# New FCC Set-top rules coming - maybe????



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

The article does mention that the only 2 companies you can buy your own box from is DirecTV and Dish. I don't know how much Dish charges, but most people would balk at what DirecTV charges to own the box.

http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-set-top-box-future-20151109-story.html


----------



## trh (Nov 3, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> The article does mention that the only 2 companies you can buy your own box from is DirecTV and Dish. I don't know how much Dish charges, but most people would balk at what DirecTV charges to own the box.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-set-top-box-future-20151109-story.html


But another part of the article mentioned making the boxes more compatible between providers.

Just think if you could buy a 5-tuner DVR that would work on Dish, DIRECTV and all the cable companies (and even OTA?). Some would probably find that well worth the cost.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

It really comes down to whether the cable companies will be successful in holding off a requirement to support Vidipath. The Vidipath standard was created by the same company that created Directv's RVU, and as they have identical software stacks they are very similar and it is even possible they are the same thing under different names.

If they had to go that way, then Comcast, TWC, Directv/AT&T, Dish, and the rest of the smaller cable companies would provide you a "gateway" box that would do whatever tuning/decryption is necessary and distribute video streams encrypted using DTCP-IP. A compliant 'client' device (a small box similar to a Genie client, Chromecast or eventually built into all TVs) could decode that, and it would show the provider's UI. There would also be an option for a smarter device like a Tivo to receive the streams and present them with their own GUI - this is probably one of the things the cable companies really object to (and Directv would probably object to as well) because they can't force ads on you in the guide etc. if you aren't seeing their crappy UI. Without such a requirement, Tivo would likely go out of business or at minimum would cease selling directly to consumers since without their UI and feature set there's no reason to choose a Tivo over a cable company DVR.

You'd have the option of either owning your own client devices or renting from your provider, one or more of the client devices could have a hard drive so you can record, you could presumably get multiple gateways (at least from some providers, I doubt it would be a requirement) if you needed more tuners, so you wouldn't lose anything you had today but you'd have a lot more options. You could have clients that connect to multiple gateways, if you had both cable and Directv, and switching providers would be as simple as swapping out the old provider's gateway for a new one. All the client devices you own, including DVRs, would continue working fine (though presumably you'd lose all the recordings from the old provider, not sure how that would work)

Hopefully consumers will win this one. There's a chance we might, since this FCC commissioner doesn't seem to be as much in the pocket of cable companies as was originally assumed (since he used to work in the cable industry)


----------



## SeaBeagle (May 7, 2006)

Herdfan said:
 

> The article does mention that the only 2 companies you can buy your own box from is DirecTV and Dish. I don't know how much Dish charges, but most people would balk at what DirecTV charges to own the box.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-set-top-box-future-20151109-story.html


Purchase these receivers from ebay. Much cheaper. Just check the receiver number to make sure the receiver can be activated without having to pay off some previous subscribers bill.

Sent from my iPad 4 128GB using DBSTalk mobile application.


----------



## Bedford11 (Aug 21, 2015)

It's the UI (user interface) that it all boils down to.

The new Satellites being shot up are IP based
All the streaming services are IP based
All the big cable giants offer their product streaming over the internet now
Both AT&T/Direct TV and Dish have a new UI ready to go ( suspect these to be compatible with the new format)
DVR's will be in the cloud not in a set top box or more than likely everything will be on demand.
AT&T says they want to reduce in home equipment
I see a universal, cheap, subscriber owned small set top box with universal search coming quickly 
It's time to integrate sat, cable, roku's 3000 channels and any of the myriad of other online offerings into one searchable unit

http://www.project-disco.org/competition/110515-are-set-top-boxes-finally-ready-for-disruption-its-the-user-interface-stupid/


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Bedford11 said:


> Both AT&T/Direct TV and Dish have a new UI ready to go ( suspect these to be compatible with the new format)


UIs are window dressing. It is the codecs, chipsets and processors that handle signal reception and display - the UI is just the interface that allows the user to control the rest of the receiver.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Bedford11 said:


> It's the UI (user interface) that it all boils down to.
> 
> The new Satellites being shot up are IP based
> All the streaming services are IP based
> ...


Uh, say what?

Explain to me how the new satelites are ip based vs the other satelites please....first I have ever heard of that...

And I absolutely hate the idea of cloud based DVRs, and will never work for everyone so DVRs in homes will still exsit.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

inkahauts said:


> Uh, say what?
> 
> Explain to me how the new satelites are ip based vs the other satelites please....first I have ever heard of that...
> 
> And I absolutely hate the idea of cloud based DVRs, and will never work for everyone so DVRs in homes will still exsit.


He's out there with that claim (or more likely parroting claims he's read that are out there) There's no such thing as an "IP based satellite" since as you are well aware satellites are just amplifying and rebroadcasting what is sent to them. The packet encoding satellites typically using for video is based on a MPEG transport stream (which Directv uses) but newer standards allow a generic transport stream, which permits IP packetization. There's no real advantage to using that if you are sending video, it is just an additional wrapper for the MPEG data. True IP is a two way protocol, which is of course impossible for Directv's satellites since Directv dishes are one way only. Using IP framing for MPEG transport streams buys you nothing so I don't see any particular reason why Directv would want to switch to that.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Yeah which is why I said that and was waiting to see what he was going to claim on it.


----------



## Rickt1962 (Jul 17, 2012)

Bedford11 said:


> It's the UI (user interface) that it all boils down to.
> 
> The new Satellites being shot up are IP based
> 
> I want what he is smoking ! LOL


----------



## lee635 (Apr 17, 2002)

Maybe the original poster meant something like UDP (User Datagram protocol) or some other connectionless protocol and simply mis-spoke? I'm not an expert in satellite transmission, but am thinking that to provide some error checking and parity files, then straight mpeg data won't work (or will it?). Also, not everything on small dish is mpeg, there is some data, such as program guide. Just saying, I don't think his comment was that out-of-line for the rather strong reply.

Thanks for all the great info on this site! 



slice1900 said:


> He's out there with that claim (or more likely parroting claims he's read that are out there) There's no such thing as an "IP based satellite" since as you are well aware satellites are just amplifying and rebroadcasting what is sent to them. The packet encoding satellites typically using for video is based on a MPEG transport stream (which Directv uses) but newer standards allow a generic transport stream, which permits IP packetization. There's no real advantage to using that if you are sending video, it is just an additional wrapper for the MPEG data. True IP is a two way protocol, which is of course impossible for Directv's satellites since Directv dishes are one way only. Using IP framing for MPEG transport streams buys you nothing so I don't see any particular reason why Directv would want to switch to that.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Satellite broadcasts use a ton of error correction, but it is at a higher layer than MPEG (or IP would be, if that was used) Directv broadcasts at a rate of exactly 60 Mbps on a typical transponder carrying HD channels, and slightly over 1/3 of it is error correction overhead.


----------



## DTVDiscount (Aug 11, 2016)

Should the possibility of a non-proprietary box in the future prevent anyone from locking into a new two year agreement for new DTV equipment? I wouldn't want to purchase a DTV DVR right now but I'll take the free equipment upgrade because it will take a while to shake out.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

DTVDiscount said:


> Should the possibility of a non-proprietary box in the future prevent anyone from locking into a new two year agreement for new DTV equipment? I wouldn't want to purchase a DTV DVR right now but I'll take the free equipment upgrade because it will take a while to shake out.


No. it'd be years before anyone even made a box, if that entire idea comes to fruition, and someone thinks it'd be worth it anyway. I think it's fools gold now to be honest...


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Per the thread I started on Friday *FCC retreats on set-top box proposal* the whole original concept has changed according to the article referenced in that thread:



> Instead of requiring operators to offer streams of content that can be tuned in by just about any other device, the revised rule now will require the operators themselves to make apps for connected TV devices.
> 
> Now you may wonder what's so bad about that....
> 
> ...


As I noted in my second post in that thread:



phrelin said:


> The question is: "What's the point?" Even CBS Corp. now offers streaming programming without ads, following the other three broadcast nets which offer that on Hulu. Who in 2020 will need a DVR or any other set top box?


Regarding satellite as a service system, if you cannot get adequate high speed internet through a "wired" system or a cellular wireless system, there are two satellite internet service providers that likely will work on becoming financially competitive for the streaming TV market if they hope to prosper.

In the meantime, Dish is focused on being competitive with the Flex Pack and no charge for the first box, though in fact you are paying $12/mo for DVR service. But that has to be considered as the equivalent of an ISP charge plus an "ad-free-by-skipping-commercials" add-on.

Streaming TV will not kill satellite or cable TV, but the whole box question has become moot IMHO.


----------

