TiVo Steals iTV's Thunder

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 33
    I had a TiVo, with a lifetime membership. I switched to a cable variant, because I got tired of waiting for a the HD TiVo. The cable version works better than the TiVo I had, AND I can record two HD shows and watch another......all at the same time (and it didn't cost 800 dollars). The only thing I can't do is watch the movies that I have on my computer........so the iTV is perfect for me.



    I used to play slide shows on my TiVo from my Mac........until they stopped supporting OSX beyond Jaguar. Now, I can do the same thing with my Xbox 360. The TiVo had a nice niche a while ago........but that is long gone. It is only a matter of time before they go by the wayside. They innovate too slowly.......the world has caught up and it will leave them behind.



    They sould have teamed up with Apple when they had the chance. Because, they didn't support Apple, I will not support them.



    One disatisfied TiVo customer. I wonder if there are more?



    I WILL buy an iTV.
  • Reply 22 of 33
    I agree with the TiVo analysis. A few years ago, TiVo was the thing to have.



    Now, $699/TiVo + $12/subscription/month + $5/cablecard/month v. $10/cableco-DVR/month? Sure, the cableco's DVR has crappy software, but is it that crappy?



    What I'd like is some anonymous box somewhere quietly recording HDTV onto a standard drive, with NAS features, and a bunch of iTV-like terminals. I.e., separate the recording side from the playback side. This way, I can watch a show that's been recorded anywhere in the house. Sure, TiVo supports TiVo to TiVo transfer, but it's slow (and supporting multiple TiVos is expensive). Furthermore, I don't know that I want to watch a show here versus there until I'm actually watching it, and then I have to wait for TiVo's old, clunky USB interface to stream the show.



    iTV has a place. It just needs content to feed it.
  • Reply 23 of 33
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Isomorphic


    I agree with the TiVo analysis. A few years ago, TiVo was the thing to have.



    Now, $699/TiVo + $12/subscription/month + $5/cablecard/month v. $10/cableco-DVR/month? Sure, the cableco's DVR has crappy software, but is it that crappy?



    Yes, I find it at least that crappy (Comcast Motorola 3412 with Microsoft software). It's not just the lousy interface (compared to my first generation ReplayTV unit), but stunning lack of reliability. Shows inexplicably fail to record, even though the box said it was going to record them. Occasionally, only the first 20 minutes of an hour show get recorded. Once, I ended up with two recordings--one of the first three minutes, another which the wonderful user interface claimed to be of the rest of the show but was really only the next 20 minutes. It was a mystery show, too. Blasted box tricked me into watching the first third of it!



    The final straw was coming home from a weekend away to find the box had done a complete brain wipe--not only erasing everything that had been recorded (and not yet watched), but forgetting all the shows I had programmed it to record.



    I ordered a Tivo HD the next day. Sure it costs more, but I expect it will actually WORK. And, if there is a problem, I expect Tivo will provide support, unlike Comcast, who simply denies knowing about any problems but will swap the box for another one just like it. With the same problems. They sucked me into doing that once already.
  • Reply 24 of 33
    PVRs (including TiVo) are not the runaway success being depicted here.

    They are very popular with a tiny number of people who own them. I love mine. But I am one of the eighteen people in the UK who own a TiVo. Which is now no longer sold!



    What TiVo have done is they have built a better VHS. A device that helps us to watch broadcast TV. But like the VHS, it does nothing to change the business model of TV. TV is still produced by program makers who create content to allow advertisers to attach their crap which in turn is bundled by networks to give away to viewers.



    I might be alone in my view, but I think that that that model is bad, and should die. Advertising causes programming to be dumbed-down, sanitized and allows brain-dead suits to interfere with the artistic content of television in order to sell more snake oil. Great shows with an enthusiastic small fanbase currently die. Lousy shows with a large demographic will flourish. The business model of TV sucks, and you can see how much better television gets when producers can escape advertisers.



    It is true that TiVo does allow us to skip-though ads. Hence the moves to make ad skipping illegal / immoral and tantamount to piracy and theft.



    The reason iTV is exciting, in my opinion, is not the technology or the interface, but the prospect of a model of TV distribution which can happen without the networks and without the advertisers. Allowing program makers to sell content directly to viewers is a good thing. And within ten or fifteen years, we could see a very radical change in the way that TV is created and financed.



    Of course if the networks get wind of this, they will try to strangle iTV in its crib. So Shhhh!



    C.
  • Reply 25 of 33
    irelandireland Posts: 17,798member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whoami


    watch apple steal back the thunder....



    APPLE + GOOGLE + YOUTUBE = $$$$$$$$$$



    nooo! = (*) (*) Millions of eyes..
  • Reply 26 of 33
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 27 of 33
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,339moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis


    This is why I no longer subscribe to Cable or Sattelite of any form.



    Yeah, what I never understood about cable is that you pay loads of money a month and yet you get more adverts than terrestrial TV, mostly for the benefit of watching a whole bunch of reruns that used to be on terrestrial TV.



    I find I'm also watching TV less and less and just getting videos online because they have no adverts and you can pick and choose what you want to see when you want. Plus reviews are a click away.



    I guess TiVo probably is on the way out but I think we still need much faster broadband for it to become viable to replace TV with downloads. I think it was worked out that you'd need around 28Mbit broadband to rival the quality of SD TV. With H264, that will reduce considerably but they broadcast some cable shows in HD, which raises the bar again.
  • Reply 28 of 33
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 29 of 33
    The iTV will change everything, it is the bridge that will connect the TV to new media. I can't wait.
  • Reply 30 of 33
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 31 of 33
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis


    Hardly... it connects iTunes content (and other supported Media) to a TV wirelessly. Hardly new media...



    You mean like podcast content isn't "new" media? For an Open Source advocate I think you're missing the picture. Folks can create decent looking shorts with Apple's consumer grade tool chain (iMovie, iDVD). Some folks even use a bit of Keynote.



    Vinea
  • Reply 32 of 33
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,081member
    Null.
  • Reply 33 of 33
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis


    Note I was referring to TV, as I saw the statement above mine to be quite flawed with it's wording.



    Nothing wrong with the wording. I believe the point is that iTV should (if implemented correctly) connect your TV set to YouTube like content. There should also be some level of interactivity possible.



    It can be done now (say with Media Center PC + 360) but less elegantly than Apple typically does things.

    Vinea
Sign In or Register to comment.