Cablevision and Time Warner to offer DVR service without box

[jmatero]

Interesting development.....

http://dvr.about.com/b/a/159936.htm

Cablevision and Time Warner Cable to offer DVR-like service without the DVR box

Customers of Cablevision and Time Warner Cable can expect a different kind of DVR in the near future. These two companies will be offering DVR capability without the use of a cable box. They will use DVR servers instead of a box with a hard drive in your home. This is an interesting development for the future of Cable DVRs, stay tuned.

[classicsat]

Been discussed last month.

[jmoak]

Haven't been around much lately, eh?;)

That was the "Tivo Killer" back in march. (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=293270)

Last month it was the evils of "Switched Broadcasting" that was gonna kill 'em.

This month is still open, but we've just started. I'm sure another killer will be around soon. stay tuned.

[dirtypacman]

I think they call that "On-Demand" ... funny how stuff is repackaged 10x to satisfy different people or re-sell an old idea.

[mtchamp]

Cable trying to take control away from the customer and force them to watch ads. Yes it's old news and it will probably fail given the availabilty of more choices for cable like the just released DT Series2 and upcoming Series3. Then there's always competition from satellite that will keep these cable co execs dreaming.

[NewYorkLaw]

I think they call that "On-Demand" ... funny how stuff is repackaged 10x to satisfy different people or re-sell an old idea.
Exactly.

[dt_dc]

Been discussed last month.Heck, been discussed last year (March 2005):
http://archive2.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=233120

A couple of the more recent threads:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=293270
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3894919&&#post3894919
Etc.

[HiDefGator]

There are probably lots of low income people out there that would like some dvr functionality but can't afford to pay for it. A free network dvr service that forced you to watch commercials would be perfect for them.

[drew2k]

What Cablevision is proposing is not "On-Demand", which usually refers to instant viewing of a tile from a cable-company defined list of titles.

Cablevision's service would eliminate a DVR in the customer's home and instead stores titles on their server ONLY after the customer has made a conscious choice to scheduled a recording. All other buffering would also be on the server, but the difference from on-demand is that customer MUST CHOOSE what to record.

[NewYorkLaw]

What Cablevision is proposing is not "On-Demand", which usually refers to instant viewing of a tile from a cable-company defined list of titles.

Cablevision's service would eliminate a DVR in the customer's home and instead stores titles on their server ONLY after the customer has made a conscious choice to scheduled a recording. All other buffering would also be on the server, but the difference from on-demand is that customer MUST CHOOSE what to record.
How long before *everything* that airs is kept and served-up "on demand?"
Sounds as though we're getting close to that.
Pete

[drew2k]

There are probably lots of low income people out there that would like some dvr functionality but can't afford to pay for it. A free network dvr service that forced you to watch commercials would be perfect for them.Believe me - this will not be a free service. Cablevision will still charge a "Remote DVR" service fee. The fact that Cablevision will save money, as they no longer have to support individual DVRs in multiple homes, does not translate into free service.

[drew2k]

How long before *everything* that airs is kept and served-up "on demand?"
Sounds as though we're getting close to that.
PeteI think Time Warner tried that and ran into problems with the content providers because of "re-transmission" regulations or something like that. That was a couple of years ago, though, and times have changed. Now networks are offering up titles "on-demand" on their own web sites, so maybe they'd be more open to cable-cos again storing all titles. I really can't say fathom that would work to make everyone happy though ...

[Stormspace]

I think Time Warner tried that and ran into problems with the content providers because of "re-transmission" regulations or something like that. That was a couple of years ago, though, and times have changed. Now networks are offering up titles "on-demand" on their own web sites, so maybe they'd be more open to cable-cos again storing all titles. I really can't say fathom that would work to make everyone happy though ...

I still like my TiVo cuz when the cable feed drops during a storm I still have content to keep me happy. :)

[TiVoPony]

Heck, been discussed last year:


Or three years ago. Look for 'Mystro'.

Or even further back. The 'Full Service Network' from Time Warner back in the mid 90's. Jim Barton (TiVo founder) worked on that.

Not a new idea, people have been talking about it forever.

And if they use overshoot compensation after fast forwarding (to accomodate the inherent lagginess of remote control over a network)...that would be an interesting application of a TiVo patent. ;)

Pony

[ZeoTiVo]

I think Time Warner tried that and ran into problems with the content providers because of "re-transmission" regulations or something like that. That was a couple of years ago, though, and times have changed. Now networks are offering up titles "on-demand" on their own web sites, so maybe they'd be more open to cable-cos again storing all titles. I really can't say fathom that would work to make everyone happy though ...


this "server DVR" is their way around content provider objections. The customer actively asked to save and timeshift the show. Most likely everything is still held somewhere and buffered out from the same source when the customer "demands" the playback of soemthing they "asked" to "record".

Pretty silly to me vs having a DVR in house - but I can see a business plan that works for it. adn the savings and simplicity are good for the cable company and the customer - No dual tuners and no conflicts - nothing to screw up the scheduled recording on an in home DVR - no more software to develop to try and compete with TiVo season passes etc, no service calls, etc..


BUT
the whole thing will be a real simplistic DVR with no cool features - season passes and wishlists most likely fairly weak and of course no TiVoToGo or HME and so on.
No PonyPoker eitehr and you deal with whatever cruddy FF speed they can provide - I do not forsee 60 times real speed FF or 30 second skip

[ZeoTiVo]

Haven't been around much lately, eh?;)

That was the "Tivo Killer" back in march. (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=293270)

Last month it was the evils of "Switched Broadcasting" that was gonna kill 'em.

This month is still open, but we've just started. I'm sure another killer will be around soon. stay tuned.


this month it is the Yahoo scheduling software for PCs that lets :rolleyes: you use your PC and your own TV tuner card to record shows off the broadcaster you subscribe too. the software is free and ad supported and is touted to break the closed circuit of current methods by replacing a DVR with a PC :confused: :p

[Jag998]

Pony

Do you think a Networked DVR would infringe on the patent that TIVO just defended in the DISH case?

[dt_dc]

Or three years ago (...)Yup:
http://archive2.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=2740636&&#post2740636

[dt_dc]

That was the "Tivo Killer" back in march. (http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=293270)As tiring as the constant Tivo death announcements are ...

Nowhere in the thread you linked to or this one (or the articles linked from them) is the nDVR / RS-DVR concept labled as anything more threatening than an "interesting development for the future of Cable DVRs" (which I would call pretty accurate).

Since when did every "interesting development" start automatically equating to "Tivo Killer"?

[Dan203]

And if they use overshoot compensation after fast forwarding (to accomodate the inherent lagginess of remote control over a network)...that would be an interesting application of a TiVo patent. ;)

Is that a TiVo patent? My MOXI has overshoot compensation, do they pay you guys some sort of license fee for that?

Dan

[TiVoPony]

Pony

Do you think a Networked DVR would infringe on the patent that TIVO just defended in the DISH case?

I'm not a lawyer, nor shall I play one on the fora. ;)

Pony

[jmoak]

Nowhere in the thread you linked to or this one (or the articles linked from them) is the nDVR / RS-DVR concept labled as anything more threatening than an "interesting development for the future of Cable DVRs" (which I would call pretty accurate).That thread or links not withstanding, it was very easy to find stories that portrayed it as much more than just an interesting development, at least for tivo. fwiw, I wholeheartedly do not agree with their conclusions.
"Cablevision Targets TiVo" (http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/49621.html)
"Cablevision's DVR move will force TiVo's hand" (http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=989)Since when did every "interesting development" start automatically equating to "Tivo Killer"?Lately, it has not been too bad, which is a welcome change from what we've seen in the recent past.
...which was the nexus of my sad attempt at humor.:o

Still too much of a tender subject to try to joke about, I guess.
My bad.

[Brighton Line]

First and foremost the Network DVR is a MONEY MAKER for Cablevision. The cost of the physical DVR in a customer home is great. The up front cost of the 8300 box itself and the field visit to fix it (yah Cablevision charges for the install but that installer could be doing something else). The cost of supporting that box at the customer home would also be gone and the nagging calls of external storage too ;)

Network DVR saves the cable company money and they get a bigger profit margin from the $10 a month DVR fee without the box in the home IMHO.

[dt_dc]

That thread or links not withstanding, it was very easy to find stories that portrayed it as much more than just an interesting development, at least for tivo.The beauty of e-journalism / blogs ... you can find a story that says just about anything.

Anyway, my only point is that not every thread / discussion of some of these technologies / developments / etc. (other DVRs, VOD, nDVRs, SDV, IPTV, etc. etc. etc.) is "Tivo Killer" oriented.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Nothing more, nothing less.

[ZeoTiVo]

The beauty of e-journalism / blogs ... you can find a story that says just about anything.

Anyway, my only point is that not every thread / discussion of some of these technologies / developments / etc. (other DVRs, VOD, nDVRs, SDV, IPTV, etc. etc. etc.) is "Tivo Killer" oriented.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Nothing more, nothing less.

I do agree with what you say ont his.
It does also help me judge the knowledge of the Blog or article when they do go in that mode though. TiVo is the known name so I can see why they pull it out to know the reader can usually identify with the name but when they start trying to show how this competes with or kills a TiVo DVR most times they fall incredibly flat on their facts. :p Witness that latest article on the Yahoo scheduling front end for a PC with a TV tuner card. functionality that existed in the early 90's