[mythtv-users] Hijacked - PVR-500

ryan patterson ryan.goat at gmail.com
Fri Apr 6 11:57:11 UTC 2007


On 4/5/07, Larry Sanderson <larry.sanderson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Well, in Time Warner's defence, Anandtech was a little dumb, there.
> > Anyone who's read about CableCard knows that the card and device are
> > married, so sticking the card in one of their TVs and then moving it
> > to a PC is a dumb thing to do.  After that, it was just signal
> > strength issues, which anyone with a PVR-500 can relate to.
>
> Sorry to hijack this thread on Cable Card (btw - I always thought you
> could take one cable card and move it from device to device with no
> problems.
>

Yes that is how cablecard was designed to be used.  But TimeWarnerCable (and
other cable companies) have decided to lock the cablecard to one device
(based on the device serial number?).
Personally I see no reason for them to be doing this except to make
cablecard less attractive to the customer.  Like the TWC tech said in the
article "Why go through all this trouble when TWC will rent you a
{proprietary locked and restrictive} DVR for extra money every month?"
(paraphrased)  Apparently they feel threatened by cablecard.  They think if
they make it unattractive enough then customers will tell congress to change
it back to the "old easy way."

Live and learn!), but regarding the PVR-500:

Mine worked fantastic right out of the box.  Just curious: how lucky was
> I?  Are there any stats on how likely you are to get ghosting, static,
> or other visual artifacts due to inappropriate signal strength?


Mine worked perfectly straight out of the box too.  I have no idea what
"signal strength problem" he is talking about.
-- 
_____________
Ryan Patterson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mythtv.org/pipermail/mythtv-users/attachments/20070406/9ab5ea85/attachment.htm 


More information about the mythtv-users mailing list