AVS Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,971 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
By Popular request, I am doing a simple poll to expand the other poll at

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=194208


The purpose of this one will be to allow people who want 169Time to venture into offering a similar 1394 I/O for DVHS recording to other than DBS equipment.


Please choose one of the following two choices. You may vote in both Polls and this is encouraged. I have worded the questions so that this Poll will not interfere with the results of the other Poll but will expand the scope of what is desired by those who plan to support 169Time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
It seems that noone has replied to this thread yet so I will be the first to share my opinion. I can see how the market for the 6000 may be significantly larger than the 4DTV, but if you think about it, it may not be worth it to develop something for the 6000 at this time. Why? With the introduction of the 921 PVR early next year, many might go for a simple "official" product rather than bother modding their 6000 and using a DVHS deck/PC to record. Of course there are many anxious people here wanting to record DiscoveryHD for example, but by the time (and if) Dish switches to 8PSK completely and makes the 5000 combo obsolete, the PVR 921 should be there to handle all the recording needs and I'm sure clever individuals here will think of ways to feed the transport stream from the PVR to manipulate in a PC, DVHS deck, etc. Perhaps when the PVR comes out it would be ideal for 169time to develop an addon to it. The PVR would allow people to bypass expensive DVHS decks/tapes and/or the need for a dedicated computer to do the recording. Then only the streams wanted to be archived to DVD, for example, could be fed to the PC via the 169time addon. My point is that I think an addon for the 4DTV would be the ideal way to go right now since it's an incredible receiver itself and has a huge advantage to DBS in both quality and programming. With the addition of firewire capabilities it would be THE receiver for quality buffs like myself to own and play with. Big thanks to the 169time developers and I hope I was of some help in making their decision.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,685 Posts
Your assumption is the 921 will ship in the near future. The samsung was 6 months late and Bruce has been promising the Promise module this entire Year. The question for any new STB will be how much of the existing products can be leveraged with minimal investment, and time. As Don has said many times, we all hope the window will really close for 169time one of these days, but am not holding my breath, just letting my HD library grow.


dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
There is one thing that a 169Time modification to 6000 would allow that the 921 would not - recording PPV. More likely than not PPV will be marked as copy none, so a 169Time mod to the 6000 might be the only way to record this stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
871 Posts
Don,

The HDD 200 serves as the generic hidef sidecar for all Motorola digital boxes be it 4DTV, StarChoice, or cable.


Modding the HDD200 would make the HDVR available to all three user groups simultaneously.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,971 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Todd- Not sure what you mean, technically. Are you saying that if I have HDTV cable here or Star Choice in Canada, that buying a Sony HDD200 with a proposed 169Time HDVR would automatically allow that receiver to connect to cable for HDTV recording? Can you explain that in more detail?

TIA


leszek1- Many people have made similar statements over the years, starting with the first of us recording to 3/4Umatic back in the 70's. However, these claims like you make are just not valid because they assume many things will happen that in some respects not only violate actual 1394 licensing agreements but also are not based in current practice or policy direction or insider info. Dishnetwork is well aware of the current usage of the 5000/HDTV modulators and assumes that all current owners of these systems keep them because they are recording. Dish not only has no intention of crippling their transmissions by making special requests of licensed providers but is actually encouraging time shifting through continued development of products to achieve this. In the words of one insider I spoke with about this very subject- To think we would sell a product that will time shift and allow for user recording and then shut it off by an illegal signal encryption would not only violate our license agreements but also sabotage our own product. If there will be copy protection encryption it will be done by the provider, not DishNetwork.


The whole issue about this subject is totally out of the mindsets of the doomsday crystal ball gazers. This doomsday prediction has been with us ever since we began recording TV programs by people who spend their time dreaming up reasons why they won;'t be able to do something tomorrow. Meanwhile the rest of us just continue doing it and continue to smile at the doomsday crusaders. Yes, your post brought one of those smiles to my face.

Besides, IF the 5C were to be implemented, then by pure technology even the 6000 + an HDVR would not work either because there is no DVHS VCR hi def that is made that has not implemented 5C code. Therefore, the HDVR connected to a DVHS where 5c is only at one end of the 1394 connection would disable it as well. 5c requires that the system be implemented at both ends of the 1394 connected devices. The only reason why our 169Time systems work today is because, contrary to all the doomsday predictors, no one has yet implemented 5c on HBO, Showtime, CBS HD, DishPPV, DirecTV PPN and HDNet. Did I miss any that we do now with 169Time? Nope! We are still recording every day, contrary to what the Doomsday predictors said years ago. You know what I say- If you are a doomsday worshiper, go up on that mountain top and wait. I'm busy having fun with my toys!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
800 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
Are you saying that if I have HDTV cable here or Star Choice in Canada, that buying a Sony HDD200 with a proposed 169Time HDVR would automatically allow that receiver to connect to cable for HDTV recording?
The Motorola (not Sony) HDD-200 is a generic HD decoder box that connects via a serial link to several different Motorola/GI boxes. The list includes the DSR 920, 921, 922, and 905 (all flavors of 4DTV C-band/Ku-band receivers), the Navigo 401 (used by Star Choice for Ku reception in Canada), and at least one digital cable box (I think it's the DCT2000). A FireWire mod to the HDD-200 would make the new capabilities available to the users of all those boxes.


Of course, not all HD cable systems are using STBs compatible with the HDD-200, and in fact the box now being rolled out by Comcast in a lot of areas (the Motorola DCT5100) is an all-in-one STB with its own component outputs. So the potential benefit of an HDD-200 mod is now less than it would have been.


I would certainly buy it if it were available, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
The only reason why our 169Time systems work today is because, contrary to all the doomsday predictors, no one has yet implemented 5c on HBO, Showtime, CBS HD, DishPPV, DirecTV PPN and HDNet.
Don,


5c is a firewire protocol, and cannot be "implemented" at the broadcasting source. It can only be implemented on the firewire device itself. Witness the firewire enabled CableTV boxes, which had 5c copy none turned on even for OTA signals! (You can do a search in for that story - pretty amusing.)


Leszek
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,971 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The encryption is what I was talking about, You know that and you know that I know that. Encryption may be added all the way at the source by the copyright holder and while the signal providers like cable aren't supposed to implement it on their own under the license agreement, it doesn't mean it won't happen, as we saw in the case of Cablevision of LI.


Ron, thanks for the clarification. I really didn't follow the connection between the cable boxes and the DirecTV HDD200 receiver.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,534 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
The encryption is what I was talking about, You know that and you know that I know that. Encryption may be added all the way at the source by the copyright holder and while the signal providers like cable aren't supposed to implement it on their own under the license agreement, it doesn't mean it won't happen, as we saw in the case of Cablevision of LI.
Don,


I'm still not following what you're claiming. Encryption is added today at the source. This is true for all premium content. HBO is never in the clear. It is encrypted in the link between HBO and Dish/Cable provider and it is encrypted between Dish/Cable provider and the Dish/Cable STB. Today the only place you get it in the clear is from Dish5000 or 169Time. I see no reason why they would not continue the encryption past the STB once the STB has firewire with 5c.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,971 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
leszek1- This discussion is here pointless and has no bearing on the subject topic. If you wish to pursue this, please start a thread on it and I'd be happy to learn your sources and documentation for your claims before I spend anymore time on it..
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top