Time Warner Cable Navigator - Page 8

Yes--it's seems that they've changed their tune. They had a lot of negative things to say about it at first--I can recall reading one of the officers pretty flatly state that he thought that it was a bad idea as specified.

After I read that document you linked to, I called my friend who works on one of the TiVo firmware teams (ad features). He says that, while they've been working on the platform-specific ports the MSOs let them know that OCAP and platform-independence for their offerings was where they were headed, so they've basically kowtowed to that. In one way I know that this is cool with them--I interviewed them for a job a couple of years back (ended that job search with a disability retirement). Their software architects are very gung-ho on true object-oriented development--they were doing everything in C++ back then and the switch to a Java profile shouldn't be very traumatic.

The cool thing about that is that you should eventually be able to use TiVo on 3rd party OCAP DVRs if you cable operator offers it. (That's if any such things should ever come to market--again, how do you sell a device with no native UI? Look at the plethora of AV/HDDs available out there ). Manufacturers could even take to embedding HDDs in their monitors--Mitsubishi has several monitors with embedded DVRs; you could download the the TiVo GUI into those as well.

I found the following quote from the document that Paul Simoneau linked to interesting, especially the word "targeted." I had thought that OCAP would be deployed much sooner (middle of 2007).

I think maybe they're talking about full deployment across all of their systems, nationwide. Again, I don't think that OCAP is required by the FCC--just separable security. All the boxes that they deploy after 1 July 2007 can't have embedded conditional access methods and have to use CableCARDs of some kind. They can achieve that without OCAP.

Well, I suppose you could refer to it as TiVo changing their tune. I would probably classify it as TiVo being dragged into it. They bitched about OCAP when there was a chance of making a change in the direction of software deployments for the cableco's. Now that OCAP is a near-certainty, they have no choice but to go ahead and go along with it.

What will then? From just casual reading I was under the impression that the whole problem with SDV and CableCard was the fact that the current CableCard implementation (or card host I guess is more accurate) is not bidirectional? I must not have the whole picture and it sounds like you do. Maybe a short and sweet primer on CableCard and SDV? This might not be the right forum for it, but it would be nice to have a single source for a accurate definition, and it sounds like you have the knowledge to provide one.

In the context in which I stated that, I was making the point that M-CARDs without bidirectionality could benefit TiVo, since it could be used to authenticate and decode multiple channels simultaneously. That doesn't require bidirectional communication.

Right now, SDV is integral to the proprietary, platform-specific code in cable boxes. An OCAP-capable host (which, by definition, implements the bidirectional host interface) can be programmed with the SDV protocols. These are interactive--the box has to ask for a service (i.e., television channel) and receive a response from the network telling it what frequency and program number the stream containing the service is in your neighborhood.

I mentioned before that there's an initiative to define a standard SDV protocol which could be implemented in a light weight fashion by cable "thin clients" which can't sell for enough to justify the added cost of a processor and memory sufficient to host OCAP.

You can find a primer on CableCARD technology here; there's a primer on OCAP here. Enjoy .

Thanks much!

Is this a genuine link?

Doesn't work using Firefox. Pretty much a blank "frame" page with no innards inside the boxes where you'd think something would be.

With IE7 I got a first dialog to fill in your zip code, but then the second page is empty like that first page I got with Firefox.

Anyway, am I supposed to be seeing something "real"? Or is that your point... that the geniuses at TWC can't build a working web page??

The link is broken. The Time Warner websites are set up to provide different content based on your location. I am not sure how to link to a particular region's content.

xnappo

Go to their main WEB site www.timewarnercable.com and enter a ZIP code for a city within the region you want.

This should transfer you to the WEB site for that region's Time Warner provider.
According to www.usps.com 64105 is a ZIP code withing Kansas City, MO.

By the way when I tried to enter www.timewarnercable.com a second time in my WEB browser, it still took me to my local Time Warner site, but there was a selection to enter a new location at the top of the WEB page.

Guys (and Gals), And what is wrong with the link provided on THE VERY FIRST POST on this thread?

Okay--I give up. What is wrong with that link? It brings me to a page labelled "Time Warner Cable's Digital Cable DVR" on TWC Nebraska's website.

EDIT: I get it. You meant "why don't you just use the link on the first post in this thread?" in response to all of the preceding chat about what zipcode to use, etc. Nevermind .

Sorry to waste more space but:
1. It wasn't clear from the post that the content was the same as the link on the first page - I still wish someone would post some large images!
2. My guess this link isn't working for people with cookies for their zip code.

xnappo

The pictures in that Answers On Demand page seem pretty large and clear.

I'm using IE7 too and I get a blank window with menu items along the left side, nothing about ZIP code. I click on any of the menu items and get info & movie in the window.

Hmm, I guess that depends on your definition - to me those are tiny. I am talking 1024x768 at least, with more examples of displays while fast forwarding, hitting the iinfo button while watching a program etc...

xnappo

Those would seem to be 640x400--what information do you think might be on those menus that they're too small to show? Why do you need larger images?

You didn't say anything about content before. I agree--there's nothing in that "Answers On Demand" page about controlling DVR playback or manipulating live TV. Except for that DVR section, which seems to be about recording things more than anything else, the "answers" are all about the IPG in general, which would run on non-DVRs.

I can tell the general color scheme from those pics, but can't get a good feel for the font choice etc..

[EDIT] Disregard, I finally was able to get to the large pictures.

Looks hella better than Sara from what I can tell from those small pics though.

xnappo

While there are good reasons to settle on a single software platform, I do not think it's the prime reason for MDN. Ya gotta think in business terms, not technology. A single software platform works on the expense side of the ledger. OCAP (according to what I've read about it) provides them a source of brand new revenue! NEW business. Because, it represents the ability for the cable guys to create new interactive services. And "new services" mean new sources of revenue.

So we get the ideal business move, have the potential for expense reduction AND at the same time have technology in place to sell us new stuff.

Now SDV does neither, none. The money they are and will spend will not reduce expenses (maybe increase?) nor in itself generate new business (although it CAN be a factor in new business). However, SDV is very much needed BY the cable guys because of the competitive landscape. It seems that FIOS from the telcos is the single biggest threat to the cable guys. They already enjoy the benefit of being a legalized monopoly, I'm in a TWC city so I DO NOT have a choice to get Cablevision, Comcast etc. BUT it probably will take a few years, but some day in the future I'll have an actual choice. So, the cable guys HAVE to be in a position to deliver as many streams as the FIOS guys can.

Anyway, I'm sure I'll take tons of shots, so fire away.

With the side benefit that they keep money in-house, since the development was done in-house. No cash going out to external developers any more.



I'm still waiting for a list of these "new services" that makes any sense. Buy a pizza over my cable connection ? Yawn... We've been hearing that same old song and dance for years.



Ummm.... What ?

SDV is a short and medium term fix for the cable guys, to help 'em free up bandwidth. In the long term, they've got problems. They can monkey around all they want with how they allocate bandwidth, but at the end of the day, they're always gonna have less bandwidth than fiber. As HDTV becomes more prevalent, high-speed internet bandwidths increase, cable's shortcomings will become exposed. They're not quite at the point of re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but I don't imagine it will be that long before they need to take a long hard look at their infrastructure.

Also, by fiber I really mean FTTH (fiber to the home), and not FTTN (fiber to the node). FTTN meets the market now, but will be near obsolescent 5-10 years from now. That relatively paltry 25 Mbps will tap out quite quickly as bandwidth utilizations increase in the near future.


Just with that 2nd paragraph's grammar.

A very large benefit from the OCAP DN is that they can give access to their current "Holy Trinity" of interactive services (IPG, IPPV and VOD) to people who buy OCAP capable televisions who don't want a leased STB. Before CableCARD, they could force everyone who wanted more than analog cable to take a box which would give them access to to those services; now, some folks who've purchased Digital Cable Ready televisions are opting to give up access to those services in order to dump their cable STBs and lower their monthly bill by a few bucks (probably less than $100/year, CableCARD vs STB). (I agree with Paul--I've yet to hear about any "new interactive services" that sound likely to generate any significant income. There's little that I can conceivably do on my television that I can't more conveniently do online. But then maybe I have a poor imagination is poor ).

I disagree with your "SDV is a non-revenue generating thing made necessary by the need to compete with the coming FTTH services from the telcos" argument. SDV clears up bandwidth that can be used to generate revenue by other means than just cable television. They can offer ever higher datacomm rates to both consumers and businesses, for one thing.

One of the forthcoming "services" from cable that is being tested here is "Start-Over". This allows the viewer to view a program from the beginning IF they tune into the program while in progress. The viewer can pause and rewind, but not FF (past commercials). It seems to work quite well - however, at the moment, the number of networks that are available that way are pretty limited. But, from what I have heard, programmers are pretty much in favor of it - so we will see more of that. Another service that uses the same technology (as "Start-Over" and SDV) is nDVR (initially also named Mystro by TW). This is basically a networked DVR concept.

These, along with various On-Demand products are intended to compete with the satellite services. However, they are no defense against FTTH (FiOS, etc.)! That is a future threat, and one that cable can compete against by running fiber to the home as well. Satellite is a current threat and these products are intended to fight that. OCAP extends the playing field by enabling all future devices to work with these new services. Cable makes their money by delivering (and charging for) services. Owning and leasing STBs takes capital and does not yield the best return. Till now, the have been a necessary evil - once OCAP is in place, cable will no longer have to do that.

I have a couple of questions for people with Navigator after looking through the 'Answers on Demand'

1. Can you still change the aspect ratio/zoom using the '#' key on the remote?
2. Can you still select the date from the 'Guide'?

Thanks,
xnappo

Everything "looks" better than SARA, but the problems remain. It doesn't matter how different it looks, what matters is function and availablity, the latter being the most important.

I've used (sparingly) Passport at my daughter's in North Carolina, Moxi at my sisiter's in Wisconsin, SARA here at home, and DirecTV at my neighbor's cabin. There are aspects of each that I like (or I should say that I don't mind). SARA does the job of recording what I want and it's been pretty bullett-proof for me for the past 2 years. Passport and Moxi expand on SARA by adding keyboard entry for advanced searching (something I almost never use), by displaying the IPG, recorded programs and programs to be recorded, in different ways, etc.

All those items enhance the functionality for many folks, but I can't remember a single item from either that I miss when I'm back home using SARA. The only item I could use is the Tivo Wish List, so I wouldn't have to rely in TitanTV, especially when I'm away on vacation. I did like being able to view IPG data for a given channel, much like I do using TitanTV. SARA limits that to the 1.5+ hour by 5 channel grid with no other display options.

I didn't see a big difference in selecting items to record or selecting recordings to view other than some options. I didn't play around with series recordings on either because I wasn't going to be at either place long enough and it was summer rerun season. I did have some difficulty trying to help my daughter get Passport to allow her TV to properly expand SD channels and I'm not sure we ever got it set quite right. I wasn't subscribed to the Passort thread at that time.

I did get used to both fairly quickly though. I'm sure if I had used either for any length of time, I could have gotten used to the differences and would probably have come to like some features I didn't get to explore.

But, the bottomline for me has always been that until we actually have options to choose from, all the bashing of one over another and lamenting missing features is pretty much for naught. I would love to have Tivo software, but not at a higher cost. I've heard anywhere from $3-$10/mo for the Tivo port and that's over and above current costs. Tivo hardware is too expensive in a changing world. I've been through 3 different cable boxes in the 3 years I've had HD. Two of those were $500 each retail and I don't know what the 8300 would have cost. If I had had to buy each of those, I'd probably still be on my first box (non-DVR).

However, once things stabilize with OCAP, etc., I might then be persuaded to invest in a purchased DVR. Hitachi just announced a 1T drive for $399 specifically for DVRs. Being able to purchase a DVR with that kind of capacity and the ability to run different software with varying degrees of functionality based on cost will go a long way toward making the DVR a standard piece of equipment. The unknown factor is what impact things like Start Over, more VOD, etc., will have on the long term need for a DVR. If I can't get 8-10 years worth of use, it just doesn't seem prudent to buy one vs continuing to rent the latest from cable.

I am VERY aware of what Start Over is. I work for a company that is one of the main suppliers for this feature, and I'm directly involved in the development of the product/project.

The cablecos are in favor of this, exactly because it's not likely to get them sued as nDVR will. The content providers have their panties in a bunch about nDVR, and are trying to destroy it via law suits. StartOver isn't enough of a threat to make that big a fuss over. So, it'll likely succeed because it isn't innovative enough.




You really think that cableco's are gonna run fiber, when they've already got an existing cable infrastructure in place ? Put down the crack pipe. They're gonna try to squeeze as much as they can out of that existing cable before they even consider laying fiber. DOCSIS 3.0 will be a slight reprieve, but in the end FTTH simply has too many advantages.

Satellite's cooked unless they change their business model. The latencies are too high to provide voice or data services effectively, so they're locked into a video-only business. Put that up against the triple-play (voice,video,data) that the cableco's and telco's can roll out, and it spells doom for the satellite guys (turd bird, indeed).

Oh I agree, I did hedge that by saying it could be a factor in new revenue generation. Remember I said NEW business; freeing up bandwidth and offering potentially more bandwidth for data isn't really "new" business. If I left the impression I thought SDV had no relation to revenue generation, I did not do so intentionally.

Hmmm, my second paragraph appears to contain proper grammar... maybe you meant first or third?

The point I was trying to make was that as I understood it, MDN being an OCAP application "sets the stage for" and "allows" new 2 way things to happen. How they take advantage of it is another issue entirely. AND what we individually think of each possible service isn't as relevant as we think it might be.

In my area, cable is very much fiber to the node already, has been for 2-3 years already. NOBODY is even thinking that FIOS will mean fiber into my apartment, it's going to be fiber to a node as well.

Uh, I do NOT do crack and trust me, TWC-NYC operates on fiber! And neither it nor Verizon are going to do fiber to the home anytime soon. In my market.

Matter of fact, a lot of the services we take for granted did NOT happen here until they laid fiber. DTV and RR only came to me ONLY when they got the fiber laid up here. The curious thing is that they basically started at the southern end of Manhattan, then traveled north. Alphabet City (less expensive housing compromising, a lot of tenement buildings) got fiber goodness a good 18 months before I did.

Now it's also obvious to me that what a cable co does here isn't any guarantee what will happen elsewhere. BUT I'd be almost willing to bet that replacing cooper with fiber is less costly than running brand new fiber.

You're right. It was the third, starting "Now SDV does, neither..." The second paragraph was only a sentence. Sorry for the mix up.



Makes sense for multi-tenant structures to leave it FTTN (node in basement). Residential is a more likely target for FTTH.

This last sentence makes me curious.

Why would a cableco outlay a huge chunk of cash, when (in their minds) they've already got a capable infrastructure laid out ? Obviously, this doesn't apply to cablecos which already have fiber laid out, which I have to assume is in the minority right now.

Also, why do you think that laying fiber is less expensive than laying cable ? Splicing fiber is a hell of a lot harder than traditional cable, you need to upgrade to optical transmission gear versus the commonplace cable stuff, and so on and so on...