End of QAM tuners ?

[Dave62]

Ummmm, is it ?

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

[evilpenguin]

*sigh* yeah, probably, at least with the big ones like Comcast. This will be a major cost savings to the cable companies while at the same time providing them witih new and exciting opportunities to nickel and dime their customers.

Comcast Seattle has been on the chopping block for a while as a test market (I think 9/28 is the day QAM dies here) but I can't imagine that they won't fast track this to the rest of the nation ASAP.

[reggie14]

Ick. I don't see why Comcast would really care. Between the two that they give out for no extra cost and the $2/month fee for the other ones, I have a hard time believing they're really making any appreciable amount of money on these things. I'm not really sure how advanced the security is for these things, but I'm guessing it probably lets the DTAs pick up SD channels that fall outside the expanded basic tier.

evilpenguin-
What sort of warning did you get from Comcast on this? I would basically expect them to just flip the encryption switch without any warning, since they don't really seem to acknowledge the existence of QAM tuners anyway.

[evilpenguin]

Originally Posted by reggie14

Ick. I don't see why Comcast would really care. Between the two that they give out for no extra cost and the $2/month fee for the other ones, I have a hard time believing they're really making any appreciable amount of money on these things. I'm not really sure how advanced the security is for these things, but I'm guessing it probably lets the DTAs pick up SD channels that fall outside the expanded basic tier.

Its not these things that they'd be making money on, but having a low cost box that they can single out channels on will allow them to create more tiers of service without complicated filtering at cable drop. Less filtering means less cable techs having to come out to do installs/uninstalls. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if they just stopped physically disconnecting people all together since without the box 99% of the signals on the cable with be will be essentially useless.

Originally Posted by reggie14

What sort of warning did you get from Comcast on this? I would basically expect them to just flip the encryption switch without any warning, since they don't really seem to acknowledge the existence of QAM tuners anyway.

It seems to be a 2 step process.

First they reclaim the analog channels and give you 40-50 HD channels with the new space and leave the expanded basic QAM channels in the clear. That seems to be wrapping up with downtown Seattle scheduled for 9/28 from what I've read on the AVS forums and the newspaper. That's the good step.

The bad step is the one that seems to be slowly cropping up now where people on the outskirts of Seattle are reporting that their local headend has started encrypting QAM channels so they're only getting 10-20 + local HD rather than the 70 they were getting before.

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

The bad step is the one that seems to be slowly cropping up now where people on the outskirts of Seattle are reporting that their local headend has started encrypting QAM channels so they're only getting 10-20 + local HD rather than the 70 they were getting before.

Well, I take full responsibility for this. I noticed that I was getting most of my expanded basic tier in QAM a few weeks ago, and shortly thereafter I bought an HDHR. So, it makes perfect sense that just after doing that I'd find my HDHR significantly less useful.

Oh well, I'm just hoping my firewire recording box keeps working. Maybe I'll even have to pick up another one, and possibly an HD-PVR.

[Brent]

As I'm reading this I don't see how its "the end of QAM tuners" really. Time Warner and many other cable companies have limited unencrypted QAM to the locals already - for over a year. And the decision to grant waivers on these "dumb" devices doesn't seem to allow the cable companies to encrypt all QAM does it?

EDIT: But it does mean the faster end to analog channels without a cable box right? And fewer unencrypted QAM channels for many.

[reggie14]

Presumably the locals will still be available. This is just the FCC granting some exceptions to the separable security (cable card) requirement, which is a different issue from FCC rule prohibiting local broadcast networks from being encrypted.

So you're right Brent, QAM won't go away entirely. But, its been pretty nice to use the HDHR lately, instead of my analog tuners, for SDTV. The picture quality isn't that much better, but the file sizes are significantly smaller. I need to set my analog tuners to 3GB/hr to be satisfied, while the digital SD channels come out around 1.5GB/hr.

[Brent]

But it will give the cable companies an option to sell the basic tier with the "dumb" box and drop all analogs which is also bad for cable users correct?

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by Brent

But it will give the cable companies an option to sell the basic tier with the "dumb" box and drop all analogs which is also bad for cable users correct?

Exactly. This is all part of Comcast's (and the other companies) plan to drop the analog channels. You might even be able to let the DTAs access multiple tiers rather than just the expanded basic lineup. I'd guess that would require the DTAs to know and use multiple decryption keys, and I'm not sure if they can do that. I've heard the DTAs have pretty rudimentary security capabilities, but I don't really know what that means.

But, presumably this will close the last door for recording non-local channels without a cable box. But, it's just a matter of time before you're going to want to watch everything in HD anyway, so maybe it's not a big deal. I was always kind of hoping Comcast would start broadcasting the expanded basic HD channels in clear QAM. Actually, for now I'm getting TNT-HD and Universal-HD in clear QAM.

[Dave62]

Maybe the end of QAM tuners is a little extreme. Still, it's not a good development. My system gets more and more complicated with each passing month.

I fear most of my existing QAM tuners (I have 4) will need to be replaced with a STB and HDPVR.

Imagine, taking my wonderful HDHR and replacing it with 2x STB and 2x HDPVR. I'll need a bigger cabinet... and another UPS... and lots more patience to reconfigure everything...

All this new spending... Hey! This is a jobs stimulus plan.

[Fuzzy]

As stated earlier, this isn't affecting everyone, as a LOT of people out there don't get ANY clear-QAM to begin with. I know on my Charter line-up, I'm only able to get locals, plus maybe 4 other channels (and those 4 are nothing I've ever wanted to watch).

Obviously I can't expect them to really care about us as the fringe side-crowd (the computer based QAM guys), but with so many TV's being sold with built-in QAM tuners, it really seems like a pain to do this. Still, I wonder how many people with newer TV's are getting just basic cable?

[SHS]

Basic = This usly only your Local channel sometime a few extra open channel Analog or QAM if that Cable Companie has gone full digital and switch is not allow on local channel there fix open channel.
Lifeline Basic = Same above depend on the Cable Companies on they list as above.
Expanded Basic = Uesly you receive over 50+ channels both in low and high channel number.

Think of this device as a CableCARD type setup there is very good reason why the FCC ban set-tops with integrated security and approved only separable security such as the CableCard or a downloadable conditional access system.

[Beefcake550]

I have Charter as well. From day one, I have only been able tog et the locals via QAM, so as long as they don't get rid of unencrypted QAM, I'll be happy-ish. I have an HDHR along with an HD-PVR.

-Brian

[evilpenguin]

Originally Posted by Brent

As I'm reading this I don't see how its "the end of QAM tuners" really. Time Warner and many other cable companies have limited unencrypted QAM to the locals already - for over a year. And the decision to grant waivers on these "dumb" devices doesn't seem to allow the cable companies to encrypt all QAM does it?

EDIT: But it does mean the faster end to analog channels without a cable box right? And fewer unencrypted QAM channels for many.

Well, I had my fingers crossed that clear-QAM was going to become the new "Cable Ready", but this ruling certainly pushes that in the opposite direction. Sure, HTPC's are a casualty no one cares about but us, but the average person is going to start complaining when they need a box and 2nd remote for every TV they own. Didn't consumers already win this fight 20 years ago when cable companies first tried to force boxes on everyone?

[Brent]

Originally Posted by evilpenguin

Well, I had my fingers crossed that clear-QAM was going to become the new "Cable Ready", but this ruling certainly pushes that in the opposite direction. Sure, HTPC's are a casualty no one cares about but us, but the average person is going to start complaining when they need a box and 2nd remote for every TV they own.

Lets not kid ourselves. The FCC is not fighting for us, the consumer. It would be nice to have most clear-QAM but I gave up much hope for that when Time Warner limited me to locals only a while back. I'm not a huge fan of the move to web-based distribution of TV content either because it gives them even more power in the long run.

[SHS]

Who know maybe near future something like WinTV-CI + CableCard or something like ATI TV Wonder Digital Cable Tuner but notire to MCE at all we nere can what going to happing for all we know the day of recoder maybe over.

[stanger89]

Not going to happen, I don't know how Europe lucked out, but here in the US there's no way Cable Labs, Dish, or DirecTV will allow a recording device to be made that records to an unencrypted format.

DirecTV worked on a DVB-CI like card at one point, but deep-6'd it. ATI's DCTs aren't limited to MCE because of some deal with MS, it's because only MS had the access to the system to build a secure recording platform, which is what CableLabs requires for CableCard certified devices.

The content companies (ie MPAA) are demanding complete control over their content from leaving the studio to coming out your TV, and the middle men (cable/sat/packaged media) are content to go along with those demands. And with them all including DVRs in their service that work for most people, nobody cares what happens to those of us who aren't content with the limitations of DVRs.

[SHS]

stanger89 you never know what going happing just like with HD-PVR even I though for sure it was going get canned but as old saying gose if there will there a way hehehe.

The content companies (ie MPAA) are demanding complete control over their content

That never going to happing becuases if MPAA had it there way there would be no VCR, DVR, Camcorders nor any PC Capture card weather not it Analog or Digital.

[evilpenguin]

I know the HD-PVR is the silver bullet to save us from the cable companies meddling, but I was just hopping it wouldn't be necessary because its the most expensive single tuner you can buy.

[Dave62]

Other than broadcast networks, it seems like the HDPVR will be the last game in town. I wonder why there's no competition for it yet. Is the analog hole really going to remain open ?

I can see it now, 1 HDHR replaced with 2x HDFury, 2x STB, and 2x HDPVR. If that happens I quit.