You probably need to look at MBC program guide and I think you might change your mind on Foreign FTA. It puts Dish to shame
MBC.net | MBC2 - MBC Max - MBC4 - MBC Action____
New FTA service with 20 english channels
- Thread starter shadyone
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 1K
- Views 222K
- Status
You probably need to look at MBC program guide and I think you might change your mind on Foreign FTA. It puts Dish to shame
MBC.net | MBC2 - MBC Max - MBC4 - MBC Action____
I dont think any malice was intended Shady. You have to admit the coincidental facts would raise the question, especially considering the nature of the topic. Since this is a board you can read all you want without reg'ing, I was here frequently for about 2 years before I reg'd so I understand how you felt you "knew the guys" before you ever interacted with them. I didnt get active until I had time to bone up on what I needed to do to "replace" my whithering away C band analog TV sources with digital + Ku modes.
I can't imagine how many other "lurkers" there are with the open board mode Scott runs. I'm sure there are quite a few. May be a good poll.....and means to increase registry......lol
Now back on topic. I would love to see this come to fruition, but I have my doubts. The satellite "savvy" of the group seems less than I would expect for such a venture. Although trivial, the use of the term DBS for FTA bugs me. We, as an FTA community take DBS and DSS to relate to the SSP monopolies and their band allocation above 12.2ghz. Like I said trivial yes, but an indicator, at least to me. Had they used the term DVB instead, I would not have given the point a second thought.
Regarding the info on usage of 22" for dish size. I dont see the DVB/DSS guys sharing their high power resources with such a venture. A better indicator of their intent would be which signal polarity, circular or linear is expected to be used. If I had to venture a guess, this 22" reference is for the countless "starving patcheye culture" refugees since everyone on this side of FTA knows 22" is unaccepatable for the lower DVB spectrum.
Regarding the info on using ANY FTA box. For any free DVB-S reception, sure, but for smartcard based "extras" not likely. Many of the STBs didnt come with a reader, and those that did, the OEM FW supported XCRYPT (Korean company) only (except Pansat's CONAX) AFAIK.(Yes Globecast is Nag3, but that is a "dedicated system")
It probably wouldnt be difficult to put an XCRYPT CAS in place and I did read that there is a version that is done thru the RS232 port, but the factory FW would have to support it. XCRYPT is big in Europe.
XCRYPT Inc. - Company Profile
Regarding the original release about using legacy DN IRD. The reference was removed, and likely was rooted in the various IRD to FTA projects, again targeting the sat hacking community, and another indicator of lack of practical DVB FTA operation experience.
As a sidenote, with the right guys in the FW development, it is entirely possible to use any STi5518 based box for this venture. The DP301-013 and DP5XX as well as the DTV Gaboa and DRD430 IRDs would be ideal for such. The card reader is already there, and the FW is what makes it all workable. There are a number of 1st and 2nd gen FTA boxes that are 5518 based. Blackbirds, Fortecs, Pansats and the CS4000, plus LOTS of others. The source code for the CS4000 and Pansat 2700 is readily available, and with the right coder at the wheel, could be ported to the DN/DTV IRDs. Problem is, like Sin LaSalle said, "A Brotha's gotta get paid". I suspect there are a number of C++ coders that are up to the task, but unless a means of payment were arranged not likely we will see it.
One thought I had on the subject of paying the FW developer was having a means to register the FW by some means relevant to the CAS (an Rx #, CAM ID or similar) before it could be used for premium content, which would be the main reason to use one of these IRDs with the built in card reader. Might work if they could get a FW coder on board. Yes it would be "clonable", but one would still need to use the associated CAM for premium content.
Besides all the above, here is the real hitch I see in the venture. Content providers have grown accustom to getting paid by the advertizers and the service providers for carriage. This is total BS, but this double dipping precedent was set ~30 years ago, and has been the model every since. Feel free to drop Ted Turner a line and tell him thanks.
The obvious question is why dont the advertizers complain. After all the more carriage, the greater the customer base.
I suspect the content provider's response is that loosing carriage revenues would cause an increase in ad time prices, so the advertizers just bite their tongue and accept it.
The ones that need to complain are the consumers. We do, in our own way, by virtue of being devout FTAers, but as long as there is a mass of consumer "sheep" out there, it will not change.
Another point in this is that any content provider that signs on and becomes popular would get lured away when offered the extra carriage revenues by one of the "big boys". Also, any content provider that is already with one of the SPs would not (and probably could not under terms of a contract) risk being dropped if they came on board with this proposal.
Initially the best hope this has is to try to consolidate the available FTA providers. If one could get a "The more you buy the more you save" bandwidth deal, and offer lower TP space prices to existing stations by joining a co-op type mux this thing might fly. Coordination and negoitiation would be tedious, hours long, and returns slim, not exactly a desirable bussiness model. If it became sucessful, luring others to the project would be the next objective.
PS - Anole, that was Clara that said "Where's the BEEF!"......it even landed her a spot on Carson.....lol
I can't imagine how many other "lurkers" there are with the open board mode Scott runs. I'm sure there are quite a few. May be a good poll.....and means to increase registry......lol
Now back on topic. I would love to see this come to fruition, but I have my doubts. The satellite "savvy" of the group seems less than I would expect for such a venture. Although trivial, the use of the term DBS for FTA bugs me. We, as an FTA community take DBS and DSS to relate to the SSP monopolies and their band allocation above 12.2ghz. Like I said trivial yes, but an indicator, at least to me. Had they used the term DVB instead, I would not have given the point a second thought.
Regarding the info on usage of 22" for dish size. I dont see the DVB/DSS guys sharing their high power resources with such a venture. A better indicator of their intent would be which signal polarity, circular or linear is expected to be used. If I had to venture a guess, this 22" reference is for the countless "starving patcheye culture" refugees since everyone on this side of FTA knows 22" is unaccepatable for the lower DVB spectrum.
Regarding the info on using ANY FTA box. For any free DVB-S reception, sure, but for smartcard based "extras" not likely. Many of the STBs didnt come with a reader, and those that did, the OEM FW supported XCRYPT (Korean company) only (except Pansat's CONAX) AFAIK.(Yes Globecast is Nag3, but that is a "dedicated system")
It probably wouldnt be difficult to put an XCRYPT CAS in place and I did read that there is a version that is done thru the RS232 port, but the factory FW would have to support it. XCRYPT is big in Europe.
XCRYPT Inc. - Company Profile
Regarding the original release about using legacy DN IRD. The reference was removed, and likely was rooted in the various IRD to FTA projects, again targeting the sat hacking community, and another indicator of lack of practical DVB FTA operation experience.
As a sidenote, with the right guys in the FW development, it is entirely possible to use any STi5518 based box for this venture. The DP301-013 and DP5XX as well as the DTV Gaboa and DRD430 IRDs would be ideal for such. The card reader is already there, and the FW is what makes it all workable. There are a number of 1st and 2nd gen FTA boxes that are 5518 based. Blackbirds, Fortecs, Pansats and the CS4000, plus LOTS of others. The source code for the CS4000 and Pansat 2700 is readily available, and with the right coder at the wheel, could be ported to the DN/DTV IRDs. Problem is, like Sin LaSalle said, "A Brotha's gotta get paid". I suspect there are a number of C++ coders that are up to the task, but unless a means of payment were arranged not likely we will see it.
One thought I had on the subject of paying the FW developer was having a means to register the FW by some means relevant to the CAS (an Rx #, CAM ID or similar) before it could be used for premium content, which would be the main reason to use one of these IRDs with the built in card reader. Might work if they could get a FW coder on board. Yes it would be "clonable", but one would still need to use the associated CAM for premium content.
Besides all the above, here is the real hitch I see in the venture. Content providers have grown accustom to getting paid by the advertizers and the service providers for carriage. This is total BS, but this double dipping precedent was set ~30 years ago, and has been the model every since. Feel free to drop Ted Turner a line and tell him thanks.
The obvious question is why dont the advertizers complain. After all the more carriage, the greater the customer base.
I suspect the content provider's response is that loosing carriage revenues would cause an increase in ad time prices, so the advertizers just bite their tongue and accept it.
The ones that need to complain are the consumers. We do, in our own way, by virtue of being devout FTAers, but as long as there is a mass of consumer "sheep" out there, it will not change.
Another point in this is that any content provider that signs on and becomes popular would get lured away when offered the extra carriage revenues by one of the "big boys". Also, any content provider that is already with one of the SPs would not (and probably could not under terms of a contract) risk being dropped if they came on board with this proposal.
Initially the best hope this has is to try to consolidate the available FTA providers. If one could get a "The more you buy the more you save" bandwidth deal, and offer lower TP space prices to existing stations by joining a co-op type mux this thing might fly. Coordination and negoitiation would be tedious, hours long, and returns slim, not exactly a desirable bussiness model. If it became sucessful, luring others to the project would be the next objective.
PS - Anole, that was Clara that said "Where's the BEEF!"......it even landed her a spot on Carson.....lol
Last edited:
I've seen Dish or Direct brochures that tell customers they can skip past the ads. Wonder why advertisers don't complain about that?
LOL. Good point.
Fast foward feature timed to coincide with commercial lengths blatently named commercial skip feature. A carry over from VCR days to PVRs and a superficial offering to the sheep to keep them calm and in the stock yard.
In reality it doesnt change the cost paid for having to press the skip button for 1/3 of one's viewing time.
Yea, and I'm amused that someone joined the forum just to blast all the nay-sayers, with four posts in a row. -
To quote a very old 'burger commercial, "Show me the BEEF!". -
My point was that some of you in this thread, posted comments that I felt was unfair and unnecessary,
checking someone over like they are a suspicious person/scammer, thinking that there is some ill intended motive behind DBS and what is trying to be accomplished for the FTA community. Then you acknowledge the special thanks that was given? 
No one has requested money from the FTA community to fund the project. It's being funded with personal finances, and voluntary time is put into the project, and has been made transparent on the DBS website, with various updates, as to what is being accomplished. If anyone does'nt like the project, they don't have to view the free channels when they become available.
You probably need to look at MBC program guide and I think you might change your mind on Foreign FTA. It puts Dish to shame
MBC.net | MBC2 - MBC Max - MBC4 - MBC Action____
And your point is? Those channels are'nt available anywhere in the North American viewing spectrum. I should have stated what I said in my post, a little more clearly, so that you could have understood it better. Roughly 80% of "North American" FTA programming, is foreign related, non english speaking channels, mostly news and or religious programming. If you go back 20-30 years ago when the C Band market was in heavy use , that was'nt the case. Almost everything was free at one point. In the present, here and now, this is'nt the case. So, no changing of the mind here.
My point was that some of you in this thread, posted comments that I felt was unfair and unnecessary,
No one has requested money from the FTA community to fund the project. It's being funded with personal finances, and voluntary time is put into the project, and has been made transparent on the DBS website, with various updates, as to what is being accomplished. If anyone does'nt like the project, they don't have to view the free channels when they become available.
It would be safe to say that all members would like to see this succeed. In fact we had discussions not too long ago and even before mention of freedbs where we were asking how come the European FTA model is popular and doable and the North American FTA model is apparently not (with the exception of Glorystar).
We were trying to brainstorm on what we could do, putting ideas forth, why some things would work and why some things would not work. Some of the ideas on the brainstorming threads came from long time members and relatively
new members, and even from members who were into FTA since the very beginning.
A mention of a new TP,station or network is and always will be meant with interest on these forums. After all we had lost a slew of network stations on 123W, CBS on 125W, White Springs on 129W.
Just like how many of us did the brainstorming on the European FTA model, we were doing the brainstorming on the new network as well. With the lack of information regarding satellite location and the proposed providers, we were and are brainstorming.
Some of our more knowledgeable members here have great insight on how the process works like how much transponder time costs and what is involved with distribution and where would be a great satellite location for the new network.
I don't doubt someone from the new network was taking down notes along the way. With all the combined talent and experience from our members (and sponsors) here, I have a feeling that some of our suggestions and concerns were noted by those at the new network.
Some of the other comments I have seen (before any mention of the freedbs proposal), mentioned that especially now in this economy.....the time is right for idea of satellite TV with no monthly fees and 100% legal by itself has a potential for fairly good appeal. Perhaps now we can really make a all out effort to promote FTA and the new network as well. But lets not forget Glory Star, I think they have been a successful FTA model to date.
I agree wilth Bill that you would be hard pressed to find someone that would be against this project succeeding, save the "big boys".....lol
Satsurfer, some things to keep in mind is that a number of the folks here are older and have learned to listen to that lil' voice that says "If something looks to be to good to be true, it probably is". The negativity you picked up on, was more about that than anything else. Add to that some of the tech related points I made in my post and you have a bit more foundation for doubt.
The thing is we are all techno geeks here and a site with general statements and no techie "meat" is perceived as a sales pitch. I know there was no solicitation, but it's all hearsay/wishful thinking/15 minutes of fame until the specs are rolled out.
Collectively there are a couple of centuries of satellite related experience floating around this board at any given time , so if your going to talk turkey you'd better be prepared to get quized.
I hope with all my heart this gets off the ground, and tip my hat to those that put forth the effort to make it happen. It will be a daunting task.
Are you "in the know"? You seem to speak from a position of inside info. If you have some knowledge of the technical specifics of the project, by all means please share. As I pointed out, some of the general info released is already in conflict with common FTA practices and parameters. An overview of the proposed technical aspects would go a long way to elicit credibility.
For example 22" dish? Not gonna happen for Free to Air transponders in the lower Ku band. Even if they could see enough signal, rain fade would certainly be an issue.
Tell me about the ideas on the table regarding smartcard/CAS access and management.
How will STBs that do not have a card reader be accounted for?
What CAS is being considerd?
Is there more than one model being considered?
Have the models that do have readers FW compatability been checked with the desired CAS?
Is the grand scheme to solicit existing content providers, or rely on upstart ones, or both?
Have network/independent afiliates been considered as potential additions?
See what I mean................ MEAT.
I dont think anyone is knocking the project, or it's developers. I dont think any of the guys here would intentionally be unjustly judgmental. In fact I am sure that if such behavior was to surface Scott or Tony would be on top of it.
Give me your thoughts Spock...........
Satsurfer, some things to keep in mind is that a number of the folks here are older and have learned to listen to that lil' voice that says "If something looks to be to good to be true, it probably is". The negativity you picked up on, was more about that than anything else. Add to that some of the tech related points I made in my post and you have a bit more foundation for doubt.
The thing is we are all techno geeks here and a site with general statements and no techie "meat" is perceived as a sales pitch. I know there was no solicitation, but it's all hearsay/wishful thinking/15 minutes of fame until the specs are rolled out.
Collectively there are a couple of centuries of satellite related experience floating around this board at any given time , so if your going to talk turkey you'd better be prepared to get quized.
I hope with all my heart this gets off the ground, and tip my hat to those that put forth the effort to make it happen. It will be a daunting task.
Are you "in the know"? You seem to speak from a position of inside info. If you have some knowledge of the technical specifics of the project, by all means please share. As I pointed out, some of the general info released is already in conflict with common FTA practices and parameters. An overview of the proposed technical aspects would go a long way to elicit credibility.
For example 22" dish? Not gonna happen for Free to Air transponders in the lower Ku band. Even if they could see enough signal, rain fade would certainly be an issue.
Tell me about the ideas on the table regarding smartcard/CAS access and management.
How will STBs that do not have a card reader be accounted for?
What CAS is being considerd?
Is there more than one model being considered?
Have the models that do have readers FW compatability been checked with the desired CAS?
Is the grand scheme to solicit existing content providers, or rely on upstart ones, or both?
Have network/independent afiliates been considered as potential additions?
See what I mean................ MEAT.
I dont think anyone is knocking the project, or it's developers. I dont think any of the guys here would intentionally be unjustly judgmental. In fact I am sure that if such behavior was to surface Scott or Tony would be on top of it.
Give me your thoughts Spock...........
I'll bet Dish is willing to sell Nagra 3 CAS real cheap! Coincidentally, most "FTA" receivers in the market right now, WILL work with it, guaranteed!
the suggestion is MBC might want to join this proposed venture to increase their market to the USA, they actually have an 1 Arab only speaking Channel already but the rest are dual audio
These guys are faced with a tough decision as to what technology to go with.
I can see the appeal of going with DVB MPEG2 compatible equipment when the are millions of ex hacker boxes floating around that could be used and the attempt to make the small ex hacker dishes work, but as others have pointed out the small dish is going to be a challenge
Maybe these guys should have a chat with the guys at FreeHD Canada , the use of DVB-s2 equipment and/or more advanced codecs like MPEG4 could cut their bandwidth and transponder costs substantially (maybe in half) a big consideration with a free service.
I would think long and hard before going with old technology even if the standard is well adopted, maybe put a few teaser channels in DVB and the rest in something more advanced, the dealers would love this.
I can see the appeal of going with DVB MPEG2 compatible equipment when the are millions of ex hacker boxes floating around that could be used and the attempt to make the small ex hacker dishes work, but as others have pointed out the small dish is going to be a challenge
Maybe these guys should have a chat with the guys at FreeHD Canada , the use of DVB-s2 equipment and/or more advanced codecs like MPEG4 could cut their bandwidth and transponder costs substantially (maybe in half) a big consideration with a free service.
I would think long and hard before going with old technology even if the standard is well adopted, maybe put a few teaser channels in DVB and the rest in something more advanced, the dealers would love this.
IMO if one were serious, DVB-S2 with MPEG 4 codecs is the only way to go. RTV uses one C-band TP on AMC 3, with modest FEC, and gets good results. The quality is not GREAT, but its passable for SD. Oh yeah if you haven't seen it, I think at last count there are upwards of 30 channels on ONE transponder. BIG cost savings fo a potential uplinker, IMO.
Plus there are a LOT of receivers that can do S2 out of the box, Coolast 8000,8100,Diamond, Pansat 9200,9000,Azbox, Vantage, etc.
I HOPE the card reader thing is JUST an option, so those boxes with no reader can be utilized.
I am excited about this, and I think I speak for all serious FTA users when I say we would be willing to kick in a few bucks a month for decent channels with decent quality, even if they ARE ITC. :up
Good luck to all concerned!
Plus there are a LOT of receivers that can do S2 out of the box, Coolast 8000,8100,Diamond, Pansat 9200,9000,Azbox, Vantage, etc.
I HOPE the card reader thing is JUST an option, so those boxes with no reader can be utilized.
I am excited about this, and I think I speak for all serious FTA users when I say we would be willing to kick in a few bucks a month for decent channels with decent quality, even if they ARE ITC. :up
Good luck to all concerned!
From their website:
Using dvb-s2 or 4:2:2 would eliminate most of the potential viewers (including me). How many of the "dormant" stbs can tune dvb-s2? I understand your financial point but you have just destroyed their mission statement's purpose.
Using dvb-s2 or 4:2:2 would eliminate most of the potential viewers (including me). How many of the "dormant" stbs can tune dvb-s2? I understand your financial point but you have just destroyed their mission statement's purpose.
Agree 100%, and I will add that the PPV aspect of the new service is a great idea. But also this begs the question ... how many (here on these forums) are ready for PPV capability?
I am not trying to sound negative, just realistic. I perfectly understand the need for buying another receiver for the PPV aspect of the new service, but as long we are spending the extra money ...lets spend it on a receiver that does it all (PPV, 4:2:2 HD and AC3)....does such a receiver exist?
I'll bet Dish is willing to sell Nagra 3 CAS real cheap! Coincidentally, most "FTA" receivers in the market right now, WILL work with it, guaranteed!
Dish don't own Nagravision 3
I agree wilth Bill that you would be hard pressed to find someone that would be against this project succeeding, save the "big boys".....lol
Satsurfer, some things to keep in mind is that a number of the folks here are older and have learned to listen to that lil' voice that says "If something looks to be to good to be true, it probably is". The negativity you picked up on, was more about that than anything else. Add to that some of the tech related points I made in my post and you have a bit more foundation for doubt.
The thing is we are all techno geeks here and a site with general statements and no techie "meat" is perceived as a sales pitch. I know there was no solicitation, but it's all hearsay/wishful thinking/15 minutes of fame until the specs are rolled out.
Collectively there are a couple of centuries of satellite related experience floating around this board at any given time , so if your going to talk turkey you'd better be prepared to get quized.
I hope with all my heart this gets off the ground, and tip my hat to those that put forth the effort to make it happen. It will be a daunting task.
Are you "in the know"? You seem to speak from a position of inside info. If you have some knowledge of the technical specifics of the project, by all means please share. As I pointed out, some of the general info released is already in conflict with common FTA practices and parameters. An overview of the proposed technical aspects would go a long way to elicit credibility.
For example 22" dish? Not gonna happen for Free to Air transponders in the lower Ku band. Even if they could see enough signal, rain fade would certainly be an issue.
Tell me about the ideas on the table regarding smartcard/CAS access and management.
How will STBs that do not have a card reader be accounted for?
What CAS is being considerd?
Is there more than one model being considered?
Have the models that do have readers FW compatability been checked with the desired CAS?
Is the grand scheme to solicit existing content providers, or rely on upstart ones, or both?
Have network/independent afiliates been considered as potential additions?
See what I mean................ MEAT.
I dont think anyone is knocking the project, or it's developers. I dont think any of the guys here would intentionally be unjustly judgmental. In fact I am sure that if such behavior was to surface Scott or Tony would be on top of it.
Give me your thoughts Spock...........
I'm not at liberty to discuss the technical aspects of the project. Credibility will speak for itself when the project is up and running. Updates will be made public on the site as they become available.
New news release on their site, mpeg2 it is for a year then mpeg4. Lots more updated info there.
- Status
