Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#141

Post by MatthewWilkes »

reaperducer wrote: post #16
MatthewWilkes wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article should be switched to an alternative that doesn't have restrictive geofilters or removed.

This article should be switched to an alternative It's an LA Times article written by an LA Times reporter published in the LA Times for the benefit of LA Times readers. What European alternative do you suggest?

Deletion then.

I'm not suggesting a European alternative, I'm saying that this does not belong on hackernews.

Asto it being original reporting, that's a little hard for people to factor in when it's entirely blocked.

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#142

Post by trelliscoded »

I used to work for a set top box middleware vendor, and at the time circa 2005-6 we had internal charge amounts of about a few hundred bucks for the mid range PVRs at the time. I just looked at a competitive analysis sheet I still have access to and it look like the total BoM for a modern PVR with all the bells and whistles like voice recognition and 4k is around $400-600 including a cheap AV rated drive to store the video.

The lower end ones with cloud PVR look like they're crazy cheap, like a low end cell phone. I wouldn't be surprised if the IP only ones were $50 in Q10000. There's a bunch of implementation notes about fiddly expensive analog calibration for the terrestrial and docsis transceivers, but it looks like the two major ASIC vendors both ship turnkey calibration systems to help reduce manufacturing cost. One of them has a nice menu of prevalidated contract manufacturers that already have production lines ready to go once you sign.

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#143

Post by simooooo »

samcampbell wrote: post #130
nickreese wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice disclaimer on that affiliate link.

Good point- This is an affiliate link. I actually don't want the money from Amazon from the referral link, I signed up for Amazon Associates for the API access to their product catalog for a side project. Amazon requires a certain level of activity for this. So if someone happens to buy, you're supporting a side project.

Sneaky

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#144

Post by esotericn »

dionidium wrote: post #12
MatthewWilkes wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article should be switched to an alternative that doesn't have restrictive geofilters or removed.

There's an assumption in this statement that doesn't survive scrutiny. This is original reporting. What makes you think there's an equivalent alternative? † † This perception is obviously a huge problem for papers like the L.A. Times (and for writers, in general). For better or worse, this is how people see it, now. If you don't like the source, then you just imagine substituting in another one, like you're buying po…

The equivalent alternative for European browsers is this: " "

I suspect we're more than 25% of HN's audience.

(Realistically, a mirror is the realistic alternative. Two have been posted and downvoted into oblivion. So it seems the HN community along with the LA Times support censorship. Nice.).

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#145

Post by rasz »

k3oni wrote: post #71
rb808 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

powerline networking is your friend.

This, they have some nice ones with over 900Mbps now out pretty cheap and they work as expected.

last time I checked the "900Mbps" topped out at 200mbit real data

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#146

Post by rasz »

ascagnel_ wrote: post #9
drblast wrote: post #5

I have the same reaction every time I read about any cable company, and that's, "WTF are you all still giving them your money for?!" They have a monopoly on a dying service you literally don't need at all, and most people hate having to deal with them. The pricing and contracts are antagonistic to customers. Is it just momentum at this point?

In the US, cable companies are generally the only source of high-speed internet, and they sometimes charge a higher sticker price to provide internet-only service vs. bundling with TV service.

I think this might be illegal in EU/my country, so my ISP (liberty global) just charges same price for bare internet and internet+200 channels bundle.

Cable providers literary make money by giving TV service for free. They sell pre programmed channel spots like supermarket sell shelf space - You cant change channel order :/ plus they track/sell TV viewing data

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#147

Post by rasz »

captainmuon wrote: post #18
LanceH wrote: post #3

I would really like to buy a box that was sophisticated enough to cache which channels I have and what is showing on those channels. They all seem to do a very slow refresh every time I switch between menus. It's now a distant memory being able to switch between channels instantly. I should at least be able to page through the menus quickly.

I always thought about putting multiple tuners in the box, and just decoding multiple channels simultaneously. Then to switch a channel you would just "put another window in the front". You could have a predictive system that would decode the three most likely next channels and start decoding them. In the best case, this would move the latency of the first switch close to zero, and of subsequent switches to 1/2 or 1/…

Afaik the delay is not in tuning per se, but in waiting for first decoded valid mpeg segment with I frame, and those are usually 1 per second?

What could be done, on the cheap, Cable provider wide is authoritative server ready to give you arbitrarily generated I frames with 1/60 time resolution on demand, as most cable boxes nowadays are two way anyway (they need upstream link to transmit all the spyin^^^ channel usage statistics back).

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#149

Post by dpeck »

dpeck wrote: post #74
reaperducer wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you literally don't need at all Unless you live in a place without broadcast television, or little broadcast television, and with little to no internet service. So pretty much 20% of the United States. The nation is much larger than the east and west coasts.

cable tv without broadcast... does that combination exist anywhere?

thanks sibling responders, I learned something new.

I grew up in rural southeast US and I've always associated cable with cities/suburbs and had broadcast/satellite (old giant ones most until middle school).

Re: How much does a cable box really cost? The industry would prefer you don't ask

#150

Post by Tactic »

x3n0ph3n3 wrote: post #94

Am I the only one here who still torrents all of their TV?

With a Usenet subscription, sabnzbd, and sonarr it's all automated. Subscribe to the shows you want and forget about the cable companies. Is it piracy to download shows broadcast on-the-air?

Ultimately I view it like I did music... give me a reasonable way to access and pay and I'll do so. And when iTunes came out I deleted my 10 gigs of mp3's and paid for music. I'll do the same when the media company come to their senses and respect the cost of scale they now have. I can live with that.

Post reply on HN