I have had the the Toshiba 50HMX96 for 6 months now. I can say this has been the worst entertainment experience of my life. I have had about 300 cablecard resets, 10 cablecard replacements, 20 hard crashes and reboots, a firmware update, and nothing has fixed my lockup issues. Cox suggests that they are not to blame, and that renting a set top box will cure my blues.

Toshiba has been very attentive to my issue, but they can't get cox to update their batch of cablecards, Toshiba is convinced that cablecard firmware update will fix the issue, and will not service my TV any longer, including replacing it.

Now the meat of my issue.

Cox cable, My local provider, refuses to provision the DVR that I own (a Cox DVR), instead insisting that I rent one and use this one as a doorstop. I did some research and determined that they are breaking FCC regulations with this position. So I have decided to bring file against Cox in small claims.

If there are others that fall into this category, I would encourage them to do the same. As a group, perhaps we can get there attention. I also plan to followup with BBB and the registrar of contractors.

Can you quote the regulation you think Cox is breaking? I have a Time Warner box I'd like to use but didn't think they were required to activate it. My box was disabled by one of their bullets quite awhile ago. But I thought these boxes were different than third-party boxes mentioned in the FCC regs.

Research a little more... they do not have to provide service to a privately owned STB/DVR.
Good luck with that lawsuit.

Your best option is to be persistent with getting Cox, the CableCard manufacturer and Toshiba to work together to resolve the "bug".

6 months is persistent enough


"§ 76.1202 Availability of navigation devices.
No multichannel video programming
distributor (cable provider) shall by contract, agreement,
patent right, intellectual property
right or otherwise prevent navigation
devices that do not perform conditional
access or security functions
from being made available to subscribers
from retailers, manufacturers,
or other vendors that are unaffiliated
with such owner or operator, subject to
§ 76.1209.

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_06/47cfr76_06.html

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/1999/nrcb9009.html

http://www.fcc.gov/Speeches/Kennard/Statements/stwek845.html

If I understand you correctly your TV does not support CableCard but you have a separte PVR box that supports Cable Card that you purchased from your local COX service and they want you to replace it with a PVR leased from them instead, is this correct?
Or did you purchase the PVR from another COX location that may be using different broadcast equipment and/or firmware release on the headend then the PVR you purchased supports.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8205190&&#post8205190

"As far as the box not being recognized by Cox, if you were to purchase one on the open market and it came from another MSO (i.e. another Power Key encryption key) Cox would have to get the key from SA. Chances are if you purchase one on Ebay it is owned by an MSO (in other words, you bought stolen equipment) -- SA would tell Cox this, and Cox would not authorize it.

If you purchase the box from Cox or someone who purchased the box outright, you would be good to go. Contact Cox customer support center and they would be able to get the key and authorize your box."


And where did you purchase your "Cox DVR". I have a very hard time believing that if you purchased it from them and have a receipt, they would not authorize it. For some reason I believe there is more to this story than what you have posted - or that it in fact a stolen DVR that won't get you very far in a lawsuit - and you might need that lawyer for something else.

masterp2,
Provide all of the links you like and interpret as you wish. My suggestion would be:
Can you provide any links or info to retailers that sell digital cable boxes/DVR's for U.S. consumers? Even the manufacturers will not sell directly to the consumer.

Only one that I know of that is a Motorola HTiB system. There is a LEGAL reason for that... :)

6 months is persistent enough


"§ 76.1202 Availability of navigation devices.
No multichannel video programming
distributor (cable provider) shall by contract, agreement,
patent right, intellectual property
right or otherwise prevent navigation
devices that do not perform conditional
access or security functions
from being made available to subscribers
from retailers, manufacturers,
or other vendors that are unaffiliated
with such owner or operator, subject to
§ 76.1209.


Emphasiss mine.

Does this DVR have cablecard ability?

Of course this is in addition to all the other responses you have received.

Basically, ain't gonna happen. :rolleyes:

And on the original post, the fact that cable cards are working for other customers of Cox and other MSO, its clear they do work.

That means the problem is within the TV set and really is a Toshiba issue. You would be better suited to sue them - as you might then have a case.

Cox cable, My local provider, refuses to provision the DVR that I own (a Cox DVR), instead insisting that I rent one and use this one as a doorstop. I did some research and determined that they are breaking FCC regulations with this position. So I have decided to bring file against Cox in small claims.


Your situation is very timely. On Thursday the FCC issued a number of rulings that support your claim. Look on the bottom of this page for the specifics.

http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2007/dd070111.html

It looks like you may want to wait until July 1, 2007 to file your claim.

Quote from FCC ruling:

3. To carry out the directives of Section 629, the Commission in 1998 required MVPDs to make available by July 1, 2000 a security element separate from the basic navigation device (the “host device”). The separation of the security element from the host device required by this rule (referred to as the “integration ban”) was designed to enable unaffiliated manufacturers, retailers, and other vendors to commercially market host devices while allowing MVPDs to retain control over their system security. MVPDs were permitted to continue providing equipment with integrated security until January 1, 2005, so long as modular security components, known as point-of-deployment modules (“PODs”), were also made available for use with host devices obtained through retail outlets. In April 2003, in response to a request from cable operators, the Commission extended the effective date of the integration ban until July 1, 2006. Then, in 2005, again at the urging of cable operators, the Commission further extended that date until July 1, 2007. In that decision, the Commission also stated that it would “entertain certain requests for waiver of the prohibition on integrated devices for limited capability integrated digital cable boxes.”

Three cable companies asked the FCC for extensions or waivers of the rules. In most cases the FCC denied the request.

Your situation is very timely. On Thursday the FCC issued a number of rulings that support your claim. Look on the bottom of this page for the specifics.

http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Digest/2007/dd070111.html

It looks like you may want to wait until July 1, 2007 to file your claim.

Quote from FCC ruling:

3. To carry out the directives of Section 629, the Commission in 1998 required MVPDs to make available by July 1, 2000 a security element separate from the basic navigation device (the “host device”). The separation of the security element from the host device required by this rule (referred to as the “integration ban”) was designed to enable unaffiliated manufacturers, retailers, and other vendors to commercially market host devices while allowing MVPDs to retain control over their system security. MVPDs were permitted to continue providing equipment with integrated security until January 1, 2005, so long as modular security components, known as point-of-deployment modules (“PODs”), were also made available for use with host devices obtained through retail outlets. In April 2003, in response to a request from cable operators, the Commission extended the effective date of the integration ban until July 1, 2006. Then, in 2005, again at the urging of cable operators, the Commission further extended that date until July 1, 2007. In that decision, the Commission also stated that it would “entertain certain requests for waiver of the prohibition on integrated devices for limited capability integrated digital cable boxes.”

Three cable companies asked the FCC for extensions or waivers of the rules. In most cases the FCC denied the request.

None of this will allow the OP to get a Cox DVR that he somehow acquired activated.

Some of you guys are making some invalid assumptions. The DVR is aquired legally, and is not stolen or "activated", whatever that means. Cox was seliing DVR's is some markets. I don't know if they still do, I think not. It is irrelevant however, Cox has run the numbers on the DVR, it has not come back stolen. Nonetheless, an individual who purchases one of these is doing nothing wrong, and should expect full support from the law. I have no sympathy for someone who obtains one that is stolen, as unfortunate as this is in an unscrupulous world.

In my case, I feel it is just plain wrong. They have allowed these DVR's into the marketplace, and now they are forcing consumers to trip over themselves. The same thing happened with cable modems a few years back.

I am reasonably sure that the DVR (8000HD) has the same compatabilty, but Cox has said nothing about this, only that their policy is to NOT enable 3rd party obtained STB's. By itself, I think it is an illegal position, but I stand to be shown the door.

The real insult, is that they will not do anything to help fix the cablecard issue, although I have been telling them that SA has had the solution for months. "not our problem". And of course, if i were able to obtain the correct cable card from SA, Cox would not provision that either This is simply bad faith, and in my opinion, a contract issue.

I'll have my day, for better or worse. $31 is all I will lose. If anyone has any suggestions to strengthen my case, I would like to know.

Well then, if Cox sold you the DVR and Cox is your provider, why not show them the reciept and that should prove it's not a 3rd party DVR. IMO... if they "sold" it to you, they should support what they "sell". Sounds reasonable to me.

It seems to me that you hace two separate cases.

1. The inability to suport a DVR that you bought from them. You should demand your money back. That case could be heard today. That has nothing to do with the cable card.

2. The lack of competance with the cable card may have to wait until July 1, 2007.

Sometimes the best course of action is to suggest to a supervisor at the cable company that you are prepared to take your story to a TV station or newspaper with a consumer "ripoff" segment. They may give in because the damage done to them by the negative publicity is far more harmful than paying a small claim.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. i bought the DVR through legal means from a 3rd party, not Cox. It was originally purchased legally from Cox to the best of my knowledge. If I become aware that it wasn't, I will have no legs obviously. But I don't have to prove that it was, Cox will surely be happy to prove that it was stolen (they haven't been able to) If it wasn't, then I engaged in a legal transaction with transferred rights that every american has the right to expect. No, I didn't check with the cable company first (nor do they advertise this issue), and the money does not really matter to me FWIW.

Ratman, opinions aside, I am without a case unless a judge decides I have one. What I can prove, what Cox can prove. I will probably lose, just because they have an entire legal department dedicated to spite lil ol me. But I'm on a terror now, and I am so PO'd that I will probably dedicate more time to this, despite better advice. That comes from someone who usually advises against getting wrapped up in bureaucratic messes (like this) and spend that extra energy making a bookcase with your son instead. I will make time for both. I may center my argument on contract, I just am not sure yet.

I have made my intentions clear to Cox. They spit me to the side.

I have a legally owned DVR that says "COX" all over it. Purchased by an account holder of Cox, it became a resellable commodity that found its way to me in our free trade economy. If Cox will not provision it for the person who inherits it, then it becomes a lump of coal at the hands of Cox. I believe that act of denying the transfer of rights would be highly illegal, but I have more research to do.

When it is sitting on the judges bench, Cox emblematic, the reaction should be an educational conclusion. My expectations are low.

Assuming your PVR is totally legal The problem I thnk you are having is that not all COX locations use the same make and model PVRS so a speccific COX location can not support all PVRs sold by other COX locations. Just like all GM car dealers can not support all GM cars sold in other parts of the world.
In any case can you explain how you have verythng connected since it appears that if your cable service is connected to the PVR you are referring that you cannot getout to output decoded programs to your TV usinf RF, S-Video, component or DVI/HDMI. Or if instead you connect the cable service directly to your TVs QAM tuner that you can not get it to work either but all of the unencrypted analog cable channels(1-99) work using the analog tuner. Is this a correct understanding?

There is no connectivity challenge, it is simply not activated. Cox willfully has decided I need to rent one. I suppose I can get 1-99 with a direct connection, but I cannot say if the DVR will pass through 1-99, I have never hooked it up to try.

Since my neighbor up the street rents the exact make model, I have made a few assumptions. So far Cox has not dispelled my assumptions. Just won't do it per policy.

Right now, I watch encryption via cable card, built into the TV, nearly worthless as described in my first post. That would be the contract issue. I paid for something I cannot use with any competent reliability because Cox won't update the cable card firmware apparently.

My options are

1. rent a dvr
2. rent a decoder (STB)
3. stop watching digital
4. keep using cable card with the harrassing lockup issues.

hope I haven't left anything out. I hope to elect option 5: use the dvr I own, with all the freedoms and rights attached by law.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough. i bought the DVR through legal means from a 3rd party, not Cox. It was originally purchased legally from Cox to the best of my knowledge. If I become aware that it wasn't, I will have no legs obviously. But I don't have to prove that it was, Cox will surely be happy to prove that it was stolen (they haven't been able to) If it wasn't, then I engaged in a legal transaction with transferred rights that every american has the right to expect. No, I didn't check with the cable company first (nor do they advertise this issue), and the money does not really matter to me FWIW.

You were had. The only way that DVR could be "sold" in the US would be for someone to not have had it when they disconnected and paid the $200-300 lost box fee. That fee bought a door stop. The only recourse would be that the one that paid the fee return the box to the system office it came from for a refund of the fee. Cox can not magically look up the box number in their local data base to see where it came from, unless from their local system.

Your best bet is to rise through management with your cable card issue....

There is no connectivity challenge, it is simply not activated. Cox willfully has decided I need to rent one. I suppose I can get 1-99 with a direct connection, but I cannot say if the DVR will pass through 1-99, I have never hooked it up to try.

Since my neighbor up the street rents the exact make model, I have made a few assumptions. So far Cox has not dispelled my assumptions. Just won't do it per policy.

Right now, I watch encryption via cable card, built into the TV, nearly worthless as described in my first post. That would be the contract issue. I paid for something I cannot use with any competent reliability because Cox won't update the cable card firmware apparently.

My options are

1. rent a dvr
2. rent a decoder (STB)
3. stop watching digital
4. keep using cable card with the harrassing lockup issues.

hope I haven't left anything out. I hope to elect option 5: use the dvr I own, with all the freedoms and rights attached by law.


As VideoGuy noted in the previous thread, if it was purchased from Cox, they will activate it. If not, it would have a different encryption key that they would not have access to.

As previously stated, Cox Cable Cards work fine with other TVs. Your real effort should be to file against Toshiba for selling a TV that clearly is not up to cablecards specs - which I wonder if they did "selfcertification" on your set instead of really testing it. That's where you have your lawsuit on the cablecard.

Well unless your cable card system in your Toshiba is incompatible with the digital equipment that your local COX service has at its head end ( and therfore makes them exempt from having to support it) as of 1 July 2007 they should provide adequate cable card support. Just because the boxes are of the same make and model does not mean that there internals are all the same since different cable company installations use different internal components and firmware in order to insure that the boxes being supported by them are all ones supplied by them under terms of their government franchise agreement. I understand that in Canada users can purchase PVR boxes from cable companies since Canadian allow requires this option but I am not award of this happening in the US.

As I suspected, you might have spent 5 minutes as I did - to find out that Toshiba DID NOT SUBMIT YOUR TV TO CABLELABS FOR TESTING. They did a self-verfication that it was compliant with CableCards specs. OBVIOUSLY IT IS NOT.



http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/3263/cablecardtoshibamf1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


If it was tested in their labs AND VERIFIED OR CERTIFIED AS WORKING, then most likely the problem would be with SA Equipment/Software that Cox is using, but since everything S/A and Cox is using HAS BEEN TESTED IN THE CABLELABS LABS and CERTIFIED OR VERIFIED and the Toshiba has not - its pretty clear where the problem probably is.

I'd go after the Retailer and Toshiba with a lawsuit for a refund of the TV if I were you.

^

Ouch Fan, that is gonna hurt!

^

Ouch Fan, that is gonna hurt!


Do you disagree? I'd sure think that is where I would start :confused:

Do you disagree? I'd sure think that is where I would start :confused:

Oh I certainly agree, especially since he has been a member here since 2002?

Things are starting to make a lot of sense:

I have had the the Toshiba 50HMX96 for 6 months now. I can say this has been the worst entertainment experience of my life. I have had about 300 cablecard resets, 10 cablecard replacements, 20 hard crashes and reboots, a firmware update, and nothing has fixed my lockup issues. Cox suggests that they are not to blame, and that renting a set top box will cure my blues.

Cox has gone through 10 cards, all with a TV that is probably buggy, if not non-compliant. :confused: Yep must be Cox's fault. :rolleyes:

Toshiba has been very attentive to my issue, but they can't get cox to update their batch of cablecards, Toshiba is convinced that cablecard firmware update will fix the issue, and will not service my TV any longer, including replacing it.

Toshiba on the other hand wants Cox to update firmware that cuurently works with other compliant devices, but they are being attentive... I wonder why? Maybe they know their set is buggy and/or non-compliant and passing the buck costs them nothing? :rolleyes:

Thank you for some very insightful replies. I am learning more all the time. Maybe a little more confused than before, but that's the way it goes.

As we speak, I am experiencing an outage. Cable modem works fine, so i am at a loss, but this seems like a common occurence. I broke out the old OTA antenna that I used with satellite in years past. Finally, the least harrassing of all avenues, simply requires rabbit ears: how ironic I flashback to the network peacock in all its color and splendor. (yes I am that old)

You were had. The only way that DVR could be "sold" in the US would be for someone to not have had it when they disconnected and paid the $200-300 lost box fee.

I would appreciate knowing how you come to this conclusion. The best information I have is that Cox sold these units to its customers in some markets.

I am by no stretch arguing, just collecting information.

A little birdie told me. ;)

A little birdie told me. ;)

masterp2 - message me the serial number off your box - and i will ask the local cable company here to find out if they can call S/A and see what the deal is.

1) Is it a SA8000HD or a SA8300HD?

2) How much did you pay for this box

3) Did you buy it locally or where did you come by it?

4) What city did it come from?

A little birdie told me. ;)

Actually, if you start here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=8133219&&#post8133219) and read about 10 or so posts you will find that he purchased his DVR after this post (see that he had not yet purchased it yet) knowing another person had trouble getting Cox to activate it - and given he says he PM the person, why do I think he just purchased New04quest's DVR that already said he could not activate it.

Michael, you have no idea where the other guy got the DVR, with or without Cox logos on it. As stated, someone might have paid the lost/stolen/non-returned fee - but that doesn't mean it becomes a unit that Cox will authorized as it was not purchased as customer unit - only partial replacement value.

Why anyone would buy a unit that they were told upfront Cox wouldnt license is beyond me - but maybe you thought you could bluff your way through.

Sorry, that doesn't work.

I really have nothing to hide here.


1. 8000HD
2. $50 I think, although not real material
4. Las Vegas (best info I have)

3. was not purchased from ebay, a private party sale, no implied guaranties.

numbers off barcode

000A73ED5FAO
SABHWVGMW
N0018849797


Thanks for the assistance. I am sure whatever you find will be informative.

I really have nothing to hide here.


1. 8000HD
2. $50 I think, although not real material
4. Las Vegas (best info I have)

3. was not purchased from ebay, a private party sale, no implied guaranties.

numbers off barcode

000A73ED5FAO
SABHWVGMW
N0018849797


Thanks for the assistance. I am sure whatever you find will be informative.

Simple question - $50 didn't raise a flag for you for a unit that goes for over $600?

no

I realized that I was assuming some risk. Risk that it may not work, risk that it may have been misrepresented, etc. It is not a perfect world, and fortunately, I didn't need it to feed my family, just view a moving picture.

Just putting things in perspective. :)

You raise an interesting question. $600? Where does this figure come from?

What they cost in Canada where you can buy them from the system providers - but I should say - I believe that is the SA8300HD - though I doubt the SA8000HD was much cheaper when it was sold.

Also, read this:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=9457835#post9457835

Fan,

The most S/A will be able to tell you is who and where it was sold and shipped to.

I believe that answer is Cox Las Vegas.

Cox Las Vegas will be able to look the box up and see who it was issued to.

I assure you that answers will be forthcoming in some form or fashion on all concerns.

4) What city did it come from?
4. Las Vegas (best info I have)

Cox Las Vegas has never sold the SA DVR's (or any other digital STB's AFAIK). If it came from that market, it was "stolen" and remains the property of Cox Communications Inc. of Las Vegas regardless of how it was "obtained". If the previous owner who was leasing the STB, decided to keep the box, which they don't own, they would have been charged a fine equitable to the cost of the hardware, but they would still not have any ownership rights.
It will still not be provisioned by any market.

vegggas

Cox Las Vegas has never sold the SA DVR's (or any other digital STB's AFAIK). If it came from that market, it was "stolen" and remains the property of Cox Communications Inc. of Las Vegas regardless of how it was "obtained". If the previous owner who was leasing the STB, decided to keep the box, which they don't own, they would have been charged a fine equitable to the cost of the hardware, but they would still not have any ownership rights.
It will still not be provisioned by any market.

vegggas


I suspect that is the case as well, which would be why they would not be after the current sub for receiving stolen property - but as you state, that does not give the right of ownership - it was only payment for a non-returned box - which most probably did not even cover the cost of the DVR and does not obligate them to provision it.

I am all set up for satellite, have used satellite in the past. I was always put off by the lack of HD content. This experience has me rethinking. If, in fact, I can get an HD DVR under free type promotion, I am thinking of going back. I have just grown tired of the cablecard fiasco, and the Toshiba runaround.

I appreciate all those that have an interest in this, and I will continue to pursue it. At the same time, I need to make sure I don't get completely absorbed into it. If cox had only factually demonstrated what you guys suspect to be the case, I would have never pursued the DVR issue. If it turns out that the DVR is not legally owned by me, I will get rid of it. That is an unfortunate waste of hardware. But the DVR's actual origin is not known for a fact, and that leaves this a mystery.

As a person notes in the link above that the Toshiba in question is showing issues on both Motorola and S/A CableCards, again, I believe that you are venting at the wrong company. It might make you feel better, but I would go after Toshiba and the local retailer first because I sure would NOT be signing a contract with E* at this time - and last year at this time I was a big advocate of theirs.

Wow, Cox just left. They tried to enable the unit, but for some reason, the "unauthorized" screen is all she could get. "Not in their database" or something. At least they tried. But what could she have done differently? She was a newbie going on supervisor instructions to attempt it. If I had been more knowledgeable, maybe I could have made a suggestion.

SABHWVGMW, this is the number they used. Is this the SN? Is it suppose to be 9 digits?

Thoughts?

I suspect you are talking about the DVR here.

I know that most cable systems have a different key. In fact in my area, even though its part of the same County, if you try to take a cable STB to the next County, it will not work no matter what they do. They must take the Box into the Office and essentially reprogram the firmware (probably not the technical term) to see their system or something of that nature. I believe that can only be done after S/A gives them the key.

Now, I would suspect that is the same with other systems - and Cox is no different - that Las Vegas has a different code than Phoenix and it must be changed over (at least that is what I understand from a local non-Cox system here where they HAVE moved a box between the 2 Counties after it was flashed/reprogrammed in their offices).

So unless Cox Las Vegas and Cox Phoenix use the same keys, which I suspect they do not to keep stolen boxes from being shuffled around the Country, I am not quite sure why they would not be aware it had to be changed over to the Phoenix Code. Maybe they thought it was a Phoenix box that did not require the conversion.

Of course, there is the other side, that maybe it Las Vegas and Phoenix DO USE THE SAME KEYS - and the box didn't come from Las Vegas so they assumed it would work but then it did not because it wasn't from Vegas.

Again, I might not be using the standard verbage because I do not work with these things - only a lot of experience with helping some people in similar situations - but I believe that you can understand what I am trying to convey.

However, there is something missing here - why did the Cox people come back out today and try to activate it after the last thing you said was they would not activate it?

I had an outage. The problem resolved itself after I plugged in the signal amplifier that my son had pulled the plug on before he went back to school. IOW I found the problem. But they came out anyway after my call. When she got here (she wanted to check my line strength numbers) the TV locked up again when I turned it on. She saw it, and swapped out the CC (#9). I brought up the DVR, and for some reason, this time, they looked at it. I can't explain why. But I do believe I have run this course.

May be time to just move on. I see the Directv DVR is junk. Echo has the better HD selection and a decent DVR. Maybe it is time for something new. I am really torn here.

She probably didn't realize it was from a different system.

Let me ask you the next obvious question - why aren't you raising hell with the company that sold you the TV set and Toshiba as it seems they are the ones to blame with about the CableCard issue. All your anger and focus seems to be at the cable provider :confused:

If I buy a car that is suppose to run on 93 Octane Gasoline - but it stalls out when I put 93 Octane Gasoline in it - yet all other make and model cars run fine on 93 Octane Gasoline that comes from that Gas Station, and cars similar to mine have the same issue with 93 Octane gas around the Country, my issue isn't with the Gas Station - its with the car company.

I am, and have asked Toshiba to buy back the TV. So far I have had no luck. They think I should be their beta guinea pig for the foreseeable future.

Do you have some advice on controlling the decisions of large corporations? I paid $1879 to an authorized on-line dealer. They are suddenly "stupid" also. This is NOT as easy as you make it sound!

a) the online retailer couldn't give a rat's patootie.
b) Toshiba has their Cablecard slot working in other areas, I'd assume or there would be a larger outcry.
c) if there is a "compatibility" issue with the specific Cablecard manufacturer and the TV, then the two parties involved should address the issue to resolution.
d) if the third party that provisions the card (cable provider) and acknowledges a compatibility issue... they should work with everyone to resolve.

Sounds great... but in reality, no one cares because no one wants to put any effort into a technology that was "dead on the doorstep". Sad but true...

That is the problem, one consumer, three parties all claiming "it's not us". I don't ever want to be in this position again.

Do you have some advice on controlling the decisions of large corporations? I paid $1879 to an authorized on-line dealer. They are suddenly "stupid" also. This is NOT as easy as you make it sound!

As you are in Phoenix, call the TV stations for their Consumer Reporter. I'd just do the cablecard issue with the Toshiba. The DVR is a different battle which is more murky as you have seen and only confuses the issues. You can always come back to that later.

Give them all the facts.

The bottom line, as you state, Toshiba wants you to be the guinea pig. You did not sign up to be the beta tester and want a working set or your money back as Toshiba had a working cablecard as a feature of this TV.

Also send a letter to the State Attorney General about this and copy Toshiba and the Online Retailer.

I would suspect that it is about TV - and the February Sweeps are coming up - a TV station might want to get into this - plus Toshiba will be a lot more responsive to a TV station in Phoenix than an individual consumer.

b) Toshiba has their Cablecard slot working in other areas, I'd assume or there would be a larger outcry.

As noted in the link, this mode which is self-verified and not tested at CableLabs has issues with Motorola and S/A CableCards that have been tested at CableLabs.

As I indicated...
There are "a ton" of people using Cablecards from various providers without incident or complaint (knowing the restrictions). They are assuredly using Motorala or SA cards since (I believe) they are the only Cablecard manufacturers/providers.

So... if there is an issue "SPECIFIC" to Toshiba, then the OP needs to address that with the involved parties to address/resolve provideing them with the pertinent information. Or............... get a different TV or rent an STB.

Not much else to discuss IMO. ;)

As I indicated...
There are "a ton" of people using Cablecards from various providers without incident or complaint (knowing the restrictions). They are assuredly using Motorala or SA cards since (I believe) they are the only Cablecard manufacturers/providers.

So... if there is an issue "SPECIFIC" to Toshiba, then the OP needs to address that with the involved parties to address/resolve provideing them with the pertinent information. Or............... get a different TV or rent an STB.

Not much else to discuss IMO. ;)

Considering there are less than 300,000 CableCards in use Nationwide, no there are not a "ton" of people using CableCards. When you break it down to the number of CableCards set, the pool shrinks even more. The fact is, CableCards work fine on Cox Cable Phoenix. They just don't work ANYWHERE on this set.

Thus, its is very likely one Toshiba Model can be a problem - with only several reports on AVS Forum - as there are - from both Motorola and S/A based systems.

You are assuming that all the other CableCards work properly with the same Toshiba model in other locations - something we have asked in the proper threads and no one acknowledges they have this particular Toshiba Model working properly with a cablecard.

Thus, you might be chasing Big Foot that you assume must be out there with no proof, thus far the evidence all falls to the side that the non-standard conformity of the set is the issue at this juncture - as others have working cablecards with Cox in Phoenix.

Regardless, he asked for solutions - you told him to suck it up and have a nice life. I gave him realistic options.

The moral of the story of this thread - don't invest in features in electronics which have a dubious outlook.

Considering there are less than 300,000 CableCards in use Nationwide, no there are not a "ton" of people using CableCards. When you break it down to the number of CableCards set, the pool shrinks even more. The fact is, CableCards work fine on Cox Cable Phoenix. They just don't work ANYWHERE on this set.

Thus, its is very likely one Toshiba Model can be a problem - with only several reports on AVS Forum - as there are - from both Motorola and S/A based systems.

You are assuming that all the other CableCards work properly with the same Toshiba model in other locations - something we have asked in the proper threads and no one acknowledges they have this particular Toshiba Model working properly with a cablecard.

Thus, you might be chasing Big Foot that you assume must be out there with no proof, thus far the evidence all falls to the side that the non-standard conformity of the set is the issue at this juncture - as others have working cablecards with Cox in Phoenix.

Regardless, he asked for solutions - you told him to suck it up and have a nice life. I gave him realistic options.

Hey there Slick...
I've "assumed" nothing whatsoever.

I don't know (or care) how many Cablecard "users" there are in the U.S.

My point was that there ARE xx number of Motorola and SA Cablecards in use thoughtout the US where they/it works "as advertised".

As I stated previously, there could be a compatibility iissue specific to this TV and the Cablecard. If I didn't give that impression, you misunderstood.

He does need to suck it up! If he doesn't want to professionally and "Maturely" try to address and resolve the issue, there are no alternatives than to move on and live with it.... and that's the way it is! Are you going to "fix" it for him? I think not!

I do have a Big Foot... I have an idea where to place it. :mad:
You are not the king of the monkey bars. Playground time is over... go take a nap.

a) Sounds great... but in reality, no one cares because no one wants to put any effort into a technology that was "dead on the doorstep". Sad but true...

Aug, 30, 2006

A federal appeals court upheld an FCC mandate last month requiring cable companies to support CableCard technology

Pronounced "dead" in the pages of The New York Times as recently as July, CableCard devices now appear destined for the vast majority of U.S. cable customers' homes by the FCC deadline, currently set for July 2007.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71682-0.html

Yeah...
And with Cablecard II waiting in the wings, no one will put any effort into existing issues/problems, especially the cable provider.

And for those that ask... no, Cablecard II "features" are not backward compatible with existing Cablecard interfaces. You must have a CCII slot in the device (TV/DVR/STB).

EDITED for clarification

Yeah...
And with Cablecard II waiting in the wings, no one will put any effort into existing issues/problems,

And for those that ask... no, Cablecard II is not backward compatible with existing Cablecard interfaces.

Incorrect. It does work with the original specs. It only support the specs that the device supported (most likely Cablecard 1 specs).

He does need to suck it up! If he doesn't want to professionally and "Maturely" try to address and resolve the issue, there are no alternatives than to move on and live with it.... and that's the way it is! Are you going to "fix" it for him? I think not!


An interesting observation, however I may know something you don't. :D


I do have a Big Foot... I have an idea where to place it. :mad:

And based on your posts here, it would make a nice fit - why don't you try it as its obviously been there before.


You are not the king of the monkey bars. Playground time is over... go take a nap.

Again, I'll leave that title to you.

Sheesh!!! Okay... yeah a cablecard II slot will work with a cablecard I (assuming it works!) with the exiting limitations!. A Cablecard II WILL NOT work in a Cablecard I interface!

Sheesh!!! Okay... yeah a cablecard II slot will work with a cablecard I (assuming it works!) with the exiting limitations!. A Cablecard II WILL NOT work in a Cablecard I interface!

That big foot tasting good?

As always.. you are the best and smartest on the forum! :)

That big foot tasting good?
After it's been where your head has been? Nah! ;)

After it's been where your head has been? Nah! ;)

There you go again with another false statement as we both know your foot has never been near my body has been.

You're the best Jerry... the BEST!

Now if I only knew who Jerry was. Pass me some of whatever you're on.

Sheesh!!! Okay... yeah a cablecard II slot will work with a cablecard I (assuming it works!) with the exiting limitations!. A Cablecard II WILL NOT work in a Cablecard I interface!

Huh? :confused:

I believe you have this reversed. Cablecard II is supposed to be backwards compatible, meaning it can be used in a Cablecard I slot. This will not however, give you the benefits of Cablecard II as the host device will still be one-way.

Huh? :confused:

I believe you have this reversed. Cablecard II is supposed to be backwards compatible, meaning it can be used in a Cablecard I slot. This will not however, give you the benefits of Cablecard II as the host device will still be one-way.

Shhhhhhh!!!!! Genuis at work!!!!!

He's tasted his foot several times already!

Huh? :confused:

I believe you have this reversed. Cablecard II is supposed to be backwards compatible, meaning it can be used in a Cablecard I slot. This will not however, give you the benefits of Cablecard II as the host device will still be one-way.

Yes... I guess my intent wasn't clear in Post #57. My bad...

My comments afterwards were nothing more than my frustration trying to dodge "Mr. Wonderful's" barbs. He has an odd way of trying to make friends and being helpful. And... has a serious issue if someone disagrees with him/her. :rolleyes:

Here is my latest email to Toshiba:

--Original Message--
From: xxxxxxxx@cox.net
Date: 1/15/2007 1:15:23 PM
To: customer_support@tacp.com; xxxxxxx@cox.net
Subject: Re: Aaron Dickerson Fw: Invoice from AbsoluteHD LLC

I want to inform you that I have made repeat attempts to get Toshiba to fix my unit. They have not been able to resolve these issues. Let me summarize, from day one

1. 6 months
2. Approx 15 service calls to Toshiba
3. Approx 12 service calls to the local provider
4. 9 cable card swaps
5. Repair company visit with firmware upgrade


Please reply. I have obtained enough documentation, that I feel it is necessary to escalate this issue to the BBB, FCC (as applicable) and local civil authority. I do not plan to continue to watching this troubled TV at the cost of approximately $2000. Other sets in my area work fine with cable card, and I have determined that this IS a Toshiba issue, which I cannot resolve, despite 6 months of active attempts to cooperate in that vein. Thank You

The response:


"Michael,

As we have advised you previously, Cox Communications is trying to update the firmware on your CableCARD so that you do not experience the issue that you have with the card dropping channels.

The last communication that we received from Cox is that they were having trouble updating your card and they were thinking about switching your card out.

We have advised Cox to try this, else get Scientific Atlanta, the card maker, involved as Scientific Atlanta has created a patch to help resolve this issue.

I strongly recommend that you contact Cox, if they haven’t already contacted you, to have your CableCARD exchanged and proceed in the process to get your issue resolved.

I will not exchange or refund your purchase at this time as I feel that this issue is not a fault of the television (it is Cable Labs self verified).

Please let me know if you have any questions. Additionally, your address listed below and email address do not match what we have for you on file. I assume that the address we have on your file is a correct address, and we can reach you by either email address. The phone number you have below does match.


Sincerely,

Paul Cline| Team Leader- Operations

Advanced Services Group | TOSHIBA

Phone# (800)-575-5469 Ext. 3128

Fax# (309)-589-7707

PaulCline@Affina.com"

As of last night, with yet another new cablecard, I am missing about half of my channels. So Cox has set up the 13th service call on this TV.

Call the TV stations or check on their website to see if they have consumer reporters.

My comments afterwards were nothing more than my frustration trying to dodge "Mr. Wonderful's" barbs. He has an odd way of trying to make friends and being helpful. And... has a serious issue if someone disagrees with him/her. :rolleyes:

Especially when people are wrong and continue to post wrong facts which you now admit were wrong.

As explained. Initially... not "clear" with my statement. After that.... frustration due to your belligerent rebuttles. ;)

You seem to have an agressive nature and a predisposition to continually try to better yourself with condecension when someone opposes your "opinion". I've seen this in various threads that you've embellished with your wisdom. You should try to work on that... ;)

As explained. Initially... not "clear" with my statement. After that.... frustration due to your belligerent rebuttles. ;)

You seem to have an agressive nature and a predisposition to continually try to better yourself with condecension when someone opposes your "opinion". I've seen this in various threads that you've embellished with your wisdom. You should try to work on that... ;)

Again - you told consumer he was screwed. I offered solutions.

You also made more than one false statement concerning his situation - and things that you are unaware of - as bfoster can atest to.

Looks like this is the pot calling the kettle black.

No... I suggested that he either persue a resolution or move on... Your solutions are equatable to "The Peoples Court". That does absolutely no more or no less than my suggestions/observations. Your solution IMO is not the ONLY alternative. I have a differing opinion and you bring out hostilities. What makes YOU right?

I don't know what other "false statements" I made, but so be it. Nor do I have any idea as to what you allude to as, "things I am unaware of". Is there a "secret sorority"?

Why do you need bfoster to attest to your BS? Stand on your own... ;)

You have some serious issues that you need to address with your insecurities.

And now back to our regularly scheduled programming....




We have advised Cox to try this, else get Scientific Atlanta, the card maker, involved as Scientific Atlanta has created a patch to help resolve this issue.

I will not exchange or refund your purchase at this time as I feel that this issue is not a fault of the television (it is Cable Labs self verified).




masterp2,

They are blowing you off again.

These two issues seem to be the crux of the problem. I would go right back to Toshiba and tell them that the S/A Cablecard has been certified by CableLabs and their television has only been self-verified by Toshiba (not to be confused with CableLabs self-verified, Bulls%^t). This alone means any talk of a "patch" is clearly the fault of the TV tuner. Do they really believe that Cox should have to install patches on Cablecards because a television is not compliant? How many "patched" cards does Toshiba recommend they keep on hand? What happens when you move to a Motorola system? Does Motorola now need to issue a "patch" for your television?

Good luck.... :)