TiVo, Sony and others to FCC: 'gateways' should replace CableCARD
By Ben Drawbaugh 
posted December 23rd 2009 12:56PM
posted December 23rd 2009 12:56PM
All the comments to the FCC in response to the call for ideas to replace the failed CableCARD idea were due this week so we spent a little time reading a few of them and found some overwhelming trends. Everyone seems to applaud the death of CableCARD and is pushing for an end to the associated mandates as well as those related to 1394. Neither of these two ideas worked out as planned as is evident by the fact that most consumers don't use them. What's more interesting though is the recommendations and none were as detailed and thought out as TiVo's -- although we admit we didn't read them all. The idea TiVo and others are getting behind is what might be known as a gateway, which we envision would look a lot like a cable modem. The key here is that while various gateways would be available depending on the medium your preferred provider used (coax, satellite, fiber), they'd all share a common interface on the consumer side and as you might expect this common interface would be of the IP variety with standard internet protocols like HTTP and SSL on top of it.
The way this would work is that the gateway would support Ethernet, MoCA, WiFi or whatever physical connection that would connect it to your home network. Then any device could discover its services via something like Bonjour and then gain access to both linear and VOD content via HTTP, or whatever. This way TiVo or anyone else could create a device (DVR, smartphone, TV) that connects to the home network and discovers and accesses these services. TiVo argues that this model would help spur competition because it would allow the video providers to do their own thing on their own equipment and use whatever medium they desire for transmission, while at the same time give consumers the choice to access the content they paid for via any device that supports the standard protocols. TiVo does point out that the FCC needs to be careful or this gateway might become a gatekeeper. But the real key here though is that no single entity like CableLabs would be able to enforce restrictions on how you enjoy your content, but the gateway would have to offer all the same services that you can get with a provider issued set-top box. The other great thing about this idea is that consumer electronics companies could make just about any device work on cable, satellite or whatever. Which would also work in the providers favor because even if your provider decided it was time to rip and replace for the next new thing -- or you switch providers -- the video devices you bought would keep right on truckin'.
What is really up in the air though is exactly what standards this gateway would be required to support and while everyone seems to think it'd be great if it supported standards like DLNA and RVU, most don't seem to believe they should be mandatory. The other sticky point that wasn't exactly spelled out by TiVo comments was DRM. Obviously the content industry won't sign off on any plan that doesn't at least offer some levels of protection, so this is something that would have to be worked out. This of course could be as simple as using DTCP-IP or choosing a DRM standard like Microsoft's PlayReady or Apple's FairPlay, but any DRM would likely get in the way of a truly open system.
Overall we like this idea because not only is it simple enough that it might actually work, but because it still gives the operators the opportunity to keep its proprietary offerings -- for those who just don't care about things like DVRs and integrating internet services with traditional broadcast TV. In the end we really just want a choice when it comes to how we consume the content we pay for and just about anything has to be better than what we have now.
Here's an easier idea, stop encrypting the stream and you wouldn't have to worry about any of these silly devices. Cable companies can physically control which houses already get cable; why encrypt? For satellite you need a receiver and the service can be tied to that.
@fatslug You'll still need the media converter so that the STB or PC doesn't have to deal with coax vs fiber vs ethernet, etc. You'll also still need a certain amount of intelligence in the gateway to handle details specific to the connection - cable signal levels, satellite calibration, etc.
Tivo would love this, I'm sure - they could make one Tivo, instead of a Tivo HD with CableCard, a Tivo SD with analog, a new DirecTivo with satellite integration, etc. They're also clearly positioning the home network as the means of connecting, so any device or PC can partake of the content - and presumably allow Tivo to upgrade existing boxes (all of which have ethernet) to handle any new standards.
@fatslug
Here, here...
The fact that cable-card devices did not work simply because some folks just didn't support the technology... Nor did most companies have enough internal skill-sets to support it's need... S@it, I was over on another site where a person was told directly by his cable company that they just didn't support CCards at all... Additionally, most companies never informed their clients nor made it a cost efficient change... I think I pay $3.00 less for the CCard then the HD box itself from my cable provider which is absolutely ridiculous...
@fatslug
Commercial satellite TV is encrypted. Decryption is handled by the receiver. Anyway, in the cable world access control used to be done by simply installing a trap to filter out the frequencies of content you weren't paying for. The problem with this method is a technician has to go out, climb the pole, and replace that trap every-time you change services. That's expensive and easily defeated. Just take the trap off and put a different one on. Cable lines are pretty far away from the power lines so you'd be surprised how many folks are willing to climb up there and do it. Additionally delivering certain channels encrypted is part of the contract a service provider has with content providers. They don't really have any choice.
@(Unverified) Some newer neighborhoods like mine don't even have power lines. The cable is provided via a large green box on the corner. Easy to access.
So what would people do with their old equipment if this idea became a standard? Would I need a converter box for my older TV that doesn't support my new cable delivery system?
@LowSky
The old stuff would keep working as well as any new boxes from the provider, this would just be for those who wanted to use 3rd party devices. The cable provider could use the gateway for their own services if they wanted to obviously.
I have a TiVo HD and use a cable card with cox service. I haven't had any problems whatsoever. I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. If your using an HTPC, and are trying to use a cable card I can sort of see an issue there.
In fact I like using a cable card better than a cable box. We had a set top box before, and it was a somewhat large box (no dvr) and it definitely had a cable card in it. Whats the point of a cable box if it already uses a cable card?
Our technicain installed it about a month ago, and told us that the cable card was going out of date.
Honestly though I don't view this as a problem. So what if I can't access the on demand stuff. The free stuff is usually old indy films, and that's what netflix instant watch is for right?
Other then HTPC's I don't see an issue with cable cards, and I know that not too many people build their own HTPC's. I was going to, but a TiVo HD was way cheaper.
@ryguy222
The problem is that your TiVo HD can't access VOD (free or pay) and needs a TA to access SDV channels. You might respond with tru2way, but then you are stuck accessing VOD via the operators UI, not the TiVo -- I assume part of the reason you bought a TiVo was because you prefer the UI. According to the TiVo statement, the CableLabs tru2way agreement actually forbids TiVo from integrating web services in with the tru2way UI, so in other words any CableCARD device would need multiple UIs. You might as well get separate boxes.
@BenD I'm not sure that many people using a Tivo or a CableCard PC really care about VOD. If the choice is the current solution without VOD, or a new solution with VOD, I'd personally want to stay with the current solution- anything on demand can be recorded or accessed via the internet anyway, sometimes even for cheaper than the VOD prices.
@jhoff80
I'm talking free VOD not pay per view and eventually all scripted programming will be on demand. We're not talking about what will be released this year, we're talking about the future. Any solution decided on today would take at least 1-2 years before it was implemented.
@BenD
If we're going to talk about the future then, then the future would be just using a straight up Ethernet connection. I mean as far as encryption goes, you would just need to enter in your username or password, and boom your in. You could access VOD if you wanted to. I mean my TiVo can access netflix watch instant, so we know it's not impossible to do over the net. That way TiVo users wouldn't need to upgrade, and most cable boxes and TV's already have Ethernet ports.
Forget all this coaxial, network encryption garbage.
@ryguy222
Two big problems with your theory. For starters 90% of Americans don't have Ethernet drops behind their TV and two 100% of Americans don't want to type in a username or password just to watch TV.
It has to run over coax and it has to continue to work the same as it does now. We're looking for new options, not to get rid of what we know works.
@BenD
I didn't either, but TONS of people have wi-fi or have access to one. I bought a wireless N adapter that cost 50 bucks, and it works great. Essentially ethernet is the same thing as Coaxial, Ethernet starts off as Coaxial, only ethernet is faster. If the set top box had it's own wi-fi, or had an internal modem that would also be an easy option.
If we're going to have new technology, people will be willing to change things up.
@ryguy222
Actually Ethernet is a layer 2 network technology that will work over many layer 1 technologies like coax and CAT5. And this proposed gateway would support IP over coax via the MoCA protocol (see link in post) which is also layer 2. It is much much faster and more reliable than 802.11N (MoCA 1.1 is 270Mbps, real world performance).
I think cablecard would have not faled if cable companies were required to use them as well. If they had been prohibited to use integrated boxes and required to use cable cards, it would be different. As is, there is no incentive for the cable company to make the cards work. By not making them work, they tie you into their box... let's see... they don't do work and you have to lease their box. They spend resources making cablecards work and they have less income, no incentive for them to do so.
@xtasi
That's good thinking, which is why the FCC required exactly that. The problem is that the operators just installed the CableCARDs before hand and in the end the installers still didn't need to know anything about CableCARD to support the operators set-tops.
@xtasi The cable companies ARE required to use CableCard.
@drumist
I believe that cableco is required to "suppot" it. Meaning, that it should be made available to us poor saps.On several threads, people have mentioned that when they call and ask about it, the cable company doesn't know what "cablecard" means.
@xtasi
They are required to install a CableCARD if you request it. But I had multiple technicians come to the house to get my CableCARD working and everyone of them said something along the lines of "Oh god, these things never work." One actually said "Why would anyone ever not get a box.", right as I was standing there.
Jokes on them though, I just downgraded to basic cable rather than pay for a digital package and their crap ass settop box with a circa 1990 UI. And I'm all the happier for it. Still get the network channels in HD and all the important cable channels in analog.
@BenD I was home when my parents got their CableCard installed in their Tivo and the installer was actually very knowledgeable (I think he was a supervisor in a different region) and I got into a discussion with him about this. He mentioned something about the fact that the CableCards that are installed inside of the boxes that the cable company rents are "pre-paired" from the factory - basically, they are hard-coded to the box and "active" when they are deployed which is very different than needing to install one in the field and have them paired with a 3rd party device. I think that the problem is that the requirements for CableCard in the cable companies devices is that they are not actually separate from the boxes, even though they handle the authentication (I know the boxes that Comcast rents have covers over the CableCard slot - maybe even soldered in place - so much for being separate).
Of course, right when CableCard is starting to become a viable setup they want to change it.
We finally get the OEM PC restriction removed, and finally are getting the Ceton MOCUR tuner, and now they want to switch to something else.
I've said this in other threads on the subject, but the issue isn't so much the hardware as it is the Cable companies' resistance to installing it.
Besides that, remember when the idea was to have a CableCard slot in every TV, DVR, etc? Maybe if they went forward with that and advertised it a little then people would use it. Now it's pretty much the ATI tuner and a Tivo HD that have the slot (accessible at least, I know the newer cable boxes use it internally), so most people don't even know it exists.
But, I have to admit, as someone who has four ClearQAM tuners already (and only one OCUR tuner), I'd love a device like a cable modem that receives the digital encrypted signal, and decrypts that to ClearQAM for all the channels I pay for.
As for the above comment, unless your network has moved to switched digital video, everyone who subscribes to cable gets every stream. I can physically access the HBO stream, for example, over my QAM tuner. It needs to be encrypted so that I can't watch it unless I'm a subscriber. With SDV, they only send the channel that you're watching at the time, but not all cable companies use that yet.
@jhoff80
No one said CableCARD support was going away, just that going forward we needed a more open platform. And CableCARD didn't just fail because the operators didn't support it well, it failed because you as a customer have to sacrifice services you've paid for (VOD, SDV channels) in order to use it. And the interface itself is expensive to implement since no one uses PCMCIA anymore.
@jhoff80 you also have to remember that any changes that will be made are several years off. This is just proposing ideas, then they all have to get together and decide on a standard. (and if they're anything like IEEE, that could take years!) Then after a standard is agreed upon, the CE companies have to make the devices themselves, so it could be 5 years before we see any devices on the shelves.
This approach makes a lot of sense, and that's why it won't go anywhere. Cable/Satellite companies rely to some extent on the difficulty in switching from one system to another. If I buy a bunch of satellite boxes for each TV, I'm not going to want to lose that investment, so probably won't switch to cable. Cable companies want the monthly fee for each box for each TV in a home.
This proposal would eliminate both of those issues, and would foster more competition and lower prices. What cable/satellite executive wants that?
@orev
None. Which is why it is a good thing the FCC gets to make the call and it's a good thing that Congress passed the Telecom Act of 1996 which requires the exact competition you mention.
Keep yer government hands off my cable!
I agree, all this encryption are just a waste of time. hello content developers! All you content is already pirated! and Cable Card has not been cracked.
If you insist on using this gateway to do decryption just give me a clear stream of content that I pay for out of it. If you continue to encrypt it I will just go pirate it even if I do pay for the content.
Mitchell
as a consumer i like the idea of having more control over what I can and cannot do at home, but someone who works in the field for a cable company, cable cards are not the answer. I cannot count the number of times I've run into issues with a tv's firmware which prevent it from properly decoding a cable card stream. And no, it is not a good idea for me to be upgrading someone elses tv firmware. I could deal with that on my own, but the average consumer cannot.
Invision is the lack of sight. Envision means to imagine. Sorry to be a spelling queen.
The cable industry proposed the cable card system and subsequently the tru2way. It is clearly their baby. (You know that a cable card looks like a PC card but it isn't? Why use a standards based solution when you can make it proprietary? And from what I could tell when getting the things paired up, they have to use lower layer DLC type information to do the paring -- shades of SNA!)
I have TiVo HDs with cable cards. Installing an maintaining (Comcast switched from Motorola to SA cards here earlier this year) was not a pleasant, nor a quick task. (also, once the cards spontaneously lost their pairing) It has taken dozens of phone calls to both TiVo and Comcast support to get the setup to work and continue working.
I have friends and relatives who would love TiVio HD and for some I might even buy them as gifts. But I would be stuck trying to get the cable cards paired would be called every time something didn't work. So I don't recommend and I don't gift them with TiVo HDs or anything else that takes cable cards.
My situation is an example of why CC are strangling the 3rd party consumer equipment side and alienating cable customers. And why the FCC (finally) acted.
This time I hope the consumer equipment manufacturers get their designs approved. Then maybe the consumer would have a fighting chance of plugging things in and being able to relax because the setup will just work.
A nice start, but probably won't go anywhere without new legislation. Isn't it about time that Congress enabled the FCC to specify like it does for OTA, the frequencies that can be used, the encryption that can be used and the modulation techniques that can be used.
If we regulated the technical aspects of cable delivery and forbid the cable companies from renting receivers (much like the telephone companies no longer rent telephones) then there would be a free and open market. Since the government want to get rid of OTA broadcasting, why not regulate cable delivery as if it were OTA.
The cable company would still have the ability to tier and restrict and sell premium services, but they wouldn't have the right to do anything but deliver it to a coax outlet. TV sets and other devices then could be built with standards to enable reception just like they do for OTA.
It certainly would be in the best interests of the consumer.
This will never fly anytime soon. There are too many open issues, and by the time you try to nail them down with some standards, the technology will have already moved on.
Cablecards would have been a decent solution if people had been able to by TVs and other devices with Cablecard slots. But today, the only two things on the market with Cablecard slots are Tivo and Moxi. TVs with Cablecard slots are no longer sold. Why is that?
Right now, the technology in set-top boxes is changing quickly. Each year, new features are available that make the old boxes seem obsolete. This is a double-edged sword for both consumers & cable companies, since no one likes to change out equipment all the time. But people do want new capabilities.
TV & the internet do appear to be on a collision course. More & more people are dropping cable & satellite and getting the content they want via the internet (or Netflix). Once a majority of people get their content this way, cable companies will start to turn off the TV broadcast pipes and just be ISPs. They may still sell cable TV service, but for this they'll just give you a little dumbed-down nettop CPU to hook up to your TV to pull in some channels via the web. This will be just for folks who want to stick with the old paradigm.
Perhaps by that time, YouTube (or some other site) will be so big, that they will be the "standard" way to watch video content in the future (they're pretty close now).
@CityZen The reason you see such few TVs with Cablecard slots is that the customer just doesn't want them. And it's for a very easy reason. There is no way to get a guide reliably. I don't know how they missed it, but for some reason the Cablecard standard did not allow for the TV to read the guide data that is sent in the Out Of Band management channel where the Set Top Box gets it from. Without any kind of guide, channel surfing thru 100-200 channels isn't feasible. There was only one solution and that was the TV guide stuff that was sent mostly by PBS stations but that system was grossly unreliable. Now a days with a lot of TVs having Ethernet connections it wouldn't be a big deal to get the guide via the Internet (like Tivo and MediaCenter do) but back then TVs just didn't have Ethernet jacks.
After reading the Tivo brief (the Sony one was very badly written), I am kind of excited about this approach. I was wondering how you were going to convert the cable plant from the QAM approach to an IP based solution. The gateway as Tivo described solves it. On the cable side it is all QAM and on the user side it's ethernet, MoCA, and probably a analog phone port. This solves the issue with compatibility as you could connect older QAM/Cablecard equipment directly to the cable bypassing the gateway and the new stuff can use the IP link. From a Media Center point of view it would look like an HDHomerun where the PC receives the MPEG-2 stream via UDP/IP over an Ethernet connection. The only concern I would have is how many QAM tuners would be in this thing? You just know the providers would only want to provide two. Would we able to purchase the gateway or would someone like me who would like 4 cable tuners for his HTPC have to rent two gateways?
@(Unverified) Actually how I am envisioning this thing looking is like a Verizon FIOS ONT. It would be a box somewhere on the residence with a Coax IN and a Cablecard slot that the CATV technician plugs into and on the customer side there is Gigabit Ethernet, a coax pass-thru (for legacy equipment) + MoCA RG-6 connection, and a analog phone port. What would be nice on the user side is 3 slots where you the customer could put 2 QAM tuners per slot (comes with one at install, the 2nd and 3rd are optional) so the user could have 2-6 QAM->IP tuners based on their needs.
I can't imagine the cable companies getting behind this, which would make it no different than CableCard. Without cable company support, it comes a non-starter. Why not just deliver content over the internet and bypass the cable companies all together?