montge
09-29-03, 04:26 PM
First off I really could care less that the initial part of my discussion occurred in the way it did, except for not getting a good answer.
A few day's ago I asked a question about DISH's business model, and why they don't allow other DVB-S STB vendors to work on their network (as their are plenty of vendors that have DVB-S STB's which are easily compatible with DISH, assuming DISH would allow CI-CAM modules to be used on their network.) My point of the question is that it appears that Dish is spending a lot of money on R&D for inferior products. They also seem to be ignoring the time told business question "what's your business?" In DISH's case, it's selling video products to consumers and businesses via Satellite. They're not really a company setup to be in the business of producing hardware and software. However this discussion was closed as it was deemed to be about "hacking". (I do realize the compatible probably means only SDTV, since there are no FOTA - Free OTA DVB-S/ATSC broadcasts as far as I'm aware.)
However there are other discussions which are about truly hacking the system, meaning adding extra HD space, "backing" up movies, and other discussion about extending capabilities of these boxes?
My question is why is there a double standard about "hacking questions"? Why was my discussion closed, but other's not? The policy appears to be you're allowed to "void the warrantee", (actually I think the sealing stickers say more then that on the devices, something about opening the box may be punishable.) However asking questions that do not involve "illegal" modification of any box are prohibited?
As far as I can tell I was stating facts about DISH's current business model, and the reference DVB security model, all which are based on public knowledge available from both organizations web sites.
A few day's ago I asked a question about DISH's business model, and why they don't allow other DVB-S STB vendors to work on their network (as their are plenty of vendors that have DVB-S STB's which are easily compatible with DISH, assuming DISH would allow CI-CAM modules to be used on their network.) My point of the question is that it appears that Dish is spending a lot of money on R&D for inferior products. They also seem to be ignoring the time told business question "what's your business?" In DISH's case, it's selling video products to consumers and businesses via Satellite. They're not really a company setup to be in the business of producing hardware and software. However this discussion was closed as it was deemed to be about "hacking". (I do realize the compatible probably means only SDTV, since there are no FOTA - Free OTA DVB-S/ATSC broadcasts as far as I'm aware.)
However there are other discussions which are about truly hacking the system, meaning adding extra HD space, "backing" up movies, and other discussion about extending capabilities of these boxes?
My question is why is there a double standard about "hacking questions"? Why was my discussion closed, but other's not? The policy appears to be you're allowed to "void the warrantee", (actually I think the sealing stickers say more then that on the devices, something about opening the box may be punishable.) However asking questions that do not involve "illegal" modification of any box are prohibited?
As far as I can tell I was stating facts about DISH's current business model, and the reference DVB security model, all which are based on public knowledge available from both organizations web sites.