msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader) (01/10/85)
doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee) writes: > Even if you can tune all cable channels now, it is almost certain > that you won't be able to in the near future (within the lifetime > of the set). > ... There is a crying > need for an ability to connect TV's, VCR's, stereo systems, and > cable TV together in a reasonable manner. I wouldn't be surprised to > find a revolt occurring in the next few years, with a new set of > standards ... incompatible with current equipment ... What there is a crying need for is component-based TV systems. If you want a good audio system, you can go out and buy a radio tuner and a tape player and a turntable and speakers and choose each component separately, and just connect them together. Well, I should similarly be able to buy a TV monitor and a videotape player/recorder without a tuner, and then buy the tuner or tuners with the degree of cable readiness (and remote controlledness) that I want. And if the cable system changes, I should be able to go out and buy a new tuner if I want, and junk the old one. Mark Brader
schachte@ittvax.UUCP (Peter Schachte) (01/14/85)
<The bug lives> Mark Brader writes: > What there is a crying need for is component-based TV systems. > [...] Well, I should be > able to buy a TV monitor and a videotape player/recorder without a tuner, > and then buy the tuner or tuners with the degree of cable readiness (and > remote controlledness) that I want. And if the cable system changes, I > should be able to go out and buy a new tuner if I want, and junk the old one. This is a good idea, but not sufficient. If you get cable and want to subscribe to any scrambled services, you are stuck with *their* tuner, making yours, and your remote control, useless. What we really need is a standard for the electrical interface of all unscramblers. Then the companies that design tuners would allow some number of slots for you to plug in unscramblers, and let the channel number for each such slot be settable. With this system, you would call up your cable company and tell them you want to get HBO. You go to their office and pick up the unscrambler, and they tell you that HBO comes in on channel 91. You plug the unscrambler in to your tuner and set it for channel 91, and bingo! HBO on channel 91, and your remote control still works. The problem is, of course, that undergound unscrambler companies would crop up to sell these unscramblers. Once you found out which unscrambler you need for your movie channels you could just buy one and never pay for movies again. Anybody have any other ideas? -- Peter Schachte (decvax!ittvax!schachte)
allyn@sdcsvax.UUCP (Allyn Fratkin) (01/15/85)
In article <282@lsuc.UUCP>, msb@lsuc.UUCP (Mark Brader|LSUC|Toronto) writes: > > What there is a crying need for is component-based TV systems. > If you want a good audio system, you can go out and buy a radio tuner > and a tape player and a turntable and speakers and choose each component > separately, and just connect them together. Well, I should similarly be > able to buy a TV monitor and a videotape player/recorder without a tuner, > and then buy the tuner or tuners with the degree of cable readiness (and > remote controlledness) that I want. And if the cable system changes, I > should be able to go out and buy a new tuner if I want, and junk the old one. > This is already possible. Panasonic (I think) has exactly this system. You can buy a 25" monitor and then a tuner, etc. Most of the nicer televisions now have video and audio inputs (some even have more than one set!) so at least you could use the set that way. If, in the future, you need a new tuner, just buy one, and hook it to the audio and video inputs of your existing television. -- From the virtual mind of Allyn Fratkin sdcsvax!allyn@Nosc or UCSD EMU/Pascal Project {ucbvax, decvax, ihnp4} U.C. San Diego !sdcsvax!allyn "Generally you don't see that kind of behavior in a major appliance."
mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) (01/16/85)
In article <1597@ittvax.UUCP> schachte@ittvax.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: >The problem is, of course, that undergound unscrambler companies would >crop up to sell these unscramblers. Once you found out which >unscrambler you need for your movie channels you could just buy one and >never pay for movies again. What's to say that such companies don't already exist? How many ways can there be in common use to scramble a TV signal, anyway? The cable company has to buy their unscrambler boxes from somebody (I doubt they make them themselves), and if you can buy a cable tuner from Jerrold (the same ones the cable company rents you) why is an unscrambler box any different?
fnf@unisoft.UUCP (Fred Fish) (01/17/85)
>Mark Brader writes: >> What there is a crying need for is component-based TV systems. >> [...] Well, I should be >> able to buy a TV monitor and a videotape player/recorder without a tuner, >> and then buy the tuner or tuners with the degree of cable readiness (and >> remote controlledness) that I want. And if the cable system changes, I >> should be able to go out and buy a new tuner if I want, and junk the old >> one. Peter Schachte writes: >companies that design tuners would allow some number of slots for you to >plug in unscramblers, and let the channel number for each such slot be >settable. I think I would much prefer something like the original suggestion where the cable company furnishes a box that goes into the video line AFTER the tuner. This should be much simplier (cheaper!) than the current boxes, and allows full use of the remote controls, switchers, etc. Anyone see any technical problems with this? -Fred
dwl@hou4b.UUCP (D Levenson) (01/17/85)
In Somerset Co. New Jersey, the TKR Cable company does not scramble the movie channels. They install a notch filter on the pole where your drop connects to their backbone, to notch out the channels you're not buying. (Or so I've been told -- anyone know for sure?) What the CATV industry is drifting toward, however, is not scrambling but encryption -- the decryption can then be done by anybody's cable-ready video product if it has the key. The key is distributed in a way that allows the company to charge for it, and updated once per billing-cycle. -Dave Levenson AT&T Holmdel
stoner@qumix.UUCP (David Stone) (01/17/85)
> In article <1597@ittvax.UUCP> schachte@ittvax.UUCP (Peter Schachte) writes: > >The problem is, of course, that undergound unscrambler companies would > >crop up to sell these unscramblers. Once you found out which > >unscrambler you need for your movie channels you could just buy one and > >never pay for movies again. > > What's to say that such companies don't already exist? How many ways can > there be in common use to scramble a TV signal, anyway? The cable company > has to buy their unscrambler boxes from somebody (I doubt they make them > themselves), and if you can buy a cable tuner from Jerrold (the same ones > the cable company rents you) why is an unscrambler box any different? *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR VIDEO *** Anyway even with underground unscrambler companies,United Cable of the Bay Area located in Hayward,Calif. uses in-line filters on the incoming cable to the decoder box and even gives you a discount if you don't use their box last I heard ! This way if you have a cable ready TV or Video recorder then you can still get the movie channels without the box. This is a good example that I wish other cable companies would follow. But then they couldn't get the extra money for their silly little boxes. OH WELL .... stoner@qumix David A. Stone Qume Corp. San Jose,Calif.
brian@sdcc3.UUCP (Brian Kantor) (01/18/85)
> if you can buy a cable tuner from Jerrold (the same ones > the cable company rents you) why is an unscrambler box any different? More and more cable companies (especially those serving hi-tech areas like silicon valley and the like) are going to descramblers which are digitally addressable. These are individually numbered and can be individually turned on or off for each scrambled channel by the cable company. Thus buying a descrambler from a legit manufacturer would gain you nothing (except saving the monthly rental, if any) because you would still have to get the cable company to enable it for each scrambled channel you wanted to watch. Of course, a pirate descrambler could be built that ignores the on-off codes - probably would be cheaper that way too. I haven't seen any at our local swap meets, but its probably just a matter of time. Brian Kantor UC San Diego decvax\ brian@ucsd.arpa akgua >--- sdcsvax --- brian ucbvax/ Kantor@Nosc ``You unlock this door with the key of imagination...''
stoner@qumix.UUCP (David Stone) (01/18/85)
> >Mark Brader writes: > >> What there is a crying need for is component-based TV systems. > >> [...] Well, I should be > >> able to buy a TV monitor and a videotape player/recorder without a tuner, > >> and then buy the tuner or tuners with the degree of cable readiness (and > >> remote controlledness) that I want. And if the cable system changes, I > >> should be able to go out and buy a new tuner if I want, and junk the old > >> one. > > Peter Schachte writes: > >companies that design tuners would allow some number of slots for you to > >plug in unscramblers, and let the channel number for each such slot be > >settable. > > > I think I would much prefer something like the original suggestion where > the cable company furnishes a box that goes into the video line AFTER the > tuner. This should be much simplier (cheaper!) than the current boxes, > and allows full use of the remote controls, switchers, etc. > > Anyone see any technical problems with this? > > -Fred *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR video *** As I mentioned in an earlier posting United Cable of the Bay Area (Hayward Calif) uses a filter before the cable box thus eliminating the box if you have a cale ready unit. stoner@qumix David A. Stone Qune Corp. San Jose,Calif. before the cable
shaprkg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Bob Shapiro) (01/18/85)
In article <2640@sdcc3.UUCP> brian@sdcc3.UUCP (Brian Kantor) writes: >> if you can buy a cable tuner from Jerrold (the same ones >> the cable company rents you) why is an unscrambler box any different? > >More and more cable companies (especially those serving hi-tech areas >like silicon valley and the like) are going to descramblers which are >digitally addressable. These are individually numbered and can be >individually turned on or off for each scrambled channel by the cable >company. Thus buying a descrambler from a legit manufacturer would gain >you nothing (except saving the monthly rental, if any) because you would >still have to get the cable company to enable it for each scrambled >channel you wanted to watch. > >Of course, a pirate descrambler could be built that ignores the on-off >codes - probably would be cheaper that way too. I haven't seen any at >our local swap meets, but its probably just a matter of time. > I think you will find out that recently almost all cable systems that are installed are either put in with return channels allocated on the cable or a dual cable system which permits bidirectional traffic. The reason for this is that the cable people intend to get into many fields above and beyond the broadcasting of television and many of these require 2-way communication. Examples are home security (which I believe is already in existence in some cable systems), polling of viewer opinions (also implemented in some systems), and even such things as data channels so you can hook up your modem and transfer data at rates considerably faster than what is practical today over standard phone lines. Along with this capability is the ability of the cable company to read your tuner and see what it is set to. Perhaps you might be able to put a second tuner in parallel and they might not be able to tell, but I suspect that if you merely replaced their select box with yours they would know in a big hurry. There are laws on the books which make such actions theft and you might be treated accordingly. Just as an aside I believe cable systems come in 3 flavors. 1. The real old ones use blocks (typically at the pole) to allow only those channels through which you pay for. If you want to cheat you have to climb the pole and remove the blocks. These systems would probably never be 2-way. They have a real advantage to the user in that they permit the user to use the cable with a cable-ready TV and watch pay channels without a descrambler. When you wish to change your pay channel selections then the company must send a person to the pole to redo the blocks. Obviously a slow and expensive process. The disadvantage is that none of the goodies of the future will be available and even current goodies such as the ability to watch special events (boxing matches, 1st run movies, et al) which are pay as you go is usually not available. 2. The next is a tuner which unscrambles those channels which a signal from the host permits it to. This only requires 1-way communication as typically they send out an addressable reset followed by the channels they wish you to watch. The advantages and disadvantages are directly opposite to the above case. Most newer cable systems work this way even if they have a 2-way cable capability. This is because they have only reserved the right for the future but haven't gone to the expense of implementing it yet. 3. Finally the 2-way system which is pretty much as I described above. The problem with playing games with method 2 is that the company can switch to method 3 without your knowledge and you could get caught. As to the scrambling techniques other than the direct block it appears that almost all systems use a form of screwing up the horizontal sync. The sound appears to be untouched. My cable company also has a tuner which is smart enough so that after it senses a couple of seconds of scrambled channel it totally turns the channel off and I see and hear nothing. If I look at the same channel with my cable-ready VCR I can see the distorted picture and the voice is fine. One of the most interesting things that occurs in my system is that if I have side-by-side pay channels (e.g. 43 And 44) and I only have rights to 1 of them I can see a poor reception of the other by adjusting my TV set from its normal channel 3 to either channel 2 or 4 (to go up or down). Apparently the signals slop over the 6mz band. I have often thought about a system which would read one channel and output another. e.g. channel 43 I pay for and 44 I don't. If I could push the cable down 6mz per channel and then feed it into my tuner I might be able to watch 44 instead of 43 even though I told the box it was 43. Obviously the amount to be moved has to be variable and probably in both directions, and it also relies on a principle which I think is true - all channels are scrambled via the same algorithm. Moving 6mz channels around may not be too difficult. After all the box itself moves everything to channel 3. Bob Shapiro
al@psivax.UUCP (Al Schwartz) (01/18/85)
In article <388@unisoft.UUCP> fnf@unisoft.UUCP (Fred Fish) writes: >I think I would much prefer something like the original suggestion where >the cable company furnishes a box that goes into the video line AFTER the >tuner. This should be much simplier (cheaper!) than the current boxes, >and allows full use of the remote controls, switchers, etc. > >Anyone see any technical problems with this? > >-Fred Yes! From the point of view of the cable company this will not allow them to keep you from receiving the channels that you do NOT pay for. My cable company furnishes a tuner box with the descrambler built in. There is a plate on the underside of the unit that can only be opened by the cable company (I could probably open it myself but I may destroy the box in the process) that is used to select which channels the box will descramble. I realize that another method of preventing the reception of channels that you do not pay for is to put "traps" on the incoming cable line, but this makes it necessary for a cable technician to come to your house to add more channels for you. The method they use now only requires that the customer come to the office with his present box and exchange it for one that has the descrabler enabled for the channels that you wish to add. -- Take off! You hoser! Al Schwartz Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA {trwrb|allegra|burdvax|cbosgd|hplabs|ihnp4|sdcsvax|aero|uscvax|ucla-cs| bmcg}!sdcrdcf!psivax!al