 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5
3 edits | Will it be cheaper than renting a DVR from cable company This might be interesting depending on what they charge per month for the service. A DVR can run anywhere from $10 to $20 per month for each DVR from a cable company. But a hosted server could be used from multiple TVs without having a DVR on each TV.
It would also depend on whether they allow fast forwarding thru commercials or not. A service that doesn't do that would be pretty worthless for most people.
Also with a networked DVR service, you are subject to the same problems people have with VOD - and that is all the available channels available at a node for VOD can be used up by neighbors and you may get an error msg that you can't play back your recording when you want to. Of course, a good deployment of SDV could mitigate this problem.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page
Ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya punk? |
|
|
|
| Wow! If the Cable Companies deployed this correctly and allowed two things.
1.) Allow me to purchase as much storage as I want.
2.) Allow me to view the recordings on any STB in the house
I wouldn't need Vista Media Center. |
|
 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to Linklist
Re: Will it be cheaper than renting a DVR from cable company You think that savings will be passed on to the customer? I don't. |
|
EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | What are the caveats? It seems like that this concept, taken to its natural conclusion, could have the cable companies record every single program over a certain period of time (say, a few days), and then make all programs from that time available "on-demand", which I think would be great (from the consumer's perspective). But I suppose there's probably some limitations in the ruling that would make such things impossible? |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: Will it be cheaper than renting a DVR from cable company I would image you would probably end up with a scenario where the price didn't drop but you got to use the recorded content on all TVs. A win-win scenario (you get "more DVRs" and they make more money)
--
OASAASLLS |
|
 DaMaGeINCThe Lan ManPremium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
kudos:2 | Cablevision was sued by the entertainment industry Yet another example of the entertainment industry inhibiting innovation and screwing everyone over. |
|
 SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | What controls this? If there is no box, then what are you pointing the remote at to chose content, FF, Rewind, etc? |
|
| said by SLD:If there is no box, then what are you pointing the remote at to chose content, FF, Rewind, etc? There will probably still be a box, but it won't be a DVR. Much cheaper to produce. |
|
 JSYPremium
join:2000-04-05
Elmhurst, NY | Lukewarm My guess is that there will still be a cable box - that they just meant there would be no need for a hard drive box for the consumer.
I'm lukewarm about it all because if it's anywhere as responsive as VOD on TWC - where FF, RW, etc. response times are not immediate - then I am not sure if the experience would be the same. A reduction or elimination of a DVR fee would make it easier to adapt.  |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: Will it be cheaper than renting a DVR from cable company said by Linklist:Also with a networked DVR service, you are subject to the same problems people have with VOD - and that is all the available channels available at a node for VOD can be used up by neighbors and you may get an error msg that you can't play back your recording when you want to. Of course, a good deployment of SDV could mitigate this problem. True, but the times that service may be out due to whatever It would be nice to know the program is still being recorded. Also would this allow for more recordings at once? |
|
DaMaGeINCThe Lan ManPremium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
kudos:2 | reply to JSY
Re: Lukewarm Ya, good point. Response times are like in the 5+ Second range. Would make it really annoying. |
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1 | They need to market as service This needs to be turned into a service like youtube, hulu etc. Just make it ip based and allow anyone to use it. This way people with DVRs can get access to it. |
|
1 edit | Sure. go ahead and do a network dvr then bitch your running out of bandwidth. What next metered Tv? Only way i can see this to work is if docsis 3.0 is deployed.
edit rant off now. |
|
| reply to DaMaGeINC
Re: Cablevision was sued by the entertainment industry And this surprises you how?
If the entertainment industry wanted to effectively fight this, they'd be far better off designing a DVR that was more friendly to them, such as having less capability to skip ads, and giving it away completely free to anyone who wanted one. That way, people could time-shift for free and avoid paying TiVo or the cablecos. Not everyone would go for it, but I suspect that many people would.
These clowns can sue all they want, but it won't stop progress. Even if they could manage to stop this or that implementation of something, they're trying to hold back the sea. Eventually, they'll lose. |
|
DaMaGeINCThe Lan ManPremium
join:2002-06-08
Greenville, SC
kudos:2 | Oh no!! Not a surprise at all. |
|
 MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | reply to Linklist
Re: Will it be cheaper than renting a DVR from cable company said by Linklist:Also with a networked DVR service, you are subject to the same problems people have with VOD - and that is all the available channels available at a node for VOD can be used up by neighbors and you may get an error msg that you can't play back your recording when you want to. Then obviously the DVR hogs who are causing congestion transferring way more than they could possibly ever watch have to be stopped by going to a bill-by-the-byte system.
--
Electile Dysfunction: the inability to become aroused over the choice for President put forth by either party. |
|
 swintecPremium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:4
 ·RapidVPS
 ·Sprint Mobile Br..
 ·VoicePulse
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to hayabusa3303
Re: Sure. That brings up a good point. I would imagine they would offer something like 80 GBs to customers...but if every customer tried to use that much, it would create issue. Essentially this would mean they would have to boot the "resource" hogs, all while playing the advertising game of which cable company can offer the most DVR storage than the other. Drvies arent cheap, nor unlimited space, so this could prove interesting.
--
Usenet Accounts |
|
| reply to hayabusa3303
DOCSIS doesn't have anything to do with QAM video delivery.
Just like VOD and SDV, the network DVR would be delivered over a QAM channel to the cable box. It would not touch the CMTS network. |
|
| reply to swintec
said by swintec:That brings up a good point. I would imagine they would offer something like 80 GBs to customers...but if every customer tried to use that much, it would create issue. Essentially this would mean they would have to boot the "resource" hogs, all while playing the advertising game of which cable company can offer the most DVR storage than the other. Drvies arent cheap, nor unlimited space, so this could prove interesting. LOL. If you watch too many hours, they would throttle your account and only show programming at 15fps. |
|
| reply to smcallah
said by smcallah:DOCSIS doesn't have anything to do with QAM video delivery. Just like VOD and SDV, the network DVR would be delivered over a QAM channel to the cable box. It would not touch the CMTS network. I thought about that after i posted but you never know what could be done in the future.  |
|
