CableCARD on Vista to require CableLabs certification

If you want to be able to use the forthcoming CableCARD 2.0 standard on a Windows Vista-powered Media Center PC, you'd better make sure to read the label on that box carefully. According to Microsoft's Jim Allchin, CableLabs plans a rigorous certification program for CableCARD 2.0, which will require manufacturers to submit their machines for approval. Part of the approval involves making sure the computer includes a "protective path," which we assume means it adheres to CableLabs' standards for DRM. While this may not mean much for customers who plan on buying an MCE PC through an established manufacturer, most of which will likely get CableLabs certification, it could pose a challenge if you plan on buying a Media Center through one of the many boutique manufacturers that have cropped up to meet the demands of high-end customers -- or if you plan on building your own. And if you already have a Media Center PC, you can probably forget about CableCARD 2.0 compatibility, and just hang onto that set-top box forever.

[Via HDBeat]

[George @ Feb 8th 2006 4:57PM]

I enjoy reading other opinions about CableCARDs, the Cable industry, Microsoft, OCAP, CableLabs, etc...
I have worked with the OpenCable project (CableCARD) now for five years. I am usually amazed at the information some people have, the lack of information other people have, and the miss-information that some people post.
The CableCARD has been a two-way device since its conception. Only after a year long battle, and concessions by many, devices that accept the CableCARD, were built to a one-way agreement.
CableCARD 2.0 is a label placed upon it by various people, to show that it (the CableCARD) is being upgraded to two-way/interactive, instead of the device (television).
The latest change to the CableCARD is the ability to multi-stream (view more than one service at a time, i.e. PIP).
OCAP/Two-Way has been an on-going process for about five years.
The certificates that have been discussed that CableLabs provides, are required to ensure the compatibility of any device, to copy protection requirements, mandated by authorities (not CableLabs).
So yes, a CHLIA (CableCARD - Host License Agreement) must be signed with CableLabs by any manufacturer desiring to build a device that will accept CableCARD technology.
Microsoft, well lets just say, "the computer will be the center of the home entertainment system", you figure out whose plan that is.
Download-able security, a whole other subject.

[Headend @ Apr 1st 2006 12:41PM]

Actually it is in the best interest for us Cable Provider's to eliminate STB's all together and put that into the hands of the consumer. The Avg. DVR Settop costs $450 and and depending on the features. Do the math on that $5-$8 rental fee. We rarely ever recover the cost of the box. Not to mention the customers that never return the equipment. This goes to bad debt and other customers end up paying for it. Trust me. It is in our best interest to leave the equipment for demodulating our CATV signal in the hands of the consumer. All cablecards are two-way capable, it is just that the end-user equipment does not support it. Once the cable card 2.0 standard is officially released all we do is upgrade the firmware on the current mediacipher cards and it is done. I am just interested to see how long it is going to be before PCIe Tuner cards are available that support the second version of CableCard.

[Doug Vanden Berg @ Feb 1st 2007 12:11AM]

I suspect that we will be able to hack our way through the Cable Labs requirement of certified hardware. As long as the PCIE cards are available to purchase, software can be bent to our advantage.

[Curtis Jones @ May 20th 2007 2:53AM]

The FCC Requires "Sepable Security" so the cable cards themselves must suport the security not the host device thats why the new cable boxes must have a cable card slot (Existing Ones Do Not Have to),so the market may supply a way to get a cablecard 2.0 input. Plus DVR Capability is also required by the FCC. So denying it to consumer to record shows on there PC would be breaking the law. not to mension that someonne could take a cable card ready device and put unix/bsd/linux on it and make "master digital copies" anyway so im not so worried about DRM.

[Andrew @ Dec 17th 2007 10:14PM]

this all sounds good and all but what about mac? Mac's havent been making tv tuners. A windows vista computer would just freeze up often.

[ucif @ Jan 30th 2006 6:00PM]

I am a spammer: [e-mail]

[kraemer @ Jan 30th 2006 6:25PM]

Who cares? How is Cable labs even in the loop? If I buy a PC card adapter and get the Cable card from my cable provider then how is cable labs even involved?

[MadaMadaDane @ Jan 30th 2006 6:29PM]

Wow, it's looking more and more like Vista might actually fail.

I think with how utterly uncompromising they're being with the 'secure paths' DRM in Vista, it'll be our fault (we, the people who actually realize why this is important) if we can't get the rest of the country/world to reject this outright.

[E-Rock @ Jan 30th 2006 6:34PM]

Unless they are the only source of the CableCARD readers, how will they prevent them from being added to homebrew systems?

This is a shame, as the people who will make the best use of this technology will be locked out. Ah DRM, what can't you ruin?

[medric @ Nov 6th 2006 3:15PM]

What is the status of this Vista in in RC1-2 and we have a shipp schedule for the beg of next year, and i have not heard anything at all about cable card 2.0. does anyone knnow or have heard anyhthing as of yet

[Wes Felter @ Jan 30th 2006 6:36PM]

The rules for HD-DVD and Blu-ray are quite similar. Will each PC model have to be certified by AACSLA or will software players be certifiable separately? Like all other questions about AACS, don't expect them to answer...

[Alcaron @ Jan 30th 2006 6:53PM]

Hate to say it but this post smells of BS.

First, I thought Vista was only going to support CableCard 1.0? Did they change their minds and I missed the memo?

Second, like someone pointed out, this is not really much different from BR and HDDVD.

And finally, the poster doesnt really say anything other than this COULD impact it. They apparently have no idea whether it will or not and are just saying it to throw out a little sensationalism.

I read CNN for that, I don't need it here too!

[Jake @ Jan 30th 2006 7:02PM]

What about this scenario: since they claim CableCard will only work with "certified" systems, what happens if you want to upgrade your computer? Will your PC be able to play back pre-recorded content if you upgrade the video card or hard drive? This seems like utter BS, and will only cause confusion for Vista users. Palladium, Trusted Computing or whatever Microsoft calls it is just another way of saying "We own you."

We're moving to a permission-based copyright regime, aided & abetted by our elected representatives. I don't know if they are corrupt or affected by the contributions they receive from their corporate supports, but I do know that they are fools for making it harder for citziens to express indivuality. I'll vote for any politician who breaks this mold, regardless of their party affiliation. It's enough already.

[Carbsumer @ Jan 30th 2006 7:12PM]

This just means people who want to use uncertified cable cards won't use Media Center. There is and will continue to be third-party options that provide more flexibility.

Based on my own experiences, the vast majority of people who use Media Center to actually record and watch TV built home-brew computers (any computer that didn't come with Media Center). Those same folks arealso huge HD enthusiasts. So, blocking that crew out could be a huge setback for the Media Center team.

[Riskable @ Jan 30th 2006 7:59PM]

Ahahah! It feels *so* good to be right. I posted about this here--on Engadget no less--back in November of 2005 that this would be the case:

http://www.engadget.com/2005/11/16/microsoft-announces-cablecard-for-late-2006/#c562079

What's funny is that in those comments you have some Microsoft sympathizers claiming that I'm wrong! My my my...

Then it came up again a few weeks ago:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/06/atis-ocur-worlds-first-cablecard-hdtv-tuner-for-vista-pcs/

-Riskable
"I have a license to kill -9"

[Dazed and Confused @ Jan 30th 2006 10:41PM]

There is really a lot going on here - and the situation is very confusing to the casual observer.

From what I have been able to figure out, Microsoft has licensed CableCARD 1.0 from CableLabs (old news) which offers the ability to descramble digital cable content - but not two way interactive TV. Microsoft was even showing off Vista using a digitable cable TV tuner at CES 2006 in Las Vegas. They were using a prototype CableCARD 1.0 digital TV tuner card - but I did not get information on the company that made it.

Microsoft has not licensed CableCARD 2.0 - which is required for interactive TV support (including channel guide, movies on demand, etc.). Furthermore Microsoft folks at CES 2006 that appeared to know anything about the HDTV and digital cable standards would not say when - or even if - they would ever license the CableCARD 2.0 standards from CableLabs.

We will soon be seeing a CableCARD 2.0 compliant CE devices (e.g., STBs, TVs, etc.) which will be labelled "Digital Cable Ready". The idea here is that consumers will be able to buy their own cable ready equipment and use them on any digital cable system in the US.

A bit more background .... these CableCARD 2.0 complaint devices require a full implementation of a Java based TV specification called OCAP 1.0 (from CableLabs). The OCAP 1.0 is based on GEM (short for Gloablly Executable MHP), which is in turn based on DVB-MHP. And DVB-MHP is the interactive TV standards for the pretty much the rest of the world outside of the US.

Furthermore, Blue-Ray uses BD-J for its interactive TV specification - which is also based on the GEM standards.

In contrast, Microsoft is pushing its own standard for interactive TV content - which is part of the HD-DVD specifications (fact) - and is probably going to part of their IPTV offerings (speculation).

Given Microsoft's love of anything Java (or lack of) - coupled with their support for competing technologies (HD-DVD, IPTV) - we may never see Microsoft support a full CableCARD 2.0 specification. Third party providers will have to do that - presumably bundled with their digitle cable ready tuner cards.

To make it all more confusing - there is even talk of obviating the CableCARD standard altogether and replacing it with a "downloadable crypto" capabilities instead. I suppose the advantage here is that we would not need to rent the CableCARD from the cable company in order to use our own digital cable ready equipment - but the lifespan of systems that actually use the physical CableCARD slot may be rather short.

The details on all this are pretty easy to find if you bother looking for it with Google.

But the madness here runs deep.

[Bill Landon @ Jan 31st 2006 12:01AM]

Wow, poster #10 "Dazed and Confused" seems to have an informed view that does not take cheap shots at MS. It seems like it's easier for some people to blame all their misfortune on the big bad microsoft...puhleeze. It's the RIAA/MPAA along with politicians who are to blame. MS is just complicitory because they have to be stay competitive. They are in business to provide products for the mass public..yes the unwashed masses and they do a good job of it.

Vista to fail? Not bloody likely. Consumers to get the shaft because of pro big business politicians, most likely. Will the unwashed masses thank said previous people for the privilege, absolutely.

[Ian @ Jan 31st 2006 12:19AM]

LOL. Love reading the uninformed tirades of the clueless. How can CableLabs require certifiction? Who do you think owns the cable card spec? When you get a CableCard from your provider (Comcast etc...) the device you place it in needs to have a production certificate from...wait for it... Cable Labs. If not the two devices cannot be "paired." Of course Cable Labs will not hand out those certificates to uncertified hardware. So pending a cracking of the cable card spec and the availablility of bogus certificates that get around the certificate revocation process you will NEVER see a device that can handle CableCard that has not been certified by Cable Labs.

Every single Cable Card device has to abide by this. There are no exceptions, not even your "but the code wants to be free" tux-pumping linux box. Deal with it. Cable Labs IS The Man and MSFT is his bitch.

[wim @ Jan 31st 2006 3:19AM]

ok, the solution, in one word:
" mediaPortal"

I have tried and tested windows xp mce 2004 and 2005 to the max, and my conclusion is that windows MCE is sufficient for analogue tv. But is not suited for non american markets whatsoever. european standards are not taken into account, digital TV is not supported because of the Common interface. (c'mon MS how hard is that?)

Within mediaportal, all sorts of digital tv work flawwless, the minimal system specs are much lower, and it is updated on a weekly base. what more could you want? o and the best of all.. its free.

Numerous other alternatives can be taken into account. (meedio, mythtv on linux, GBPVR etc) Watching microsoft's stand in this one, It is their strategy to not actively support Windows MCE for non oem systembuilders.
they don't want you to fiddle around with it.
just unpack, plug in and start using as much paid services as possible with it. that's what they want you to do.

If they should also try to answer every joe's question about non working cablecards and not supported exotic hardware, they would never be able to get HDTV in there.
That's why HDTV for DIY PC's will be possible in the near future only with open source products or products from countries who do not have to bend over for the RIAA and other wannabee "we rule the media world" organisations.
If you want a User centric media system, use a system build by users. and that my friends, would be open source

[Nick @ Jan 31st 2006 10:04AM]

#13, agree with you 100%

I've been using mediaPortal for a while now on my DIY mediacenter in my living room, and have to say it is superior in almost everyway to MCE. There are so many more plugins available under mediaPortal, and the setup program allows for more control (including programming remotes other than the MCE remote).

I'm not a "down with Microsoft" person, but there are cases where open-source software strategies do offer more than what Windows has built in.

[TroyG @ Jan 31st 2006 1:38PM]

Chris Lanier's blog is reporting that it's only a "kit" that will need to be certified.

http://msmvps.com/blogs/chrisl/archive/2006/01/30/82109.aspx

Finally, I find it odd that no one has mentioned HDMI-enabled video-cards along w/ the Cable Card kits. I have a sneaking suspicion that they'll be a requirement to using this supposed "kit".

[Joe @ Feb 1st 2006 10:04AM]

Let's just hope that D* shows the HTPC home-brewers some love.

It would be a wild stretch to say this is all ironed out right now. Obviously, the best deal would be that both CableLabs and D* put out PCIe cards that when paired with WinVista drivers can be assured of a secure path and work. HDMI/HDCP is a fact of life, I can deal with that, my TV has them. I just want the ability to tune a Cable or D* HD tuner with a HTPC without any stupid IR blaster or any additional digital/analog conversions. The worst case scenario is OEM only with little upgrade options.

Honestly, it makes good business sense for D* to support the homebrewer. I'm not as sure with Cable co's. D* currently subsidizes a lot of hardware purchases of STB's right now to get people locked into subscriptions. Look at all the huge rebates and free h/w and installation they give new subscribers. Imagine them locking in very valuable subscribers ($10/mo extra for HD, lots of premiums, probably ST for $300/yr) without subsidizing a DIME of their hardware because they are using a homebrewed HTPC. Hell, Rupert may want to give the cards away. Assuming Vista gives them the foundation to be confident in their anti-piracy measures, I can't see why they'd be against this - they LOSE money on hardware. CableCo's, however love hitting you with that BS rental fee. I can't see them wanting that revenue stream to dry up.

Thoughts?