Who knew that our love for all things technology would lead to us learning about the executive branch of the Federal Government? We sure didn't. We did learn that in order to change the rules, the FCC has to issue a Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making in order to give everyone involved a chance to have their opinions heard. Well the cable industry and others are officially on the clock as they now have 30 days from yesterday to let the FCC know how they feel about the
new rules that are supposed to help fix CableCARD (and another 15 for responses). On the same day the FCC issues a Notice of Inquiry about CableCARD's eventual replacement to which comments will be accepted for 60 days (responses have another 30 after that). The replacement has a new nickname too, AllVid, but other than that it seems everything is up for discussion. In fact the FCC is trying to determine just about everything, but it does believe that industry standards already in place should be required like
DLNA and
UPnP. Other questions remain though, like how long after the AllVid devices are deployed should the CableCARD mandates stay in effect? One other interesting note in the 28 page PDF is that the FCC thinks that either a dual tuner set-back box would work, or a 6 tuner version for the whole house -- or some combination. At this point it is all speculation but if you want to take an active role in the process download the PDFs yourself and get your comments in before its too late.
posted April 22nd 2010 5:31PM
I would prefer a six tuner device for the whole house myself.
I think they should keep the name "CableCARD", which sounds way better than "AllVid." Maybe call it "CableCARD Plus" or something, but I don't wanna call up my cableco and say "I want an allvid installed", that just sounds retarded.
@engadgetcomexcludeengadget
Well it's not really a card, so that wouldn't make any sense either.
points 14 and 16 are particularly interesting. I thought they had already decided that there was to be an IP based alternative to the tuning adapter by the end of this year? So why are they requesting comments on that in section 14? Requiring a self-install option for cable-cards (16) will be awesome, particularly for those of us using them in something other than a TiVo.
@glugglug
The FCC prefers not to force any particular technology on anyone. So instead they take TiVo's suggestion and give CableLabs an opportunity to respond. If they don't, then it'll be made into a rule. Or if CableLabs comes back and says it won't work and here's why, the FCC will listen, but require an alternative solution that obtains the same goal of making SDV channels work on the TiVo without the need for additional hardware.
It is actually a pretty fair process and much more effective than I ever game the gov't credit for.
Why not have a single point of decryption ("P.o.D.")within each household? Instead of CableCARD or "AllVid", create a box where security provisions will pass the subscribed signals to the TV unencumbered? The lone box could utilize either a CableCARD or DCAS style system to decrypt the signal, and pass it without transcoding. It should allow "two way" capable devices of sending upstream signals without alteration. DBS would incorporate the same P.o.D.. TV tuners or other STBs would handle the decoding for everyone. As the P.o.D. decrypts the signal per household, the only limit to how many TVs can be serviced is power output/signal strength. That would be perfect for me at least. I can view digital Cable in the same way I do analog cable, and my current devices won't need STBs.
@Meeso I'm not sure it's practical to have one box that will decrypt everything. It sounds like what you're suggesting is an in-line decryptor that would basically spit out clear QAM channels throughout your home. That box would basically have to decrypt all the channels in real-time. That's *a lot* of data.
I think the "AllVid" idea is probably a better long-term solution. I think the AllVid approach works better with SDV, and is generally probably better suited for handling weird things that cable companies might want to do in the future on the back-end, without impacting costumers on the front-end. I also suspect the AllVid approach would probably work better with video-on-demand.
Don't get me wrong- I'd love to have unencumbered TV signals going throughout my house. I have a HTPC right now, and it's a fairly complicated setup right now with a combination of clear QAM tuners, a firewire-recording STB, and another HD STB hooked up to an HD-PVR. But, I don't expect we'll see an FCC standard that will prohibit DRM, because content creators and providers are too concerned about video piracy. I think their fears are misguided, since I think fairly widespread piracy will happen at least as long as there are analog outputs on STBs, and almost certainly beyond that as well.
It's easy to file a comment using the quick filing link:
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list
All you have to do is select the proceeding, 97-80 and then enter your comments. The more people that comment on the failure of the current tuning adapters, the more likely we'll get a quick fix.
John
@johnw248 I didn't know people were having significant problems with the tuning adapters for SDV. What problems are people having? What's the quick fix? It doesn't seem like AllVid has much potential to be a quick fix.
@reggie14
The TAs lock up and become unresponsive which makes you miss recordings on channels and in some cases locks up the entire DVR.
The AllVid isn't a quick fix, but the FCC plans to replace TAs with an IP connection between the headend and the DVR by this Fall.
@reggie14 As Ben said there are lock-ups making them miss recordings. It seems to be related to the unit downloading the virtual channel table, but since it's a "secret cablelabs" device, we can only guess. The way the unit works, it replaced the VCT that the cableCARD has, so when it locks up all channels stop working.
John