Opencable™ Applications Platform (OCAP™)

OpenCable™ Applications Platform (OCAP™)

November 14, 2005 FCC Agenda

• How did we get to OCAP™?

• How does OCAP™ work?

• What is the status of the project?

2 OCAP™ Background • “We are relying on the relevant industries to make progress towards achieving portability .... If they do not, or if the effort is unduly delayed, it will be necessary for the Commission to consider whether further action is necessary." [Navigation Device Order (1998)(para. 132)]

• Trials retailing non-portable STBs were unsuccessful

3 What is OpenCable™?

• Separated Security – CableCARD™

• Software Platform – Middleware: OCAPTM – Headend and Network support

4 OCAP™ Background • Portability – Benefits to consumer • STB, TV or PC purchased at retail can be used at any location with any MSO • Market competition will result in lower cost hardware for consumers – Benefits to Application Developers, Networks • Nationwide and common software platform will result in scale economies for interactive services • Write once and run everywhere becomes possible – Benefit to MSOs • Good competitive response to DBS, Telco

5 How best to achieve Portability?

Portability Options – 1999 Decision

Option A: Middleware Option B: Protocols Standardized middleware Standardized “protocols” for each new feature Applications written to one Each app written to corresponding standard Interface feature protocol (multiple) - Greater design flexibility - Greater commonality across cable (MSO, Apps, CE) industry at feature/app level - Fewer Intellectual Property - Potential IPR issue for each new problems feature protocol ($, time) - Faster innovation - Better stability -Cooperation required among MSOs for each new feature - Each new feature subject to standards process 6 Interoperability Complexity

Billing Systems Navigators/EPGs - CSG Innovis -GuideWorks - Convergys -TvWorks -DSG - Passport - SARA VOD Suppliers - Mystro - SeaChange - Optimum -C-COR - Concurrent - Broadbus Third Party Applications - Arroyo - GoldPocket / Tandberg -BIAP Set Top Box OS - Bluestreak - PowerTV -TVWorks -VRTX - Zodiac - Linux -Navic - VxWorks - Visiware -OS20 - Aperios

7 Interoperability Complexity Solution

Billing Systems Navigators/EPGs - CSG Innovis - GuideWorks - Convergys - Passport -DST - SARA - Mystro VOD Suppliers - Optimum - SeaChange -C-COR Common Middleware - Concurrent - Broadbus - Arroyo Third Party Applications - GoldPocket / Tandberg Set Top Box OS -BIAP - PowerTV - Bluestreak -VRTX -TVWorks - Linux - Zodiac - VxWorks -Navic -OS20 Plug and Play - Visiware - Aperios

8 Middleware Solutions Examined

1 ACTV 9 Microsoft 2 Adv. TV Sys. Comm. 10 MoreCom 3 Canal Plus 11 NDS 4 Excite@Home 12 OpenTV 5 General Instrument 13 PowerTV 6 Hewlett-Packard Co. 14 Sun Microsystems 7 ICTV 15 Virtual Modem 8 Liberate 16 VXM Network

9 Logic of JAVA-based Middleware

• Limitations of Presentation Engine approach – Market examples • ATVEF • WebTV, Wink, Liberate – Customers want a TV-centric user interface, look & feel

• Execution Engine approach – JAVA based – Adopted by Europe, Asia with DASE, MHP – Adopted by Cell phone industry in JAVA phones – Broadcasters and CE industry reached same conclusion on ACAP standard

10 What’s the Rest of the World Doing?

11 Current OCAP™ Services • S. Korea cable operators have begun commercial OCAP™ services in 2005

Mosaic EPG SMS Messaging App

Examples of Current OCAPTM Services

12 Leased STB

VOD UI

CA Software Stack

Hardware - Design

13 Plug & Play / Uni-Directional

Separates Security MSO UI and Software Applications replaced with CE UI

CE UI – e.g. Gemstar EPG

CE OS

Hardware: CE Device TV,STB, DVR, DVD, PC CableCARD - CA

14 Plug&Play-Bi-directional /OCAPTM

MSO Apps

Common Applications Layer OCAP™ Insert MiddlewareOCAP™ Layer - OCAP™ Stack Hardware Abstraction Layer

Hardware: Any OS

15 Interfacing to MSO Apps

MSO Apps: EPG VOD Caller ID

Scientific Atlanta Pace ODL OCAP Stack Alticast OCAP Stack

Samsung Motorola Samsung OCAP Stack Motorola OCAP Stack

Panasonic Panasonic OCAP Stack

16 OCAP™ Layers

MSO Policy Engine Programmer Monitor MSO Unbound Bound Application Applications Applications EPG Resident apps

OCAP™ Application Programming Interface

JVM MHP HAVI

OCAP™ Implementation

17 OCAP™ 1.0 Software Stack

MSO Monitor Non-Resident Application MSO 3rd Party CE JAVA CE Native EPG Applications Applications Applications Application Resident Apps

MSO OCAP™ Application Programming Interface CE Vendor

Resource Application MHP HAVi CE Native OCAP™ JVM JNI Manager Manager JIT JMF JAVA TV Application Environment Third Party OCAP™ Implementation

Native Application Libraries

Operating System and Device Drivers (Linux, PowerTV, VxWorks, etc.)

Host Device Hardware

18 Why a Monitor App?

CE JAVA (or JNI) Bound Apps Apps (ex. HBO app, ESPN app) (ex. Photo Unbound Apps viewing app) (ex. EPG)

• Monitor app helps MSO provide consistent environment (due to MSO network-specific services) • e.g. configure EAS • Monitor app reacts to resource contention User decides among competing applications to allocate • Processor Cycles •Memory • Graphics Plane • If user choice of CE JAVA app conflicts, MSO may use MA to alert customer

19 OpenCable™ Headend & Network

HEAD-END/SERVER/BACK OFFICE

Linear Video

ETV Mosaic VOD Server app data

Navigation Regional Asset Guide data Server Mgmt System

Content Delivery OCAP Device Net

OCAP App / Common Applications & Download Software to Provisioning download

Policy Server DAC 3.1/ Box Logging DNCS 4.0 DHCP Billing new OCAP™ client software Legend: new OCAP™ servers Existing to be enhanced 20 Cable’s Economic Incentive for OCAPTM

• More Application Innovation on Cable Platform – National Platform for Cable – Programmers, Advertisers, Third Party Developers – Competitive response to DBS, Telcos • Capital Reduction – Consumers purchase own CPE – Reduces Underlying Hardware Cost – More competition among STB suppliers

21 Cable’s Economic Incentive for OCAPTM

• Operations Efficiency, cost savings – De-couple Hardware from Software – Move to one Applications stack – Buy Hardware and Software from different suppliers • Potential market share gains – Better Cable Presence at Retail – Win back DBS, Telco customers • Increase “Digital Cable” Penetration

22 Progress to Date • CHILA signatories – Samsung – LG – Panasonic – Digeo • Substantial Investment by N American MSOs – UI porting to JAVA • GuideWorks • Time Warner Cable Digital Navigator – Headend equipment upgrades & purchases – Joint middleware development – Work with CHILA signatories – Creation of new specification for enhanced services

23 Widespread Participation • Interoperability Workshops at CableLabs® Application Headend Implementation - ABC -DigiSoft -ADB -Starz! -S&T - Alticast - GuideWorks - Softel -Comcast -TWC Dig Nav - Thales -LGE -TVWorks -Unisoft - Motorola -Pixel Play - NDS - Zodiac Tools -Osmosys - NPTV -Emuse -Pace - Aptiv Digital - Ensequence - Panasonic -Cox - Extensible - Pioneer Formatting -Samsung

24 Continuous Spec Development

• Thriving ECR process – 248 refinements to spec ’04,’05 – 21 companies participating • Open process • Extensions to embrace new innovations –DVR – Home Networking – IP Tuner (IPTV) – Downloadable Security • Continued MHP, ARIB harmonization

25 OCAP™ Works

• OCAP™ allows us to meet consumer expectations

• Practical solution to a difficult problem

• Platform for innovation