 
icp1
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Saint Louis, MO
clubs: | yay! not that I really want my isp/cable controlling my dvr in any way, but come on, anyone with common sense knows there is no material difference between allowing a personal DVR and same features at the head end. | |
|
 | 
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
1 edit | Re: yay! I agree. I can't figure out why there's so much consumer (i.e. DSLR member) backlash to this idea.
As for the ruling, it's good for the fact that it at least lessens the industry's ultra-tight reins on content. Maybe this leaves a little crack in the doorway for other distribution systems that won't get squashed. Not sure it's very significant to consumers otherwise. | |
|
| | 
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast
| Re: yay! said by Goober  :I agree. I can't figure out why there's so much consumer (i.e. DSLR member) backlash to this idea. How about because it will be only marginally cheaper than a physical DVR in the home, but at the same time much less responsive to rewind and fast forward remote control commands. It also lends itself to experiments preventing the fast forwarding thru commercials. Despite the Appeals Court ruling, pressure on Cablevision by the entertainment industry to prevent skipping thru commercials will be considerable and easier to try out with a Network DVR.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|
| | | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | Re: yay! So, why not just NOT SUBSCRIBE TO IT? This is only allowing it to be offered, it isn't REQUIRING YOU TO GET IT. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| Re: yay! said by Eat Me :The problem is that if it catches on, then regular standalone DVRs may die off. So, in other words, if lots of customers like this option better, then other options may not be offered as much. Sorry, I cannot get too concerned about that. Let's respect our fellows enough to let them decide what's best for them, instead of wishing to withhold from them the options that they themselves my prefer. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | Re: yay! Why insult people by claiming that they won't choose what's best for themselves? | |
|
| | | 
dennismurphy
Put me on hold? I'll put YOU on hold
Premium
join:2002-11-19
Parsippany, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by GOLFnSUN :How about because it will be only marginally cheaper than a physical DVR in the home, but at the same time much less responsive to rewind and fast forward remote control commands. It also lends itself to experiments preventing the fast forwarding thru commercials. Despite the Appeals Court ruling, pressure on Cablevision by the entertainment industry to prevent skipping thru commercials will be considerable and easier to try out with a Network DVR. Disagree on the "marginally" cheaper - it's substantial.
think about the potential for deduplicating data - you only keep ONE copy of each program centrally, instead of hundreds of thousands distributed all over the place.
This is a major win for consumers:
a) Lower cost - let's say the supplier price for hard disks is $35. $35 x (figure) 200,000 DVR's in CV territory (I bet the number's a lot higher, actually) = $7m in savings that can (not necessarily will be) passed on to the consumer.
b) Higher reliability - CV can use a mid-tier disk array with some variety of protection (be it RAID, replication, etc.) that protect against failure. In the current model, if a disk fails, all of a consumer's recordings are lost.
c) More availability - say you forget to schedule a show to record. It's in the CV archive anyway, so why can't you "record" it after the fact?
Lots of potential here. LOTS. This can change the way we watch TV as we know it (as TiVo did for us 10 years ago.) | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
dennismurphy
Put me on hold? I'll put YOU on hold
Premium
join:2002-11-19
Parsippany, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: yay! said by Eat Me :My most recent quote on SAN storage the other day for video was over $80,000 for about 12TB, and that is actually the lower end using SATA drives instead of fiber channel. It's also cheaper than what a vendor like EMC would charge you. Suffice to say that enterprise storage is not going to be $35 for a 1TB disk. These are not desktop drives that you buy from Fry's. Of course we're talking enterprise storage ... very different. But the prices are continuing to fall ... Even still, using some dedupe and content compression (go check out ocarina networks), you can achieve economies of scale ...
(I work in enterprise storage, so I know a bit about it). | |
|
| | | | | vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD
1 edit | said by Eat Me :There is also great potential for: - Preventing commercial skipping If you can stream media to your TV, then you will always be able to DVR it, and thus skip commercials.
Myth TV and other type DVRs, will DVR an OTA signal for instance.
I do see this as an issue though. And whats worse, even if Cablevision allows you to skip, the media companies may sue for *allowing* the skipping of commercials. TIVO was sued for adding in the 30 second jump.
But again, no one can stop you from hooking up your own media center and you will always have control of that.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
|
| | | | | | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA
| Re: yay! Actually, I don't believe TiVo has ever been sued for 30-second skip. It is not a documented feature. ReplayTV, an early TiVo competitor, was sued for its commercial-skipping capability, though. Perhaps that's what you're recalling.
Regardless, the point is well-founded: Promoting a feature that specifically facilitates commercial avoidance is not going to go unopposed. | |
|
| | | | TheWiseGuy
Dog And Butterfly
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-04
Yonkers, NY
1 edit | said by dennismurphy :said by GOLFnSUN :How about because it will be only marginally cheaper than a physical DVR in the home, but at the same time much less responsive to rewind and fast forward remote control commands. It also lends itself to experiments preventing the fast forwarding thru commercials. Despite the Appeals Court ruling, pressure on Cablevision by the entertainment industry to prevent skipping thru commercials will be considerable and easier to try out with a Network DVR. Disagree on the "marginally" cheaper - it's substantial. think about the potential for deduplicating data - you only keep ONE copy of each program centrally, instead of hundreds of thousands distributed all over the place. I am fairly certain you can not. I believe the original ruling was very specific and it included how the Network DVR would work, especially as far as buffering/caching and storage.
From the appeal decision
"If a customer has requested a particular program, the data for that program move from the primary buffer into a secondary buffer, and then onto a portion of one of the hard disks allocated to that customer. As new data flow into the primary buffer, they overwrite a corresponding quantity of data already on the buffer."
»en.wikisource.org/wiki/Cartoon_N···ngs,_Inc.
--
Warning, If you post nonsense and use misinformation and are here to argue based on those methods, you will be put on ignore. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Re: yay! True. I'll agree with that. | |
|
| | | | jesseb_66
join:2002-12-06
Tucson, AZ
| I've only used vod in VT with Adelphia and now Comcast. It is very slow but getting better. When it was first rolled out it took a good 2 minutes to load the menu. Also with no indicator if it was working or not it was a bare. Its down to seconds now but still feels pretty sluggish. | |
|
| | | | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Re: yay! Early VOD certainly was worse than the present systems. Anything that isn't instant won't be as satisfying. But, other than for skipping commercials, we rarely use the remote. I still think it's just a matter of getting used to it. | |
|
| | | | | | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Re: yay! Well VOD on DTV is just about instant
its more of a download than a stream so once its on your box you can ff and rewind just as fast as if you had recorded it off the normal channel | |
|
| |
| | 
banditws6
Shrinking Time and Distance
join:2001-08-18
Naples, FL
·Comcast
| Re: yay! said by aaronwt :Then I think they chnaged it so everone would have their individual recordings, which would be identical to having it stored locally, only you would have a delay in response like with VOD. The delay is response is what kills my interest in this type of service. I'm nitpicky like that.
--
"I'll follow the law until it's just stupid." -Ted Nugent | |
|
| | | 
r81984
Thread is
Premium
join:2001-11-14
St John'S, NL | Re: yay! The delay is basically nothing. Why would that bug you? | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | neufuse
join:2006-12-06
Indiana, PA
·Comcast
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: yay! 1 to 2 second delay with play? ha... comcast here and the initial startup of content can take up to 3 minutes to start on VOD... and it's not just a box I have, everyone in the area has the same problem... and FF and RW have a lag of up to 5 seconds... and stopping a FF or RW can lag also to go back to play... it's almost not usable... and switched video is a pain in the butt too with its channel change lag.... | |
|
| | | | | | | geonap
lolatidiots
join:2005-12-14
Glendale, CA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: yay! charter does the same thing, delay sucks.
the point is that it's not that we dont want to wait, it's that a one to two second delay is mentally straining and annoying.
have you ever tried to hook up a midi keyboard to a computer with an interface that has latency? it's like playing piano and waiting a second to hear it, it's freaking annoying and it weakens you. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | |
| | |
| | | 
rahlquist
Redeye
join:2001-10-30
Villa Rica, GA
| Re: yay! said by morbo :where's the advantage of having potentially 10,000k versions of the same recorded show? i just don't get this strategy. Who says they will store that many? They may only store 1 eventually, and spool it out to memory and then to the customer. Think about it. If TV goes all digitial content schedules could go completely out the window and you could watch anything you want whenever you want using the methods mentioned here. It wouldbe like watching every show "On Demand". Of course you will be spoon fed the commercials but what price is that to pay for content I can watch whenever I want for just s small fee per program...ooops did I let the cat out of the bag?
--
Fed Up With Stupidity?
Patentlystupid.com | |
|
| | |
dennismurphy
Put me on hold? I'll put YOU on hold
Premium
join:2002-11-19
Parsippany, NJ
·Optimum Online
| said by morbo :said by aaronwt :I think originally they wanted to pool the content. So if one person recorded a program, basically that program would be used for everyone. Then I think they chnaged it so everone would have their individual recordings, which would be identical to having it stored locally, only you would have a delay in response like with VOD. where's the advantage of having potentially 10,000k versions of the same recorded show? i just don't get this strategy. Deduplication ... each customer can have their own "set" of recorded shows, but they can basically be pointers back to the centrally archived version of it.
Cool stuff. | |
|
| | | | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| Re: yay! said by dennismurphy :said by morbo :said by aaronwt :I think originally they wanted to pool the content. So if one person recorded a program, basically that program would be used for everyone. Then I think they chnaged it so everone would have their individual recordings, which would be identical to having it stored locally, only you would have a delay in response like with VOD. where's the advantage of having potentially 10,000k versions of the same recorded show? i just don't get this strategy. Deduplication ... each customer can have their own "set" of recorded shows, but they can basically be pointers back to the centrally archived version of it. Cool stuff. The problem is that the Content Providers want to make the savings to the Cable System Operator impossible by not allowing this and requiring a descreet copy for each customer. Thus if 10,000 customers want to have show X recorded there will be 10,000 copies (each taking up space on the Cable System's Drives) not ONE copy and a list of 10,000 customers who want to see it (a list that gets pruned as each says "Delete" the recording). Since the Cable System needs to pay for enough storage to hold 10,000 copies of just one program this is a major expense that would not exist if only 1 copy per program was needed. The amount of storage gets excessive since that 10,000 copies is per program. | |
|
| | | | |
dennismurphy
Put me on hold? I'll put YOU on hold
Premium
join:2002-11-19
Parsippany, NJ
·Optimum Online
| Re: yay! said by RARPSL :The problem is that the Content Providers want to make the savings to the Cable System Operator impossible by not allowing this and requiring a descreet copy for each customer. Thus if 10,000 customers want to have show X recorded there will be 10,000 copies (each taking up space on the Cable System's Drives) not ONE copy and a list of 10,000 customers who want to see it (a list that gets pruned as each says "Delete" the recording). Since the Cable System needs to pay for enough storage to hold 10,000 copies of just one program this is a major expense that would not exist if only 1 copy per program was needed. The amount of storage gets excessive since that 10,000 copies is per program. Agreed - if you can't dedupe the data, and can't provide substantial space savings, then there's no point here.
The cost for enterprise-class storage is still significantly higher than the entry-level storage in the common DVR. And if all you're doing is migrating that entry-level storage data into an enterprise-class array, that's a losing capex proposition. | |
|
| | | | | |
| fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| said by icp1 :not that I really want my isp/cable controlling my dvr in any way, ....
... if you rent/lease one from the cable company, they already do.  .. 100% of it, all the way down to the remote control, the ability to adjust the volume on the box rather than the TV, the time you can save a program for.. all of it is micro-configurable... they just don't.
...but come on, anyone with common sense knows there is no material difference between allowing a personal DVR and same features at the head end. You're correct.
And, there are both pros and cons on either service.
A few of the pluses I am looking forward to in the future is that if the power or cable goes out, my shows record.. if the box goes bad, so what.. and like VOD, if I want to watch it in any room, I can.. not just the one box that it's on. | |
|
| | |
| | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | Re: yay! Well, it's not like TiVo hasn't caved to content providers' demands in the past. They could do so in the future as well. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
Goober
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| Re: yay! To an extent. Certainly TiVo hacks are nothing compared to what ReplayTV hacks could/can do that did raise the content providers' collective ires. But, I agree that the TiVo hacks are useful for what they are and make for relatively more pleasant viewing. | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| while i dislike a DVR being bound to the network, i like the outcome of this because i feel the entertainment industry doesn't have the right to hold the customer by the balls as the love so much to do.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| said by icp1 :not that I really want my isp/cable controlling my dvr in any way, but come on, anyone with common sense knows there is no material difference between allowing a personal DVR and same features at the head end. Except on the headend, you can disable fast forward!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee | |
|
| | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | Re: yay! Well, with tru2way, you'll be able to disable fast forward even with a stand-alone DVR. | |
|
| |
| | bicker
join:2007-05-10
Burlington, MA | Re: yay! If they combine this with SDV, it will surely result in a net surplus of available bandwidth. | |
|
Smokey
I killed the Wabbit
Premium
join:2003-05-20
Va Beach
clubs:
·Cox HSI
| Good call I support the idea of networked DVR. I really like the idea of "primetime playback" or being able to pull a show that I missed for say, 24-48 hours after it's programing. If I set the show to be recorded, then normal access to it until I delete the show. This also allows the video to be moved over other streams, possible internet and mobile if those accounts are tied to the cable account.
It will be interesting to see what the MSO's come up with now that they have this ruling.
--
Para Bellum!! | |
|
needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through
join:2001-05-02
Glendale, AZ | Increased Storage? Will this mean I can save more programs for longer times?
--
Great success! High five! | |
|
danclan
join:2005-11-01
Midlothian, VA
·Verizon FIOS
| Considering Congress and FCC haved carriers to decouple encryption from the stb...there should be a vast market of 3rd party STB boxes for you the customer to choose from based on capacity, speed, interface, guide etc. and this head end option should be yet another option and carriers should be looking to get out of STB market...why cant they use smart card ala dish or directTV? Would vastly simplify things and make many lives easier.
Instead there are lawsuits still and your are, for practical concerns, locked in. Tivo is your only real choice and dont try to say that mythtv is a real alternative for Ma and Pa kettle...it aint and never will be...
If STBs were completely decoupled from carriers you could take yours anywhere to any cable co and plug it in and enjoy. There would be one less hook in your lip for you to stay... | |
|
| Joe12345678
join:2003-07-22
Des Plaines, IL | Re: Considering Congress and FCC haved carriers to decouple where will they get the bandwidth for this?
I don't think they have the room to have 100 copy's of the same show in HD all being stated 1-5 min a part for each other to 100 different people. | |
|
| | 
Ilovemyfios
@verizon.net
| if ok'd, is Verizon next - both good & not so good heres the thing..
from the viewers standpoint, a maybe win..
I like the idea.. I read somewhere that maybe Verizon might even consider it, that they are waiting to see the outcome from cablevision's case. I still like their home media dvr though, for $10/mo more it has much better functionality but its something to consider. Also, what if there is an outage, I think I can still watch my home media DVR.
Now watch Verizon nix it for a network solution  | |
|
|
|
|
The Network DVR Lives
·
