TiVo Community Forums Archives - DirecTiVo: Isn't the need somewhat rare?

TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like Google.

Pages:1

DirecTiVo: Isn't the need somewhat rare?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: jmccorm

I appreciate the quality that a DirecTiVo can give, but isn't it a rare consumer that can actually take full advantage of the product? I mean, you have to live in a primary city where DirecTV offers local channels, but at the same time, must not be able to receive local channels (according to "the rules") via an antenna. Either that, or completely give up all TiVo features with your local channels, and receive them via cable.

I can understand how TiVo is forced to produce such a unit to match Microsoft. But I really can't see how either company is really creating a good fit for anyone but a small minority.

And it is a complete sham how DirecTiVos and Ultimate TVs are sold by Circuit City in a 'secondary city", like my own, where there is no chance of receiving network stations. What the heck is Microsoft thinking, anyhow? It is crazy!

Or do I completely misunderstand how the local network rebroadcasts work?

[This message has been edited by jmccorm (edited 07-01-2001).]

Posted by: Corey140

quote:

but at the same time, must not be able to receive local channels (according to "the rules") via an antenna

No, that restriction is gone somewhat. If you live in city that is carried on Directv, you can subscribe to your local channels as long as your in the DMA.

------------------
What is popular is not always right.
What is right is not always popular.
It is better to be quiet and thought a fool than to speak and remove all
doubt.

Posted by: Wayne Bundrick

quote:
Originally posted by jmccorm:
I appreciate the quality that a DirecTiVo can give, but isn't it a rare consumer that can actually take full advantage of the product? I mean, you have to live in a primary city where DirecTV offers local channels, but at the same time, must not be able to receive local channels (according to "the rules") via an antenna. Either that, or completely give up all TiVo features with your local channels, and receive them via cable.

I can understand how TiVo is forced to produce such a unit to match Microsoft. But I really can't see how either company is really creating a good fit for anyone but a small minority.

And it is a complete sham how DirecTiVos and Ultimate TVs are sold by Circuit City in a 'secondary city", like my own, where there is no chance of receiving network stations. What the heck is Microsoft thinking, anyhow? It is crazy!

Or do I completely misunderstand how the local network rebroadcasts work?

[This message has been edited by jmccorm (edited 07-01-2001).]

I think you misunderstand "the rules". If you live in a DMA for which DirecTV carries local channels, then you can subscribe to them on DirecTV, whether or not you can receive the local signals with an antenna. Everyone in the DMA can subscribe to local channels if DirecTV offers them.

If DirecTV does not carry the local network channels for your DMA, then you can subscribe to "distant" network channels, provided you are unable to receive your locals with a rooftop antenna. You will of course have to prove to your local stations that you can't receive their signals before they'll let DirecTV pipe in distant duplicate signals.

Roughly half of the nation's 100,000,000 television-viewing households live within the 30 or so largest cities, most of which DirecTV does have local network channels. DirecTV wouldn't offer local channels if there wasn't a large potential subscriber base for them. And that's also why there's little chance of DirecTV ever offering local channels to more than about the 50 largest cities.

Plus, I think your point of view puts way too much value on broadcast network TV. I've had DirecTV for five years. I couldn't get networks on DirecTV. So I stopped watching network TV. It's that simple. There are 200 other channels to choose from.

Also, let the record show that the DirecTiVo was available in stores about six months before UltimateTV, so this is not at all a case of TiVo being "forced" to match Microsoft.

Posted by: feldon23

With the spotbeam satellites DirecTV and Dish Network are adding in the sky, we will be seeing more cities and more local channels carried. All the local UPNs, WBs, etc. for the major markets will be up in a couple years, plus the 4 networks will have more cities covered.

And all while the picture quality of the other channels goes UP. DirecTV and Dish compressed their regular channels to hell to fit ~120 channels [locals for 30 cities].

Posted by: choccy

quote:
Originally posted by feldon23:
And all while the picture quality of the other channels goes UP. DirecTV and Dish compressed their regular channels to hell to fit ~120 channels [locals for 30 cities].

But that menas your 40Hr DirecTiVo unit isn't going to be able to store as much (time-wise) as it was able to before since it just writes the DTV stream to disk.

------------------
Tim 'Timmy' Gladding
Sony SVR-2000 - 2.0.1-002-010 (untouched)
Philips HDR-112 - 2.0.1-002-000 (82 hours - hacked to death!)

Posted by: ayrton911

I am fortunate enough to receive the NY/LA distant networks on DirecTV. However, I still have cable for other reasons (no WB and plus local sports teams). I must admit that I love the idea of DirecTiVo though.

I think for me I am glad my first TiVo was (is still) a standalone, but in the near future I'd like to add a DirecTiVo to my A/V equipment. I disagree when someone said that we put too much importance on network TV. There are other channels out there, but there is great sports and series carried by network television and I would say about sixty percent of my programming comes from network TV.

Overall, yes, DirecTiVo probably won't be something everyone will see as beneficial, but plenty will.

Posted by: SmokeBringer

quote:
Originally posted by jmccorm:
I appreciate the quality that a DirecTiVo can give, but isn't it a rare consumer that can actually take full advantage of the product? I mean, you have to live in a primary city where DirecTV offers local channels, but at the same time, must not be able to receive local channels (according to "the rules") via an antenna. Either that, or completely give up all TiVo features with your local channels, and receive them via cable.

Couple facts that you should consider...

First, DirecTV covers approximately the top 45 market areas in the US with local channel coverage. I'm not sure how you define rare, but my guess is that the top 45 markets cover 65 to 85 percent of the television watching population.

Second, I wonder how much local TV is actually watched by DirecTV subscribers. I, for one, watch nearly nothing on local stations. I used to watch local news, but I now get that (via radio) on my morning/evening commute.

I find that the majority of prime time national network programming is geared toward someone with a sixth grade level of education.

------------------
PC Boards Repaired Here!
-- (Ignore the Name) --

Posted by: pv

quote:
Originally posted by SmokeBringer:
I find that the majority of prime time national network programming is geared toward someone with a sixth grade level of education.
[/B]

That's not really fair to the networks. Even in their declining age, their viewership is *much* larger than their nearest non-OTA competitor. What's killing the networks is all the alternatives in total, not any one of them.

As a result, the networks for the most part produce programs that are as inoffensive as possible. There are some very good network shows (the only big-three program I'm watching right now is CSI. Great program!), however, all the good ones tend to be as niche-oriented as your average cable show, and thus they don't get enough ratings to be treated well. Fox and WB on the other hand, have a small enough audience by comparison that they can survive well on niche shows. It's a "killed by your own success" sort of thing.

Now that the cable networks are putting out original programs as good or better than the networks at their best, the death knell is really sounding. For every CSI, NYPD Blue, and David Letterman, there's stuff like Six Feet Under, Stargate SG-1, and Dennis Miller Live. And, they replay their shows in a TiVo friendly manner, sometimes with no ad breaks.

As for truly local programming, I prefer radio to TV. TV news just plain sucks, OTA or cable. PV

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by SmokeBringer:

DirecTV covers approximately the top 45 market areas in the US with local channel coverage. I'm not sure how you define rare, but my guess is that the top 45 markets cover 65 to 85 percent of the television watching population.

Nielsen's Ranking of DMAS

quote:

Second, I wonder how much local TV is actually watched by DirecTV subscribers. I, for one, watch nearly nothing on local stations. I used to watch local news, but I now get that (via radio) on my morning/evening commute.

Unlike some others I watch a lot of OTA programming. Probably over 50% of all my TViewing.

I get very good OTA reception. Instead of paying 5 bucks a month for the 5 local channels that Dishnetwork calls "local coverage", I use Dishplayer for the Dish stuff, TIVO for the OTA, and ReplayTV for a 2nd OTA tuner and extra capacity.. There are over 20 channels in the LA DMA, of which 12 or 13 are of interest to me at one time or another.

Posted by: brianp6621

quote:
Originally posted by jmccorm:

I can understand how TiVo is forced to produce such a unit to match Microsoft.

Just a little comment since everything else was touched on.. It seems like you make it out that TiVo only did the D-TiVo to compete with M$..

Well TiVo was on the market with the D-TiVo a good 6 months or more before UTV was..

------------------
Using version 2.0.1

Posted by: Dan203

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
Unlike some others I watch a lot of OTA programming. Probably over 50% of all my TViewing.

I'd say 90% of what I watch is from Network TV (i.e CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, UPN and the WB) Out of the other 50 or so channel I get I only watch a few shows from Comedy Central, TLC, Discovery and FX.

Dan

------------------
Moderator: TiVo Coffee House, Help Center & Happy Hour

Posted by: Fofer

Luckily I'm in a big market (L.A.), in which most of the networks are covered with locals on DTV. From what I hear, by early 2002 the "Must Carry" rule will compel DirecTV to carry the rest (namely, KCOP.)

I think that's when I'll go for a DirecTiVo -- by then the dual tuner will be working swimmingly, and I won't have to sacrifice a local channel.

Posted by: TomK

I've gotten entirely used to life without the major networks. I live in a smaller market and couldn't get the waiver for the national feeds and I haven't missed them.

------------------
Tom

Life's great when you're great

Posted by: bonscott87

Network TV still exists?

Other then Dark Angel and Boston Public on FOX, network TV offers me nothing. I have 220 channels to choose from, why the heck to I want to watch CBS or NBC?!? http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

To be honest, I have a Stand Alone Tivo to cover the networks and conflicts.

------------------
Scott
Sony SVR2000 and
Sony Sat T-60 DirecTivo
MX-500 remote.....ROCKS!

Posted by: 12monkeys

DirecTV has almost ten million subscribers, so I don't think that making the DirecTV receivers with TiVo service is a bad decision. But then again, I have a Sony SAT-T60 DTiVo. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

Think of television as an arms race -- now that DirecTV has TiVo, hopefully cable television set-top box manufacturers will want TiVo to "arm" them. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Oh, wouldn't it be great if I was crazy? Then the world would be okay.
12monkeys

Posted by: arjay

Some interesting opinions just posted. I wonder if there's any correlation between TIVOvision and a preference for cable/satellite fare?

Just me of course, but I wouldn't pay for locals if I could get them for free OTA. And I want all the locals, not just the 5 or 6 that DirectDish provides.

It seems technically really dumb to have to get local channels from 45,000 miles (round trip) away! Whatta' waste of bandwith. But whatever sells.

I like the PBS method of providing a one day delayed national feed, but that's going to fly for the commercial nets.

Posted by: CoosCoos

quote:
Originally posted by Wayne Bundrick:
You will of course have to prove to your local stations that you can't receive their signals before they'll let DirecTV pipe in distant duplicate signals.

Why is that? Are they worried DirecTV will strip out the local commercials and insert their own?

I see that a lot on cable. A commercial will start for a fraction of a second and then another one will start over it. I suspect the cable company is stripping out TLC's commercials and playing their own.

------------------
Cous cous is the food.
CoosCoos is your online hero.

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by Wayne Bundrick:
You will of course have to prove to your local stations that you can't receive their signals before they'll let DirecTV pipe in distant duplicate signals.

Originally posted by CoosCoos:
Why is that? Are they worried DirecTV will strip out the local commercials and insert their own?

I see that a lot on cable. A commercial will start for a fraction of a second and then another one will start over it. I suspect the cable company is stripping out TLC's commercials and playing their own.

It's a complicated legal issue. Here are some definitions which cover the rules of this issue.

DMA - Designated Market Area. Any of 210 areas of the country, as defined by Nielsen Media Corp. Your DMA determines which local stations you can subscribe to, according to SHVIA.

SHVIA - Satellite Home Viewers Improvement Act. Passed in 1999, this law set new rules about who could receive local and distant OTA signals. Some parts are very controversial, and no one seems to be able to agree as to exactly how it should be implemented.

Must Carry - Part of SHVIA, this states that if a DBS provider carries any local stations from a particular market, they must carry ALL the stations in that market by 1/1/02. There are exceptions and rules that go along with this, so in reality we may not see all stations in a carried DMA up on satellite. If a local station seeks must carry status, they must provide a good quality signal to the DBS provider's local receive facility.

Posted by: Kablemodem

Did you ever notice how many DirecTV commercials you see? I doubt non subscribers see that many.

Posted by: Wayne Bundrick

quote:
Originally posted by CoosCoos:
Why is that? Are they worried DirecTV will strip out the local commercials and insert their own?

What local commercials? If DirecTV doesn't have your local stations and you are allowed to see the same network programming from distant stations instead, then you're seeing distant commercials, not local commercials. That is the reason local stations would rather not allow satellite dish owners to have access to network programming from other cities.

quote:
I see that a lot on cable. A commercial will start for a fraction of a second and then another one will start over it. I suspect the cable company is stripping out TLC's commercials and playing their own.

Cable systems are allowed to replace certain commercials on TLC and other channels (but not on broadcast channels, by law cable - and presumably satellite - is required to retransmit them without alteration). What you are seeing is the sloppy cable system being unable to cleanly break away to insert their own commercials.

Posted by: rasheed

quote:
Originally posted by Wayne Bundrick:
Cable systems are allowed to replace certain commercials on TLC and other channels (but not on broadcast channels, by law cable - and presumably satellite - is required to retransmit them without alteration). What you are seeing is the sloppy cable system being unable to cleanly break away to insert their own commercials.

Most of these are done on a timer system and sometimes an embedded signal in the content provider feed that allows the cable operator to put their own commercials. This is also how it is done to put in 'local edition' into some programs like CNNH. It is another reason why content providers need to be on-time with their programs which makes it great for TiVo viewers. However, the cable commercials department typically have bad clocks/timers and it isn't very seamless most of the time. This is part of the contract with the content providers to allow this. I assume DirecTV could do this too and put some more 'national' commercials before compressing the feed for broadcast (I have cable, so I don't know if they do this).

The idea behind local commercials is to help defray the cost of some of these cable channels (or rather another revenue stream for the cable operator aside from the end customer monthly fee). I assume most of you know that almost all of the 'basic'/'extended basic' cable channels demand fees from the cable company. ESPN has recently been in the news for demanding the most increase in fees due to expensive contracts for things like NCAA and NHL, etc. This has placed a lot of fear at many cable operators. Many cable providers would like to move ESPN off 'extended basic' and make it into a premium channel (which ESPN never allows in its contracts with providers).

So, in theory, there are a number of channels that people may never watch which there are paying for even if it is an ad-supported channel. Some of the newer boxes and systems will make more variety pacakges easier to do, but perhaps a more difficult billing headache. I know my operator tested this more than 7 years ago with AMC, TNT, TBS, but they charged a high fee to remove these channels from one's lineup because it required a visit to put a special filter on the RF cable (they since stopped that program).

Rasheed

Posted by: eaadams

UPN UPN UPN UPN
When is DirecTV supposed to start to roll out mass UPN?
------------------
Evan Adams
eaadams@ucdavis.edu

[This message has been edited by eaadams (edited 07-03-2001).]