It seems to us that if you live in Ohio are provided service by Massillon Cable TV, you have yourself a pretty good cable company. We don't say that because we just visited or have read great things about the HD offerings though. We say that because the aforementioned operator has called out Moto and Cisco for its apparent duopoly which the claim goes on to say is used to forced cable operators in the US to use overpriced DRM. That all sounds good to us -- although we don't really understand most of it -- but the interesting part is this is the first time we've seen anyone cast any blame on Motorola and Cisco. And to think all this time we've blamed the cable company for trying to provide us with POS, overpriced DVRs.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
DavidB @ Aug 29th 2009 11:53AM
Doesn't matter at all. Tru2way is on the verge of launching most everywhere and makes this a moot point.
Michael @ Aug 29th 2009 12:12PM
Really?
darklighter @ Aug 30th 2009 10:07PM
You're completely missing the point. This isn't about set-top boxes, this is about the headend systems, and tru2way isn't going to open that market up at all.
DavidB @ Sep 1st 2009 8:24PM
Um, no, you don't know what you're talking about just as this blog doesn't.
If you buy a True2way box, whatever encryption the cable company uses works your box with a card they provide. Why should you or Joe Shmoe care what the cable company uses? In the end it matters not 1 bit to you or him. The cost of either DRM from Cisco or Moto isn't expensive.
This small cable company is the cable version of Sinclar broadcasting, saying bad things about vendors to try and blame someone else on poor financial performance.
This is like arguing that you can't fit a Ford brake pad on a Chevy brake calliper.
As far as the DVR software, that's up to the cable companie's and the contracts they have. For Comcast you can blame the old TV guide contracts they signed for far to many years in advance.
UnnDunn @ Aug 29th 2009 12:26PM
Let's not pretend Massillon is doing this out of some sense of "consumer friendliness." They sunk a bunch of money into network equipment that ran on an incompatible conditional access scheme (the "Evolution" boxes), but rather than dump the incompatible boxes, they are trying to force Motorola to implement the technology that would make the Evolution boxes compatible (SimulCrypt.)
What Massillon is doing should be lauded, and if they succeed in getting Motorola/Cisco to support Simulcrypt, it will ultimately benefit consumers, especially combined with CableCARD. But that isn't why they're doing it; they're doing it to salvage some return from their investment in the Evolution boxes.
Kain @ Aug 29th 2009 1:55PM
Oh look thats my shitty comcast dvr! I wish we had fios!
captaincheeseloaf @ Aug 29th 2009 6:50PM
They were the only Cable company around here that forced you to get a box after the Digital Changeover. everyone else has the bandwidth. these guys are barely above a mom and pop operation.
Matt W @ Aug 30th 2009 2:46PM
A good friend of mine has Massillon cable. They had SciFi HD before Dish or DirectTV did, and I was jealous. Who would have thought that a small little cable operator would be so far ahead of the big guys.
Unknown @ Aug 30th 2009 9:12PM
Actually this world is much harder to get into than you think and motorola and cisco don't do the choosing. IT's the same kinda of good ole boy network that meets twice a year to turn down the request of a new vendors encryption. You know the one that Widevine, Veramatrix, Proidium and a cast of other characters have already made it through.
Though you may not value encryption it's hear to stay. What is interesting is the idea that companies like Cisco have network based security groups who could potentially argue that those IP based security protocols are enough. The only thing prohibiting hackers or enthusiasts from blasting content in the clear is the mere fact that encoders are generally expensive.
JeffDM @ Aug 31st 2009 12:36AM
Sounds like the cable companies & suppliers are still at their shenanigans. The networks are probably helping them with this. All three industries seem to be trying too hard to protect their industry, but it seems to the point of just driving subscribers away.
The sooner the cable TV industry starts making sense or failing that, shrivels and dies, the better. I have no interest in linear programming and the irritations that it brings, and the awkward workarounds (DVR) to make it work for me. Thankfully I'm not beholden to any video subscription system.
Matt N @ Sep 20th 2009 7:36PM
They may have a good cable offerings but they suck for internet! Unfortunately when they were established, the FCC allowed them to have a monopoly over the area due to the investment that was put into the infrastructure. I have them for my internet and I really wish I could get better than 6MB/S for 40 bucks!