Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
An End To Unencrypted Digital Cable TV and the HTPC?
An End To Unencrypted Digital Cable TV and the HTPC?
Date: August 27th, 2009
Author: Ryan Smith
Buy the SiliconDust HDHR-TECH SiliconDust
Blank
 Newegg $299.00
 
 

For those of you with cable TV service, for some time now you've been witnessing the slow transition of cable TV from a pure analog service to a pure digital service. With cable systems finally at their limits for bandwidth, within the last year the cable companies have finally begun what has been dubbed the "analog reclamation" - removing analog channels from their service and replacing them with digital versions that require 1/6th (or less) the bandwidth. Because the reclamation involves removing analog versions of most for-cost channels (what's commonly called the Expanded Basic tier), the reclamation has been tied with the deployment of Digital Transport Adapters - low-cost cable boxes that are little more than a basic QAM tuner attached to an RF modulator. This has allowed cable companies to reclaim this space without deploying otherwise very expensive Set Top Boxes to every TV at an affected household.

A side effect of this has been that computer TV tuner users, such as HTPC owners who in the analog age were accustomed to getting access to the EB tier on their computers with a simple analog TV tuner, were able to access those same channels in their digital form using ClearQAM-capable tuners. This is because the FCC mandated that the security mechanism be separate from the STBs, which gave rise to the continually problematic CableCARD. In the name of cost, DTAs do not have the ability to use CableCARDs, and as such do not meet the separable security requirements. Ultimately this required cable operators to put the digital versions of their EB tiers in the clear if they wanted to use DTAs, and this is why ClearQAM tuners can exist in a useful manner.

That age, however short it was, looks to be coming to a close. DTAs may be little more than a basic QAM tuner, but that "little more" is that they support a very basic form of encryption - a 56bit DES-based cypher known as Privacy Mode - which would allow them to receive and decrypt lightly encrypted channels. The FCC separable security mandate has previously prevented Privacy Mode from being used, but we have known for some time that cable companies and device manufacturers were looking to get a waiver for DTAs. In effect they have been soliciting the FCC for permission to encrypt all EB tier channels with Privacy Mode, so that reception would be limited to DTAs and CableCARD devices.

The FCC has granted their request.

The ramifications are two-fold. For the cable companies, once they implement this Privacy Mode across the board they will no longer have to install and maintain expensive signal traps to keep customers on lower tiers such as Limited Basic from accessing additional channels. For computer/HTPC users, this is an end to being able to directly receive EB tier channels with any kind of commonly available digital tuner. Privacy Mode is not open for licensing, and CableLabs will not license CableCARD for any kind of open (read: not locked down to hell and back) tuner. This means ClearQAM tuners made by ATI, Hauppauge, SiliconDust, and others would no longer be useful for receiving EB tier channels.

For pure digital reception on computers/HTPCs, what would be left would be two things. One would be fully licensed systems that implement head-to-toe DRM, the only way that CableLabs will license CableCARD for computers. This is not cheap, and brings with it all the disadvantages of not building your own system. The other would be utilizing the Firewire output of some STBs, but such STBs can be hard to acquire and the FCC allows broadcasts to include a copy-never (5C) flag that disables this output.

The last option would be to take advantage of the analog hole left by the component video output of STBs, using devices such as Hauppauge's HD PVR that can redigitize the output of STBs for importing into a computer. The drawback of this is a loss of quality due to an analog generation being included in the process, and whatever pitfalls that come from using the STB such a device would be attached to. None of these options are as simple and cheap as things stand today with a ClearQAM tuner.

At this point there's no reason to believe that cable companies won't deploy Privacy Mode across their networks, so it's a matter of "when", not "if" this will happen. It goes without saying that if you're currently enjoying the use of a ClearQAM tuner to receive EB tier channels, you'll want to enjoy what time you have left, and look into other solutions for the long-haul. At this pace, it looks like cable TV and computers will soon be divorcing.

On a final note, the loss of ClearQAM access is likely going to be followed by the loss of some fraction of the HTPC market, where users will not find as much value in a device that can no longer watch or record live TV from their cable company. Because of this potential nosedive in the HTPC market, I would be very surprised if Microsoft stayed entirely mum on the issue. They've put a lot of effort into Windows Media Center as a TV viewing platform and HTPC suite over the years, and this drives a stake right through that given the low adoption of CableCARD systems. Microsoft has been diversifying their TV operations over the years by getting satellite companies on-board and making some investments in IPTV/Internet TV, but cable TV is too big to ignore if Microsoft wants to keep pushing WMC. What this may lead to is anyone's guess, but unless they're going to drop the emphasis on TV viewing with WMC something will need to happen to keep WMC relevant in the cable TV space.


66 Comments
Username:
Password:
The moral of the story by geekfool, 86 days ago
Just watch Hulu instead. I do and I have a cqam tuner too.

Reply
RE: The moral of the story by justniz, 85 days ago
I didn't buy an HD tv to watch worse-than-analog-quality streams.

Reply
RE: The moral of the story by flashbacck, 85 days ago
I agree.

Reply
RE: The moral of the story by xsilver, 82 days ago
funny thing is - some people cant tell the difference or dont mind.

320p on 50" - o_0

Reply
RE: The moral of the story by leexgx, 82 days ago
i thought most HTPC was used for streaming illegal video files from an server in the house as most if not close to all of HTPC users do not have an Cable/sky input source

Reply
RE: The moral of the story by justniz, 79 days ago
Not at all. Mines a mythbox, in the longe not basement, I mostly use it for recording tv shows off my cable. Partly so I can watch shows when I want, and partly so I can skip commercials. No illegal streaming here.

Reply
it's not that simple by faxon, 86 days ago
if we could just watch hulu instead for everything, tv would cease to exist in its current form. what im curious to know is if it will be possible to buy an add in card which complies with everything the cable companies may implement so that you can use it the same way you would a normal set top box. sure, the cost of it will suck, but preventing it entirely will loose them customers

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by AmishElvis, 85 days ago
It looks like in a year or two we will be able to watch everything on Hulu. I think we are witnessing the last gasps of cable TV. At some point the cable companies will end up being ISPs and nothing else.

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by Pessimism, 85 days ago
Hulu doesn't help us Canadians.

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by mmntech, 85 days ago
Well I'm sure you can always go to CBC's website and watch bad TV on there, as the CRTC wants you to do. CRTC: CBC Ready To Collapse, or Conglomerates over-Regulating Ticked-off Canadians.

I have a QAM tuner in my TV. When I had cable I would get a few unencrypted digital channels but my ability to receive them was spotty at best. The few HD ones offered had no sound. I switched to satellite instead. Double the number of stations for the same price as cable, better image quality on SD stations, plus my box can easily be upgraded to a DVR unlike the ones Cogeco was using.

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by Flunk, 85 days ago
I'd rather not watch anything than watch the CBC. I have Rogers and they provide me with exactly 0 unencrypted digital channels for my QAM tuner! We always get screwed with our telecommunications services in Canada.

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by moretoys, 85 days ago
check out anchorfree if you want to use Hulu

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by Pirks, 84 days ago
RE: it's not that simple by Flunk, 83 days ago
You see, I've read that article too. But it's not accurate, you can still watch Hulu using hotspot shield. I live in Canada too.

Reply
RE: it's not that simple by thurston, 82 days ago
Or people without Broadband Internet.

Reply
Couple of things by BrooksT, 86 days ago
It seems clear that cable companies, at the behest of old media companies, want to keep computers and cable TV separate. It's not unlike what's going on in newspapers right now. It's idiotic, but hey, if they want to detach their business model from the internet, it's their foot to shoot.

As others have noted, Hulu and similar companies will negotiate alternative delivery agreements with the content producers, and the cable companies will be left as increasingly irrelevant middlemen and, ultimately, providers of commodity bandwidth service.

Also, a note to the author: you wanted "downside", not "opportunity cost." An opportunity cost is something you can't do because you chose to do something else (i.e., if you only have ten minutes on a break, the opportunity cost of reading Anandtech is that you can't read Ars).

Reply
proofreading by wolf550e, 86 days ago
[quote]At this point there's no reason to believe that cable companies won't deploy Privacy Mode across their networks, so it's a matter of "if", not "when" this will happen.[/quote]

You meant "when, not if".



Reply
So much for Cable Ready by James5mith, 86 days ago
I know I might be dating myself, but the "Cable Ready" decision was a big win for the consumer. It forced cable companies to allow their expanded basic to be available to anyone with a "cable ready" TV, without forcing them to use a STB. This meant that they couldn't force you to purchase a STB to watch TV.

It seems this is very cyclical. People fight for the cable companies to "free" TV, and win, then it's forgotten. It happened in the 80's, it happened in the 90's, and now it looks like it will skip a decade, because the American populace doesn't care enough anymore to even try and fight.

Reply
Well, you should specify which country you're talking abouty by medi01, 86 days ago
As, for example, in Germany cabel providers "went digital" quite some time ago.

Reply
RE: Well, you should specify which country you're talking abouty by Scali, 85 days ago
Indeed, here in The Netherlands it's the same. Everyone gets the digital channel for free, along with their analog channel, but all channels are encrypted. Officially, you need a TV card with support for CI+ and then use an CI+ module and an Irdeto2 card from the cable company to decrypt it.
Unofficially, no TV card supports CI+ yet, as far as I know... but there is one regular CI module which happens to work with the Irdeto2 card, even though it is not officially supported (the AlphaCrypt). There have been rumours for quite a while that the AlphaCrypt will be actively blocked, but so far it still works.

Reply
RE: Well, you should specify which country you're talking abouty by mmaenpaa, 84 days ago
Yep,

In Finland we only DVB-C/T (and of course DVB-S). Analog is gone. All the regular channels are "free" (Actually TV is not free, if you have a TV set you need to pay yearly around 230€ (=about 322$ US), this is practicaly a tax). You can buy different channel packets from your cable operator if you want extra. I am using http://www.team-mediaportal.com/ mediaportal. So maybe they can block the HTPC in USA but here it is just another receiver. You just order a service and use a smart card for the service. Seems weird if it wouldn't work in USA? Are the cable operators so afraid of hackers? Actually I was under theimpression that this is the reason why Microsoft Media Centers do not support DVB-C (difital cable).

markku

Reply
RE: Well, you should specify which country you're talking abouty by vittu, 83 days ago
Finland is actually a bit more complicated case. Yes, you can watch the limited amount of SDTV channels on cable after you paid your yearly household TV-licence fee (and if not the law abiding type, even without, for this the HTPC is the best cover), but try to have the HDTV delivered, and it gets very complicated. First of all you need approved HD-CableReady TV-set. The approved models are more expencive (compare the prices of Samsung LE40B750 (not approved), and identical LE40B755 (approved)). The cable provider (Welho) registers the serial number of your TV-set, and then rents you the CA-modul with Conax Chipset Pairing (so add to the TV-licence fees the extra monthly 3.90 (rent) + 25,90 (HDTV package). Finally you adjust everything, pick the favorite channels, delete the channels you do not use, etc. The next morning your channels are reverted to the "normal", as the cable company has been checking the Conax Chipset Pairing. You try to switch off the updating function, change the locking code, lock all the deleted channels with a kids lock, nothing helps. They are like zombies back next morning. But this is just an approved TV-set i'm talking about. HTPC will under such circumstances and regulations never become approved = legally accepted in Finland for HDTV. So the question about the cable operators being afraid of hackers is moot in Finland. You are supposed to get what you paid for (TV-licence fee) for "free". For everything else you pay, and even if you are willing to pay for HDTV, your HTPC will not be accepted.

Reply
I wonder by djc208, 86 days ago
I'd like to think that some enterprising company will figure out a loophole for this just like the HD-PVR, but we'll see.

I do agree that for HTPC people like myself this reduces my desire to keep cable TV. Not having multiple tuner boxes and the trouble of controlling them is one of the reasons I stay with cable. This cutoff could have a lot of us re-consider cable over satelite.

I also have to wonder how long until the TV manufacturers just stop offering anything other than a OTA tuner in TVs. CQAM and analog tuners are going to be useless, the Cable companies never really liked Cable Card and so it's died a slow death, to the point that most current TVs don't offer a cablecard socket any more. Other than OTA there will be few users who will not need some sort of box at this point to get their content.

If we're lucky the TV companies will push to get some sort of universal control scheme such as over HDMI, so that you don't need seperate or programmable remotes to use your TV/box combo.





Reply
RE: I wonder by fic2, 85 days ago
Not sure why people think that CableCARDs are dieing. As far as I know every new cable box that is coming out now uses them.

Reply
Your information is incomplete by jmurbank, 86 days ago
I disagree what you are saying because my cable company is private compared to companies like Comcast. I still get analog channels and including free HD channels. For digital cable channels, I have to use a cable box which is no problem for me.

If you are just recording a TV show, who cares about the quality. If you care for quality you will not be watching TV because you will be using satellite or using rental services.

If you really want to know about digital cable, it is just a re-encoded data in MPEG-2 that the cable company receives from their satellite system. Basically who cares about quality at this point since you are already getting something that is being re-encoded and using a Hauppauge PVR will not be any different. At least it will be recorded instead of being missed and being a slave for re-runs. Though if an on demand service from your cable provider or hulu.com contains your TV show, why in the hell are you recording it.

If you do not like your cable provider, start standing up and stir the waters.

Reply
RE: Your information is incomplete by hifiaudio2, 85 days ago
I am with Jmurbank... My understanding is that local channels (local HD) are broadcast in the clear, always, by law. That is all I care about so this has no effect on me.


Reply
RE: Your information is incomplete by lonndoggie, 85 days ago
Same here. Whatever I can get OTA is what they offer, and that's fine. However, they also still have a very full range of analog stuff, which I also capture with an analog capture card. If that stuff goes away, then there's a bummer.

Reply
RE: Your information is incomplete by Rindis, 81 days ago
I'm trying to think of a single local channel I care about....

Nope. Doesn't help.

Reply
Misleading by archcommus, 86 days ago
I think your article may be a little misleading. So you're telling us that the little DTA boxes they deploy will now be able to decrypt, so it's easier for them to encrypt EB tier channels that they move from analog to digital. This could spell the end of receiving EB tier channels on a computer TV tuner. However, you act as if this kills HTPC TV viewing entirely. What about local stations? As far as I understood, they are required to provide these in the clear, and in most areas are even in HD in the clear. This will not be changing, correct? That is all I really ever expected to receive with ClearQAM anyway. Yes, losing analog stations is a bummer, but most of my recording is local HD. Maybe eventually there will be an external CableCARD-ready tuner that will work with a home built PC...maybe.

Reply
RE: Misleading by Spivonious, 85 days ago
They also fail to mention that digital expanded basic channels are already encrypted, at least on my local Comcast (PA). The only QAM channels I can receive are the basic basic channels (the networks + a couple of others). All of my analog channels already have digital equivalents and since I only subscribe to basic basic (don't watch much TV), this move of expanded basic to digital will not affect me. And is renting a box for $2 a month really that much?

Reply
RE: Misleading by BigLan, 85 days ago
Same thing for me. All I've ever been able to get with qam is the locals + a couple more. It's whatever is on the basic cable package.

I didn't know there were any cable providers sending enhanced basic channels in clear qam. All that I'd heard was cablecos moving channels from the EB tier to a digital tier so that you ned a STB to get it, but the cable market is so fragmented I'm sure there are some areas where this happens.

I think the reality is that everyone will be forced to using STBs in the future for cable TV. The only reason we're not already there is that the cable industry is keeping analog on life support - they could have turned it off at the OTA transition and forced everyone to move to STBs.

Reply
RE: Misleading by erikstarcher, 81 days ago
Using a HDHomeRun I get all of the basic, expanded, and local HD channels. Comcast in Baltimore, MD. Everything from ESPN to Discovery is broadcast in the clear and in digital. The only things I don't get are the pay channels, and the expanded HD channels. If Comcast starts encrypting everything but local, I will be screwed. I want the ability to watch something on the TV in by bedroom that was recorded in the living room. Comcast doesn't offer that ability on their DVR's, and FIOS isn't available yet.

Reply
RE: Misleading by rdominique, 71 days ago
Ditto for me in Montgomery County Maryland. I am enjoying it now and hope it doesn't end anytime soon. If it does then it is bye bye to cable. Do the cable companies realize how much of their customer base they will alienate if they render all digital tuners in expensive HDTVs and computers useless?

Reply
Not an end to the HTPC. by chrissp, 86 days ago
The title of this post is a bit over the top. Not everyone uses an HTPC just to watch cable tv and I very much doubt loosing TV will be an end to the HTPC.

The beauty of an HTPC is having a PC hooked up to your living room equipment, coupled with a wireless keyboard and mouse you can browse the internet, watch videos on you tube, send email, all from the comfort of your arm chair and on the big screen.

I have a Media Centre and a Windows home server. My DVD collection has about 600 DVD's all of which are ripped to my homeserver. I then use My Movies to catalogue and organise the collection.

If I want to watch a film, I can do so quickly and easily, if I want to look at photos or videos I have taken its a simple matter.
I can also play music from the homeserver to my media centre. Instead of many small devices sitting under my TV I have just one and it can do so much more than all the others.

Recording live TV is overrated in my opinion. If that goes the HTPC will still be there, but I doubt it will disappear, it will simply become on demand iptv or perhaps other services will spring up to replace them such as FreeView and iplayer in the UK.



Reply
RE: Not an end to the HTPC. by paperfist, 86 days ago
Yes, that's great for you and the way you specifically use your HTPC, but for me and many others the goal of building an HTPC was to replace TiVos so that you could record and possibly archive your favorite shows AND also have the benefit of doing some of the things you do.

If it works the way the article is implying then it's a huge lost for the hobby.

Reply
RE: Not an end to the HTPC. by justniz, 85 days ago
>> I very much doubt loosing TV will be an end to the HTPC.

I totally disagree as I for one am basically the polar opposite of how you think and use HTPC.

I have a mythbox setup (love linux, hate windows) and nearly all my viewing is recorded tv shows. I hardly ever watch movies more than once so don't bother with owning or ripping DVDs,even though mythbox supports it. If I want to do computer-type activities I prefer the pc in my office than doing it on my tv, partly because 16:10 aspect is better than 16:9 for surfing, and also I'm more comfortably sat at a desk than trying to manage a mouse and keyboard perched on my lap on a couch.
I actually like the fact my HTPC works more like an appliance than a PC and doesnt have/need a keyboard or mouse.



Reply
RE: Not an end to the HTPC. by bigboxes, 84 days ago
Totally agree with you. I use my HTPC the same way. I use it to game, surf the net and play files (movies, tv shows and music) from my file server. I don't bother with tv capture, though I have from time to time in the past. I've got probably three tuner cards in a box somewhere.

I've got one digital converter box (in the living room) and the other TVs (in the bedroom and the office) use the analog signal that still is provided by Time-Warner. In fact Time-Warner was touting this feature that you wouldn't need to run out and purchase digital converter boxes for your old TVs when all the OTA channels went digital. My monitor has a built in (analog) tuner that I rarely use (though I do have it hooked up to cable).

Reply
So many channels by Flyboy27, 86 days ago
200+ Channels and still nothing on! I'm going outside! Long live Hulu, I hope Google never buys you. Kudos to ABC and NBC for putting full episodes online. CBS needs to get their heads out of their asses.

All a cable company or phone company is to me is an internet provider. I can get all the TV I want over the air or online. I don't need a home phone or the actual TV from the cable company.

Reply
Real Winner? Cable Companies by jbwhite99, 85 days ago
Now, in order to watch anything but local channels, you have to have a set top box. This means that you will only get local channels unencrypted, the way I read that. Today, I get extended basic on all of my TVs (ESPN, HGTV, networks), and HD local channels on my HD sets. I don't get ESPN HD/HGTV HD on any set except the one with the cable box.

I read this to say you must have digital cable, and buy a box for every TV in your house to watch ESPN. Otherwise, you get network only. What this means is that a big advantage cable has (no STB) is gone - if I have to rent from the cable company, why not rent from Direct TV or AT&T?

To the gentleman who asked about CBS on Hulu - check out tv.com - I think you will find CBS there. TV.com is owned by CBS (they bought out CNET).

Reply
DTV by Sunraycer, 85 days ago
I have Comcast. I already don't get any EB channels on QCAM, and never did. I get the local stations only. I've also noticed it seems like they are getting ready to start dropping Analog Service.

The article didn't mention well that we will still get OTA and local channels on Cable. I agree this is much less than we got with Analog. I guess I've just been expecting that for a while.

I agree that they don't seem to be planning on playing frequency trap games like they did on analog. I think we all know that didn't work well. The QCAM I get doesn't seem to be frequency grouped (I know digital stations aren't ordered by freq like Analog was, but you can look up the digital freq.)

I agree with most of the authors statements, including the work arounds with analog outputs, except that I don't think HTPC sales / builds will dive a whole lot. I use mine for playing music, watching DVDs, Blu-Ray, online TV....although recording TV TIVO style was really nice. I still do it on local stations....

I also agree that it's surprising Microsoft isn't more vocal....

Reply
RE: DTV by cbuchach, 85 days ago
I have a great HTPC with two QAM tuners and 2 analog tuners and will be sad to see analog service go, though I have to say I expected something like this, but figured it would a year or two after the digital transition. If it does come to this, I can't say I will even consider cable anymore as I really liked not have a tuner box connected to every TV. So, I would certainly switch over to AT&T service.


Reply
RE: DTV by JarredWalton, 85 days ago
You know, I have Comcast (and an HTPC), but what I do most of the time is just use the Comcase DVR to record stuff. And *that* is my biggest beef. The stupid DVR box has a whopping 80GB hard drive. Are you SERIOUS!? In a day and age where 1TB drives cost less than $100 (often a lot less), we can't get more than an 80GB drive? It's ludicrous, especially when HDTV sucks down about 8GB per hour of content. I'd be perfectly content if there were an easy way (i.e. that didn't get me in trouble with Comcast for cracking the box) to pop in my own HDD. What I usually end up doing is just downloading the episodes off the net for the series that I watch and using my HTPC that way. Don't tell the TV companies.... :-|

Reply
RE: DTV by bsoft16384, 85 days ago
Get a TiVo HD.

It's $13/mo if you buy a year of service at a time, which is cheaper than the Comcast DVR ($16/mo). The box costs about $150 used.

You can throw a 1TB disk in the TiVo easily, if you're willing to pop the top.

The first CableCARD from Comcast is free (assuming that you don't have another set-top-box), so you're covered there.

Reply
Cable TV DRM, meh ... by Smell This, 85 days ago
With my Fusion5 I got all the analog EB, unencrypted QAM (local and 1/2 dozen or so digital channels) and all the digital music channels (though for the most part I did not receive the video feed of the 'music' channels).

I got tired of CableCo incompetency and price increases and cut them off last Fall. So long, suckers.

I have even less empathy for Microsoft DRM.

My recorded content is for my personal consumption under fair use. I don't pirate or do the torrents and have even less empathy for those who do than CableCo or MS.

You thieves are the ones who have ruined a good thing for the rest of us ...



Reply
Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by chromal, 85 days ago
The article fails to discuss encryption key cracking. I mean, a 56-bit key doesn't sound like very much; surely, stronger ciphers have been cracked... And if not today, in 18, or 36 months?

Reply
RE: Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by chromal, 85 days ago
actually, It looks like a 56-bit DES key was cracked in 1999 in 22 hours. I wonder how fast it could be cracked today?

Reply
RE: Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by TheSmJ, 85 days ago
That was using a specially designed machine to crunch the keys, not a single home PC.

Reply
RE: Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by justniz, 85 days ago
I was just thinking the same thing.
How often (if ever) do they change the key?

Reply
RE: Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by Ryan Smith, 85 days ago
To be frank, it likely wouldn't take very much. Write something up in CUDA/OpenCL, and a GPU is going to rip through keys like there's no tomorrow; Distribtued.net has GTX 280s doing RC5-72 at a rate of 250Mkeys/sec. DES should be even faster.

But doing this is a DMCA violation, and as opposed to just ripping DVDs it would probably get you send to a nice American prison.

Reply
RE: Okay, maybe this is stupid, but... by chromal, 84 days ago
Apparently, in US courts, ripping DVDs is no longer considered 'fair use' but is, in fact, an 'unlawful' violation of the CSS provisions in the standard. I think we're going to have to increasingly accept that maintaining our rights will take us increasingly into so-called 'unlawful' zones, but, at least to me, an unreasonable law isn't worth respecting.

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 2





AnandTech.com Blog Categories
All categories
Anand's Macdates
Anand's Theater Construction
Anand's Updates
Cases and Power Supplies
CeBIT 2008
CES 2008
Computex 2009
Derek Decanted
Eddie's Got Game
Gary's First Looks
IT Computing general
Jarred's Musings
Kris's Corner
Raja's Ramblings
Rob's Experiences...
Ryan's Ramblings
Virtualization
What's New with Wes
Blank
Blank

Blank

Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank


more Blogs Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information