Edited for some brevity here -<br><br>On 05/09/2007 04:10 PM, Joe Borne wrote:<br>> ...<br>><br>> 2. A "connector" to allow MythTV to accept a raw DV stream.<br>><br>> Does anyone on the list who is a developer know of a package or think
<br>> they can create one that can fill role #2?<br><br>>> "Michael T. Dean" wrote:<br>>> Myth would need a new DvRecorder and all its associated support<br>>> (including either on-the-fly transcoding support--which would limit the
<br>>> number and/or resolution of captures--or DV playback support with<br>>> optional post-recording transcoding).<br><br>>> Based on the value I place on my time and on the content of encrypted<br>>> channels, I feel waiting for a device that outputs a more-approriate
<br>>> format (i.e. not so huge) would be more worthwhile. Then again, I'm<br>>> living without any encrypted channels--just OTA--now because they're not<br>>> worth the cost of having a cable/satellite subscription to me.
<br><br>I see your point. But the need is already a lot more than a blip on the radar and it's only going to grow. In all honesty I fear that third party PVR's, even Tivos are under a very real threat to be eliminated by provider/cable company cooperatives. IMHO as consumers we should be outraged by this. In most parts of the USA and the world we get no choice about our cable provider, they are monopolies. So we get to watch only what they choose to provide at the costs they want to charge. Now we're going to let them tell us when we can watch it, and how, and with what equipment? The last time i checked I still lived in America - so I say no. (Please no replies ranting about the politics aspect here - there are other listservs for that)
<br><br>A good case in point is the fact that my "Big 3" channels (ABC/NBC/CBS) are the ones 5C encrypted on my cable. WTF? If I could get an antenna to work where I live (I can only get about 50% signal here, not good enough to get usable HDTV OTA) I could get those channels IN AN UNENCRYPTED FORMAT FOR FREE. What could the reasoning behind encryption possibly be? Surely not to protect content?
<br><br>The whole fight over DRM on music just ended this last month. The fact that iTunes is now going to offer DRM-free versions of almost all of its music signals that the end of DRM is on the way. M$ followed suit within days for it's Zune service. Over the next year or so competition will drive prices down yet again, and fewer and fewer consumers will buy the DRM'd version until the providers see no point in carrying it any more. Sure, the DMCA will still exist, but it will molder in a folder somewhere because the content providers themselves will see no point in enforcing it. Within a few years the MPAA will be forced into the same position the RIAA now finds itself in.
<br><br>All of this happened because people said "I'm not paying $22 for a CD with one good song and 14 songs that are crap anymore". They then went out and continued to download non-DRM versions of music however they could. Then Apple had the brains and guts to force a deal with the labels that allowed them to sell songs individually at a price people were willing to pay. A dollar a song isn't a bad deal and it's getting cheaper all the time.
<br><br>If my cable provider offered me completely unencrypted content for an extra $10 a month I'd pay it. Perhaps if another cable company were able to move in and compete (Verizon FOIS anyone?), we might see things like this happen. Until then, we have to fight this the same way consumers fought the RIAA. Just tell them no. Show them you can get the content anyway and prove their whole idea false. The iTunes deal happened because users went outside iTunes and other similar services to get non-DRM'd versions of their music.
<br><br>Apple, M$ and the cable companies/equipment manufacturers should be
working towards this. After all, the incorporation of DRM technology
represents a serious investment for them will little or zero return.
They are wasting their research and development dollars on something
that provides zero value for their consumers, and in many cases royally
ticks the customer off.<br><br>I'm not advocating anyone go out and break the law. I pay for my premium cable service, and it comes with a PVR. So I have the right to view this content, and to do so in a time-shifted format. But I believe I also have the right to do it with my own equipment.
<br><br>So I'm going to continue my search for a piece of affordable equipment that can make this translation. We are very, very close here. As the HD market expands, the device will appear, I promise you.<br><br>So I repeat my offer. Anyone who is willing and able to contribute should contact me. I am willing to donate my time and effort to coordinate the task. Heck, I can even set up manufacturing, sales and distribution for the finished product.
<br>