TiVo Community Forums Archives - Trolldoodle thoughts

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

Trolldoodle thoughts
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by feldon23 in the troll feeding thread:
Which starts by not responding to your OR rammy's negative posts towards Tivo.

As you wish feldon23. If you consider my opinions trollfull with respect to TiVo that certainly is your perogative.

Actually you are the perfect example of a pro TiVo poster who makes me react the same way as rammy. You guys have agendas.

We all do. Mine is comparing all PVR features available and picking ones that suit me from whatever the source. I have no particular ties to TiVo or any other brand. But if you check my post history you'll find a fair number of complimentary comments with regard to Tivo.

You never have anything bad to say about TiVo and rammy never has anything good to say about TiVo.

The truth might be somewhere in between.

Posted by: bgreen5

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:

The truth might be somewhere in between.

Haven't even read the other thread yet, but in general I'd have to agree that the truth usually does lay "somewhere in between".

------------------
Welcome to the TiVolution!

Accept no limitations. Reject ultimatums. If you're going to join a revolution, choose wisely indeed.

Favorite posters: Jim West, bareyb, Otto, _ITV

Posted by: dgh

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
You guys have agendas. We all do. Mine is comparing all PVR features available and picking ones that suit me from whatever the source.

Of course reminding everyone how a Replay or Dishplayer suits you in a TiVo forum goes over about as well as repeatedly extolling the virtues of Windows in a Mac forum. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Dave Hicks

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by dgh:
Of course reminding everyone how a Replay or Dishplayer suits you in a TiVo forum goes over about as well as repeatedly extolling the virtues of Windows in a Mac forum. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

Unfortunately that's true. You can't mention anything without getting into a (figurative) battle about it. These are interesting gadgets. Wouldn't it be of interest to anyone to discuss their different points without having to get into ego battles?

I'd been using a Power Mac G4 until recently. (I know little about computers.) But it was a long term loan and now I've got a PC of my own.

I could have bought a Mac. But the compatibility issue, for me, overrode other qualities Mac excells at. So I got a PC.

Now to dummy ol' me the Mac and the PC seem much more alike than different. I like the Mac's physical build quality which is like good luggage rather than a PC's rather, er, computerlike construction. The Mac is simpler than the PC and the PC has more bells and whistles. They've both got their li'l peculiarities. The Mac gets things done with one button on its mouse that the PC does with two plus the li'l wheel. (But I've gotta' new optical PC mouse which is really slick!)

What's even more interesting is when I had the Mac I liked NN as my browser. On the PC I can see why so many people like IE. They work differently on each kind of computer. (Of course MS wasn't making it easy to GET NN on the PC so I had to go out of my way to download it to even try it.)

I was expecting more of a difference though between the machines. I could use either. (Of course I don't know much about specialized applications. Why is Mac the "graphics" machine of choice? Do PC's crash on complicated graphics programs?)

Anyway there're few poular sites for discussions about different brands of similiar devices. I kinda like DBSForums 'cause they lump all the PVR's together. The result is they're more Dish oriented because AVS has Forums for everyone but Dish. But every kind of PVR is welcome.

This TiVo Forum is the biggest and best Forum on PVR's. But AVS also hosts Forums for every other brand except the Dish stuff. And, like it or not, Dish is a major player.

Personally I believe that laying out the facts is the best way of talking about a complicated new product like PVR's. There really is more than one right answer for many things. New people come to this and all the Forums to learn about this new stuff. I don't want to have to be a sales shill; I want to talk about the interesting things which the new technology offers. If that makes me a troll I guess I'm guilty.

[This message has been edited by arjay (edited 08-01-2001).]

Posted by: Otto

Everyone calm down already. Don't make me have to bust some heads! http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
All comments made in this post are my opinion and my opinion alone. Deal with it.
Otto, Zen TiVo Master - Moderator - AVS Tivo Forums - Tivo Underground, Tivo Coffee House
"The way of the portable computer user is as a stony path strewn with plugs and sockets, all the wrong size..." -- Terry Pratchett

Posted by: dgh

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
Wouldn't it be of interest to anyone to discuss their different points without having to get into ego battles?

Even vulcans seem to have trouble doing that sometimes. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
Now to dummy ol' me the Mac and the PC seem much more alike than different.

A fine discussion for a general computing group. But like I said, if you go into a forum of Mac enthusiasts, it's just not likely to go over well at all. They've already made their choice and many are quite sure of their reasons. It's all about location.

------------------
Dave Hicks

Posted by: bgreen5

Resisting... powerful urge to... extol virtues of Mac... getting sucked in... must not pass beyond event horizon...

http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

I think Arjay summed it up very nicely.

My philosophy on the matter is simple: don't beat me up if I simply mention in passing that I use a Mac, and I won't feel compelled to escalate into a flame war.

Let's see, trying to remember what... oh yeah, the reason for my post:

A fascinating parallel for me is the whole "other brands vs. TiVo", "TiVo won't be in business much longer"... yada yada yada.

Apple is still around, and occasionally thriving, not simply because loyalists refuse to "give up"... but because Apple never stops innovating (or leveraging others' innovations)and frequently bundles new technology (in respectable volumes) and brings it to the consumer market faster than than competition. Historical examples: true plug & play, built-in networking, quality audio/video options, SCSI, FireWire, wireless, optical, DVD-R, flat-screen displays, etc.

As for TiVo, I'm not sure about what the timing requirements are for critical innovations, but if they think they're "done" innovating... that is when I will consider TiVo dead.

Because most people simply aren't yet aware of PVR technology, I think TiVo has a buffer zone in terms of what capability they currently need to offer to stay alive. One of them is dual-tuners on the combo, but I'm not sure what else is necessary at this moment.

They'll certainly not want to get beat to market in other areas of capability, and hopefully they're still cooking in the kitchen.

------------------
Welcome to the TiVolution!

Accept no limitations. Reject ultimatums. If you're going to join a revolution, choose wisely indeed.

Favorite posters: Jim West, bareyb, Otto, _ITV

Posted by: pv

Arjay uses his PVRs in a way many people seem to think is seriously wacky, but he's not a troll in any sense of the word.

And even through the wackiness, there's a lot of interesting discussion material there. If you want to disagree with him based on his posts, fine. But don't call him unwarranted names. PV

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by pv:
Arjay uses his PVRs in a way many people seem to think is seriously wacky, but he's not a troll in any sense of the word.

And even through the wackiness, there's a lot of interesting discussion material there. If you want to disagree with him based on his posts, fine. But don't call him unwarranted names. PV

Hmmm?

(Thinking.)

Thanks for your closing thoughts. As far as the "wacky" part, maybe you're right? But that's what the whole competitive thing is all about. Time'll tell who gets slices from the PVR pie. I'm sure TiVo will have an ample helping.

There is a post by DrStrange in this thread which questions the reason for UTV having a "remind, tune, but not record" option. The reason people may request such a feature is that they don't watch everything timeshifted.

That is the core of the "wacky" use of my PVR's. I choose not to watch most programming in a VOD mode. There's way too much good but not great stuff available for me to want to record everything for future viewing. The more I record the more other stuff I won't watch. There's really no end to this viewing problem.

I'd venture to say (and I will be heartily disagreed with here) the success of TiVo depends on whether DrStrange's (and many TiVovangelists) view that (most?) everyone who gets a PVR will watch everything timeshifted turns out to be the case. If so there's no question TiVo is best. It's PC to predict that to be the new paradigm for future Televiwing.

If not the Dish cheap stuff and UTV's expensive stuff may sell pretty well. Their methods more easily allow for a mixed methodology in TV watching habits. (ReplayTv appears to currently be out of the picture as a significant competitive factor. I'm sorry about that. ReplayTV came remarkably close to fulfilling my needs in the abstract. If only their execution was as competent as their concept.)

I'm not taking my position for the sake of trolling. I truly have no interest in watching TV that way. At this Forum I appear to be in the great minority. (And incidently that also appears to be true at the ReplayTV Forum. Other Forums haven't focused on the issue very much.)

My take on it though is how wacky is it to watch TV as it is presented? TV itself has gone through a paradigm shift in the past 10 tears or so. Satellite service starting with C-band probably brought this about. Now it's typical to have over 100 channels available. Even the cable guys are getting there. There's almost always something on right now that's worth watching. Don't need a machine to improve the quality of 90% of my televiewing. The other 10% is what timeshifting machines are for. For me.

If the market proves my take on the mass audience "wacky" so be it. It'll be interesting to see the PVR penetration rate when the digital TV standard takes effect and the field has reached a certain maturity. I predict PVR's alone won't reach VCR's level of penetration. A way of recording to removable media will make digital TV recorders ubiquitus. A PVR DVD-R machine. Something in a consumer machine approaching what is just barely attainable in computer setups today.

Meanwhile we've got an interesting three way split in approaches to selling PVR's. The TiVo (and DirecTVo) approach. The Macrobux advertizing and marketing blitz. And the Dish po' boy minimalist approach. (ReplayTV may come up with a viable 4th way based on the huge cable audience--we'll have ta' see.)

The one thing I'll repeat is whatever I, DrStrange, rammy, feldon23, and everyone else may say only matters in making us feel good. The market is bigger than we give it credit for and we're all just bit players in this game. (I may get substantial disagreement here about my last point. That's OK. This is a place to discuss things.)

[This message has been edited by arjay (edited 08-02-2001).]

Posted by: Jim West

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:

My take on it though is how wacky is it to watch TV as it is presented? [/B]

arjay, you certainly are entitled to your opinion and to watch TV any way you wish. You must either not get very many interruptions while watching TV, or they do not bother you. Before TiVo I missed parts of many shows because of interruptions (telephone calls, including important ones; relatives dropping in; hunger pangs; nature calling; etc.). Now, since nearly everything I watch has been recorded - even if I am only a few minutes behind live - I just hit pause and I can come back a few minutes, hours or days later to see the rest of the program. That one feature is worth every penny I have spent on TiVos. To me it is more important than skipping ads, instant replay, etc.

Probably the second most important thing to me is the ability to rapidly skip the part of programs which do not interest me (jabber in sporting events; news in which I have no interest; unimportant lead ins and exits; some types of music; etc.). This saves me a tremendous amount of time and lets me use my limited TV time watching things which really interest me.

My wife, on the other hand, prefers to watch live TV, and it doesn't seem to bother her if she is interrupted.

arjay, if you have tried using TiVo the way most of us do and didn't like it, then you may not be missing anything you wish to have in TV viewing. If you have never tried our method for at least a couple of weeks, you should do so as a basis for comparison.

By the way, live TV is a complete misnomer. Most television programs are pre-recorded, including many sporting events. Remember the Olympics? Even much of the news is pre-recorded.

Jim West

Posted by: Jim West

One other point. While I was typing the post above and watching a recorded program I was interrupted twice by telephone calls that were important. If I had been watching live TV I would have missed a significant part of my program. All I did was hit pause, and now I am ready to go back and watch the rest of the program without any gaps.

Jim West

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by Jim West:
arjay, you certainly are entitled to your opinion and to watch TV any way you wish. You must either not get very many interruptions while watching TV, or they do not bother you. Before TiVo I missed parts of many shows because of interruptions (telephone calls, including important ones; relatives dropping in; hunger pangs; nature calling; etc.).

Ain't it a bitch? Most of us have a gadget that lets anyone in the whole world ring a bell in our houses. Talk about a privacy issue. I handle it with an answering machine.

quote:

Now, since nearly everything I watch has been recorded - even if I am only a few minutes behind live - I just hit pause and I can come back a few minutes, hours or days later to see the rest of the program. That one feature is worth every penny I have spent on TiVos. To me it is more important than skipping ads, instant replay, etc.

So called trick play is very useful. I use it to pause or repeat when necessary. I find it useful to have available even when I don't use it. With a big buffer I don't have to think about recording; it happens automatically. I really don't skip commercials that much; that's the time to take a pee or whatever.

quote:

Probably the second most important thing to me is the ability to rapidly skip the part of programs which do not interest me (jabber in sporting events; news in which I have no interest; unimportant lead ins and exits; some types of music; etc.). This saves me a tremendous amount of time and lets me use my limited TV time watching things which really interest me.

My wife, on the other hand, prefers to watch live TV, and it doesn't seem to bother her if she is interrupted.

I don't want to be an "efficient" TV watcher; that just isn't where I'm at. I find I pause more on the satellite channels which are commercial free 'cause there aren't any natural breaks in the programs.

quote:

arjay, if you have tried using TiVo the way most of us do and didn't like it, then you may not be missing anything you wish to have in TV viewing. If you have never tried our method for at least a couple of weeks, you should do so as a basis for comparison.

It's not that I don't like it; I just don't do it. It's not natural to me to watch average programs timeshifted, even good ones. I watch exceptional (to me) programs timeshifted. Some of those I want a permanent copy of. The other thing is for programs longer than an hour I prefer to have them on tape because I may not watch them for weeks.

Jim, it's not right or wrong. It's watching TV. It's not a big deal for me. Whatever works to make TV watching fun!

quote:

By the way, live TV is a complete misnomer. Most television programs are pre-recorded, including many sporting events. Remember the Olympics? Even much of the news is pre-recorded.

Jim West

Well you're certainly right there. I remember early Fifty's television when everything was live. It wasn't all great of course but some of it was. Hour long really live dramas!

These days aside from a few programs like the non taped parts of news shows "live" really means "currently on air". But there is a continuity to it. And with both on screen and paper program guides I have no trouble getting programming I like.

Don't make converting me an issue of any importance. It isn't. What's important and interesting is what the market will say about what sells.

I happen to believe that a no service fee approach will sell. While many people appreciate TiVo's highly focused search and conflict resolution features many will go for other brands' no fee and cheaper initial cost. That's the way it is. There's li'l that will change that when the entire potential market is considered. A legible guide and the ability to record and "trick play" will sell.

Hell UTV is trying to sell that without making it cheap. Their gimmick is the web connection of course and two tuners (which shortly won't be a unique advantage). It'll be interesting to see if they succeed.

Posted by: Otto

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
I happen to believe that a no service fee approach will sell. While many people appreciate TiVo's highly focused search and conflict resolution features many will go for other brands' no fee and cheaper initial cost. That's the way it is. There's li'l that will change that when the entire potential market is considered. A legible guide and the ability to record and "trick play" will sell.

I agree, but you run into the problem where you can't sell the box at a price point high enough to make a profit. The hardware still ain't cheap. The profit margin on the current PVR's is mighty mighty slim, if in fact there is one. The hardware is just too pricey, even in super bulk. This will change over time, admittedly, but even so..

------------------
All comments made in this post are my opinion and my opinion alone. Deal with it.
Otto, Zen TiVo Master - Moderator - AVS Tivo Forums - Tivo Underground, Tivo Coffee House
"The way of the portable computer user is as a stony path strewn with plugs and sockets, all the wrong size..." -- Terry Pratchett

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by Otto:
The profit margin on the current PVR's is mighty mighty slim, if in fact there is one.

I agree.

I think the strategy of Echostar is to sell the boxes at cost or below (in the case of new sub promos) and build their subscriber base with "free PVR" as the pitch. All those new subs will be buying programming. For a satellite service that's where the money is.

It's too bad that DirecTV can't work out a deal with TiVo to subsidize the $10. monthly service fee. Say by providing free service (up to a max. cost of $250.) with a certain level and duration of programming committment. Much is possible when programming is part a deal. That's a substantial income stream that doesn't stop. People will pay for programming much more readily than for a recorder service.

Also satellite already provides and delivers the program guide. Except for DirecTiVo I believe none of the other satellite recorders requires any connection to a phone line. I saw a post at another Forum stating that as a reason why someone chose UTV over DirecTivo. Get rid of phone calls and the need to provide program info and the cost to TiVo is substantially reduced. It'd be a win win deal!

[This message has been edited by arjay (edited 08-03-2001).]

Posted by: pv

Please understand Arjay, I was defending you!

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
That is the core of the "wacky" use of my PVR's. I choose not to watch most programming in a VOD mode. There's way too much good but not great stuff available for me to want to record everything for future viewing. The more I record the more other stuff I won't watch. There's really no end to this viewing problem.

I see what you're saying, but the main reasons PVRs were created was to free you from the tyranny of "watching what's on right now". That's what defenestrating [1] network executives on tivo's commercials was all about.

If you want to watch everything live, why have a PVR? As a timeshifter of almost 20 years standing, I just don't get it. I don't know why anyone would want to be tied to the TV in real time, for anything. It's just so wrong.

quote:
My take on it though is how wacky is it to watch TV as it is presented? TV itself has gone through a paradigm shift in the past 10 tears or so. Satellite service starting with C-band probably brought this about. Now it's typical to have over 100 channels available.

That's the heart of it. With all these channels available, there's still nothing worth watching on at any given time, and even if there is, it started 15 minutes ago, and you'll get carpal tunnel syndrome channel surfing to find it. If I want to watch something, I want to watch the whole thing, and at a time when I can give it the proper attention. Given any alternative, I am never a passive TV watcher. I would rather turn the tv off and read than surf. But then I'd rather read than do a lot of other things, too.

quote:
Even the cable guys are getting there. There's almost always something on right now that's worth watching. Don't need a machine to improve the quality of 90% of my televiewing. The other 10% is what timeshifting machines are for. For me.

For most timeshifters, those two percentages are reversed. In my case, it's more like 99% shifted, 1% live. The 1% is weather reports, maybe the rare sports event that I actually want to sit through.

quote:
If the market proves my take on the mass audience "wacky" so be it. It'll be interesting to see the PVR penetration rate when the digital TV standard takes effect and the field has reached a certain maturity.

This is the big question. It's my belief that more people aren't timeshifters because the current commonly available technology, VCRs, just plain sucks at the job. If all TV programs were available ala-carte and on demand, the age of broadcast TV would be over inside of a year. This is why the networks are scared of PVRs - all the bullcrapola they do with "lead in programming", and "retention rates", and all that, are worthless when you can snatch out the one or two good programs on their network and effortlessly ignore the rest.

The real reason most broadcast TV sucks is that there are agreements to carry random crap from the content producers in exchange for the good stuff. Programming on pay stations like HBO and Showtime is consistently good is because they don't have to make deals like this, and their business model isn't based on massive amounts of couch potatoes camping out on their station between 7:00 and 10:00PM. Can you imagine "Six feet under" running on broadcast tv? Not in this decade.

Anyway, the brief version of why I said "wacky", is that I believe that your time is worth more than being enslaved to a fixed broadcast schedule. Until the world changes and all programming is available on demand, PVRs are the answer. PV

[1] I love this word.

[This message has been edited by pv (edited 08-03-2001).]

Posted by: David Bolling

quote:
Originally posted by pv:
If you want to watch everything live, why have a PVR? As a timeshifter of almost 20 years standing, I just don't get it. I don't know why anyone would want to be tied to the TV in real time, for anything. It's just so wrong.

That's a strongly worded opinion. Can you really not think of ANY reason someone would need to be watching TV real-time and still want trick-play functionality and recording capability? I bet I can change your mind and convince you that there are uses for such a viewing habit. It's the use I will soon dedicate a TiVo to. Ready? ...

I'm a trader and have CNBC tuned on a TV on my desk all day long (usually with the volume off). That info is usually only useful when viewed real-time. Even so, when there are important announcements or useful analysis, being able to replay something in the buffer again can be helpful. Also useful is the ability to call up a segment broadcasted earlier in the day after reading about it later in the day (e.g. an interview I didn't know I'd be interested in at the time). The default mode for this TiVo, however, is to show what's live. I can't exactly time-shift my trading -- 'twould be nice, though. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

Posted by: pv

quote:
Originally posted by David Bolling:
I'm a trader and have CNBC tuned on a TV on my desk all day long (usually with the volume off). That info is usually only useful when viewed real-time. Even so, when there are important announcements or useful analysis, being able to replay something in the buffer again can be helpful. Also useful is the ability to call up a segment broadcasted earlier in the day after reading about it later in the day (e.g. an interview I didn't know I'd be interested in at the time). The default mode for this TiVo, however, is to show what's live. I can't exactly time-shift my trading -- 'twould be nice, though. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

There's this thing called the internet, which gives you this sort of information on demand and in real-time, often for free. If you really need to watch your stocks that closely, why would you want to slog through all the junk that CNBC shows that's not pertinent to your stocks? I am not convinced; try again. PV

Posted by: dgh

TiVo had better add a disclaimer that they're not responsible for day trading losses http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Dave Hicks

Posted by: willardcpa

Just think of the problems a day trader would have if he got into the buffer and was always 1/2 hour behindhttp://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

Posted by: dgh

quote:
Originally posted by willardcpa:
Just think of the problems a day trader would have if he got into the buffer and was always 1/2 hour behindhttp://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

Statistically, he'd probably do just as well as the guy who was caught up - but that might not stop him from blaming TiVo anyway http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Dave Hicks

Posted by: walters

quote:
Originally posted by dgh:
TiVo had better add a disclaimer that they're not responsible for day trading losses http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

They already have one, just like practically every product and/or service I've ever seen. It usually contains something like "...PROVIDED 'AS IS' WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR NON-INFRINGEMENT" (emphasis added).

Now, as for daytrading losses in TiVo itself: if only we could keep the shortsellers off this forum http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
Philips DSR6000 DirecTV with TiVo
Vote for new TiVo features

Posted by: David Bolling

quote:
Originally posted by pv:
There's this thing called the internet, which gives you this sort of information on demand and in real-time, often for free.

If you're talking about a quote feed, I have a separate service for that. I'm not talking about quotes or similar market data. I'm talking about news events (see below) ...

quote:
If you really need to watch your stocks that closely, why would you want to slog through all the junk that CNBC shows that's not pertinent to your stocks? I am not convinced; try again.

I don't watch CNBC for stock info. I watch it for economic data reports, Fed actions, major news events. Not that it matters to this discussion, but for clarification I don't trade stocks, but rather index futures, therefore I'm interested in general market moving events rather than specific stock news. I'm tuned into economic numbers released many mornings at 8:30am (reported first on CNBC), Fed announcements 2:15pm on Fed days, interviews and opinions by economists and bond traders, etc.

I'm eager to have the power of TiVo aide me in having this info real-time and also available to be randomly accessed at my command.

Another use for TiVo in this setup: TVeyes.com allows me to be notified when certain keywords are spoken on CNBC in case I miss something. I can then go to that segment on my TiVo. In those cases, the info is not timely, but at least I have the ability to bring up the original video footage rather than just read what TVeyes provides me.

Posted by: pv

quote:
Originally posted by David Bolling:
Another use for TiVo in this setup: TVeyes.com allows me to be notified when certain keywords are spoken on CNBC in case I miss something. I can then go to that segment on my TiVo. In those cases, the info is not timely, but at least I have the ability to bring up the original video footage rather than just read what TVeyes provides me.

I've never heard of tveyes before; what an interesting idea. But I couldn't find anything on their site that says what stations they're monitoring.

Whether this is a good use for the tivo or not, it's certainly not what they're designing the software to do. It's marketed as the timeshifter's nirvana. You can't seriously complain that it doesn't do something totally unrelated to what it's being sold for. I've used a shoe to drive a nail; that doesn't mean I should complain to the shoe's manufacturer that it does a crappy job of driving nails. PV

Posted by: David Bolling

quote:
Originally posted by pv:
I've never heard of tveyes before; what an interesting idea. But I couldn't find anything on their site that says what stations they're monitoring.

You can't specify. But you sure won't find "Alan Greenspan" mentioned on HGTV or ESPN. The keywords I specify generally only appear on CNBC and CNNfn.

Posted by: arjay

quote:
Originally posted by pv:

Please understand Arjay, I was defending you!

I understand that. Although we disagree on many issues we agree on the point that this is a place to discuss ideas.

quote:
Originally posted by arjay:
That is the core of the "wacky" use of my PVR's. I choose not to watch most programming in a VOD mode. There's way too much good but not great stuff available for me to want to record everything for future viewing. The more I record the more other stuff I won't watch. There's really no end to this viewing problem.

I see what you're saying, but the main reasons PVRs were created was to free you from the tyranny of "watching what's on right now". That's what defenestrating [1] network executives on tivo's commercials was all about.

If you want to watch everything live, why have a PVR? As a timeshifter of almost 20 years standing, I just don't get it. I don't know why anyone would want to be tied to the TV in real time, for anything. It's just so wrong.

I get it; your footnote [1] that is!

I disagree that watching TV in realtime is in any way "tyranny". I chose to watch most TV in realtime. I can do otherwise; I have 3 PVR's and 4 VCR's. Tyranny would be having to watch TV timeshifted if I didn't want to. That'd be so wrong. Let's defenestrate that idea right now.

I use the pause, repeat, and (occasionally) slo-mo functions of PVR's for shows I haven't recorded. Long buffers are useful if I want to check on something that's been over for a few hours.

I use TiVo as a backup for my favorite shows. I keep it busy. There usually is room for only one or two Suggestions. But I usually watch most shows as they air.

I'm highly suspicious of the motives behind pushing the idea of total timeshifting as "a new paradigm" of PC TV watching. TiVo is designed for precisely that application. If not used that way it's not used to its potential. ReplayTV also had that idea in mind but didn't push it as intensively as TiVo does. Dan203 in this thread makes the point that TiVo can be a drag to use when playing something else through it. "You will constantly be interrupted by TiVo asking to change the channel while playing the game, or watching the DVD and if you don't answer it will change by default." That point also holds true if you try to watch a program in realtime.

The other satellite recorders (Dish's and the not dissimiliar UTV for DirecTV) don't make a big issue about watching live vs. timeshifted. And they are TiVo's big current competitors.

They don't have TiVo's intricate program searching capability. But they have other unique capabilities. And the market is still up for grabs. One way of influencing the uncommitted into making a decision in your favor is to act as if that's the decision everyone has already made.

Of course its not that simple and there are other factors involved but here at these Forums a significant number of posters take TiVo personally. They think they are making a difference in making TiVo successful. So this "new paradigm" is presented as something that everyone should want and if you don't follow that line of thinking you're "wacky".

quote:
My take on it though is how wacky is it to watch TV as it is presented? TV itself has gone through a paradigm shift in the past 10 tears or so. Satellite service starting with C-band probably brought this about. Now it's typical to have over 100 channels available.

That's the heart of it. With all these channels available, there's still nothing worth watching on at any given time, and even if there is, it started 15 minutes ago, and you'll get carpal tunnel syndrome channel surfing to find it. If I want to watch something, I want to watch the whole thing, and at a time when I can give it the proper attention. Given any alternative, I am never a passive TV watcher. I would rather turn the tv off and read than surf. But then I'd rather read than do a lot of other things, too.

I agree with you about reading but not about there being nothing worthwhile to watch. There are a half dozen non premium satellite/cable channels which much more often than not have something on right now that's worth watching. For me. Other people have different choices. But TV is watched for pleasure. It can be educational or otherwise worthwhile but it doesn't have to be.

In no case is watching TV creative no matter how skillfully you handle your remote or program your TiVo. Tivo will work just as well with shopping channels, 'rasslin', or the car chase channel as it does with Tech TV or Masterpiece Theatre.

I don't "surf" but I do look through the program guide both on screen and on paper. But if I did surf there's nothing wrong with that. If everyone watched TV differently than I it still wouldn't be an issue of right or wrong. Being judgemental about TV watching might make you feel superior but being judgemental actually is pretty dumb. People are the way they are and no amount of analyzing will change that.

quote:
Even the cable guys are getting there. There's almost always something on right now that's worth watching. Don't need a machine to improve the quality of 90% of my televiewing. The other 10% is what timeshifting machines are for. For me.

For most timeshifters, those two percentages are reversed. In my case, it's more like 99% shifted, 1% live. The 1% is weather reports, maybe the rare sports event that I actually want to sit through.

You make my point. There's actually a continuum of PVR usage. As many PVR users are concerned with the recording capacity of their hard drives it might be called a space/time continuum. Relatively speaking of course. But you don't have to be an Einstein to find a correct solution. Any 'ol answer will do.

quote:
If the market proves my take on the mass audience "wacky" so be it. It'll be interesting to see the PVR penetration rate when the digital TV standard takes effect and the field has reached a certain maturity.

This is the big question. It's my belief that more people aren't timeshifters because the current commonly available technology, VCRs, just plain sucks at the job. If all TV programs were available ala-carte and on demand, the age of broadcast TV would be over inside of a year. This is why the networks are scared of PVRs - all the bullcrapola they do with "lead in programming", and "retention rates", and all that, are worthless when you can snatch out the one or two good programs on their network and effortlessly ignore the rest.

Be careful what you wish for. If broadcast TV did not exist who would produce the programs that you like? How would they be paid for? Are you proposing a pay TV business model? I choose the programs I like with both the channel selector and on/off buttons. But it's probably a good thing there's lots of other people with different tastes. I'm rather selective in the things I buy. If everyone was like me the ad companies and network promo depts. would have mighty slim pickin's.

quote:

The real reason most broadcast TV sucks is that there are agreements to carry random crap from the content producers in exchange for the good stuff. Programming on pay stations like HBO and Showtime is consistently good is because they don't have to make deals like this, and their business model isn't based on massive amounts of couch potatoes camping out on their station between 7:00 and 10:00PM. Can you imagine "Six feet under" running on broadcast tv? Not in this decade.

"Six Feet Under" probably couldn't be shown on OTA networks because of mass marketing censorship rules. Good as it is I bet it gets a comparitively small ratings share. I notice the pay channels do pay attention to what they program during the high viewership "prime time" hours.

quote:

Anyway, the brief version of why I said "wacky", is that I believe that your time is worth more than being enslaved to a fixed broadcast schedule. Until the world changes and all programming is available on demand, PVRs are the answer. PV

If I was "enslaved" you'd be right. Right now PVR's are the answer for some people. For other people the question is what is the question that PVR's are the answer to. Me. I just watch TV.

[This message has been edited by arjay (edited 08-03-2001).]

Posted by: Teran

Yep. PVR and on-demand is a technology that will not go away. Companies and strategies will come and go, but not the technology. It will evolve into what people want and at a price they are willing to pay.

But, life is live. When something happens, you often want to know it now and not six hours ago. Some people will require the sense of community "live" TV provides. For now, PVR is being used mostly by early adopters and for many of them PVR is the community.

------------------

- Todd H. Shore -

Posted by: Alexander

This is an interesting discussion. http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

Obviously, a lot of one's opinion of PVRs and what answers they provide to you is dependent on how you view TV -- how many shows you like enough to watch, how flexible your schedule is, how much time you devote to watching TV, how dedicated you are to the TV when you're watching it, etc.

I think it's obvious that PVRs offer at least some value to almost all people. Whether that value is total and complete timeshifting and control, or just the ability to instant replay, I think practically everyone would benefit at least a little from a PVR.

Ultimately, PVRs will be commodity, built into televisions, cable boxes, satellite boxes, whatever. For little or no premium. There will be quality ones, like TiVo, for people who want premium features and performance, and there will be bare bones ones by companies we've never heard of, for people who don't really care.

And there's definitely enough momentum to get us to that point.

Also, from a technological point of view, scheduled broadcast is simply the best way to get high-bandwidth data to lots of people. Sure, cable systems could handle VOD now, but then there's HDTV, then holographic 3D TV, etc. For quite a while, entertainment will push the limits of bandwidth -- and broadcast is efficient.

So "live TV" probably won't be going away any time soon either, it'll just be a lot less important to a lot more people.

Alex

Posted by: NutMonkey

I'm with arjay on this. I mostly watch live TV, and I have been annoyed with the attitude on this forum at times that watching live TV is the "wrong" way to use a TiVo. I have DirecTV service (mostly for the NFL Sunday Ticket, and because Cox cable is a horrible company) but there's still not that much coming on that I'd want to watch, so I never really feel backed up.. I have a season pass to the Simpsons, for example, but I almost always watch it live. The Tivo is nice because I used to occasionally miss episodes if I was unexpectedly not home Sunday night and hadn't set the VCR. Now I never have to worry about it.

Most of the time my TV is on, I'm on my computer, as I am now, and the TV is on next to me. I'm not usually paying that much attention to it. Often I'm watching TechTV, and if they say something that catches my attention, and I've been busily typing in forum messages or something, it's nice to be able to rewind it and catch the whole segment. I just finished "watching" Men at Work, some cheesy movie on Comedy Central. I certainly wouldn't have recorded it and watched it later, and there's nothing else in Now Playing that I haven't seen..

So I publically apologize for my deviant behavior, but I don't usually time shift except those programs that are on when I'm not at home.

Oh, and I'm very disappointed with "Six Feet Under." That show had such a promising concept but it's too melodramatic in execution. But maybe that's a different thread...

Posted by: feldon23

Set a season pass for Battlebots and then sit down once a week and go through upcoming movies by title from A to Z. Guaranteed to keep you so busy you don't have to channel surf if you don't want to http://www.avsforum.com/ubb/smile.gif

Posted by: NutMonkey

See? You post a message saying you watch live TV, and some helpful person will undoubtedly try to "fix" your "problem" for you...