCC.)

Perfect the leased model first
Establishing a leasing model before diving into retail might be "the right order of things," says David Housman, who runs the Americas division of tru2way middleware stack maker Alticast Corp. Housman says most of his company's tru2way work is around leased cable boxes. (See Housman Takes Reins at Alticast .)

Housman, a former Charter Communications Inc. (Nasdaq: CHTR) exec, says MSOs will want to ensure that the leased tru2way boxes and the networks that are powering them are absolutely stable before a significant retail model comes into play.

"We're on the brink of technical readiness [for tru2way] across multiple MSOs," Housman tells Cable Digital News.

Still, Housman expects any tru2way retail efforts for the 2009 holiday season to be "very controlled" by operators and their CE partners. He likewise believes that activity will evolve by the 2010 season to include multiple retailers and multiple devices as MSOs get more more of their footprint ready for the platform and grow more confident that they can handle retail-bought tru2way device installations without having to rely on expensive truck rolls.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=180596

FCC Approves DTAs From Moto, Cisco, Thomson & Pace
August 25, 2009 | Jeff Baumgartner

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Media Bureau has granted three-year waivers to Digital Terminal Adapter (DTA) devices made by Cisco Systems Inc. (Nasdaq: CSCO), Motorola Inc. (NYSE: MOT), Thomson (NYSE: TMS; Euronext Paris: 18453), and Pace Micro Technology , a decision that looks to benefit Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) the most in the near-term, but could also spur adoption of the devices by numerous other U.S. cable MSOs.

The waivers give Comcast and, potentially, other operators the green light to deploy those inexpensive, one-way "channel zappers" (they cost about $35 each) with security enabled, thereby sidestepping an integrated security ban that took effect in July 2007. Those waivers will also give MSOs access to simple digital-to-analog converter boxes that cost much less than entry-level, interactive set-tops that rely on removable CableCARDs to decrypt and authorize digital video signals.
Comcast, which has tried and failed to obtain box waivers on its own on multiple occasions, has been deploying DTAs by the boatload without security enabled, as part of a larger analog reclamation strategy. However, a firmware download can activate a content protection scheme that's already burned into the DTA chips.

The FCC adopted the order on Monday but, as of this writing, has not posted it publicly. However, Cable Digital News has obtained multiple copies of it.

The FCC, in a six-page explanation granting the waivers, agreed that the DTA models submitted by Cisco, Moto, Thomson, and Pace were no more advanced than two standard-def DTAs from Evolution Broadband LLC that the Commission awarded three-year waivers to in early June. That original waiver essentially allows MSOs to use and deploy the Evolution boxes with an integrated conditional access system from Conax AS without seeking out and obtaining separate waivers.

Monday's waiver award will likely mean the same for Comcast and other MSOs that want to use DTAs with security from Moto, Cisco, Thomson, and Pace. For example, Mediacom Communications Corp. (Nasdaq: MCCC), an MSO that uses Motorola gear, recently revealed that DTAs could play a role in its bandwidth management plan.

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=180850

Thanks again Paul for continuing to post these articles. :)

Your quick Paul! Today's edition of CED Magazine's Broadband Direct didn't even mention it!

Sure it will be in tomorrows edition.

So Comcast's check to the new chairman has finally cleared and the war on cable is over.

Thanks again Paul for continuing to post these articles. :)

Your welcome. I hope Comcast does not use this encryption. If you have a HD TV with a QAM tuner these DTA boxes are useless since they only passes through a SD signal. Until Comcast can provide a low cost solution for HD for a guest room ar a kids room the use of encryption will cause a lot of people to take a second look at Comcast's competitors that already require a box for all channels.

My daughter hates a cable box and that is the one reason she is not switching to FiOS. Also, from what I have read on other forums the key will be probably easy to break - again encouraging the use of illegal cable boxes.

Your welcome. I hope Comcast does not use this encryption. If you have a HD TV with a QAM tuner these DTA boxes are useless since they only passes through a SD signal. Until Comcast can provide a low cost solution for HD for a guest room ar a kids room the use of encryption will cause a lot of people to take a second look at Comcast's competitors that already require a box for all channels.

My daughter hates a cable box and that is the one reason she is not switching to FiOS. Also, from what I have read on other forums the key will be probably easy to break - again encouraging the use of illegal cable boxes.


If your HDTV has a QAM tuner & accepts a CableCard, is it safe to presume the CableCard will handle the decryption? I've heard Comcast sometimes supplies one CableCard for free.

If your HDTV has a QAM tuner & accepts a CableCard, is it safe to presume the CableCard will handle the decryption? I've heard Comcast sometimes supplies one CableCard for free.

Comcast in my area provises a Cablecard for free (with a $30 installation charge) however these days you cannot pruchase a TV with a cablecard - the manufactures have givien up on them. Also I believe cablecards were never offered on smaller TV's such as the ones put in a kitchen or a small bedroom.

I hope Comcast does not use this encryption.?

You must be kidding. I can guarantee you they will encrypt everything except analog Basic Limited, and local HD.

If you have a HD TV with a QAM tuner these DTA boxes are useless since they only passes through a SD signal.Comcast will still provide local HD in the clear, which is no different that what HDTV QAM tuners can pick up now; all you need to do is split the signal, one for the HDTV directly, one for the DTA. In this regard, nothing will change except for needing the DTA for the Standard Basic tier.

Until Comcast can provide a low cost solution for HD for a guest room ar a kids room the use of encryption will cause a lot of people to take a second look at Comcast's competitors that already require a box for all channels. At that point the small advantage Comcast had is gone, but for a Comcast sub to bother switching to a provider that also requires a box is still a bigger transition than simply using the DTA. Don't forget each household will get 2 DTA's provided free of charge, while DBS providers charge ~$5 per for each additional box past the first one.

Also, from what I have read on other forums the key will be probably easy to break - again encouraging the use of illegal cable boxes.This may turn out to be true, but if you know the history of the subject, only a very small percentage of cable subs have ever used an illegal cable box. It's very unlikely this will change, and will have very little, if any, impact on Comcast's bottom line. If anything it would keep some subs still signed up for at least Limited Basic.

If your HDTV has a QAM tuner & accepts a CableCard, is it safe to presume the CableCard will handle the decryption? Any CableCARD or tru2way device will be fully enabled to receive all subscribed channels. Nothing will change in that regard.

I've heard Comcast sometimes supplies one CableCard for free.In some areas, yes, but it usually costs $2-3 per month to rent.

Comcast in my area provises a Cablecard for free (with a $30 installation charge) however these days you cannot pruchase a TV with a cablecard - the manufactures have givien up on them.This is incorrect. At least one HDTV manufacture, Panasonic, is currently offering tru2way HDTV's for sale, in three areas (Chicago, Denver, Atlanta) where they have teamed up with Comcast to offer tru2way service. tru2way HDTV's use the 'M' type CableCARD to offer all the same features as HD cable boxes, including On Demand and PPV.

Here is the tru2way topic: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=893485

Also I believe cablecards were never offered on smaller TV's such as the ones put in a kitchen or a small bedroom.I believe this is true, but I don't know for sure what the smallest CableCARD HDTV was, maybe 32"?

You can't simply use a spilter since the DTA is RF only. Going to need an A/B switch which means getting off the couch when I want to switch between locals and cable.

You can't simply use a spilter since the DTA is RF only. Going to need an A/B switch which means getting off the couch when I want to switch between locals and cable.

Most HDTV's have two RF inputs.

I believe this is true, but I don't know for sure what the smallest CableCARD HDTV was, maybe 32"?
Sharp had a 26" CC HDTV.

You can't simply use a spilter since the DTA is RF only. Going to need an A/B switch which means getting off the couch when I want to switch between locals and cable.

Most HDTV's have two RF inputs.
Wonderful, but that doesn't help those HDTVs that only have one RF input. The solution, though, is to get a remote controlled A/B switch.

Wonderful, but that doesn't help those HDTVs that only have one RF input. The solution, though, is to get a remote controlled A/B switch.

Now that I think about it, do DTA's have RF pass through? That would solve the problem.

Now that I think about it, do DTA's have RF pass through? That would solve the problem.

No they do not. A user on BBR was complaining about this as well. It would of been easy to implement with a simple relay, but they choose not to do so to keep costs as low as possible.

No they do not.

Thx.

The point is 99.99% of all HD sets currently and previously sold are only capable of handling clear QAM. Many people do not like any type of decoding box especially for a kitchen or small bedroom. Comcast can clearly differentiate itself from Verizon or satellite companies by offering the ability to get many channels (including some HD channels without a box. Their are good marketing reasons for not employing this simple encoding technology. We will probably know fairly soon what Comcast decides to do.

Here is another good discussion of tru2way technology:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9953439-1.html

The point is 99.99% of all HD sets currently and previously sold are only capable of handling clear QAM. Many people do not like any type of decoding box especially for a kitchen or small bedroom. Comcast can clearly differentiate itself from Verizon or satellite companies by offering the ability to get many channels (including some HD channels without a box. Their are good marketing reasons for not employing this simple encoding technology.I understand your points, and they may seem like good reasons to you, but I can guarantee you Comcast has considered them and has decided to encrypt all channels except for locals and public service. End of story.

We will probably know fairly soon what Comcast decides to do. You know now.


Here is another good discussion of tru2way technology:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-9953439-1.htmlThat article is over a year old.

I understand your points, and they may seem like good reasons to you, but I can guarantee you Comcast has considered them and has decided to encrypt all channels except for locals and public service. End of story.

You know now.



Do you have an article or some inside information to support that Comcast will do this?

The other problem with Comcast requiring a box to get HD expanded basic channels is that they're too damn expensive. You pay $6/mo. for the outlet charge and then another $7-8/mo. for the HD STB. It's ridiculous, and until we see tru2way boxes in the market (ha!), I don't see it changing.

The other problem with Comcast requiring a box to get HD expanded basic channels is that they're too damn expensive. You pay $6/mo. for the outlet charge and then another $7-8/mo. for the HD STB. It's ridiculous, and until we see tru2way boxes in the market (ha!), I don't see it changing.

In my market the additional outlet charge is $3.00 with 7.95 for an additional HD box. How do you justify $130 a year for HD an a bedroom or kitchen set that costs less that $300?

What does the cost of the display have to do with the cost of the service?

What does the cost of the display have to do with the cost of the service?

On a small set which is just used for casual viewing I really do not want to pay $11 per month to view some HD content along with the SD content.:(

Boxes may start a bit of resurgence of OTA.

jtm

On a small set which is just used for casual viewing I really do not want to pay $11 per month to view some HD content along with the SD content.:(It definitely makes sense to make such a value judgment for yourself, and decline the services that you don't find worth it. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon14.gif

By the same token, others might derive substantially more value from that offering, which explains why the pricing is as it is.

It definitely makes sense to make such a value judgment for yourself, and decline the services that you don't find worth it. http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/images/icons/icon14.gif

By the same token, others might derive substantially more value from that offering, which explains why the pricing is as it is.

I believe Comcast needs to offer a low cost HD alternative for HD (similar to the DTA) before they choose to turn on the DTA encryption. It will be interesting to see if they hold off on this encryption for competitive reasons.

I don't really see any basis for such a need. Since their competitors aren't offering such a low-cost alternative, there is no reason why they should. If there really is such a "need" then all competitors should be forced to satisfy it.

On a small set which is just used for casual viewing I really do not want to pay $11 per month to view some HD content along with the SD content.:(

On a small set you can use QAM - no box - for 'some HD viewing'. This is unique among multichannel providers.

I guess this should in big red letters.
Comcast launches Online OnDemand Beta (http://www.comcast.net/on-demand-online).

I don't really see any basis for such a need. Since their competitors aren't offering such a low-cost alternative, there is no reason why they should. If there really is such a "need" then all competitors should be forced to satisfy it.

That is exactly the point Comcast could differentiate themselves from their competitors by offering this. Comcast does not need to be a lemming and do what the competitors do.

I guess this should in big red letters.
Comcast launches Online OnDemand Beta (http://www.comcast.net/on-demand-online).

I was invited to join and I did. The picture quality is decent (not HD) and their is a wide variety with the premium content available for only those who have a subscription to the content on cable. It's a nice plus.:)

That is exactly the point Comcast could differentiate themselves from their competitors by offering this. Where is your business case showing definitively that doing so would be more profitable than what they're going to be doing? Business isn't a matter of feelings and hopes. It is a matter of learning what is truly important to customers, as reflected in what they're willing to pay the most for, as a group.

I believe Comcast needs to offer a low cost HD alternative for HD (similar to the DTA) before they choose to turn on the DTA encryption. It will be interesting to see if they hold off on this encryption for competitive reasons.
Agreed. Now that they are adding all the new HD channels (which will replace almost all of the SD equivalents), their pricing for an HD STB is out of whack. They will be totally non-competitive with satellite, which charges something like $5 per receiver per month.
As people realize that they have the full expanded basic package in HD (plus a lot more), the value equation of Comcast will go way down as more HD sets enter the home.

Where is your business case showing definitively that doing so would be more profitable than what they're going to be doing? Business isn't a matter of feelings and hopes. It is a matter of learning what is truly important to customers, as reflected in what they're willing to pay the most for, as a group.

Comcast is going through a migration of eliminating analog channels, many people do not like an STB, anything Comcast cam do to mitigate the migration discomfort will keep customers happy. Customers thinking of switching see other choices requiring a cable box for every set, which in the case of my daughter is preventing her from switching to FiOS. If tru2way becomes widespread and many manufactures incorporate it into their sets then Comcast could encrypt all premium channels with less customer discomfort.

In other words most customers do not like change, when they are forced to change many will then look at alternatives. Minimizing the change will help prevent a lose of coustomers.

Which customers, though?

A few years ago, one of the big cellular telephone providers deliberately started charging more for their unequivocally crappier service for older technology than they were charging for the superior service they provided for newer technology. It was a not-so-transparent tactic to essentially thin-out their customer-base of consumers that essentially had demonstrated that, on average, they present the service provider a lower probability of a profitable revenue stream.

Just looking at the numbers, Comcast's total number of subscribers is down, while their revenues are up. I don't know whether it really is deliberate or not, but it isn't too much of a stretch for folks to accuse Comcast of engaging in the same "greedy" ( :rolleyes: ) tactic, i.e., trading off low-margin customers for customers that are more "efficient" to serve, i.e., represent a great chance of being a profitable revenue stream.

This kind of tactic is very common and very well-accepted. Verizon did something similar by off-loading the rural northern New England states to Fairpoint, essentially recognizing that it would be better for their business to not even bother serving customers in those states, because they'd be forced, by their intentions to provide uniform quality of service, to spend too much to service those customers in light of what they'd likely be able to expect in terms of revenue from those customers.

That's not to say that suppliers shouldn't concern themselves about what you mentioned. The point is that analog reclamation has a cost and a benefit, and within that, encryption has a cost and a benefit. Those get weighed, cost against benefit, and only based on that will the decision be made. In other words, just because keeping cable networks unencrypted will make some customers happy doesn't mean that doing so is worth the costs that doing that will incur, i.e., the higher costs of installing, maintaining, monitoring, and de-installing traps.

It will be interesting to see what they decide.

Here is another article on this subject....

An End To Unencrypted Digital Cable TV and the HTPC?

Date: August 27th, 2009
Author: Ryan Smith

For those of you with cable TV service, for some time now you've been witnessing the slow transition of cable TV from a pure analog service to a pure digital service. With cable systems finally at their limits for bandwidth, within the last year the cable companies have finally begun what has been dubbed the "analog reclamation" - removing analog channels from their service and replacing them with digital versions that require 1/6th (or less) the bandwidth. Because the reclamation involves removing analog versions of most for-cost channels (what's commonly called the Expanded Basic tier), the reclamation has been tied with the deployment of Digital Transport Adapters - low-cost cable boxes that are little more than a basic QAM tuner attached to an RF modulator. This has allowed cable companies to reclaim this space without deploying otherwise very expensive Set Top Boxes to every TV at an affected household.

A side effect of this has been that computer TV tuner users, such as HTPC owners who in the analog age were accustomed to getting access to the EB tier on their computers with a simple analog TV tuner, were able to access those same channels in their digital form using ClearQAM-capable tuners. This is because the FCC mandated that the security mechanism be separate from the STBs, which gave rise to the continually problematic CableCARD. In the name of cost, DTAs do not have the ability to use CableCARDs, and as such do not meet the separable security requirements. Ultimately this required cable operators to put the digital versions of their EB tiers in the clear if they wanted to use DTAs, and this is why ClearQAM tuners can exist in a useful manner.

That age, however short it was, looks to be coming to a close. DTAs may be little more than a basic QAM tuner, but that "little more" is that they support a very basic form of encryption - a 56bit DES-based cypher known as Privacy Mode - which would allow them to receive and decrypt lightly encrypted channels. The FCC separable security mandate has previously prevented Privacy Mode from being used, but we have known for some time that cable companies and device manufacturers were looking to get a waiver for DTAs. In effect they have been soliciting the FCC for permission to encrypt all EB tier channels with Privacy Mode, so that reception would be limited to DTAs and CableCARD devices.

The FCC has granted their request.

The ramifications are two-fold. For the cable companies, once they implement this Privacy Mode across the board they will no longer have to install and maintain expensive signal traps to keep customers on lower tiers such as Limited Basic from accessing additional channels. For computer/HTPC users, this is an end to being able to directly receive EB tier channels with any kind of commonly available digital tuner. Privacy Mode is not open for licensing, and CableLabs will not license CableCARD for any kind of open (read: not locked down to hell and back) tuner. This means ClearQAM tuners made by ATI, Hauppauge, SiliconDust, and others would no longer be useful for receiving EB tier channels.

For pure digital reception on computers/HTPCs, what would be left would be two things. One would be fully licensed systems that implement head-to-toe DRM, the only way that CableLabs will license CableCARD for computers. This is not cheap, and brings with it all the disadvantages of not building your own system. The other would be utilizing the Firewire output of some STBs, but such STBs can be hard to acquire and the FCC allows broadcasts to include a copy-never (5C) flag that disables this output.

The last option would be to take advantage of the analog hole left by the component video output of STBs, using devices such as Hauppauge's HD PVR that can redigitize the output of STBs for importing into a computer. The drawback of this is a loss of quality due to an analog generation being included in the process, and whatever pitfalls that come from using the STB such a device would be attached to. None of these options are as simple and cheap as things stand today with a ClearQAM tuner.

At this point there's no reason to believe that cable companies won't deploy Privacy Mode across their networks, so it's a matter of "when", not "if" this will happen. It goes without saying that if you're currently enjoying the use of a ClearQAM tuner to receive EB tier channels, you'll want to enjoy what time you have left, and look into other solutions for the long-haul. At this pace, it looks like cable TV and computers will soon be divorcing.

On a final note, the loss of ClearQAM access is likely going to be followed by the loss of some fraction of the HTPC market, where users will not find as much value in a device that can no longer watch or record live TV from their cable company. Because of this potential nosedive in the HTPC market, I would be very surprised if Microsoft stayed entirely mum on the issue. They've put a lot of effort into Windows Media Center as a TV viewing platform and HTPC suite over the years, and this drives a stake right through that given the low adoption of CableCARD systems. Microsoft has been diversifying their TV operations over the years by getting satellite companies on-board and making some investments in IPTV/Internet TV, but cable TV is too big to ignore if Microsoft wants to keep pushing WMC. What this may lead to is anyone's guess, but unless they're going to drop the emphasis on TV viewing with WMC something will need to happen to keep WMC relevant in the cable TV space.

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=637

I suspect that Microsoft will simply be content to support CableCARD-compatible PC tuners. Microsoft is very good about finding a way to make their offering appeal to a mass-market, a characterization that doesn't really fit the built-it-yourself HTPC market, anyway.

Here is another article on this subject....

An End To Unencrypted Digital Cable TV and the HTPC?

Date: August 27th, 2009
Author: Ryan Smith

For those of you with cable TV service, for some time now you've been witnessing the slow transition of cable TV from a pure analog service to a pure digital service. With cable systems finally at their limits for bandwidth, within the last year the cable companies have finally begun what has been dubbed the "analog reclamation" - removing analog channels from their service and replacing them with digital versions that require 1/6th (or less) the bandwidth. Because the reclamation involves removing analog versions of most for-cost channels (what's commonly called the Expanded Basic tier), the reclamation has been tied with the deployment of Digital Transport Adapters - low-cost cable boxes that are little more than a basic QAM tuner attached to an RF modulator. This has allowed cable companies to reclaim this space without deploying otherwise very expensive Set Top Boxes to every TV at an affected household.

A side effect of this has been that computer TV tuner users, such as HTPC owners who in the analog age were accustomed to getting access to the EB tier on their computers with a simple analog TV tuner, were able to access those same channels in their digital form using ClearQAM-capable tuners. This is because the FCC mandated that the security mechanism be separate from the STBs, which gave rise to the continually problematic CableCARD. In the name of cost, DTAs do not have the ability to use CableCARDs, and as such do not meet the separable security requirements. Ultimately this required cable operators to put the digital versions of their EB tiers in the clear if they wanted to use DTAs, and this is why ClearQAM tuners can exist in a useful manner.

That age, however short it was, looks to be coming to a close. DTAs may be little more than a basic QAM tuner, but that "little more" is that they support a very basic form of encryption - a 56bit DES-based cypher known as Privacy Mode - which would allow them to receive and decrypt lightly encrypted channels. The FCC separable security mandate has previously prevented Privacy Mode from being used, but we have known for some time that cable companies and device manufacturers were looking to get a waiver for DTAs. In effect they have been soliciting the FCC for permission to encrypt all EB tier channels with Privacy Mode, so that reception would be limited to DTAs and CableCARD devices.

The FCC has granted their request.

The ramifications are two-fold. For the cable companies, once they implement this Privacy Mode across the board they will no longer have to install and maintain expensive signal traps to keep customers on lower tiers such as Limited Basic from accessing additional channels. For computer/HTPC users, this is an end to being able to directly receive EB tier channels with any kind of commonly available digital tuner. Privacy Mode is not open for licensing, and CableLabs will not license CableCARD for any kind of open (read: not locked down to hell and back) tuner. This means ClearQAM tuners made by ATI, Hauppauge, SiliconDust, and others would no longer be useful for receiving EB tier channels.

For pure digital reception on computers/HTPCs, what would be left would be two things. One would be fully licensed systems that implement head-to-toe DRM, the only way that CableLabs will license CableCARD for computers. This is not cheap, and brings with it all the disadvantages of not building your own system. The other would be utilizing the Firewire output of some STBs, but such STBs can be hard to acquire and the FCC allows broadcasts to include a copy-never (5C) flag that disables this output.

The last option would be to take advantage of the analog hole left by the component video output of STBs, using devices such as Hauppauge's HD PVR that can redigitize the output of STBs for importing into a computer. The drawback of this is a loss of quality due to an analog generation being included in the process, and whatever pitfalls that come from using the STB such a device would be attached to. None of these options are as simple and cheap as things stand today with a ClearQAM tuner.

At this point there's no reason to believe that cable companies won't deploy Privacy Mode across their networks, so it's a matter of "when", not "if" this will happen. It goes without saying that if you're currently enjoying the use of a ClearQAM tuner to receive EB tier channels, you'll want to enjoy what time you have left, and look into other solutions for the long-haul. At this pace, it looks like cable TV and computers will soon be divorcing.

On a final note, the loss of ClearQAM access is likely going to be followed by the loss of some fraction of the HTPC market, where users will not find as much value in a device that can no longer watch or record live TV from their cable company. Because of this potential nosedive in the HTPC market, I would be very surprised if Microsoft stayed entirely mum on the issue. They've put a lot of effort into Windows Media Center as a TV viewing platform and HTPC suite over the years, and this drives a stake right through that given the low adoption of CableCARD systems. Microsoft has been diversifying their TV operations over the years by getting satellite companies on-board and making some investments in IPTV/Internet TV, but cable TV is too big to ignore if Microsoft wants to keep pushing WMC. What this may lead to is anyone's guess, but unless they're going to drop the emphasis on TV viewing with WMC something will need to happen to keep WMC relevant in the cable TV space.

http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=637

?

- Firewire STB's are by federal law mandatory for cableco's to supply to customers on request.

- All Comcast customers can still, and will always be able to receive local HD channels in clear QAM.

- If an HTPC user really wants to maximize the experience, they will get a CableCARD.

?
- If an HTPC user really wants to maximize the experience, they will get a CableCARD.

No Ken, it actually limits your experience, since ANYTHING recorded with the CableCARD is no longer transferable to another machine. This means a very common and "fair" use case like transferring a show to a laptop to watch while disconnected (airplane, hotel, etc...) is no longer possible.

I'm also very suspicious that Microsoft is already working with Comcast to limit access to the current clear QAM extended basic channels. First off, I'm running Vista Media Center + TV Pack with all the latest patches. I have two ATI DCTs with NO CableCARDs installed. As they announced sometime ago, Comcast has finally begun to turn off all the analog channels in my area (lost AMC, USA, A&E and a few others this week, still getting ESPN and ComCentral). I assumed VMC would automatically pick up the digital channels when they showed up, or at the very least a channel scan would find them. Well after much digging around, I found the maintenance hack for my DTA and used this method (http://http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showpost.php?p=12298432&postcount=12#Scan8) to find the channel numbers to enter into the "Add Missing Channel" interface. Each one takes over a minute to enter, because VMC spends at least 30 seconds thinking about it once you hit OK. While I was then going through the further pain of matching this channel to the right guide listing (combine the sources, then hand delete the analog sources), I realized channel scan DID FIND ALL THE CHANNELS! But for some reason, they are marked encrypted (each one has a small lock icon next to it), when they obviously are not. Anyone know what's going on here? (I've posted to thegreenbutton as well, but MS has been oddly quiet there lately...).

It isn't CableCARD that limits copying, it is the content owner or distributor asserting copy protection. All CableCARD does is respect that. I don't see it as an ethic to have a way to disrespect rights, especially given that there are so many in our society prone to transgressive, self-motivated behavior.

It isn't CableCARD that limits copying, it is the content owner or distributor asserting copy protection. All CableCARD does is respect that..

Unfortunately that's not true either. Because of the fear of lawsuits, ATI developed their bios such that all content (PBS, public access, etc) is encrypted when a CableCARD is used. They also mis-interpret the broadcast flag. So they are forcing the most restrictive rights across all content.

I don't see it as an ethic to have a way to disrespect rights, especially given that there are so many in our society prone to transgressive, self-motivated behavior.

The ethical problem I see is forcing everyone to go out an buy TVs with digital receivers, and then render those receivers useless. Oops, throw out that TV and buy one with a CableCARD slot. Don't forget the extra $10/month to rent the CableCARD on top of your subscription costs. It has little to do with ethics, and much more to do with money. The new corporate mantra is reduce service and raise fees. (Airlines, Telcom, Banking, etc...)

Unfortunately that's not true either. Because of the fear of lawsuits, ATI developed their bios such that all content (PBS, public access, etc) is encrypted when a CableCARD is used. They also mis-interpret the broadcast flag. So they are forcing the most restrictive rights across all content.That's for that specific implementation. That's actually not that unusual, though: TiVo handles "Copy Once" essentially the same as "Copy Never".

The ethical problem I see is forcing everyone to go out an buy TVs with digital receivers, and then render those receivers useless.Uh-uh. The only tuners that folks were "forced" to go out and buy televisions with (pardon the bad grammar), were ATSC tuners. There was no push, by any agency, whether governmental or within the cable industry, for folks to acquire new televisions with QAM tuners. None.

In my market the additional outlet charge is $3.00 with 7.95 for an additional outlet. How do you justify $120 a year for HD an a bedromm or kitchen set that costs less that $300?
:confused: Do you mean AO $3 and HD Box $8?

Last time I looked, the only way to buy a tuner that supports a Cable Card was to purchase a complete HTPC solution. Has that changed? Is someone selling just Cable Card capable tuner cards now?

Greg

Last time I looked, the only way to buy a tuner that supports a Cable Card was to purchase a complete HTPC solution. Has that changed? Is someone selling just Cable Card capable tuner cards now?

GregCurrently out of stock, but listed on the Dell accessories site.

Small & Medium Business › Accessories › Desktop Accessories › TV Tuners and Video Editing

(then sort by company to get ATI to the top)

:confused: Do you mean AO $3 and HD Box $8?

Yep sorry for the that.

Last time I looked, the only way to buy a tuner that supports a Cable Card was to purchase a complete HTPC solution. Has that changed? Is someone selling just Cable Card capable tuner cards now?

Greg

You may need to make a motherboard BIOS (http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/05/06/new-utility-makes-any-computers-bios-cablecard-ready/)mod.

Ok,
I have comcast cable along with hd cable. So is it possible for the cable remote volume button and channel up and down buttons to work without first pushing the indv. cable button to move channels or the indv. tv button to rasie or lower the volume on tv.

I signed up for this hd cable package and soon after my hd cable box went dead and I turned it into local center and they gave me a new one. But when I got the new one, the old remote connection between the remote and box would let me turn the volume up without having first to hit the tv button then volume. When I asked the cable people over the phone they told me it was always that way. I said it wasn't al least for me. So have I confused you all, if so sorry.

Ok,
I have comcast cable along with hd cable. So is it possible for the cable remote volume button and channel up and down buttons to work without first pushing the indv. cable button to move channels or the indv. tv button to rasie or lower the volume on tv.

I signed up for this hd cable package and soon after my hd cable box went dead and I turned it into local center and they gave me a new one. But when I got the new one, the old remote connection between the remote and box would let me turn the volume up without having first to hit the tv button then volume. When I asked the cable people over the phone they told me it was always that way. I said it wasn't al least for me. So have I confused you all, if so sorry.

Refer to changing the volume lock in the linked PDF file.

http://www.comcast.com/MediaLibrary/1/2/CM/VanityURL/documents/comcast_dvr_remote_manual.pdf

Uh-uh. The only tuners that folks were "forced" to go out and buy televisions with (pardon the bad grammar), were ATSC tuners. There was no push, by any agency, whether governmental or within the cable industry, for folks to acquire new televisions with QAM tuners. None.

The point is you used to be able to buy a "cable ready" TV, pay for extended basic service, and tune all the channels (potentially with picture-in-picture) with a single remote and connection. Now to do the same thing, I have to pay another $10 a month, or insert another box, with another remote, etc.. I guess I don't see why you think that's so great, unless you're Comcast... (and don't waste money on picture-in-picture, it can't be used)

Refer to changing the volume lock in the linked PDF file.

http://www.comcast.com/MediaLibrary/1/2/CM/VanityURL/documents/comcast_dvr_remote_manual.pdf

thank you paulgo, it worked, its too bad the people at comcast can't communicate better over the phone, appreciate it very much.

The point is you used to be able to buy a "cable ready" TV, pay for extended basic service, and tune all the channels (potentially with picture-in-picture) with a single remote and connection. Now to do the same thing, I have to pay another $10 a month, or insert another box, with another remote, etc.. I guess I don't see why you think that's so great, unless you're Comcast... (and don't waste money on picture-in-picture, it can't be used)This is an HDTV forum. Anything that allows providers to offer more HD is always good.

Comcast will provide two DTA's for each household free of charge. The included remote will operate the TV power and volume.

Last time I looked, the only way to buy a tuner that supports a Cable Card was to purchase a complete HTPC solution. Has that changed? Is someone selling just Cable Card capable tuner cards now?

Yes.

This is an HDTV forum. Anything that allows providers to offer more HD is always good.

Comcast will provide two DTA's for each household free of charge. The included remote will operate the TV power and volume.

Yep, I got two of those as well, so I could still record on the ReplayTV. But the DTA's don't do HD, so how does that help?

The point is... Then why wasn't that was what written the first time? :) you used to be able to buy a "cable ready" TV, pay for extended basic service, and tune all the channels (potentially with picture-in-picture) with a single remote and connection. Now to do the same thing, I have to pay another $10 a month, or insert another box, with another remote, etc.. There was never any "right to picture-in-picture". :)

The right we have, in this regard, was secured for us by the FCC, and is reflected in CableCARD. If you want what you want with digital cable, then our society's decision has been that that shall be satisfied by way of CableCARD. If you have any concerns in that regard, those concerns are probably ones that are rightfully directed at CE manufacturers, such as Samsung and Sony.

I guess I don't see why you think that's so great, unless you're Comcast... (and don't waste money on picture-in-picture, it can't be used)I never said it was "great". Where did you get that from?

But the DTA's don't do HD, so how does that help?It provides you with the exact same channel access you had before the DTA existed; local HD in clear QAM, all the SD channels you pay for, and all other HD encrypted.

There is no free lunch.

It provides you with the exact same channel access you had before the DTA existed; local HD in clear QAM, all the SD channels you pay for, and all other HD encrypted.


Not exactly, there's no longer a direct connection to my cable ready TV, DVR, VCR etc, essentially making it much more difficult to maintain the same viewing experience. I'll also note that one of my TV's couldn't be powered on with the DTA remote, so you still needed to have two of them lying around, or buy a third party remote.

The beauty of it all is that the only competition is OTA or satellite. The satellite connections are just as complication (arguably more so) and the OTA selection is limited. The HTPC enthusiasts are the only ones who are going to whine loudly, and they really don't have anywhere else to go. The cable providers can pretty much do whatever they want, and charge a little extra for it along the way.

Then why wasn't that was what written the first time? :) There was never any "right to picture-in-picture". :)


It's an excellent point. But I can see this is going to quickly digress into free-market vs. regulation vs. monopoly definition discussion, and it's probably gotten too far off topic already.

our society's decision has been that that shall be satisfied by way of CableCARD.

I shouldn't even bite on this (are you trolling? :) I assume when you say "our society" you mean the most powerful lobbyists?

I never said it was "great". Where did you get that from?

Are you now saying our "Society" makes bad decisions? :)

I think it's safe to say the situation generally sucks for the HTPC enthusiast. For most everyone else, it's a mild inconvenience which are still less painful than the alternatives.

I think it's safe to say the situation generally sucks for the HTPC enthusiast. For most everyone else, it's a mild inconvenience which are still less painful than the alternatives.Then why wasn't that what was written the first time? :)

Seriously, that's a very important point. The real distinction is with regard to what should be expected: We should "expect" that the situation will be such that its acceptable by "most everyone else". We can "hope" for more, though.

Then why wasn't that what was written the first time? :)

Seriously, that's a very important point. The real distinction is with regard to what should be expected: We should "expect" that the situation will be such that its acceptable by "most everyone else". We can "hope" for more, though.

Right, but as with most companies these days, providing a great customer service is a waste of money when you can get away with the minimum (see airlines and banking for more examples) and pay someone to rationalize it to the public. :)

They don't even need to rationalize it to the public. Wal-Mart shoppers just care about what they pay at the cashier, and don't remember anything long enough to make a better choice the next time they buy something.

"This is an HDTV forum. Anything that allows providers to offer more HD is always good." How does scrambling the signals of expanded basic allow providers to offer more HD content? It is the eliminating analog channels that makes room for more HD. The same thing could be accomplished by leaving the digital signals unscrambled.

What would be even better is if HBO and SHO were also not encrypted... presented in-the-clear and untrapped. That way, we wouldn't necessarily have to pay for it, in order to watch its programming. I would much prefer getting the entire contingent of cable channels without any protection for those channels whatsoever, so we can choose whether or not we want to pay for them or not. Perhaps we can even watch first, and then pay based on how much we enjoyed what we watched. There are all very interesting ideas, but they don't really reflect a reality of commercial businesses.

let's step back a minute: the reason for all this activity is reclaimation of bandwidth now used for analog signals. that reclaimation makes possible provisioning of more hd content.

comcast and presumably other cable providers are trying to do this as cheaply as possible since they will have to provide dtas to a large portion of the customer base. comcast is providing 2 per household for free.

part of cheaply is incorporating the cheapest form of encryption to continue to tier their customer base as it currently is. that means no separable encryption and no per-customer notches.

i don't like boxes either but i just ordered two of them for our non-tivo sets that we use for occasional watching.

jtm

Unscrambled expanded basic secured using traps worked well in the analog era. It can work just as well in the all digital future. Why are the cable companies suddenly insisting on shoving boxes down our throats?

my guess is because traps aren't agile. that means the next time something changes in the lineup a zillion truckrolls are required.

jtm

What would be even better is if HBO and SHO were also not encrypted... presented in-the-clear and untrapped. That way, we wouldn't necessarily have to pay for it, in order to watch its programming.

Sounds good, but I think that would be fiscally irresponsible. :)

Note Comcast only made a gross profit of $20B last year on $35B of revenues. The overhead of all those people who have to reply to forum flames knocked it down to $6B. It's obviously time to encrypt the extended basic channels. :)

"This is an HDTV forum. Anything that allows providers to offer more HD is always good." How does scrambling the signals of expanded basic allow providers to offer more HD content? It is the eliminating analog channels that makes room for more HD. The same thing could be accomplished by leaving the digital signals unscrambled.
Moving channels 1-99 to digital makes room for more HD. Once it's digital, I can't blame a provider for not wanting to give away product, if they can avoid it.

Unscrambled expanded basic secured using traps worked well in the analog era. It can work just as well in the all digital future. Why are the cable companies suddenly insisting on shoving boxes down our throats?I suspect a lot of it has to do with labor costs, and a continual push: on the part of consumers for prices to be kept low, and on the part of investors for returns to be kept high. Think of it like a sponge being wrung out, twisting tighter and tighter and tighter. Once you've twisted the sponge a few times, there isn't much left to wring out, so you have to twist even harder. There is no opportunity to refill the sponge with water -- that would be akin to either cutting the cost of whole services out (like terminating telephone support) or bumping rates by more than what investors expect to see in growth in a year.

In our area, four service providers have already abandoned physical traps as a legitimate means of controlling access to service (and probably never even thought of using them). Only one of the five service providers continues to use this old, inefficient technology. If it really represented the kind of generalized advantage to everyone involved that some folks make it sound like it represents, then you'd expect to see at least three of the service providers using it or some analog to it, rather than four out of five using encryption and addressable converted boxes on every display and recording device. All indications are that Comcast is lagging behind the state-of-the-art in this regard -- that maintaining physical traps, while advantageous to some, is not advantageous overall, and therefore necessarily cannot last much longer.

Sounds good, but I think that would be fiscally irresponsible. :)It is such a relief to have someone carry the ball, if even for just a few minutes.

Note Comcast only made a gross profit of $20B last year on $35B of revenues.Yet the people who advise investors are saying that that's not a good place for investors to put their money these days; that that simply is not a strong enough return on investment. Verizon made $58B last year on $97B of revenues, and AT&T made $74B on $124B. So all within a few percentage points of each other, and still not considered enough to drive a buy recommendation for two of the three. Maybe people need to change, in our society, what is considered as a reasonable rate of return before they can expect any specific companies to start operating in some manner other than the manner of capitalism that we've put in place over the last thirty-five years, and if they cannot bring about such a change, accept that society doesn't necessarily want the same things as they want.

Reading these comments reminded me of something I saw about 20 years ago.

I stopped by the office of my local cable company to pick up a converter box. Just ahead of me in line was some poor soul begging the clerk to turn on her cable service just for the weekend. She was offering a partial payment of $5 (she owed much more). It just warmed my cold capitalist heart to see how addicting cable was to the unwashed masses.

This particular cable company scrambled virtually all the channels, including the locals. There were only about 5 channels, including some shopping channels, that weren't scrambled. So, when you didn't pay, BLAM! the company could, and did, shut you off remotely.

I think the FCC eventually prohibited cable companies from scrambling the local channels. But I'm sure the companies could easily petition the FCC to allow them to remotely disable DTAs if the customer hasn't paid his bill (maybe they already have this right?).

Having easy full remote control of the customer's "viewing experience" is, IMO, "priceless". No traps, no truck rolls, virtually no added costs. Hmmm, maybe it's time to buy some Comcast stock?

Verizon made $58B last year on $97B of revenues, and AT&T made $74B on $124B.

I'll be the first to agree that Verizon & AT&T make "obscene" profits. This is what Cramer calls "late stage capitalism".

However, the numbers you posted are quite misleading, since they are "gross profit". They doesn't take into account such "minor" items as taxes and interest expenses.

Yet the people who advise investors are saying that that's not a good place for investors to put their money these days; that that simply is not a strong enough return on investment.


I guess my problem is I worked this guy, Jim Barksdale, who told us customers were more important than profits and stockholders. It's funny how all his companies were bought (at very high evaluations) by people who disagree.

But I'm sure the companies could easily petition the FCC to allow them to remotely disable DTAs if the customer hasn't paid his bill (maybe they already have this right?).They almost surely do, and should surely be allowed to as long as they're providing local OTA channels in-the-clear. I cannot imagine any reason to continue providing advanced services for an account in default.

I'll be the first to agree that Verizon & AT&T make "obscene" profits.Evidently their profits are not "obscene" since they're not good enough for analysts.

Maybe people need to change, in our society, what is considered as a reasonable rate of return before they can expect any specific companies to start operating in some manner other than the manner of capitalism that we've put in place over the last thirty-five years, and if they cannot bring about such a change, accept that society doesn't necessarily want the same things as they want.

What?

With how well the economic system has worked the last few years, I don't see how you can even suggest such a thing......

I just outlined the two available options; I wasn't suggesting one over the other.

I just outlined the two available options; I wasn't suggesting one over the other.

I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough, I was being sarcastic.

Ah; thanks for the clarification.

They almost surely do, and should surely be allowed to as long as they're providing local OTA channels in-the-clear. I cannot imagine any reason to continue providing advanced services for an account in default.

But it works best if the service provider can cut off all services (not just advanced services), including local channels. Most people using DTAs won't know enough to bypass them to watch analog SD locals. And most people also don't also know that the unencrypted HD locals are also on the cable.

So what I'm saying is that, longer term, DTAs could significantly boost revenues. They lower costs in two (similar) ways: 1) they reduce churn and 2) they make it easier to extract payments for service.

Evidently their profits are not "obscene" since they're not good enough for analysts.

I wouldn't worry too much about that. It's the ebb and flow of the market.

Less than 2 yrs ago Verizon stock sold for over $45/share. It bottomed at about $23, now about $30. I'd say there's a very good chance it will be back at $45 within the next two years.

The big mutual funds that slosh around trillions of dollars don't really care what the "analysts" say, they have their own in-house analysts. Also, large cap stocks like AT&T and Verizon get bought by the index funds. If (big if) people put new money into the stock market a large amount of it will be used to bid up T and VZ stock. That's how "market capitalization weighted" indexes work.

But it works best if the service provider can cut off all services (not just advanced services), including local channels.The DTA, itself, is an advanced service, unnecessary for reception of essential services. If folks don't know that, then attribute that to their failure to learn about what they're purchasing.

The DTA, itself, is an advanced service, unnecessary for reception of essential services.
Actually it is not, because it allows the cable companies to eliminate analog cable. That's the whole point of the DTAs, to eventually make analog cable go away so that the bandwidth may be used more efficiently. Comcast may keep the SD locals, PEGs, and a handful of other channels analog for a little while but eventually all channels will be digital.

Actually it is not because it allows the cable companies to eliminate analog cable.Analog cable is an advanced service. So yes, DTAs are an advanced service.

Again, the only essential service provided by cable companies is carriage of local, over-the-air broadcast stations.

That's the law, folks.

Waiver is only good for 3 years so don't get to ahead of yourself.

Good point. This is temporary.

Having easy full remote control of the customer's "viewing experience" is, IMO, "priceless". No traps, no truck rolls, virtually no added costs. Hmmm, maybe it's time to buy some Comcast stock?
Not having to use traps, indeed saves $, as it means no truck rolls needed for services changes (Ltd./Expd. Basic) and no audits for theft of Expd. Basic. With no more theft of that service, by people removing traps, it also gains $, with more subscribers to Expd. Basic.

They will still need a few truck rolls for connect/disconnect, and they may decide to audit for theft of Ltd. Basic since it is HD, (as well as SD), but probably less often, as it isn't that cost effective, considering the lost revenue.

Now they should pass some of those savings to us honest subscribers, in the form of lesser price increases each year.;):)

I think they should pass those savings on to honest investors, in the form of higher dividends. :)

Unscrambled expanded basic secured using traps worked well in the analog era. It can work just as well in the all digital future. Why are the cable companies suddenly insisting on shoving boxes down our throats?

Scrambling content (any content) delivered digitally is a tricky business, and is subject to many variables. (Do you own a router? Do you own one or more PCs with encryption software, such as PGP or GnuPG or TrueCrypt? Then you use a process similar to what the content providers use.) It requires something a lot more complex than traps, as the same amount of bandwidth (or even the same area of bandwidth) is not often used. (The same is also true of traps; one major headache in the days of all-analog cable headends was changing trap configurations due to channel map changes rendering the trap, as configured, pointless.)

Content scrambling digitally is meant to replace the analog trap; however, it has its own set of complexities to deal with.

I think they should pass those savings on to honest investors, in the form of higher dividends. :)We'll have to agree to disagree on that since the use of DTAs would be illegal under Federal law without FCC waivers so any savings should in fact be passed on to consumers and not go to investors. IOW the waivers should not be granted if they're not in the public interest.

Your claim would only be valid if the FCC was a consumer protection agency, rather than a regulatory agency responsible to both subscribers and investors. If your logic had any merit, then why would the FCC allow MSOs to earn profit on anything?

Kevin Martin did a good job of that. Forcing use of more expensive STBs, fine for using SDV, telling Comcast how to run their network after the Sandvine incident (I miss the invisi-cap).

Good riddance to bad garbage.

Unscrambled expanded basic secured using traps worked well in the analog era. It can work just as well in the all digital future.
Apparently, you think because that system was in place for many years, that it 'worked well'. It certainly worked well for customers, but apparently not for cable cos., for all of the issues I have outlined in this thread. (So, have many others).

Even seven years ago, when Digital cable was relatively new for Comcast, those who know people in the industry, conveyed on AVS Forum, that Comcast wanted to abandon the trap/filter system, but they couldn't just yet, due to the market conditions. I think they gave the old system plenty of time, until finally changing.

Look, before the trap/filter system, they used to require boxes for any service. So, this is nothing new, except some people didn't have cable then or weren't born, so it is new to them. We didn't have cable then, either, but a few friends did.

Tru2way Troubles: Is Cable Losing Out to Telcos on ITV?
Craig Leddy | Contributing Analyst

U.S. cable operators are implementing tru2way technology as a way to spur new next-generation video devices, interactive TV applications, advanced advertising, and cross-platform services. But when major multiple system operators (MSOs) missed a self-imposed July 1, 2009, deadline to meet certain tru2way benchmarks, it raised questions over how technically challenging it is to deploy the tru2way platform.

Indeed, becoming a tru2way-ready cable system is not as simple as flipping a switch or downloading software. It requires the installation of new equipment and software, new configurations of signaling and coding, and rigorous network management and technical operations. Tru2way is a complex process that includes hundreds of steps, but it is likely to produce multiple benefits for cable and its customers.

In order to make tru2way work, cable operators must employ a network management system and add headend equipment, including application carousel generators and monitoring gear. Cable systems must undertake a level of software integration rarely experienced in the cable industry before. Deployment involves a complex integration of network management systems, a tru2way-based interactive program guide (IPG), billing and customer care systems, testing and certification processes, and an OpenCable Applications Platform (OCAP) middleware stack in the set-top or other device. Implementing a tru2way network provides a variety of significant technological benefits for cable operators across their cable platforms. Moreover, tru2way is part of an overall advancement of cable infrastructure to increase capabilities and support a variety of new consumer services.

The future of tru2way retail devices is cloudy. While cable operators need to demonstrate a good faith effort to meet federal guidelines and terms of the memorandum of understanding (MoU), it is unclear whether consumer demand will drive significant sales of tru2way HDTV sets if the only advantage is to remove a cable set-top box. Consumer electronics (CE) manufacturers themselves have shown lukewarm enthusiasm for tru2way, and many are developing Internet-connected TVs. Without support from CE makers, tru2way likely will become a solely cable enterprise that is focused on interactive applications delivered to next-generation cable set-top boxes, or new devices that are developed through deals that largely are initiated by MSOs.

http://www.lightreading.com/cable/document.asp?doc_id=180060

Tru2way Troubles: Is Cable Losing Out to Telcos on ITV?
Craig Leddy | Contributing Analyst


Seems to me that Comcast OnDemand would be just as complicated as Tru2way. It would involve many, if not all of the services the author says must be in place for Tru2way to work. Since Comcast was successful in rolling out OnDemand, it should be capable of rolling out Tru2way.

But I expect the MSO's will drag their feet as long as they can, causing the OEMs to drop support for Tru2way, just like happened with CableCard. The old Chicken and the Egg timing problem.

Greg

AT&T can have their ITV and I'll just make do with having more than 2 HD streams that doesn't slow down my internet.
Comcast gave the impression that their behind Tru2way but their actions or lack thereof do say otherwise. Not that the CEs are doing any better.

Comcast prepares to launch online video player

By Bob Fernandez

Inquirer Staff Writer

Comcast Corp. says it has developed an online video player that gives viewers a TV experience on the Internet, and the cable giant intends to put shows and movies from 24 cable networks online by the end of 2009.

But it won't be free, which is what most people have come to expect of content on the Internet.

Comcast cable customers - about 24 million in the United States - will have sole access to the cable TV fare through an online password and authentification process that references Comcast customers' billing records.

About 5,000 Comcast cable customers tested On Demand Online this summer. Comcast says it will expand the service, which customers will use through the Fancast.com and Comcast.net Web sites, to all its subscribers by Jan. 1. The company will e-mail customers to tell them when the service goes live.

Comcast chief executive officer Brian L. Roberts yesterday updated the media and industry officials on the new service at the Web Summit 2.0 gathering of technology executives in San Francisco.

In Philadelphia, Comcast executives discussed the project, which was initially announced in June with Time Warner Inc. and was called at that time TV Everywhere. "All the metrics are good, and we are just getting started," said Madison Bond, Comcast's executive vice president of content acquisition.

Comcast has negotiated deals with content providers to make the entertainment available on the Internet. Those participating include Time Warner, Starz, CBS, and the Discovery Channel. Bond said that Comcast was still securing programming rights for additional cable TV and movie content for the Internet.

Comcast views On Demand Online as an extension of a cable package for customers and allows entertainment companies new sources of online advertising. Bond declined to discuss programming deals.

Alix Cottrell, vice president at Fancast.com, said Comcast developed the online video player with an outside firm.

Through a special bit-streaming technology, the player smooths out the jerky movements of other online players by slightly altering the brightness of the TV picture when there are problems with Internet speeds.

Executives in the cable industry fear that if they do not move quickly to put more entertainment and news online, hackers could begin posting pirated entertainment and news on the Internet and undercut the cable TV business model - which is what happened to the music industry.

Comcast executives also are vehement about not putting entertainment and news online for free.

With On Demand Online, Comcast customers view only those cable TV networks in their individual cable TV packages. Thus, customers who purchase HBO or Cinemax on their cable TV can view HBO and Cinemax on their computer. But if they do not purchase HBO or Cinemax in their Comcast cable package, they cannot get it online.

Comcast's project to exploit the Internet comes as Wall Street analysts are speculating how cable companies will deal with Internet video. The big threat is that customers will cancel their cable TV service, although cable executives and others say they believe online video can be complementary to cable TV services and boost revenue through new advertising.

Industry experts have said that online video may be one reason that Comcast is negotiating to purchase NBC Universal Inc., one of the nation's largest movie and TV studios.

Comcast is in advanced talks with General Electric Co. to acquire a 51 percent stake in NBC Universal. The deal includes provisions for Comcast's eventually buying all of NBC Universal.

By owning the Hollywood entertainment, Comcast can control the flow of entertainment to the Internet, some contend.

http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20091021_Comcast_prepares_to_launch_online_video_player.html

Comcast Wired for Tru2way by Year's End
October 27, 2009 | Jeff Baumgartner


9:05 AM -- Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) EVP David Cohen reportedly told reporters Monday that the MSO will have tru2way installed across all its plant by year's end. Comcast and a handful of other MSOs that signed a binding memorandum of understanding (MoU) missed an original deadline to have that done by July 1.

Although Comcast (and presumably the other MSO members of the MoU) intend to use tru2way as a common platform for advanced interactive services, tru2way's use as an ITV engine in set-tops sold at retail has formally been called into question.

Cohen acknowledged that interest in using tru2way in retail devices has cooled, sparking thoughts on alternative ways for the platform to be distributed to retail boxes and TV sets, including downloadable approaches.

Fewer than 10 products so far have been certified for tru2way, a CableLabs platform that uses the OpenCable middleware and the removable CableCARD security module. And only Comcast has even tried to get a tru2way retail effort going, partnering with Panasonic to sell tru2way HD sets in Denver, Chicago, and Atlanta in a few stores. (See Tru2way's Retail Forecast: Cloudy , CES: Roberts Declares Open Season, and Tru2Way in Atlanta.)

But timing is everything, and we should know a bit more about tru2way's role at retail (or a possible lack of one) in short order. This morning in Denver at the CTAM Summit, execs from CableLabs, Comcast, Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE: TWC), and Bright House Networks , among others, are scheduled to appear on a panel called "Cable's Consumer Product Agenda."

— Jeff Baumgartner, Site Editor, Cable Digital News

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=183661

Comcast Clicking With EBIF
October 27, 2009 | Steve Donohue


DENVER -- CTAM Summit -- Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) has simple interactive TV applications such as voting and polling deployed to about 60 to 65 percent of its cable homes, vice president of interactive TV James Mumma said during a panel discussion here Monday.

Earlier this year, Comcast Corp. COO Steve Burke said that Comcast and its partners in Canoe Ventures LLC -- Time Warner Cable Inc. (NYSE: TWC), Charter Communications Inc. (Nasdaq: CHTR), Cox Communications Inc. , Cablevision Systems Corp. (NYSE: CVC), and Bright House Networks -- would reach 25 million Enhanced TV Binary Interchange Format (EBIF)-enabled set-top boxes by the end of the year. Comcast senior director of video product development James Mumma said today that Comcast and its partners are on schedule to meet that goal. (See Comcast Speeds Up '09 Wideband Goal , Canoe Rows Toward Enhanced TV , and Cable's Canoe Heads for Scalable Waters .)

Canoe CEO David Verklin all but confirmed that, too, in a separate conversation with Cable Digital News . "I think we'll get close [to that goal]. I think we'll get very close," Verklin said when asked if Burke's earlier stated EBIF goal among the Canoe partners was indeed achievable.

The applications that the EBIF architecture will enable include voting and polling, allowing viewers to request more information about a product advertised by pressing a button on their remotes. EBIF will also enable "t-commerce," which lets subscribers buy products through the TV, Verklin added.

Full article at:
http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=183660

Seems a little silly to reinvent all the web and streaming protocols at this point. Why not just switch everything to TCP/IPV6 and build the UI and backend on top of web technologies? Much easier to deploy and grossly simplifies the work for the consumer devices.

Why not just switch everything to TCP/IPV6 and build the UI and backend on top of web technologies?

Because my existing TiVos wouldn't work with TCP/IPV6? :)

Actually the hardware is there in terms of ports but I'd bet it couldn't be properly configured to do a good job.

Similar to implementations of tru2way. Why does a TiVo need an external box to do tru2way? Why can't the TiVo send IP packets "somewhere" the results of which cause video to "magically" appear on some QAM channel that the TiVo receives? A small matter of programming. :)

Because my existing TiVos wouldn't work with TCP/IPV6? :)

Actually the hardware is there in terms of ports but I'd bet it couldn't be properly configured to do a good job.

Similar to implementations of tru2way. Why does a TiVo need an external box to do tru2way?

I'd be surprised if the latest Tivo's don't have enough horsepower to decode Flash (though it sounds like they may not have enough for tru2way :). IPV6 certainly wouldn't be an issue. Sounds like it's just a software problem.

A software "problem" on several million already-deployed devices (including all the Motorola and SA DVRs out there).

This is a bit like suggesting that we should have switched OTA broadcasting to ATSC on February 1, 1996, instead of waiting until this year.

A software "problem" on several million already-deployed devices (including all the Motorola and SA DVRs out there).


Ahh, so the tru2way protocols are already implemented in those devices? Or will they need to be upgraded as well?

That's a good question. However, it may not necessarily need to be the case regardless: I'm pretty-sure that tru2way can be supported for tru2way devices, while legacy devices are still supported in the legacy manner, in the same system.

I'd be surprised if the latest Tivo's don't have enough horsepower to decode Flash (though it sounds like they may not have enough for tru2way :). IPV6 certainly wouldn't be an issue. Sounds like it's just a software problem.

A simple embedded ARM chip can do ipv6, it's no more demanding than ipv4, it's just packets, they come in at the same rate. It's what's in the packets that is the game changer.

It all depends on what they use for conditional access, if the stream is encrypted, how advanced that encryption is, how much horsepower does that take to decode, etc. Once you get through all those layers of the onion, you should still be left with a simple mpeg data stream which tivo's have been strong enough to deal with since day one. Problem is the encryption system. Maybe a seperate CAM device (coax in, coax out) at the cable entrance to the house? The CAM does all the tier programming and the decryption and then passes out the QAM signal to the Tivo or CableCard enabled device? (not that there's many of those out there)

This is a bit like suggesting that we should have switched OTA broadcasting to ATSC on February 1, 1996, instead of waiting until this year.

I bet more people than you might suspect would support this idea.