Except, oh, there's dozens of such solutions on the market today. As a matter of fact, I bought one just a few weeks ago.
The only advantage Apple could bring is a better UI. That's it. Apple's solution would likely be a lot less flexible anyway. You might as well buy a Mac mini plus an EyeSomething.
This is just completely untrue. You can use iTV to play your camcorder-made videos (whether they're edited in iMovie or not), your synthesizer-made songs (whether they're edited in GarageBand or not), your cam-made photos (whether they're edited in iPhoto or not). You can use it to play the audio and video podcasts you subscribe to. You can play the videos you have downloaded through BitTorrent. Do I need to go on?
Fine, iTV isn't a PVR, and for some, that is quite a limitation. But iTV is everything it claims to be: a solution to bringing your media on your computers to your TV. Your above claims simply don't hold true. You don't need to buy a single song or video on the iTunes store, nor can you not use the product on its own.
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one. iTV looks like something that will sit there for long periods of time doing nothing, and being as useless as I think it will be for the majority. It's not going to take over the living room like a DVR does. iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
Quote:
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
Quote:
iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
This is just completely untrue. You can use iTV to play your camcorder-made videos (whether they're edited in iMovie or not), your synthesizer-made songs (whether they're edited in GarageBand or not), your cam-made photos (whether they're edited in iPhoto or not). You can use it to play the audio and video podcasts you subscribe to. You can play the videos you have downloaded through BitTorrent. Do I need to go on?
Fine, iTV isn't a PVR, and for some, that is quite a limitation. But iTV is everything it claims to be: a solution to bringing your media on your computers to your TV. Your above claims simply don't hold true. You don't need to buy a single song or video on the iTunes store, nor can you not use the product on its own.
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one. iTV looks like something that will sit there for long periods of time doing nothing, and being as useless as I think it will be for the majority. It's not going to take over the living room like a DVR does. iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
Fine, it can be a ho-hum product. What I think people don't understand is that it seems in your mind this one product makes apple "evil" and possibly unworthy of purchasing ANY product from them.
The over the top hatred is really extreme and confusing. I mean why would the introduction of ONE product which you personally don't have any use for mean that you must now consider a Levono laptop? Because that's what you said earlier in this thread.
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
With those comments I'd say we are thinking alike (god forbid) the one exception being that I'm a desktop owner, and it's not going to make it's way into my TV area.
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
With those comments I'd say we are thinking alike (god forbid) the one exception being that I'm a desktop owner, and iTV is not going to make it's way into my TV area. Reason: it seems what it's for may turn out to be used once in a blue moon, and then the special feeing of having this new Apple gem of a product will be gone, and I'm out cash. If anything. I think iTV is going to improve sales for elgato, Tivo, and If your local cable company has them, cable box version of a DVR because users will feel dissatisfied after figuring out how much use they will get from this thing.
If it helps any, I don't think Apple ever intends to create a DVR. And not necessarily because they just want the cash. Ever since I found out the El Gato CEO was on Apple's (German) board, I haven't expected any competition from Apple. El Gato's products work great with Macs--the only missing link being a plug-in in Front Row for eyeTV. And I think this will happen with Front Row 2.0 (whether it ships with iLife 07 or with Leopard, I don't know).
This decision doesn't really have anything to do with Apple wanting to squeeze more $ out of us, but with corporate politics. First, Apple desn't want to piss off/alienate a successful developer who has created a wonderful product. (What message does that send to other developers?...Just remember the whole kafuffle over Dashboard/Konfabulator.) Apple won't enter a space being competently served by a partner. Secondly, Apple has to present a certain type of face to movie and TV studios. It has to present them with "guaranteed revenue" (a fiction that certain CEOs/companies have come to expect is their legal god-given right). If Apple also offered a DVR, then media companies would be less likely to partner with them, even if their actual revenues wouldn't be affected at all. For that reason, I don't even think we can expect Apple to even advertise the El Gato products, or feature them working with Macs on Apple's site (like they do with camcorders, cameras, etc.). but that doesn't mean we can't use them.
It seems like a mini plus an El Gato product is exactly what you are talking about. It works well now, and will (probably) work better in the future once FR is opened up. So go ahead and buy it. Also, if it helps, I don't think iTV is the end of Apple living room strategy, even in the near-term. But I don't think we'll even get a DVR from Apple (for the above reasons).
Finally, a better argument for criticizing Apple's iTV, is not that it isn't some other product. It's that it is essentially a $300 tax that we have to pay because media companies are paranoid control freaks who won't allow Apple to allow us to legally burn disks of media we legally own. In other words, if we could burn disks of our iTS purchases, iTV would be completely useless. Apple is caving into the media companies on this front, but it's doubtful that the iTunes Store would have graduated beyond music if Apple hadn't agreed to the "no-burning" criterion.
I am hoping this issue is addressed soon. But the ball is not in Apple's court.
Well everybody has a pre-shipping opinion on products, and there is sometimes a post-shipping opinion that differs. I once predicted the iPod was a rumor because there was no way Apple would enter the MP3 player market because there were already good MP3 players out there. I was wrong. Apple owns the MP3 player market, and there competitors even sell more "now" than they did "then" because of the iPod bringing the MP3 player market to the forefront. They just don't sell as many as Apple.
This mistake is the reason I think Apple should have gone after the whole enchilada. DVR exists, and it's getting more, and more popular, but if the iTV features were included Apple could easily own it.
For the most part its just disappointing to me personally, because now they all know Apple could come after them in the future, and they will better their products. So when Apple could have gotten the jump on them - now Apple will have to worry about a DVR service that signs a deal with Amazon because that could essentially kill it.
I would say Apple can see the inevitable for DVR technology.
Broadcast companies don't like them and every independent company who has tried to make a serious business model out of them has failed or failing. Replay TV is nearly dead, Tivo is barely doing ok, if not for the wealth of Microsoft - Media Center would be a failure.
Cable companies are in the best position to make a workable business model. Because for them DVR is not a primary business only an add on feature. A feature that goes along with Pay-Per-View and Video On Demand. That is the reason why Tivo is warming up to the idea of licensing its software to cable companies. Because in the long term its proprietary hardware only business model will fail.
Instead of going head on into this loosing battle. Apple is going around it by striking deals with studios and creating its own content distribution business model that is completely separate and not dependent on cable television.
I would say Apple can see the inevitable for DVR technology.
Broadcast companies don't like them and every independent company who has tried to make a serious business model out of them has failed or failing. Replay TV is nearly dead, Tivo is barely doing ok, if not for the wealth of Microsoft - Media Center would be a failure.
Cable companies are in the best position to make a workable business model. Because for them DVR is not a primary business only an add on feature. A feature that goes along with Pay-Per-View and Video On Demand. That is the reason why Tivo is warming up to the idea of licensing its software to cable companies. Because in the long term its proprietary hardware only business model will fail.
Instead of going head on into this loosing battle. Apple is going around it by striking deals with studios and creating its own content distribution business model that is completely separate and not dependent on cable television.
I'm not even getting into their business strategy, and what the future will be. The future ramifications of their business model from a buy all content standpoint look detrimental IMO.
I think the Tivo's pending patent lawsuit has a lot to with ReplayTV's demise. I liked the replay version better. There was a lifetime box activation fee that was a winning deal IMO.
As for Tivo going away, as you seem to suggest. I work for a warehouse that holds excess storage for a few big retail electronics outlets, and tivo was second only to the iPod during Xmas last year. We shipped directly to the stores, and that was a serious item; they never stopped coming in, and they shipped out just as fast. The price on a Tivo is pretty cheap now a days too, straight from their website, (Free Box), but as has been mentioned many times in here before. Tivo isn't the only DVR option. Most satellites come with them built in, and it's definitely here to stay. I just don't see DVR leaving the millions of users just yet. BUt I still think Apple should have took it. Content providers don't have anything to loose. All their shows are free already, and you can download most of them straight from their own websites just as fast as iTunes has them, but for free. Even ABC shows like desperate housewives. Which is might I remind you.. Owned by disney.
So I really don't think it's against their strategy, but Apples is what worries me. Plus neither the Apple model, or the stations are going to stop free recording of their shows. The VCR is proof of that. And as I said before. They continue to let you download them for free anyway.
DVR penetration is indeed growing at a faster pace as more people adopt the technology.
Estimates I see say DVR penetration in the US will go from 23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009. However the majority of that growth is expected to come from cable and satellite subscription.
Quote:
As for Tivo going away, as you seem to suggest.
No I did not suggest Tivo was going away. I said Tivo's current business model is not sustainable.
Quote:
tivo was second only to the iPod during Xmas last year.
Sales and profit are not mutually exclusive. Sales and marketshare can increase while actual profit can stagnate or decrease. Tivo has been unprofitable, at best on the edge of breaking even. In the long term Tivo will likely need to leverage its software as a its most valuable asset. Its becoming clear that DVR in of itself is a great feature but not an entire industry.
Quote:
So I really don't think it's against their strategy,
You cannot see how DVR contradicts the iPod+iTunes business model?
I agree with onlooker's concern about Apple not "sewing up" the DVR industry the same way it did to the mp3 player industry, but I don't think it is a fatal mistake because I don't see that many DVR's in people's homes.
The cable industry may be the best model for providing video on demand in the home, but how is Apple to enter partnerships in this way? Choose one provider and alienate the others? Apple needs to be independent of that. No one wants to change cellphone plans just to get an iPhone and no one wants to change cable companies (even if they could) to get iTV content. Whatever the model - it needs to work in Anytown, USA.
So given that, what is possible in a world where you have to "pay" for content in one of four ways:
1. Free, but with commercials.
2. Subscription. (Cable of course is subscription with commercials.)
3. Rent (includes paying on-demand)
4. Buy to own.
iTunes mostly is #4, but the podcasts also can be free or free with commercials.
Movies seem to work in all four for now. Which should Apple integrate with? Well so far iTV allows all 4 to be options and can easily be used with DVR devices.
Why should Apple limit itself when the future of DRM and TiVo rulings and consumer demand for BlueRay/HD DVD are all unknown? This is not as simple an industry as music.
I agree with onlooker's concern about Apple not "sewing up" the DVR industry the same way it did to the mp3 player industry, but I don't think it is a fatal mistake because I don't see that many DVR's in people's homes.
What needs Apple's "interface expertese" in the home video arena is the interface and integration of the overall system. I hope that iTV is a beginning to this, and hopefully just as with the iPod the integration of the interface and Apple hardware will grow from the iTV to cable boxes, TV's and beyond. Apple tried this with FireWire and the software development kit that they put out, but it was never fully adopted by the home AV community. I think that this is Apple's next attempt to integrate the AV systems with the home computer.
You cannot see how DVR contradicts the iPod+iTunes business model?
I was referring to Disney A.K.A ABC, CBS. and the rest. IF they are offering the shows for free already as downloadable from their own websites. Why should they care what Apple does in that respect. It' obviously doesn't effect them enough to flinch. Which is why I don't think that is why Apple isn't doing it. I think it's something they were not ready for. And I think it's a missed opportunity for bigger growth on Apples part.
If you take TenoBell's #'s of "23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009" and throw the word Apple on it. Watch that shit quadruple in two years.
I agree with onlooker's concern about Apple not "sewing up" the DVR industry the same way it did to the mp3 player industry, but I don't think it is a fatal mistake because I don't see that many DVR's in people's homes.
I don't see how Apple could sew up the DVR market. The same as no one has sewn up the DVR market. The one big limiting factor are the cable companies who are the gatekeepers. The reason why Tivo needs to cooperate with cable and satellite.
Quote:
I was referring to Disney A.K.A ABC, CBS. and the rest. IF they are offering the shows for free already as downloadable from their own websites.
Those are streamed shows with commercials. That method of distribution has nothing to do with iTunes. Even though you are not directly paying money for the streamed shows you also don't get to keep them, download them to your iPod, or stream them from your computer to your television.
Quote:
If you take TenoBell's #'s of "23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009" and throw the word Apple on it. Watch that shit quadruple in two years.
I got those numbers from Fortune Magazine and you leave out the fact that most of that growth will go to cable/satallite companies. In what way could Apple pry a DVR between cable/satallite and their subscribers?
If it helps any, I don't think Apple ever intends to create a DVR. And not necessarily because they just want the cash. Ever since I found out the El Gato CEO was on Apple's (German) board, I haven't expected any competition from Apple. El Gato's products work great with Macs--the only missing link being a plug-in in Front Row for eyeTV. And I think this will happen with Front Row 2.0 (whether it ships with iLife 07 or with Leopard, I don't know).
This decision doesn't really have anything to do with Apple wanting to squeeze more $ out of us, but with corporate politics. First, Apple desn't want to piss off/alienate a successful developer who has created a wonderful product. (What message does that send to other developers?...Just remember the whole kafuffle over Dashboard/Konfabulator.) Apple won't enter a space being competently served by a partner. Secondly, Apple has to present a certain type of face to movie and TV studios. It has to present them with "guaranteed revenue" (a fiction that certain CEOs/companies have come to expect is their legal god-given right). If Apple also offered a DVR, then media companies would be less likely to partner with them, even if their actual revenues wouldn't be affected at all. For that reason, I don't even think we can expect Apple to even advertise the El Gato products, or feature them working with Macs on Apple's site (like they do with camcorders, cameras, etc.). but that doesn't mean we can't use them.
.
Ditto.
iTV will not have a DVR. Elgato+Apple, this is what we will see. Nothing else to add.
I don't see how Apple could sew up the DVR market. The same as no one has sewn up the DVR market. The one big limiting factor are the cable companies who are the gatekeepers. The reason why Tivo needs to cooperate with cable and satellite.
I have concluded you must have no vision for anything other than what is in front of your face.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
Those are streamed shows with commercials. That method of distribution has nothing to do with iTunes. Even though you are not directly paying money for the streamed shows you also don't get to keep them, download them to your iPod, or stream them from your computer to your television.
I'd love to comment on how I can't download streamed shows, but I can't do that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell
I got those numbers from Fortune Magazine and you leave out the fact that most of that growth will go to cable/satellite companies. In what way could Apple pry a DVR between cable/satellite and their subscribers?
Again. Do I need to be your vision. Is it a gift that I alone have. Use your imagination. It's easy. Just because Apple isn't offering a DVR doesn't mean you have to argue that DVR is nothing that Apple could possibly do. Your thinking in the box - the box that your mind went into when Apple didn't offer it. Apple isn't offering it so now it's impossible, so you need to come with an excuse as to why. Drop the excuses. It's just not there. You don't know why. And nobody cares why. Except the others living in that boxed mentality with you.
Comments
Now that looks like something I could use.
Except, oh, there's dozens of such solutions on the market today. As a matter of fact, I bought one just a few weeks ago.
The only advantage Apple could bring is a better UI. That's it. Apple's solution would likely be a lot less flexible anyway. You might as well buy a Mac mini plus an EyeSomething.
This is just completely untrue. You can use iTV to play your camcorder-made videos (whether they're edited in iMovie or not), your synthesizer-made songs (whether they're edited in GarageBand or not), your cam-made photos (whether they're edited in iPhoto or not). You can use it to play the audio and video podcasts you subscribe to. You can play the videos you have downloaded through BitTorrent. Do I need to go on?
Fine, iTV isn't a PVR, and for some, that is quite a limitation. But iTV is everything it claims to be: a solution to bringing your media on your computers to your TV. Your above claims simply don't hold true. You don't need to buy a single song or video on the iTunes store, nor can you not use the product on its own.
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one. iTV looks like something that will sit there for long periods of time doing nothing, and being as useless as I think it will be for the majority. It's not going to take over the living room like a DVR does. iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
This is just completely untrue. You can use iTV to play your camcorder-made videos (whether they're edited in iMovie or not), your synthesizer-made songs (whether they're edited in GarageBand or not), your cam-made photos (whether they're edited in iPhoto or not). You can use it to play the audio and video podcasts you subscribe to. You can play the videos you have downloaded through BitTorrent. Do I need to go on?
Fine, iTV isn't a PVR, and for some, that is quite a limitation. But iTV is everything it claims to be: a solution to bringing your media on your computers to your TV. Your above claims simply don't hold true. You don't need to buy a single song or video on the iTunes store, nor can you not use the product on its own.
You're exactly right, well said!
And the percentage of people that want to do that every time they enter their living room to watch some programming is?
The difference for a person who watches TV programming between iTV and a DVR is that DVR owners use a DVR all the time, and would never go back to not having one. iTV looks like something that will sit there for long periods of time doing nothing, and being as useless as I think it will be for the majority. It's not going to take over the living room like a DVR does. iTV is a HoHum product, plain and simple.
Fine, it can be a ho-hum product. What I think people don't understand is that it seems in your mind this one product makes apple "evil" and possibly unworthy of purchasing ANY product from them.
The over the top hatred is really extreme and confusing. I mean why would the introduction of ONE product which you personally don't have any use for mean that you must now consider a Levono laptop? Because that's what you said earlier in this thread.
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
With those comments I'd say we are thinking alike (god forbid) the one exception being that I'm a desktop owner, and it's not going to make it's way into my TV area.
If you want to watch "programming", you use a TV. That's not what the iTV is for.
You cannot "watch TV programming" with an iTV. At all. It isn't intended for that.
You don't have to buy it. As a matter of fact, I won't either. But I had a desktop instead of a laptop, I might.
With those comments I'd say we are thinking alike (god forbid) the one exception being that I'm a desktop owner, and iTV is not going to make it's way into my TV area. Reason: it seems what it's for may turn out to be used once in a blue moon, and then the special feeing of having this new Apple gem of a product will be gone, and I'm out cash. If anything. I think iTV is going to improve sales for elgato, Tivo, and If your local cable company has them, cable box version of a DVR because users will feel dissatisfied after figuring out how much use they will get from this thing.
If it helps any, I don't think Apple ever intends to create a DVR. And not necessarily because they just want the cash. Ever since I found out the El Gato CEO was on Apple's (German) board, I haven't expected any competition from Apple. El Gato's products work great with Macs--the only missing link being a plug-in in Front Row for eyeTV. And I think this will happen with Front Row 2.0 (whether it ships with iLife 07 or with Leopard, I don't know).
This decision doesn't really have anything to do with Apple wanting to squeeze more $ out of us, but with corporate politics. First, Apple desn't want to piss off/alienate a successful developer who has created a wonderful product. (What message does that send to other developers?...Just remember the whole kafuffle over Dashboard/Konfabulator.) Apple won't enter a space being competently served by a partner. Secondly, Apple has to present a certain type of face to movie and TV studios. It has to present them with "guaranteed revenue" (a fiction that certain CEOs/companies have come to expect is their legal god-given right). If Apple also offered a DVR, then media companies would be less likely to partner with them, even if their actual revenues wouldn't be affected at all. For that reason, I don't even think we can expect Apple to even advertise the El Gato products, or feature them working with Macs on Apple's site (like they do with camcorders, cameras, etc.). but that doesn't mean we can't use them.
It seems like a mini plus an El Gato product is exactly what you are talking about. It works well now, and will (probably) work better in the future once FR is opened up. So go ahead and buy it. Also, if it helps, I don't think iTV is the end of Apple living room strategy, even in the near-term. But I don't think we'll even get a DVR from Apple (for the above reasons).
Finally, a better argument for criticizing Apple's iTV, is not that it isn't some other product. It's that it is essentially a $300 tax that we have to pay because media companies are paranoid control freaks who won't allow Apple to allow us to legally burn disks of media we legally own. In other words, if we could burn disks of our iTS purchases, iTV would be completely useless. Apple is caving into the media companies on this front, but it's doubtful that the iTunes Store would have graduated beyond music if Apple hadn't agreed to the "no-burning" criterion.
I am hoping this issue is addressed soon. But the ball is not in Apple's court.
This mistake is the reason I think Apple should have gone after the whole enchilada. DVR exists, and it's getting more, and more popular, but if the iTV features were included Apple could easily own it.
For the most part its just disappointing to me personally, because now they all know Apple could come after them in the future, and they will better their products. So when Apple could have gotten the jump on them - now Apple will have to worry about a DVR service that signs a deal with Amazon because that could essentially kill it.
Broadcast companies don't like them and every independent company who has tried to make a serious business model out of them has failed or failing. Replay TV is nearly dead, Tivo is barely doing ok, if not for the wealth of Microsoft - Media Center would be a failure.
Cable companies are in the best position to make a workable business model. Because for them DVR is not a primary business only an add on feature. A feature that goes along with Pay-Per-View and Video On Demand. That is the reason why Tivo is warming up to the idea of licensing its software to cable companies. Because in the long term its proprietary hardware only business model will fail.
Instead of going head on into this loosing battle. Apple is going around it by striking deals with studios and creating its own content distribution business model that is completely separate and not dependent on cable television.
I would say Apple can see the inevitable for DVR technology.
Broadcast companies don't like them and every independent company who has tried to make a serious business model out of them has failed or failing. Replay TV is nearly dead, Tivo is barely doing ok, if not for the wealth of Microsoft - Media Center would be a failure.
Cable companies are in the best position to make a workable business model. Because for them DVR is not a primary business only an add on feature. A feature that goes along with Pay-Per-View and Video On Demand. That is the reason why Tivo is warming up to the idea of licensing its software to cable companies. Because in the long term its proprietary hardware only business model will fail.
Instead of going head on into this loosing battle. Apple is going around it by striking deals with studios and creating its own content distribution business model that is completely separate and not dependent on cable television.
I'm not even getting into their business strategy, and what the future will be. The future ramifications of their business model from a buy all content standpoint look detrimental IMO.
I think the Tivo's pending patent lawsuit has a lot to with ReplayTV's demise. I liked the replay version better. There was a lifetime box activation fee that was a winning deal IMO.
As for Tivo going away, as you seem to suggest. I work for a warehouse that holds excess storage for a few big retail electronics outlets, and tivo was second only to the iPod during Xmas last year. We shipped directly to the stores, and that was a serious item; they never stopped coming in, and they shipped out just as fast. The price on a Tivo is pretty cheap now a days too, straight from their website, (Free Box), but as has been mentioned many times in here before. Tivo isn't the only DVR option. Most satellites come with them built in, and it's definitely here to stay. I just don't see DVR leaving the millions of users just yet. BUt I still think Apple should have took it. Content providers don't have anything to loose. All their shows are free already, and you can download most of them straight from their own websites just as fast as iTunes has them, but for free. Even ABC shows like desperate housewives. Which is might I remind you.. Owned by disney.
So I really don't think it's against their strategy, but Apples is what worries me. Plus neither the Apple model, or the stations are going to stop free recording of their shows. The VCR is proof of that. And as I said before. They continue to let you download them for free anyway.
Estimates I see say DVR penetration in the US will go from 23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009. However the majority of that growth is expected to come from cable and satellite subscription.
As for Tivo going away, as you seem to suggest.
No I did not suggest Tivo was going away. I said Tivo's current business model is not sustainable.
tivo was second only to the iPod during Xmas last year.
Sales and profit are not mutually exclusive. Sales and marketshare can increase while actual profit can stagnate or decrease. Tivo has been unprofitable, at best on the edge of breaking even. In the long term Tivo will likely need to leverage its software as a its most valuable asset. Its becoming clear that DVR in of itself is a great feature but not an entire industry.
So I really don't think it's against their strategy,
You cannot see how DVR contradicts the iPod+iTunes business model?
The cable industry may be the best model for providing video on demand in the home, but how is Apple to enter partnerships in this way? Choose one provider and alienate the others? Apple needs to be independent of that. No one wants to change cellphone plans just to get an iPhone and no one wants to change cable companies (even if they could) to get iTV content. Whatever the model - it needs to work in Anytown, USA.
So given that, what is possible in a world where you have to "pay" for content in one of four ways:
1. Free, but with commercials.
2. Subscription. (Cable of course is subscription with commercials.)
3. Rent (includes paying on-demand)
4. Buy to own.
iTunes mostly is #4, but the podcasts also can be free or free with commercials.
Movies seem to work in all four for now. Which should Apple integrate with? Well so far iTV allows all 4 to be options and can easily be used with DVR devices.
Why should Apple limit itself when the future of DRM and TiVo rulings and consumer demand for BlueRay/HD DVD are all unknown? This is not as simple an industry as music.
I agree with onlooker's concern about Apple not "sewing up" the DVR industry the same way it did to the mp3 player industry, but I don't think it is a fatal mistake because I don't see that many DVR's in people's homes.
What needs Apple's "interface expertese" in the home video arena is the interface and integration of the overall system. I hope that iTV is a beginning to this, and hopefully just as with the iPod the integration of the interface and Apple hardware will grow from the iTV to cable boxes, TV's and beyond. Apple tried this with FireWire and the software development kit that they put out, but it was never fully adopted by the home AV community. I think that this is Apple's next attempt to integrate the AV systems with the home computer.
You cannot see how DVR contradicts the iPod+iTunes business model?
I was referring to Disney A.K.A ABC, CBS. and the rest. IF they are offering the shows for free already as downloadable from their own websites. Why should they care what Apple does in that respect. It' obviously doesn't effect them enough to flinch. Which is why I don't think that is why Apple isn't doing it. I think it's something they were not ready for. And I think it's a missed opportunity for bigger growth on Apples part.
If you take TenoBell's #'s of "23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009" and throw the word Apple on it. Watch that shit quadruple in two years.
I agree with onlooker's concern about Apple not "sewing up" the DVR industry the same way it did to the mp3 player industry, but I don't think it is a fatal mistake because I don't see that many DVR's in people's homes.
I don't see how Apple could sew up the DVR market. The same as no one has sewn up the DVR market. The one big limiting factor are the cable companies who are the gatekeepers. The reason why Tivo needs to cooperate with cable and satellite.
I was referring to Disney A.K.A ABC, CBS. and the rest. IF they are offering the shows for free already as downloadable from their own websites.
Those are streamed shows with commercials. That method of distribution has nothing to do with iTunes. Even though you are not directly paying money for the streamed shows you also don't get to keep them, download them to your iPod, or stream them from your computer to your television.
If you take TenoBell's #'s of "23.5 million this year to 45.5 million in 2009" and throw the word Apple on it. Watch that shit quadruple in two years.
I got those numbers from Fortune Magazine and you leave out the fact that most of that growth will go to cable/satallite companies. In what way could Apple pry a DVR between cable/satallite and their subscribers?
onlooker,
If it helps any, I don't think Apple ever intends to create a DVR. And not necessarily because they just want the cash. Ever since I found out the El Gato CEO was on Apple's (German) board, I haven't expected any competition from Apple. El Gato's products work great with Macs--the only missing link being a plug-in in Front Row for eyeTV. And I think this will happen with Front Row 2.0 (whether it ships with iLife 07 or with Leopard, I don't know).
This decision doesn't really have anything to do with Apple wanting to squeeze more $ out of us, but with corporate politics. First, Apple desn't want to piss off/alienate a successful developer who has created a wonderful product. (What message does that send to other developers?...Just remember the whole kafuffle over Dashboard/Konfabulator.) Apple won't enter a space being competently served by a partner. Secondly, Apple has to present a certain type of face to movie and TV studios. It has to present them with "guaranteed revenue" (a fiction that certain CEOs/companies have come to expect is their legal god-given right). If Apple also offered a DVR, then media companies would be less likely to partner with them, even if their actual revenues wouldn't be affected at all. For that reason, I don't even think we can expect Apple to even advertise the El Gato products, or feature them working with Macs on Apple's site (like they do with camcorders, cameras, etc.). but that doesn't mean we can't use them.
.
Ditto.
iTV will not have a DVR. Elgato+Apple, this is what we will see. Nothing else to add.
I don't see how Apple could sew up the DVR market. The same as no one has sewn up the DVR market. The one big limiting factor are the cable companies who are the gatekeepers. The reason why Tivo needs to cooperate with cable and satellite.
I have concluded you must have no vision for anything other than what is in front of your face.
Those are streamed shows with commercials. That method of distribution has nothing to do with iTunes. Even though you are not directly paying money for the streamed shows you also don't get to keep them, download them to your iPod, or stream them from your computer to your television.
I'd love to comment on how I can't download streamed shows, but I can't do that.
I got those numbers from Fortune Magazine and you leave out the fact that most of that growth will go to cable/satellite companies. In what way could Apple pry a DVR between cable/satellite and their subscribers?
Again. Do I need to be your vision. Is it a gift that I alone have. Use your imagination. It's easy. Just because Apple isn't offering a DVR doesn't mean you have to argue that DVR is nothing that Apple could possibly do. Your thinking in the box - the box that your mind went into when Apple didn't offer it. Apple isn't offering it so now it's impossible, so you need to come with an excuse as to why. Drop the excuses. It's just not there. You don't know why. And nobody cares why. Except the others living in that boxed mentality with you.