Tivo: What's the "Vision"

[j0hnW]

First off, let me state that I don't mean this to be a troll post. Second, I have not visited these forums in a long time.

I've been a fan/advocate of Tivo since the early Series 1 days. I used to think that Tivo would take over the world -- TV-wise, anyway. I felt that Tivo really did (totally) revolutionize how people watched TV. I remember the heady heydays. Lots of editorial content in the Tivo interface; lots of commercials on the TV. However, despite all the marketing, Tivo could never seem to get past the "I already have a VCR" mentality.

Later, I migrated to my beloved T-60, modded to 212hrs of storage, with cache card and networking. That was an amazing combination. All the channels of DirecTV, recording two channels at once, etc. It was TV nirvana. But it didn't last -- damn you Rupert (and the expansion of digital/HD TV) !!

Currently, I've got a S3 with 1GB expanded internal HD and dual cable cards. Admittedly I'm quite happy with the performance and viewing experience. The HD records are great. I've never had a major hardware/software glitch. I'm positive it's a better user experience than any other cable DVR out there. Plus I really like the "On Demand" Netflix interface, despite a few hiccups here and there. I don't mind paying the $13.81 per month for what I know is a superior TV viewing experience.

That said, I'm wondering if there's more; if Tivo has a vision for the future. I see embedded ads in the Tivo interface for gastric bands, and I fear that Tivo has hit a desperate rock bottom, running out of options / promise / creativity. I see the bare minimum in software maintenance, much less feature update, and picture a company just barely managing a static customer base. I look at these forums, that were once lively interchanges requiring daily monitoring to keep up with the vibrant topic, and see basically the same discussions as months before.

Are the best days of Tivo behind us? Is Tivo just going to sit on it's current user base, prostituting itself with cheaper "banner" ads, and milking it's modest portfolio of patents for it's existence? Are we to just wait for the other DVR developers (SA, Motorola, Freevo/MythTV, Apple, etc) to catch up? It's so sad. I was once absolutely passionate about Tivo, seeing all it's promise and potential. Which makes the current state of things sting all that much more.

Is it too much to hope that there's some deal/pact on the horizon. That there's new hardware -- or even a new HTPC paradigm -- ready to be rolled out.

Tivo, where did you go -- and more importantly, where are you going !!!

One of your biggest fans,
John W

[bicker]

I think if you intend to judge others by how much what they do pleases you, you'll be continually disappointed by practically even interaction you have in life. Others, whether they're people, companies, institutions, or even countries, exist for their own purposes, with their own expectations and objectives, and when evaluating what's their "best days" (your term) you need to do your evaluation based on their criteria, not yours, as you did in your message.

That's not to say that TiVo is doing well vis a vis their own intentions. I've regularly questioned whether there was any defensible business plan for a stand-alone HD DVR. I think if TiVo is going to achieve something it will be becoming one of the preeminent operating systems for cable company- and satellite provider-supplied boxes.

Anyway, the information you're asking for is proprietary. If TiVo is well-run, anyone who knows what you're asking knows well to not share any more of TiVo's objectives for the future than marketing and PR and legal have already cleared for public consumption. It is unreasonable to expect a company to provide secret company information on demand.

Here's a good resource for the info you are asking for that is available:

http://investor.tivo.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=106292&p=irol-news&nyo=0

Note the 03/26/09, 04/20/09, 04/21/09, and 07/09/09 releases. They provide some insights into the future.

[JWThiers]

I think if you intend to judge others by how much what they do pleases you, you'll be continually disappointed by practically even interaction you have in life. Others, whether they're people, companies, institutions, or even countries, exist for their own purposes, with their own expectations and objectives, and when evaluating what's their "best days" (your term) you need to do your evaluation based on their criteria, not yours, as you did in your message.

That's not to say that TiVo is doing well vis a vis their own intentions. I've regularly questioned whether there was any defensible business plan for a stand-alone HD DVR. I think if TiVo is going to achieve something it will be becoming one of the preeminent operating systems for cable company- and satellite provider-supplied boxes.

Anyway, the information you're asking for is proprietary. If TiVo is well-run, anyone who knows what you're asking knows well to not share any more of TiVo's objectives for the future than marketing and PR and legal have already cleared for public consumption. It is unreasonable to expect a company to provide secret company information on demand.

Here's a good resource for the info you are asking for that is available:

http://investor.tivo.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=106292&p=irol-news&nyo=0

Note the 03/26/09, 04/20/09, 04/21/09, and 07/09/09 releases. They provide some insights into the future.

This hasn't happened a lot lately, but I agree with almost everything you said. The only place where there is even a hint of disagreement is that in addition to

I think if TiVo is going to achieve something it will be becoming one of the preeminent operating systems for cable company- and satellite provider-supplied boxes.

they should do that while maintaining their business providing stand alone dvr's to consumers.

:up::up::)

[bicker]

Well, my comment wasn't about what I want TiVo to do; it was my guess about what will pay off for TiVo. After 10+ years of trying, I see no reason to think that TiVo's stand-alone DVR business will ever pay off on its own merits. The only long-term justification I can see for the stand-alone DVR business is to help set up the profitable deals with cable companies and satellite providers. Eventually, though, if TiVo is successful in that regard, the stand-alone DVR business will have served its purpose in that regard, and will either have to justify itself on its own revenues (not likely) or face sunseting.

[richardlissoe]

Do you think the networks sit in their ivory tower and envision what the future of their network will be like and then plan from there, or do they look at what viewers are watching and advertisers financially support and then just continue the same ol', same ol'?

[bicker]

Uh, good point, but I think you posted that in the wrong thread.

[JWThiers]

Well, my comment wasn't about what I want TiVo to do; it was my guess about what will pay off for TiVo. After 10+ years of trying, I see no reason to think that TiVo's stand-alone DVR business will ever pay off on its own merits. The only long-term justification I can see for the stand-alone DVR business is to help set up the profitable deals with cable companies and satellite providers. Eventually, though, if TiVo is successful in that regard, the stand-alone DVR business will have served its purpose in that regard, and will either have to justify itself on its own revenues (not likely) or face sunseting.

I think that IF they do get the profitable deals with the cable/satellite companies (which I agree is key for their long term success) that there still will be niche market for stand alones (which is what they are now, a niche market, when compared to the cable companies DVR). If for nothing else but but to be the brand to get if you don't want the cable company DVR and to push innovation of new features. Even if they do get these types of deals, there is no guarantee that popular features are included, like MRV, TTG, etc. Just look at the old DTivo's for example, networking was never included as part of the stock OS despite those features being available in stand alones, having the hooks already built in to the OS, and being being repeatedly being requested by users.

[bicker]

I think that IF they do get the profitable deals with the cable/satellite companies (which I agree is key for their long term success) that there still will be niche market for stand alones However, after/if the value of the stand-alone business as a launching pad for the profitable ventures wains, then we shouldn't be surprised to see Moxi-level pricing to be the norm: $800 (or more) up-front, for example. I wonder if a true niche marketplace really exists, i.e., one where fans are willing to put their money where their mouths are.

[JWThiers]

However, after/if the value of the stand-alone business as a launching pad for the profitable ventures wains, then we shouldn't be surprised to see Moxi-level pricing to be the norm: $800 (or more) up-front, for example. I wonder if a true niche marketplace really exists, i.e., one where fans are willing to put their money where their mouths are.

The success of that kind of niche would really depend on the price point. $800 would be on the very high side and probably wouldn't get any real traction, but if prices could stay below $400 - $500 (basically about what pricing is now $299THD, $599THDXL) for stand alones and the cable company could be like "Brighthouse DVR powered by Tivo" as a marketing device I think that could be successful for both the Cable/Sat companies and Tivo. It would all depend on how many people you can lure away from a free cable/sat company DVR to paying the cost for a non subsidized version. Would it be a tough sell? Sure but no more than it is now. And in this hypothetical they would be pulling in money from cable and sat companies licensing their OS. A lot also depends on how much of the tivo OS is included. Do you get netflix, amazon, MRV, TTG, remote scheduling, etc. or does it get locked down like DirecTv Did? IF everything gets included it would probably not be worth trying, but otherwise... it could possibly work

[bicker]

The success of that kind of niche would really depend on the price point. $800 would be on the very high side and probably wouldn't get any real traction, but if prices could stay below $400 - $500 I was talking about including service. I think the whole game of "will they stay or will they go" isn't going to fly with a true niche device: The marketing cost is simply too high.

And my point was that a niche marketplace is not going to be fostered by a bunch of customers who want a good financial deal. Business defines customer loyalty as being willing to pay a premium for something -- not the willingness to buy something at discount.

[JWThiers]

I kind of view it as filling the same niche they currently have, but with the advantage of bringing in money from licensing the OS. And a lot depends on what the cable cos use. If is just a DVR with a Tivo interface but none of the networking features like DirecTv did, there's a fair chance that they would at least maintain if not increase their users for stand alones. Its not a big deal. Like your sig says "correct, in an irritating sort of way"

[bicker]

I kind of view it as filling the same niche they currently haveWithin which they're generally losing money.

[bicker]

Related article: http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/03/02/tivo-loses-125000-subscribers-in-january-09-quarter/13735

"As we’ve written before, TiVo could have a valuable intellectual property portfolio, but its hardware selling business is over."

[daveak]

In my own humble opinion, I think TiVo would like to get out of selling their own boxes and strictly do the software side for the Sat and Cable providers. Their real revenue source is subscriptions and once they are getting a large number of subscriptions from these sources - the stand alone TiVo box, as currently sold by TiVo, could disappear. Maybe you could buy Sat or Cable boxes that do OTA, but without subscribing to a service such as this you may not have a lot of options down the road.

[lew]

Within which they're generally losing money.

Assume tivo is able to make profitable deals with satellite and cable systems. That may be a reach. Assume the standalone market becomes break-even or even slightly profitable.

Tivo might want the standalone market to test features and products. Maybe tivo now knows the present hardware can't reliably work with an external hard drive. :)

[bicker]

Yes and that's consistent with what I said earlier:However, after/if the value of the stand-alone business as a launching pad for the profitable ventures wains, then ....

[JWThiers]

Yes and that's consistent with what I said earlier:

I think the only thing we don't really agree on is what the right price point would be, $800 vs about what we pay now (up to $500 or $600), and this is all hypothetical anyway. Viewed that way there is little difference in opinion.

Sometimes you can be difficult to agree with. :D

[bicker]

Irritating even. :)

[turbobozz]

That said, I'm wondering if there's more; if Tivo has a vision for the future. I see embedded ads in the Tivo interface for gastric bands, and I fear that Tivo has hit a desperate rock bottom, running out of options / promise / creativity. I see the bare minimum in software maintenance, much less feature update, and picture a company just barely managing a static customer base. I look at these forums, that were once lively interchanges requiring daily monitoring to keep up with the vibrant topic, and see basically the same discussions as months before.

The gastric band ads disturbed me severely... moreso because, for the week or two they ran, they were one of 3 or 4 ads in the rotation (or w/e), so they were constantly showing up.
Who's the genius who thought it would be a good idea to run ever present ads for a risky procedure.
I was told that I could not opt out of specific ads...
I assume TiVo heard enough backlash that they stopped running them.

Overall, I'd say I'm a disillusioned TiVo fan right now.
I'd love to see what they could do with better hardware (or a better hardware partner) and a much larger user base... I imagine there'd be more money and motivation to kill the undying little bugs and seriously update the UI and feature set.

[steve614]

In my own humble opinion, I think TiVo would like to get out of selling their own boxes and strictly do the software side for the Sat and Cable providers. Their real revenue source is subscriptions and once they are getting a large number of subscriptions from these sources - the stand alone TiVo box, as currently sold by TiVo, could disappear. Maybe you could buy Sat or Cable boxes that do OTA, but without subscribing to a service such as this you may not have a lot of options down the road.

I agree with this except the part about stand alone boxes. I don't think they'll disappear.
Tivo could outsource the manufacturing (if they don't already) and have stand alones sold exclusively through home theater companies.

[JWThiers]

Irritating even. :)

Just a cranky New Englander. Oddly enough I understand.

[bicker]

I even eat apple pie with a knife.

[tivogurl]

If the Comcast HD TiVo is any indication, doing boxes for the cable companies will be a disaster. I can't say whether the disaster is Comcast's fault, but reading the Comcast HD TiVo subforum shows that Comcast's box has big deficits in both functionality and reliability compared to TiVo's. That the software seems to work differently than on a regular TiVo, in areas that aren't hardware dependent, suggests Comcast's heavy hand is hard at work, which does not bode well for a successful partnership.

[bicker]

Perhaps you're a little anti-Comcast there?

The major deficits with the Comcast TiVo were mostly attributable to the anemic condition of the vast majority of deployed HD DVRs out there. The Motorola DCT- and DCH- series are 1999 technology, with 1999 horsepower -- they'd run the original TiVo (S1) software fine. Try to put the sophisticated software TiVo offers today on them and you'll naturally bump into some walls.

Combine that with a pretty severe unwillingness on the part of consumers or investors to foot the bill for replacement of millions and millions of devices, which otherwise work fine. The Comcast TiVo really must wait until the proper time, i.e., when the DCX- series DVRs finally reach a critical mass (and TiVo software starts working on the new boxes), which will be over the next number of years.

You can't rush it, no matter how much you want to. People will not put their money into something that doesn't pay them dividends in the short-term. If you see that as a problem, then start working on changing our culture. Then, once you've done that, come back and start working on the comparatively piddly TiVo problems.

[Wil]

Perhaps you're a little anti-Comcast there?Every once in awhile a post is made which in its contextual perfection makes everything you have read on the internet recede into nothingness.

[bicker]

It is time for a hymn?

[JWThiers]

lol

[Globular]

I wonder what's really left to do to innovate in this arena? Network streaming/downloading of HD content was the last major feature I was looking for, and now it's here. I really can't think of a *major* capability that can be added to the DVR platform. Sure, existing stuff can be improved (Hulu support, 5.1 sound everywhere, etc.), but I'm thinking "what's the next Big Thing?"

Please offer suggestions.

-Matt

[JWThiers]

I wonder what's really left to do to innovate in this arena? Network streaming/downloading of HD content was the last major feature I was looking for, and now it's here. I really can't think of a *major* capability that can be added to the DVR platform. Sure, existing stuff can be improved (Hulu support, 5.1 sound everywhere, etc.), but I'm thinking "what's the next Big Thing?"

Please offer suggestions.

-Matt

I think the need is mostly to improve what they have, faster streaming, more reliable, better RSS support.

[bicker]

I'm not sure how much that would really get more people to buy-in or get people to buy-in for a higher premium: "Now! not as slow as before, and not as unreliable!" Not a very sexy ad campaign; not going to help foster a reasonable amount of growth.

[ct1]

The gastric band ads disturbed me severely...

Yeah, isn't there some other way they could target the right demographic audience for that ad? Some other gadget that is heavily in use by couch potatos that watch a lot of TV. Oh wait... I get it... nm.

[daveak]

Whatever TiVo does, I am sure they will be focusing on what brings them the greatest revenue growth. I am sure there are those who work for TiVo that really want to get out the Series 4 architecture, but the driving force is the board of directors and the investors. Their primary mission is to turn an eventual consistent profit and develop the business platform for this to happen.

Whether this is bringing in more ads and/ or more subs (whether through deals with content providers or other means) remains to be seen. It would appear they are looking at ad revenue and working with the Sat/ Cable operators to increase this, along with adding subs through them. If they are really trying to increase their direct sub base - it certainly does not seem to be working very well.

Of course there could always be the TiVo Media Center, an alliance between Microsoft and TiVo... Or buyout of TiVo by somebody when it is easier to get around the poison pill.

[tivogurl]

Or buyout of TiVo by somebody when it is easier to get around the poison pill.
If the poison pill is like others I've seen, it only affects unsolicited buyouts. Shareholders can vote to rescind it on recommendation of the board to effect a cooperative buyout.

[tivogurl]

The major deficits with the Comcast TiVo were mostly attributable to the anemic condition of the vast majority of deployed HD DVRs out there. The Motorola DCT- and DCH- series are 1999 technology, with 1999 horsepower -- they'd run the original TiVo (S1) software fine. Try to put the sophisticated software TiVo offers today on them and you'll naturally bump into some walls.
Why would you do a public rollout then? The only result (and as we saw the actual result) is that consumers are going to say "this product is terrible". That's hardly the word of mouth you want from your customers. In my experience, the only reason a public rollout with a likely negative result gets done is somebody wants it to fail. "See, TiVo sucks, let's stick to our own DVR software!"

[bicker]

Why would you do a public rollout then?I just asked a parallel question to this in the eSATA thread: How many people who currently have the Comcast TiVo service would have preferred that the service was never offered?Not many I suspect.

The only result (and as we saw the actual result) is that consumers are going to say "this product is terrible".However, that's not the case. If you read the Comcast TiVo thread on AVS Forum you'll see that there are a number of folks using the service, still paying those extra few dollars per month, and happier that the service was offered rather than not. As a matter of fact, it is the only way for those users to get remote scheduling.

So I think you can attribute your confusion to the fact that people generally only post if they have a problem. With minor exception, people who are using the service without incident don't post every few weeks to say, "All is okay here!" Maybe they should, but they don't.

In my experience, the only reason a public rollout with a likely negative result gets done is somebody wants it to fail. "See, TiVo sucks, let's stick to our own DVR software!"I think that's ridiculous. You need to read up on what Comcast put into this, in terms of the R&D budget they paid to TiVo, the deployment costs they incurred, etc. And you also need to come to understand the actual status of the deployment, i.e., that most of the problems have been worked out, and that there are a lot of current customers in the test areas who are satisfied.

Long test interval... absolutely... but they are moving forward with new deployments, so that indicates that they have finally almost reached the point where you can begin to start evaluating the things that you have already reached conclusions regarding.

[JWThiers]

I did say MOSTLY. Always start by improving what you got. If you do that, you can find the improvements to make it better, faster, cheaper at its core job. This will in the long run improve your margins. Then look for the next killer app.

The thing with innovation or finding a new killer app, you really never know what it will be. If Anyone knows what the next killer app is, they could make a fortune. Look back at something as mundane as visicalc, who would have thought that an electronic spreadsheet would spur the PC market, but it did. Or who would ever have thought that people would have such a need to stay connected that they have to walk around with cell phones just so they can answer a phone. people are very unpredictable in what the want and don't want.

[lrhorer]

Related article: http://tvbythenumbers.com/2009/03/02/tivo-loses-125000-subscribers-in-january-09-quarter/13735

"As we’ve written before, TiVo could have a valuable intellectual property portfolio, but its hardware selling business is over."

People have been saying that, and things much like it, for ten years. It's certainly possible you are correct, especially in light of the rulings against Echostar and their possible implications, but crystal ball viewing aside, how do you reconcile this notion with the fact Series I and Series II TiVos were licensed to 3rd party manufacturers, and indeed most S1 and S2 TiVos were not TiVo brand, but TiVo has not licensed the S3 line, with three fairly strong models, to anyone? Indeed, why did they produce the model line themselves at all? If their intent was to go out of the hardware business, then why didn't they turn over manufacturing of the hardware to Philips, Sony, Panasonic, Hughes, and Humax? Yes, I can think of some possible explanations, myself, but they seem less likely to me than that at least for the premier product, they intend to continue manufacturing. This especially seems true to me in light of the fact their stock is doing fairly well ('last I checked, anyway - it's been a while) in this very soft economy.

[bicker]

To be fair, I didn't say that... I just quoted it. I think it is premature, but not completely in error.

With regard to licensing, I believe there is so little money to be made, that adding in an extra party made things totally worthless to all companies involved.

[JWThiers]

With regard to licensing, I believe there is so little money to be made, that adding in an extra party made things totally worthless to all companies involved.

I don't know what that fee is supposed to pay for exactly, if it is the cost that they pay for the franchising fee OK but that better work out to the actual cost of the fee/the number of customers (or something close). Its not totally worthless, but minor when compared to the rest, but $1.25 times how many customers? Nothing to sneeze at either. I don't think that they should be able to add a profit margin into a fee being paid to the government.

[bicker]

Uh.... maybe we're talking past each other. When Pioneer made the 810H-S I have, they paid TiVo a licensing fee -- essentially TiVo's cut of the profits of selling the box, in return for making the 810H-S more attractive by making it capable of supporting TiVo service. That cut into Pioneer's profit margin (perhaps even eradicating it).

[bkdtv]

I think the standalone hardware business is viable. It just isn't viable on its own.

Cable and satellite have the benefit of millions of DVR subscribers over which they spread the costs of software development and support. I don't think it's possible to remain competitive, long term, when you've only got 1/10 the number of DVRs over which to spread fixed costs.

If TiVo can create a common codebase for the cable, satellite, and standalone platforms, then it can spread the vast majority of its fixed costs across many more DVRs. That makes the standalone product much more viable / profitable.

[bicker]

You have to factor in both how much the stand-alone business helps the cable/satellite business (and early on, that would be substantial) and how much the (reasonably-price) stand-alone business hurts the cable/satellite business (and later on, that becomes significant, it puts TiVo in a position of competing against itself).

[vstone]

They may be develeoping two types of S4: one to operate as a modified S3 that will can shift to true cable box mode (supposedly unrecordable, but able to watch on demand stuff, etc) and another to operate as a true cable box to be rented from the cable company. Since they now have experience with porting their software to another CPU architecture (by doing the comcast boxes), they are likely evaluating how to best exploit their portability abilities. There is some work in going down each of several paths to better identify what is economically feasible.

[JWThiers]

You have to factor in both how much the stand-alone business helps the cable/satellite business (and early on, that would be substantial) and how much the (reasonably-price) stand-alone business hurts the cable/satellite business (and later on, that becomes significant, it puts TiVo in a position of competing against itself).

Tivo compete against itself. Lets see if they win they win, if they lose they win? What would really happen is the cable company is put in the position of ensuring the profitability of a company that makes a competing hardware product. Of course the plus side is they could actually win over some of us stand alone users in the process.

I think you overestimate how much the stand alone market would hurt the cable company. Today, despite a vastly superior product, in terms of usability, Tivo has a very small share of the number of physical DVR's in the market. IF the Tivo OS were licensed to the cable companies, the number of DVR's running the OS would skyrocket, but the number of physical DVR's tivo would be making would actually probably stay about the same or shrink slightly. Why? Because people are basically cheap. The average Joe that puts up with whatever the cable company provides does so mainly because he is too cheap to buy a better product at $300 + a monthly subscription fee on top of his cable bill. It isn't worth the money to him. There is nothing wrong with that. And if they gave him a cable company Tivo, he most likely would say "Wow cable company, you worked really hard at making a better DVR." So why would anyone want a stand alone DVR? Because the cable companies most likely would lock out a subset of features (as the did with DTivo's). They don't want MRV, or TTG or whatever the next killer app is. The people that want those features are already out here with a Tivo or a Moxie or a HTPC and a slingbox and they wont be satisfied with a feature limited option.

The more I think about it, the more I think the cable companies couldn't care less about Tivo and only deal with us because they are forced to do so.

[nrc]

I can't find the conference call where it was said, but TiVo sees the standalone business as an important component that allows them to freely innovate and enable other revenue channels. The whole audience measurement piece, for example, really depends on having a good number of households that are TiVo owned.

As for their vision, TiVo wants to provide a "comprehensive, one-stop-shop approach for linear and video on demand TV, with the most choice for consumers, combining the best way to search and watch traditional television with by far, the largest array of broadband video and music content available right to the TV." At least that's what they said in their latest earnings call.

[bicker]

Tivo compete against itself. Lets see if they win they win, if they lose they win? Rather, that arrangement would end up with TiVo basically forcing their own price down. "Not Good Eats" as they say.

I think you overestimate how much the stand alone market would hurt the cable company.Not at all. My point is predicated on how little the stand-alone market helps TiVo. Right now, its only positive contribution to the enterprise is that it gets service providers interested in partnering with TiVo. Nothing else. There is no magical money growing in the garden outside TiVo HQ because they offer stand-alone units.

The more I think about it, the more I think the cable companies couldn't care less about Tivo and only deal with us because they are forced to do so.Absolutely.

[bicker]

... to freely innovate and enable other revenue channels. The whole audience measurement piece, for example, really depends on having a good number of households that are TiVo owned.This is a really good point... the tools that will basically demonstrate how little advertisers get from advertising also hold promise for TiVo.

Are we sure that the Comcast TiVo cannot be used to contribute data to this process? (It probably cannot.)

Of course, the downside of this is that the more successful TiVo is with it, the less good television there will be to watch, since advertisers will reduce the money they direct to television productions commensurate with how much less those investments are really worth.

[Schlep]

After two years of generic DVR, I can definitely say anyone who doesn't appreciate what they do is nuts. I moved a couple years ago and had to ditch my awesome DirecTiVos.

Since then I'd been on a Motorola DVR from the cable co. The first year was free, so I didn't complain too much, but man that thing was possibly the worst electronic device I've used since a Motorola cell phone years ago. Slow, completely unresponsive at times (ever see a DVR not respond to a play command for 2 innings in baseball? yeah...), and absolutely no frills.

Managing season passes was a nightmare, VOD was useless, I could go on and on. Now I'm on the TiVo HD with a 500gb expander. Fast performance, all the channels, Netflix, Revision3 podcasts right next to other shows in now playing. It may require an initial investment of $250 that is never recouped due to the TiVo fee and cablecard, but it's completely worth it.

[steve614]

I can't find the conference call where it was said, but TiVo sees the standalone business as an important component that allows them to freely innovate and enable other revenue channels. The whole audience measurement piece, for example, really depends on having a good number of households that are TiVo owned.

Yeah, for the last couple of years, I've felt that Tivo is using us stand alone users as a massive Beta for their future innovations ( i.e., pushing ads on us through the menus ).
It's about time they start focusing on core functionality ( i.e., update the GUI, etc.).

[bicker]

They've been using us a proving grounds for their innovations and ideas since the beginning, and they've been focusing on core functionality as has been appropriate since the beginning. Nothing has changed with regard to those matters.

[JWThiers]

Are the ads in the menu really that intrusive? For me at least I already don't even see them anymore unless it is something REALLY interesting which is rare. I can't even tell you what ads are there now. When I was thinking about getting a new car a year and a half or two years ago I clicked on an ad for an SUV or something. That's the last one I remember.

[steve614]

Are the ads in the menu really that intrusive?

I don't think so, personally. I brought that up as an example to what I think is now the norm for Tivo.
Concentrating on what's good for them and not what is good for us. In the past, it felt more like a 50/50 between catering to customers and catering to other parties. Now I think it's more like 80/20 against the customer.
However, updating the website and the custom RSS feeds is a step in the right direction.

[bicker]

The only annoyance I've ever had with the links to ads is when I see one I actually want to watch, but click TiVo too soon (to go to the To Do List, perhaps) and then I have to go back and forth a few times to get it to cycle back to the link to the ad I want. (I know I can go into Showcases directly, but clicking TiVo a few times is faster.)

[JWThiers]

It goes back to the OP's complaint about the Gastric Bands. I don't ever remember seeing that one but then again I generally ignore them in the first place. First they are not overly intrusive, You aren't forced to watch one to view your recordings like some DVD's/BluueRay Disc's (that would be over the top). Second, it brings in revenue for Tivo, making them more profitable with little intrusion into the consumer.

The thought of watching a gastric bands ad bothers me, but a banner for for more info about gastric bands doesn't. If you don't want the information or don't want to watch it feel free not to. But as long as the banner isn't disturbing or graphic I don't care if the ad is for colonoscopies and enema's.

[lew]

If TiVo can create a common codebase for the cable, satellite, and standalone platforms, then it can spread the vast majority of its fixed costs across many more DVRs. That makes the standalone product much more viable / profitable.

Many of us where surprised to discover the code base for the S2 SA, at least initially, also included the code for satellite. Remember when very few changes were necessary to run S2 SA software in DTivos.

[JWThiers]

Many of us where surprised to discover the code base for the S2 SA, at least initially, also included the code for satellite. Remember when very few changes were necessary to run S2 SA software in DTivos.

And If they ever actually release another DTivo again I'm sure that if will have the same code base as the SA's just with various sections and menus disabled.

As a weird bit of useless knowledge, Way back when the first digital calculators were first appearing (the ones with LED's for a display) Texas instruments had 2 calculators the cheaper one that did +-*/ cost about $130 or so and the $300 scientific calculator were exactly the same with the exception of the face plate. The face plate of the cheaper one just blocked off buttons on the button pad that did the advanced functions.

[bicker]

Yup lots of stories like that... i.e., the difference between the Intel 80386 (dx) and the Intel 80386sx.

[lew]

If their intent was to go out of the hardware business, then why didn't they turn over manufacturing of the hardware to Philips, Sony, Panasonic, Hughes, and Humax? Yes, I can think of some possible explanations, myself, but they seem less likely to me than that at least for the premier product, they intend to continue manufacturing. This especially seems true to me in light of the fact their stock is doing fairly well ('last I checked, anyway - it's been a while) in this very soft economy.


With regard to licensing, I believe there is so little money to be made, that adding in an extra party made things totally worthless to all companies involved.

I may be wrong. I don't think tivo is actually manufacturing the hardware. I think the actual manufacturing is done under contract with the same (or similar) vendors companies like Philips and Sony also use. With very minor changes the third party tivos were all based on tivo's design.The case design (logo) was the only real difference.

I don't think many (any?) consumers are willing to pay a premium for a Sony branded tivo box. There isn't enough (any?) hardware profit to share with another company.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more stores follow Sears lead and drop tivo. Tivo may wind up being a web only product.