1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Tivo gets an extender!

Discussion in 'TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion' started by mr.unnatural, Aug 24, 2012.

  1. mr.unnatural

    mr.unnatural Active Member

    4,354
    5
    Feb 2, 2006
    Ellicott...
    +1. I typically don't start watching a football game until it's been on for at least 45 minutes to an hour. By the time it gets to the last two minutes of the game I've caught up to real time and watch the finale of the game live. If I catch up to real time too soon I'll usually pause playback and watch something else I previously recorded for about 20 minutes of so until I've built up enough of a delay to be able to skip past all the commercials.
     
  2. slowbiscuit

    slowbiscuit FUBAR

    3,501
    18
    Sep 19, 2006
    In the ATL
    +2. I watch almost nothing live, other than background noise like news and weather. Starting an NFL game or NASCAR race an hour behind live is great.
     
  3. fritolayguy

    fritolayguy Science, bitches

    175
    0
    Oct 31, 2002
    Liberty, MO.
    IMHO, only way to watch NFL football. My brother and I get together every weekend to watch our local team, and we follow this process exactly. We put phones and tablets away, and as far as we are concerned, the game is "live".
     
  4. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    Do you folks consider buffered live to be live?

    I personally consider any non-recorded (not saved to the NP list) to be live.

    I watch a lot of buffered live shows. I surf, find something of interest, pause, take care of some other items around or maybe swap tuners to surf the other tuner, then return to watch.

    I dual-tuner surf a lot.
     
  5. innocentfreak

    innocentfreak Active Member

    8,950
    3
    Aug 25, 2001
    Florida
    I consider it live. Any show I could catch up to the end of the buffer is live to me.
     
  6. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    This is simply false. Most women are not terribly interested in sports and a significant number of men are not.

    Your point here eludes me entirely. Are you saying watching TV with commercials is preferable to sitting in the stadium? If not then you have just countered your own argument.

    That would be my question, although I would not use my phone to that purpose. I use my phone to make and receive phone calls, when I must. I avoid it as much as possible. I do not use it for any other purpose.

    No. They are boring. That is irrelevant, however. They are certainly not made less boring by being heavily studded with commercials that force everyone, including those who have no interest in them, to pay for them.

    Owning an IOS device would be my version of Hell, or at least the road to it, so I suppose your statement could be taken to be true in my case.

    At work, they are forcing us to turn in our old phones and get Android phones. I am not happy about it, although I admit I really hate the current phone.

    I suppose you mean me, although I am not alone in realizing watching live TV is a total waste of time. I could not possibly care less what you think of me, but I am compelled to point out that rather than provide a well reasoned argument supported by facts, you resort to an ad hominem attack.

    Somehow I am not surprised.
     
  7. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    The answer is it makes billions of dollars for Madison Avenue executives, manufacturers who sell massive numbers of things to people who do not need them, team owners, and team members. Other than that, there isn't any.
     
  8. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    It's a gray area. Since I am rarely able to watch anything much less than 2 or 3 days after it is recorded, the question is really moot for me.

    Nielsen, ad agencies, and the networks would most definitely disagree with you. To them, the only purpose of TV is broadcasting the commercials. Of course, one may define anything any way one likes. All definitions are arbitrary. Yours, however, glosses over what many of us consider to be a very important aspect of owning a DVR: the ability to control the content, both in quality as well as in time.

    It is entirely up to you, of course, but by definition the content already recorded on the TiVo is of much higher quality than the live offerings. One is able to watch much more TV of a much higher quality in the same amount of time if one lets the TiVo record everything that might be interesting (in which case the tuners will again by definition be busy and unavailable for surfing whenever there is anything interesting on), and then selects from the list of high quality videos, rather than wading through a ton of garbage.

    I could easily spend hours looking for more interesting content to what the TiVos are already recording, but the odds of my actually finding it are very low. The odds of my finding it right at the very moment when it starts so that I have not missed the (often vital) first few minutes of the show are virtually zero.
     
  9. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I see. What, then, was your reason for writing this:

    Yes, they surely have, haven't they? Or is it somehow different when you do it? Only you and one other individual in this thread resorted to name calling, and both of you are on the same side of the issue.
     
  10. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    Uh, which definition are you using?? I prefer to think that I can determine what I enjoy a touch better than the wonks who wrote the TiVo suggestion algorithm. The fact that you think otherwise is a bit insulting.

    Also, half the crap on my TiVo is for my wife which is absolutely not of high quality to me.
     
  11. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    Well, when they start participating in these forums maybe we should adjust our terms. I submit that many people here consider watching a buffered show one minute, five minutes or maybe 10 minutes behind to be 'live' regardless of your expert opinion otherwise.

    I just floated a clarifying question out there and definitely qualified my statements with 'to me.'
     
  12. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Well, unless you are deliberately recording things you do not like on the TiVo, then by definition the things on the TiVo are what you like. Per your statements below, discount the stuff your wife has recorded.

    No, you prefer to be prejudiced. It is a simple fact humans do poorly and computers do extremely well sifting through tens of thousands of items to find ones matching particular criteria. They do so extremely quickly and essentially without errors. They also follow directions to the letter, every time. There are many, many things we humans do easily and accurately that even the most powerful computers on Earth struggle to do at all. Searching through mountains of text for matching keywords is not one of them.

    You are simply wrong. First of all, I never mentioned anything about Suggestions, and although Suggestions make the issue even more lopsided on the side of the TiVo, the statements apply perfectly well even with Suggestions turned off. Secondly, it is not the people who wrote the algorithms that determine what the TiVo will record. It is YOU who do so. You tell the TiVo what you like. It remembers and goes off searching for the the things you have told it to go find. This is true whether it is Suggestions, Wishlists, Season Passes, or manual recordings for that matter.

    It is just not humanly practical, and in fact not humanly possible on an ongoing basis, to accurately sift through upwards of 3000 programs a day, every day, 24 x 365. In less time than it takes you to sort through a single hour's worth of programming (perhaps 400 - 500 programs), the TiVo will search through 12 whole days worth of programming (about 40,000 shows), typically without missing a single hit, as long as the data from Tribune Media is correct. If you think you can search through 40,000 shows in the current schedule (let alone the million or so broadcast every year) without quite a few errors, then you are deluding yourself. Highly trained professional airline pilots frequently cannot go through a relatively short checklist (50 items or less) without making an error, and their lives and those of their passengers literally depend upon it.

    The fact I know otherwise is not a subjective matter at all. You can choose to be insulted, frightened, or just plain upset if you like, but the fact is no human being can do this sort of thing better than a computer, any more than a human can compute the value of pi to a million digits better than a computer. It was a difficult task to manage, but the computer Watson did beat the two highest ranking Jeopardy champions of all time. Of course, the TiVo does not have anything even remotely like the computing power Watson does, but then the task at hand for the Tivo is far, far simpler, and the TiVo does not have an urgent deadline of only a few seconds to come up with its answers. Being insulted by the notion a computer can do something better than you will not change the fact.

    You are allowing yourself to be ruled by an emotional knee-jerk response, rather than taking the time to fully comprehend the situation. Perhaps you will be tempted to be insulted by this statement, as well, but the very fact you use the term "insulted" eloquently proves my point. This is entirely about cold, hard mathematics, not your emotions.

    Can you more accurately determine if a single given program in the schedule is interesting than the TiVo can? Presumably so. Can you on average more accurately determine which of a very limited set of programs is more interesting? Perhaps, but probably not. Can you more accurately determine which programs from the entire list of programs are likely to be more interesting on an ongoing basis? Surely not. Will it save you anything in time and effort to try or result in fewer missed programs? No way in Hell.

    That is a completely different matter, but even if only 50% (or heck, even 10%, or 5%) of the content on the TiVo is interesting to you, the point is still valid. Presumably you won't cancel a recording of your wife's while it is underway in order to grab control of a tuner, but whether it is recording your wife's stuff, or your stuff, or both, the TiVo can and will ensure with reasonably high (not perfect) accuracy when some things one or both of you like are being broadcast and record them, if you let it. Will some things slip by? Of course, but surely far fewer than will do so if you try to manually record things.

    Put it this way. If your TiVo is properly configured for both your and your wife's needs, then at any given moment, the odds are high that any program of interest will be selected for recording, until such time as all the tuners are busy. This directly implies that if nothing is being recorded on one or more tuners, then either there is nothing at least as interesting as many things already recorded on the TiVo, or else the TiVo has missed one (or two, or however many tuners there are free). On a daily basis, the odds of the latter being the case are very low; low enough that worrying about it and obsessively trying to search for missed content is going to take a lot of time away from watching the good stuff, and only very, very rarely result in finding a program that would otherwise have been missed.
     
  13. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    Don't be silly. A definition is never a matter of opinion. It is a matter of convention. They are also completely unimportant except as a means of qualifying a debating position or allowing easy symbolic manipulations. Any two or more debaters must agree upon a uniform set of definitions to make an informative debate possible, and any two or more philosophers must similarly agree upon the definitions to make mathematical or logical proofs legible, but otherwise all definitions are meaningless.

    Definitions are never a personal matter, unless one wishes to indulge in mental masturbation. They are always a matter of organized convention adhered to by all local participants. The statement, "To me xxxx is defined as yyyy" is completely meaningless. More importantly, whether we agree to define buffered video as recorded or not in no way changes the use to which the DVR is put when buffered video is being viewed, regardless of who is doing the viewing.

    The factual point I was making, perfectly irrespective of what is defined as "live", was that the existence of the hard drive and the ability to delay and trick play video is a very distinct thing from a simple TV receiver with no storage capabilities. Whether one categorizes temporary ring buffered video differently from full blown recordings is not particularly important in the context of this discussion, but lumping buffered video together with unbuffered video, as I said, hides an important distinction.
     
  14. lrhorer

    lrhorer New Member

    6,922
    0
    Aug 31, 2003
    San...
    I think that is the most interesting perspective on watching sports I have ever seen. My hat is off to you.

    An hour, a day, a year, a decade. What difference does it make? Would it be any less thrilling to be able to watch the very first World Series game in 1903 if you could magically come up with a video of it than the first game of next year's series?
     
  15. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    You seem awfully caught up in very precise wording for me but not yourself. You told me that by definition all recordings are more important than live. You didn't mention that you meant except for what my wife recorded and except for suggestions. Maybe you also meant except for what I recorded but may not have time to watch now, or maybe what I recorded but not in the mood for now.

    Your arrogance is one thing I do know to be true.

    Maybe in your 100% black and white world you differentiate 10sec delay from 0 sec delay but I think that a poll of users hear would show you in a distinct minority. I have no doubt that it matters little to you though and are quite smug in your sense of being in the 1% subset of those who are 'correct.'

    Have a good day.
     
  16. aaronwt

    aaronwt UHD Addict

    19,167
    21
    Jan 31, 2002
    Northern...
    I don't watch as much sports as most people I know but I do watch. Most of those people watch hours and hours each week. ANd they are almost always time shifting their sports watching. It's much easier for them since they don't waste time needlessly watching commercials, plus they have children which also necessitates using a DVR.
     
  17. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    Every argument you make seems more crazy than the former. Of course it matters. Watching a game without commercials (by letting the buffer fill) while not yet knowing the outcome of the game is HUGE!

    How can you not see that?

    Watching a mid-season last year game that I already know the outcome of versus a game today that I don't know results of and will impact playoff results??

    You honestly believe these are equal?
     
  18. aaronwt

    aaronwt UHD Addict

    19,167
    21
    Jan 31, 2002
    Northern...
    Live for me is basically within a few seconds of broadcast. Anything else is not live. But by others definition then I might be watching football live since the game is still on while I'm watching what is being recorded.
     
  19. ah30k

    ah30k Active Member

    2,211
    0
    Jan 8, 2006
    According to lrhorer, you are using arbitrary and silly definitions which have no place in any discussion. It is either zero seconds delayed or not. "Within a few seconds" is no definition and couching it with "for me" is just nonsense.
     
  20. steve614

    steve614 what ru lookin at?

    10,722
    0
    May 1, 2006
    Dallas, TX
    Well if you want to get nit-picky, if you watch ANYTHING through a Tivo, you are NOT watching "live" TV.
    You are watching a TV signal that has been written to and then retrieved from a hard drive.
    Even though the delay is only a couple of seconds, by definition it is NOT "live" TV.

    :p:D
     

Share This Page