
Cablevisions Set-Top Moves
Keep Open-System Dream Alive
HARDWARE
By Matt Sump and Jeff Baumgartner
From The September 16, 2002 Edition Of Broadband Week
| Does
Cablevision Systems Corp.s decision to look beyond Sony
Corp. for its ambitious digital-cable rollout plans mean the
MSO has given up on the open-platform concept behind iO: Interactive
Optimum? No, said executive vice president of engineering
and technology Wilt Hildenbrand, who recently spoke with
Broadband Week editor Matt Stump and CED assistant
editor Jeff Baumgartner about Cablevisions move to add
Scientific-Atlanta Inc. set-top box and headend equipment
to its New York-area cable systems. Hildenbrand took pains
to emphasize that Cablevision wont run parallel platforms,
and that its dream of deploying an open standards-based video
platform is alive and well. An edited transcript follows. |
 |
|
WILT HILDENBRAND
Cablevision Systems
|
BW: We wanted to give you a chance to clarify
and react to some of the coverage out there about Cablevisions
decision to go with Scientific-Atlanta set-tops and headend equipment
for its New York-area system.
Wilt Hildenbrand: What Ive seen
written up about this is how hard everybody is making it sound.
Thats the part that fascinates me a little bit. I keep reading
about a Needham [& Co.} report that set the stage with this
parallel network silliness and everything else, and you guys seem
to be following it and, quite candidly, I dont get it and
Im sitting here in the middle of it.
Yes, the big step is working with Scientific-Atlanta
to do [a conditional-access system from] NDS [Group plc]. Some
of that is a little bit of religion and some of that is we liked
the direction we were and are headed in with the Sony box. We
dont want to give that up. It makes it easier to mix and
match, should we come to a situation where we want to do that.
The conditional-access system is one of the bigger
components of any of these digital systems. You have the encoding
process to digitize the signals. Other than a price and quality
perspective, you can pretty much interchange encoders, not encryptors,
but encoders.
So lets say were going to continue to
use the same encoded content some being direct turnaround
from the bird, some of it self-encoded that we use with Sony.
At the moment at least, and for the foreseeable future, were
going to continue to work with SeaChange [International Inc.],
so we get to use the same VOD system. Weve been using BarcoNet
for the transport system, to carry signals around to the various
places where we launched Sony, so thats not a change or
a parallel network.
Other than, yes, the S-A system has a separate controller
from what were using to authorize the Sony boxes, I dont
know that were running a parallel system here at all, guys.
BW: Is it correct to assume the Sony headend
and Sony boxes are in only X percent of the New York DMA and that
vast portions of that area dont have any type of digital
headend?
Hildenbrand: It doesnt make a lot of
difference to me where the Sony boxes are or arent because
most of the work VOD, transport, encoding and, as we do
with NDS, even encryption is the same for both systems.
Sure, the Sony boxes, for all intents and purposes, are 100 percent
server-based. Sure, the S-A implementations up to this point and
probably going forward will have some imbedded clients in them
as opposed to server-based clients.
But architecturally, certainly at a high level, that
isnt two different networks. Thats just two different
executions.
You know that I know that we didnt get the
Sony boxes populated throughout our entire area. We certainly
didnt put any in the Bronx and Brooklyn yet. We certainly
didnt put any in Connecticut, but there are some on Long
Island, there are some in New Jersey.
I would have gone for the same type of system whether
it was a Sony platform or not because we havent really decided
to step back and go with just a channel-expander platform. Were
trying to follow the same logic we were following pretty successfully
with Sony, which is trying to stay as close to an open standards
based platform as possible.
BW: What were the reasons behind the decision
to go with S-A boxes and headends?
Hildenbrand: I could take you through some
of it, I dont know if I could take you through all of it.
We started to do something with Sony. We were actually relatively
successful in getting there, short of a couple things. One, we
were late, which I dont think any of the vendors were
talking to now didnt have their period of lateness going.
Two, we designed a very high-end system that was
focused on certain interactive-TV capabilities and certain other
capabilities.
What happened to both Sony and us, our lateness coincided with
an implosion in some of the interactive space. It became less
important to focus on that and more important to focus on some
other aspects of digital television, like HDTV [high-definition
television]. We ended up agreeing it just didnt fit the
times anymore.
Technologically, Id do it all over again. You
got to see where we were able to take it both hardware- and software-wise.
Its pretty amazing, especially as you look at things you
can run along side of it.
BW: Have you encouraged Sony to get a PowerKey
license from S-A and build boxes based on that conditional access
system?
Hildenbrand: We encourage Sony to do what
they think is best for Sony, including, as they stay in the set-top
box business, look at a way that we can be not the only ones they
are selling boxes to. I wouldnt ever steer them in one direction
or the other.
On the other side of the street, you have S-A, which
we happened to choose here, who went with PowerTV and PowerKey,
although were going with NDS here. You have Motorola, who
took a little more open look at the world and said: Bring
whatever middleware you want.
Were relatively transport-agnostic, VOD vendor-agnostic
and conditional access-specific, but agnostic from a proprietary
point of view. Its there but for a couple of pieces of business
that Motorola [Inc.] is in the system. And I wouldnt say
there isnt a chance for them to get into the system.
[Cablevision New York president] Tom Rutledge has
said it publicly: Were not going to ride just one
vendor going forward. For a little while, we need to stay
focused.
I dont need to spin six plates at the same
time, but well probably in a very short order get to introducing
other vendors.
BW: The system will continue to run the NDS.
It doesnt sound like PowerKey will play a part here.
Hildenbrand: We may start with it for expediency
purposes, then switch over later in some areas. And in some areas,
well probably start with it out of the gate. I dont
think all those things are defined right now. I think the quote
you got from NDS, saying the effort is about a 90-day effort,
is about what we all figure.
Were still working our way through it, but
Im looking forward to it. It will be interesting to see
it go. Its sort of an underlining of everything we and Sony
did, if we can bring another vendor in here and have them match
up.
BW: The dream of having an open-access system
is alive and well in your future vision. Am I correct in concluding
that?
Hildenbrand: I think you would [be].
BW: I also think some people might conclude
you will just throw out NDS in a year or two and go with PowerKey,
but I gather you would not necessarily want that to happen
that you could have them sit side by side and prove this open-access
system can work, because you havent seen the new services
develop, yet, for such a platform.
Hildenbrand: Its like the great American
novel. Unfortunately, theres a little bit of fiction contained
in there. You have got to be careful with stuff, because the turning
points are so small that you dont always see them as you
are running past them. Youve got the idea, with a very large
except.
We dont intend not to have PowerKey capability
in the boxes, we just dont intend to use it at some point.
Although we are looking at a simulcrypt-type format, were
not looking at running in a simulcrypt function, that is, where
Im literally running two conditional-access systems at the
same time. This is the except.
Im looking at focusing on the NDS conditional-access
system, keeping PowerKey, since it seems to be willing to work
that way at this stage in the S-A platform as sort of a bench
bolt, if you will, where Im not necessarily running it but
I could fall back to it if we chose to at some point in time.
As far as leveraging all the other products and services, were
kind of taking it one step at a time here.
 |
|
Cablevision's Wilt
Hildenbrand said new developments
convinced the MSO to add S-A gear to its digital mix.
Pictured: The iO: Interactive Optimum menu screen.
|
BW: Have you considered the Explorer 8000
for customers who want an integrated DVR?
Hildenbrand: Thats certainly the difference
between a Sony/Motorola and an S-A. These guys have been at it
so long, they have high-definition and DVRs and PVRs. At Motorola
they have this stereo receiver and gateway device. Were
looking across the board at those things.
The interesting live-by-the-sword, die-by-the-sword
thing here is you look at a high-end box like the 8000 and its
[Digital Audio/Video Interoperability Council]-based. It seems
to me to be a contradiction in terms to go out with a high-end
box thats DAVIC-based versus [Data Over Cable Service Interface
Specification]-based. So were looking to stay DOCSIS-based,
for the most part, for our core digital deployment. So well
look at the 8000, but well probably look at it when we get
around to putting DOCSIS in it versus DAVIC.
Thats not a condemnation of DAVIC. Its
just if youre going to go that high-end of a box, and spend
that kind of money, you ought to build in the bidirectional capability
you get in DOCSIS versus DAVIC. And its not that DAVIC isnt
bidirectional its a scalability point.
BW: Is there anything in the 4200 that you
really liked and that sold you on it?
Hildenbrand: Its similar to what we
had been working on all along with Sony, so it was an easy move.
We had looked at cost-reducing some of the things in the Sony
platform, because we really shot high. I think thats why
the GI [General Instrument Corp., now a unit of Motorola] guys
were telling you we looked at the 5100. Were looking at
that family of products.
BW: I assume Cablevision will be able to do
all this within the new capital-expenditure numbers youve
announced to Wall Street?
Hildenbrand: You guys heard the announcements
at the analyst conference. The core basis of the plan they put
going forward, on the migration to this, the buildout of the system
and the buildout of the plant and the adoption of these boxes,
is part of the of the rolling plan. The good news is we are able
to reuse a lot of what we did before. We didnt have to throw
out everything.
Let me be clear. Im not using the same SeaChange
server for this whole deployment. Im having to deploy other
servers. You have to put a mux per headend. You have to put a
SeaChange server per a certain number of subscribers. Its
exactly the same architecture I would have built out, short of
some of the very S-A-specific stuff. Its the same architecture
I would have had to build out to put Sony everywhere.
Everything that we had started to plan out to get
a head start in going digital in Connecticut, New Jersey and everywhere
else is still viable. It isnt like we have to run the Sony
system and quickly crank up an S-A system to run alongside of
it. Thats not really true.
There are very specific S-A translation pieces we
have to put in, but a lot of the existing stuff is either the
same as we did with Sony, or its exactly the same pieces
we did with Sony. And the difference there is whether or not and
when we get around to running S-A side by side with Sony. Yes,
were working on making that possible, but I cant tell
you from a product perspective if were going to do it. I
can tell from an engineering perspective its going to be
possible.
BW: On the conditional-access piece, on the
STB side, will PowerKey be present in a removable card, or is
it still embedded in the box?
Hildenbrand: PowerKey is an embedded system,
so it doesnt require a card. It turns out that the S-A box
has a smart-card slot, and were just going to leverage the
existence of that. A system that is running NDS will have a smart
card in it at its simplest level.
You make decisions between two vendors that have
been in the business a long time, the decisions arent always
a sound bite. Its a summary of a whole lot of little things
and in this particular case, the whole lot of little things got
us to S-A first. But I tell you, Motorola did well enough. They
are a viable player. You could end up seeing some of their stuff
here too.
BW: Can you walk me through operationally
what happens with an installer with an S-A box? Will he activate
the conditional access with an NDS card? And who keeps the card?
Hildenbrand: Right now, the card and the box
get mated in the customers house by the technician when
he goes to the house. Assuming the S-A scenario is going to follow
the same thing, the installer will sign out X amount of boxes,
X amount of cards, mate them up when they get to the house. The
box is then provisioned from the headend and the system comes
up. Thats pretty much how it works.
Cards are not necessarily assigned to a box at birth.
They are assigned as part of the provisioning system, and it stays
with that box until it either breaks or the box gets turned back
in.
BW: If you wanted to switch to PowerKey in
any of those boxes 18 months from now, would that mean a truck
roll, or could you provision it from the headend?
Hildenbrand: The goal will be no truck rolls.
Provisioning would be a software-controllable event. Having done
a few software-controllable events here, it does work.
|