Idea for Nextbox 4.0

Need Help?

That's what we're here for! The goal of the Rogers Community is to help you find answers on everything Rogers. Can't find what you're looking for? Just ask!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Reply
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Idea for Nextbox 4.0

Dear Rogers,

I have an idea for the Nextbox (4.0) and it is to make the Nextbox broadcast a feed wirelessly to smaller units - so that families don't have to buy 4 big consoles (Nextbox's) for their families to get the premium content or down grade to other channels in other rooms.

The component would be build to recieve a signal from the larger main component (the Nextbox) - ither wirelessly (by creating a web link and auto-feed to the unit) or through traditional DSL/HDMI connecting them.

This idea is affordable because the connection can be split between units by attaching DSL outputs or HDMI outputs to the new model and building a smaller unit to receive, edit, and display content. -OR- you can build them an online access portfolio attached inside the unit that basically post your channels online and allows the smaller units to get channels wirelessly through the larger console (because I'm not sure if DSL or HDMI can go wireless).

-Jeff

Ps. The reason it would Need to be done like this is the smaller component would be build to work together with the larger unit to display HD content - when the options currently are buy 2-5 different Nextbox 3.0's. It would allow families to access their premium content throughout the house for more reasonable prices and be geared towards making better options then downgrading content amoungst the rooms in the house.

 

 

 

***Edited labels***

Solved! Go to Solution.
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,853

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

Bells FIBE remote unts are more like this currently, where there are no tuners in the units themselves, and pull off the PVR unit.

Though.. the cost for those boxes.. is not really any different than getting the regular HD boxes with rogers.

 

Currently you dont have to get many nextbox 3's... you really only need ONE to record content.  You can get the 4642 units for the other rooms. 
They have their own tuner for watching stuff... but with the whole home setup, can easily access with an internal network on the cable in your house, the content of the PVR.

Bigest downside, is these boxes are pretty BIG.


The 8642 is unfortunately the newest regular HD boxe from cisco.  HOPEFULLY they can release something smaller (like how the new NB3 is a fair bit smaller than the NB2)... and with the NB3 having 8 tuners, its would be more of a possibility of it USING the tuners on NB3 like in bells setup.



I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

I think you just need an input and output and a board on the small unit that has a program to "buff" and edit the picture quality (automatically) - because splicing it would effect quality strength and image, and programming to display a channel guide, it also needs a remote receiver. And if you go the wireless route then you could also allow communication between the large and small units to record shows or use it's other features.

Without wireless capability the units would cost under $7 a unit making it able to compete with any other cable box option - and you would get the HD package you paid for in every room for the extra you would spend on downgrading. If a family of 5 wanted one in the bedrooms and one in the living room (5 consoles) it would cost not much more then buying 1 extra Nextbox after markup.

If Rogers wanted to attempt a prototype I would go at it starting by;

Trying to splice a Nextbox
Limiting the splice output (will be edited later)
Securing the output to display proper 1080p HD to the main tv input
Building the board in the small unit so you can read and edit and add programming to the signal to make it display with less power (buffing and adding pixels automatically)
Adding the components like a remote receiver and digital output
Or trying without cables and worry of downgrading the signal by;
Creating a weblink that is attached to your Nextbox that holds your channels online
And adding a signal transmitter and receiver to the units that makes them compatable with each other and makes the smaller units recognize the content online instead of through splicing the HDMI or DSL
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

But your saying to get that type of quality in the picture they need a better model? And bigger? More parts n cost? It can't just re edit the original High Quality signal?
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

It's more or less patching/splicing into the bigger unit rather then having its own tv tuner and motherboard and digital PVR.
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

If you invent it you can Patton it as the first Digital Splicer Smiley Happy
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

I want you to build a successful prototype that splits the signal and edits and buffs the "speed" (to get picture quality) and then attach an HDMI input and make it like a router so we can market it to other companies clients through a sister company as a digital cable splitter.
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

Then we could market it in Canada - and hopefully the United States and Europe and Asia as a digital HD Splicer for a 1 time purchase for between $24.95-49.95 after parts and labour. * if it worked of course.
I Plan to Stick Around
Posts: 17

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

...... Digital HD Cable Router
Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,853

Re: Idea for Nextbox 4.0

The current nextboxes.. actually ARE a docsis3 cable router as well... IF enabled.  You can use them as an all in one modem, would just have to add a 3rd party router for wireless, etc.
Problem is, they can not currently do so.. as the signal range used for home phone, internet, and TV are seperated.. as well as what processes them in the back end... this means if one part of the network goes down, the others can stay up. (not so much, IF they were on the same with the router enabled).

 

Not saying any of this is BAD ideas Smiley Happy  Again, MOST of the stuff you have mentioned, is the way that Bell FIBE is doing it.  FIBE is IP based, and works pretty much the way you have described.

 

Hardware costs, are a little higher though than $7 though.

The NB3 currently is the step in the right direction.  Rogers themselves dont make/market/R&D the hardware though, so this is something someone else would have to make, for them to adopt.   They seem to be stuck with CISCO, so something they would have to make/develop.

Its not all out of the realm of possibility though.