<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Hauppauge HD PVR, High-Def Component Input For The PC</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/</link>
	<description>TiVo, Slingbox, Blu-ray Disc, and whatever tech I feel like blogging about...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 14 Feb 2010 19:48:08 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: MegaZone</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/comment-page-1/#comment-22224</link>
		<dc:creator>MegaZone</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 00:59:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tivolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/#comment-22224</guid>
		<description>It is technologically possible, but it would result in a unit priced higher than the existing units.  And, as in my &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/05/component-input-hd-dvrs-are-here/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;previous post&lt;/a&gt;, a component input DVR has some serious drawbacks compared to a CableCARD DVR or a native satellite DVR.  Technologically, yes, they can build a DVR with component input.  The question is, is there enough of a market for the product to warrant the expense of engineering it, certifying it, and manufacturing it?  In the US most users would probably stick with CableCARD (I know I would) while satellite users would have to sacrifice quality, and probably dual-tuner support (handing two external STBs adds complexity), to use the TiVo.

But what may drive the development is the international markets.  CableCARD isn&#039;t available in Canada.  To do a standalone HD DVR they&#039;d pretty much have to do component input.  And supporting non-freeview systems in DVB nations might require component input.  So if they do the engineering work for the broader market, we may see such a unit in the US.

But, if it happens at all, it probably won&#039;t be before 2009 IMHO.  Right now TiVo is focused on expanding their cable software penetration - porting it to Cisco (formerly SciAtl) boxes, ironing out any issues with Comcast, and getting Cox ready to deploy - as well as looking for more partners.  And not just in the US.  And they&#039;re looking for more international deals for the DVB hardware beyond Australia and New Zealand, especially now that they have the &#039;big five&#039; languages supported and adding additional languages is easier.  I think we&#039;ll mainly see improvements to the services in the US this year, an increasing embrace Internet content.  The Web Video support is just the tip of the iceberg.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is technologically possible, but it would result in a unit priced higher than the existing units.  And, as in my <a href="http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/05/component-input-hd-dvrs-are-here/" rel="nofollow">previous post</a>, a component input DVR has some serious drawbacks compared to a CableCARD DVR or a native satellite DVR.  Technologically, yes, they can build a DVR with component input.  The question is, is there enough of a market for the product to warrant the expense of engineering it, certifying it, and manufacturing it?  In the US most users would probably stick with CableCARD (I know I would) while satellite users would have to sacrifice quality, and probably dual-tuner support (handing two external STBs adds complexity), to use the TiVo.</p>
<p>But what may drive the development is the international markets.  CableCARD isn&#8217;t available in Canada.  To do a standalone HD DVR they&#8217;d pretty much have to do component input.  And supporting non-freeview systems in DVB nations might require component input.  So if they do the engineering work for the broader market, we may see such a unit in the US.</p>
<p>But, if it happens at all, it probably won&#8217;t be before 2009 IMHO.  Right now TiVo is focused on expanding their cable software penetration &#8211; porting it to Cisco (formerly SciAtl) boxes, ironing out any issues with Comcast, and getting Cox ready to deploy &#8211; as well as looking for more partners.  And not just in the US.  And they&#8217;re looking for more international deals for the DVB hardware beyond Australia and New Zealand, especially now that they have the &#8216;big five&#8217; languages supported and adding additional languages is easier.  I think we&#8217;ll mainly see improvements to the services in the US this year, an increasing embrace Internet content.  The Web Video support is just the tip of the iceberg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnG</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/comment-page-1/#comment-22220</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tivolovers.com/2008/01/10/the-hauppauge-hd-pvr-high-def-component-input-for-the-pc/#comment-22220</guid>
		<description>I think Tivo is missing the boat if it could produce a HD Component Tivo with an IR cable.  Then the Tivo customer could move between cable or satellite just like the Series 2 boxes.

John G.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think Tivo is missing the boat if it could produce a HD Component Tivo with an IR cable.  Then the Tivo customer could move between cable or satellite just like the Series 2 boxes.</p>
<p>John G.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
