http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/ Engadget Comments for Why do CableCARD host devices still cost so much? http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/Apr 17th 2010 9:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/Apr 17th 2010 10:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/Apr 18th 2010 8:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/
basically a PCM card that allows your 3rd party set top box (like a TiVo) to decode the Cable Co's encrypted digital channels]]>Apr 19th 2010 3:13AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/Apr 19th 2010 3:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/
When TVs were available with cablecard slots, it was still too early, and you couldn't get a cable card from your average cable company. I'm still amazed in the number of TVs sold as opposed to simply monitors. I figure most people use a cable box or a DVR, avoiding the TV tuner in their TV entirely. I'd love to see a current poll on how many people use internal TV tuners on their TVs. (exclusively, occasionally, never, for over the air only, or for cable systems)]]>Apr 19th 2010 10:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/If it was not for those stupid restrictions placed by MS and cable labs, we would be see way, way more HTPC's with cable cards installed. You'll have more manufactures for those cards and that would drive down the prices.
If you want to see an uptake in cable card purchases for the PC, have someone create a hack to get free cable..]]>Apr 19th 2010 11:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/
It is a CableLabs requirement, Microsoft was only complying. And now the FCC wants to remove the software certification requirement, of which it is reviewing this wednesday. With any luck other DVR software will be able to use the new tuners too.]]>Apr 19th 2010 11:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/
Really people, you have no idea how hard it is to get interoperability between supposed "standards based" devices as complicated as Cable boxes and cable cards.

There are plenty of TV models out there that where orphaned by the manufacturers because they where 2 year old models that never really worked with Cable Cards. Oh the joy to hear a customer tell you "I called Samysung and they say my cable card TV won't work with a cable card and they won't do anything".]]>Apr 19th 2010 10:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/17/why-do-cablecard-host-devices-still-cost-so-much/
Does anyone seriously think the manufactures will update any tv over 3 years old to work with any changes Youtube or Netflix makes?]]>Apr 19th 2010 10:42PM