TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > Main TiVo Forums > TiVo Coffee House - TiVo Discussion
TiVo Community
Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-09-2014, 06:02 PM   #241
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
Again, let's agree to revisit this thread in 5 years and we'll see who is right about the growth of wireless broadband and video delivery over it.
Yeah. And LTE won't have replaced Comcast and DirecTV and gang, that's for sure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephB View Post
Except you're not downloading, you're recording. What I'm talking about is suppose FX made the next episode of "The Americans" available on VOD for instant viewing at 9pm every Wednesday instead of airing it on a linear broadcast for an hour at 9pm on Wednesday. So, instead of sitting there for an hour capturing 10mbps of MPEG-4, your DVR would download the entire episode at hundreds of megabits per second in just a few seconds. Functionally, to the customer, it would work the same, but the entire episode would be on your DVR before the first commercial break would normally have aired.
Why? That makes no sense. Faster delivery just makes everything more expensive and difficult to do over linear delivery based on regular channels that are just hidden to the normal user (or could be just recorded off of PPV type of thing for movies). The hardware would have to be a lot beefier for no gain to the provider or the user. And you can bet that the content provider isn't going to let you skip ahead of where the live broadcast is, as they want you to watch commercials. Hence why, on the very rare occasion that I watch something that's not on HBO when it's actually on, I start 10 or 15 minutes late and catch up.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2014, 11:17 AM   #242
JosephB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
Yeah. And LTE won't have replaced Comcast and DirecTV and gang, that's for sure.



Why? That makes no sense. Faster delivery just makes everything more expensive and difficult to do over linear delivery based on regular channels that are just hidden to the normal user (or could be just recorded off of PPV type of thing for movies). The hardware would have to be a lot beefier for no gain to the provider or the user. And you can bet that the content provider isn't going to let you skip ahead of where the live broadcast is, as they want you to watch commercials. Hence why, on the very rare occasion that I watch something that's not on HBO when it's actually on, I start 10 or 15 minutes late and catch up.
It's very clear from every one of your posts that you are stuck in the old way of thinking. Literally everything you say isn't going to happen and "doesn't make sense" is EXACTLY what the TV industry is moving towards. They've said it publicly and in filings. IP distribution is coming. The VOD-ization of all non-live events is coming. Network DVR is coming. It may be a long time, but all of those things WILL happen. In 5 years the TV industry will look a lot different than it does today. In 10-15 years it'll look NOTHING like it looks today.
__________________
Current: TiVo HD w/lifetime, 2 x 2 Tuner Premieres

Former: S1, S2 TiVos, UltimateTV, SD DirecTiVo (x3), SA 8300HD w/Passport Echo, DirecTV HR-24 (x2) , DISH 722k, DirecTV Genie + 2 mini
JosephB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2014, 09:18 AM   #243
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephB View Post
It's very clear from every one of your posts that you are stuck in the old way of thinking. Literally everything you say isn't going to happen and "doesn't make sense" is EXACTLY what the TV industry is moving towards. They've said it publicly and in filings. IP distribution is coming. The VOD-ization of all non-live events is coming. Network DVR is coming. It may be a long time, but all of those things WILL happen. In 5 years the TV industry will look a lot different than it does today. In 10-15 years it'll look NOTHING like it looks today.
For wireless, there are physical bandwidth limitations. You can't pull bandwidth out of your @$$ and just make things happen. It doesn't work that way. And while IP distribution over cable is perfectly technically possible today, seeing that Comcast is still using MPEG-2, and not MPEG-4, which has been the standard for 6+ years now, I don't foresee them getting to IP-based distribution anytime soon.

You think channels are just going to give up their "slots" and DirecTV and DISH are just going to go away so that everything can "VOD-ize". You are crazy. Those channels are not going to give up their linear slots when 85% of the TV viewing today is linear, 15 years after the DVR was invented, and 38 years after VHS was invented. What will happen is more and more content will be available both way, but that's been happening for 5+ years, so that's nothing new.

Network DVR exists today, but a lot of cable systems don't have the bandwidth to support it. Unfortunately, a lot of systems will waste the bandwidth on it, but to the user, it doesn't really do anything that's much different than what a DVR does today. And if the content providers move to block certain fast forwarding with a network DVR like they do with ON Demand today, than that's the end of the network DVR.

In 10-15 years, the industry will look a bit different, and the pricing structure may be totally different than what we have today, but the technology distributing the video won't be much different from what's out there today.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2014, 09:38 AM   #244
JosephB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
For wireless, there are physical bandwidth limitations. You can't pull bandwidth out of your @$$ and just make things happen. It doesn't work that way. And while IP distribution over cable is perfectly technically possible today, seeing that Comcast is still using MPEG-2, and not MPEG-4, which has been the standard for 6+ years now, I don't foresee them getting to IP-based distribution anytime soon.

You think channels are just going to give up their "slots" and DirecTV and DISH are just going to go away so that everything can "VOD-ize". You are crazy. Those channels are not going to give up their linear slots when 85% of the TV viewing today is linear, 15 years after the DVR was invented, and 38 years after VHS was invented. What will happen is more and more content will be available both way, but that's been happening for 5+ years, so that's nothing new.

Network DVR exists today, but a lot of cable systems don't have the bandwidth to support it. Unfortunately, a lot of systems will waste the bandwidth on it, but to the user, it doesn't really do anything that's much different than what a DVR does today. And if the content providers move to block certain fast forwarding with a network DVR like they do with ON Demand today, than that's the end of the network DVR.

In 10-15 years, the industry will look a bit different, and the pricing structure may be totally different than what we have today, but the technology distributing the video won't be much different from what's out there today.
TV is going where the people are. If no one is watching linear TV, then they will move to what customers want, which is a netflix style interface and experience.

And Comcast has said many, many times that they are moving to IP distribution. Just because you don't think they aren't doesn't mean that all the words coming out of Brian Roberts' mouth are just made up. Come find me in 5 years and let's see where things are.
__________________
Current: TiVo HD w/lifetime, 2 x 2 Tuner Premieres

Former: S1, S2 TiVos, UltimateTV, SD DirecTiVo (x3), SA 8300HD w/Passport Echo, DirecTV HR-24 (x2) , DISH 722k, DirecTV Genie + 2 mini
JosephB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2014, 06:10 PM   #245
trip1eX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 796
It will all go video on demand. No reason why it won't. I mean who doesn't want to turn on the tv and watch what they want when they want.

The problem for us Tivo/DVR lovers is you won't be able to skip commercials.

But maybe the nature of commercials on tv will change too. Maybe they will do something like YouTube does and allow you to manually skip commercials after 5 seconds.

Last edited by trip1eX : 05-11-2014 at 06:17 PM.
trip1eX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 01:18 PM   #246
Dan203
Super Moderator
 
Dan203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Nevada
Posts: 24,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by trip1eX View Post
It will all go video on demand. No reason why it won't. I mean who doesn't want to turn on the tv and watch what they want when they want.
Apparently there are quite a few people who still like to watch whatever is on. In fact there are a couple of new devices out there designed to create "channels" of content from VOD providers like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc... where it just randomly plays shows/movies it thinks you might like back to back like a live TV channel.

While I agree that everything will eventually be available on demand, I'm not so sure that will be the only way to watch. I think the broadcasting model will persist for quite some time.
__________________
Dan Haddix
Super Moderator
Developer for VideoReDo
Dan203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 01:32 PM   #247
trip1eX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan203 View Post
Apparently there are quite a few people who still like to watch whatever is on. In fact there are a couple of new devices out there designed to create "channels" of content from VOD providers like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc... where it just randomly plays shows/movies it thinks you might like back to back like a live TV channel.

While I agree that everything will eventually be available on demand, I'm not so sure that will be the only way to watch. I think the broadcasting model will persist for quite some time.
Well if you can watch what you want when you want then that also covers those who just want to watch random content.

But interesting concept to imagine a market of un-time-shifting devices sorta speak. It's a Bizzaro world of what we have today.

Last edited by trip1eX : 05-12-2014 at 01:40 PM.
trip1eX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 01:44 PM   #248
tarheelblue32
Registered User
 
tarheelblue32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan203 View Post
Apparently there are quite a few people who still like to watch whatever is on.
There is basically a generational divide. My parents are in their 60s, and even though they have the ability to watch on-demand or time-shifted content, they choose not to. They just watch whatever is on the linear channels. Whereas I have some younger cousins in their teens who almost never watch linear channels. They only watch on-demand, recorded, or internet video content. I'm in my 30s and sort of in-between. I watch probably 70% on-demand or time shifted, and the other 30% linear channels.
tarheelblue32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 02:00 PM   #249
JosephB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by trip1eX View Post
Well if you can watch what you want when you want then that also covers those who just want to watch random content.
Not necessarily. I watch Netflix, sure, but actually not as much as a lot of people my age or younger (I'm 31).

Most of my "on demand" viewing is watching things I've recorded with my TiVo. If the industry moves towards all VOD, then I'll be mostly OK. Right now Netflix rarely ever has anything I search for, I end up having to settle for some suggestion.

However, my "just want to watch random content" sessions are usually out of frustration of trying to decide. Sure, people will just randomly choose something on demand, but I actually prefer to just sit down and have to select something that is on right now. It's just a psychological thing, maybe I'm weird. I get analysis paralysis and it's nice to just turn on the TV and select a channel and there's something on, that I didn't have to decide on out of a million choices.
__________________
Current: TiVo HD w/lifetime, 2 x 2 Tuner Premieres

Former: S1, S2 TiVos, UltimateTV, SD DirecTiVo (x3), SA 8300HD w/Passport Echo, DirecTV HR-24 (x2) , DISH 722k, DirecTV Genie + 2 mini
JosephB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 02:46 PM   #250
Dan203
Super Moderator
 
Dan203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Nevada
Posts: 24,346
Netflix's organization of content is pretty bad. If you know exactly what you want to watch it's fine, since you can search, but for finding stuff you might like you pretty much have to take what they suggest. There really aren't any filter options in the app, and on the website they're still not all that easy to use
__________________
Dan Haddix
Super Moderator
Developer for VideoReDo
Dan203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 03:15 PM   #251
JosephB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 595
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan203 View Post
Netflix's organization of content is pretty bad. If you know exactly what you want to watch it's fine, since you can search, but for finding stuff you might like you pretty much have to take what they suggest. There really aren't any filter options in the app, and on the website they're still not all that easy to use
The problem isn't finding it, they have a search feature. The problem is they don't have the rights to about 90% of the things that I search for when I decide "hey, I want to watch X, let's see if it's on Netflix"
__________________
Current: TiVo HD w/lifetime, 2 x 2 Tuner Premieres

Former: S1, S2 TiVos, UltimateTV, SD DirecTiVo (x3), SA 8300HD w/Passport Echo, DirecTV HR-24 (x2) , DISH 722k, DirecTV Genie + 2 mini
JosephB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 03:36 PM   #252
Diana Collins
Registered User
 
Diana Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City Suburbs
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
For wireless, there are physical bandwidth limitations. You can't pull bandwidth out of your @$$ and just make things happen. It doesn't work that way. And while IP distribution over cable is perfectly technically possible today, seeing that Comcast is still using MPEG-2, and not MPEG-4, which has been the standard for 6+ years now, I don't foresee them getting to IP-based distribution anytime soon...
Over the last 10 or 15 years wireless data has gone from a theoretical maximum of 11 Mbits/sec over WiFi (802.11b) and around 100 Kbits/sec (that's kilobits) over 2G (EDGE) networks to 600 Mbit/s sec over WiFi (802.11n MIMO) and around 100 Mbits/sec over 4G networks (LTE). LTE advanced will up that to 100 Mbits/sec symmetrical when moving and 1 Gbit/sec when stationary.

Throughput will continue to advance. You are the only fixated on LTE. There are newer, more robust, systems coming, not the least of which is LTE-Advanced. Technologies like Artemis' that allow frequency reuse WITHIN a cell are going to vastly increase the number of distinct streams that can be delivered over a wireless network.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
...You think channels are just going to give up their "slots" and DirecTV and DISH are just going to go away so that everything can "VOD-ize". You are crazy. Those channels are not going to give up their linear slots when 85% of the TV viewing today is linear, 15 years after the DVR was invented, and 38 years after VHS was invented. What will happen is more and more content will be available both way, but that's been happening for 5+ years, so that's nothing new...
Will the cable companies go wireless? Maybe, maybe not. The fact is that it doesn't matter - the VIEWERS will be going wireless, with or without them. Sooner or later that financial equation will become such that HBO, Showtime, AMC, TNT, and every other creator of original content, including the broadcast networks, will be able make more money selling their content directly to viewers than they make from cable companies. Long before that happens, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go to a two tier approach: free access if you have a cable sourced subscription, and a monthly fee paid direct if you don't.

The cable companies are very aware of thsi fact. Comcast is one of my customers and they make no secret of the fact that they consider linear video a legacy, and declining, business. They are morphing into broadband companies. Verizon and AT&T are morphing into WIRELESS broadband companies.

The bandwidth and technology to do IP-based distribution is coming, and in many cases is already here. The advantages to IP distribution, even of linear video content, are just too overwhelming for the cable companies to NOT pursue it.

Perhaps the most ludicrous comment you have made so far:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
...Faster delivery just makes everything more expensive and difficult to do...

Diana Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 04:47 PM   #253
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephB View Post
TV is going where the people are. If no one is watching linear TV, then they will move to what customers want, which is a netflix style interface and experience.

And Comcast has said many, many times that they are moving to IP distribution. Just because you don't think they aren't doesn't mean that all the words coming out of Brian Roberts' mouth are just made up. Come find me in 5 years and let's see where things are.
85% of TV viewing today is linear. I don't forsee linear dying anytime soon. What will happen is that most content will be available on multiple platforms (much of it already is). There's also sports, news, sports news, and a few others types of programming that don't fit into a VOD model. There are a lot of old movie channels that could use to go to an on-demand only model, but the way they are force-bundled, they won't do that anytime soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelblue32 View Post
There is basically a generational divide. My parents are in their 60s, and even though they have the ability to watch on-demand or time-shifted content, they choose not to. They just watch whatever is on the linear channels. Whereas I have some younger cousins in their teens who almost never watch linear channels. They only watch on-demand, recorded, or internet video content. I'm in my 30s and sort of in-between. I watch probably 70% on-demand or time shifted, and the other 30% linear channels.
To a certain extent, but I know a lot of people my age (24) who watch mostly or all linear TV. Even one of my roommates barely DVRs anything, and he's using one of my TiVo Minis running off of my XL4, so it's certainly not for lack of ability to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
Over the last 10 or 15 years wireless data has gone from a theoretical maximum of 11 Mbits/sec over WiFi (802.11b) and around 100 Kbits/sec (that's kilobits) over 2G (EDGE) networks to 600 Mbit/s sec over WiFi (802.11n MIMO) and around 100 Mbits/sec over 4G networks (LTE). LTE advanced will up that to 100 Mbits/sec symmetrical when moving and 1 Gbit/sec when stationary.
The problem with that argument is that a lot of that has come through wide channels, and a lot of the future gains will come through carrier aggregation, which doesn't increase the overall bandwidth, although it does tend to make bandwidth more available, just like DOCSIS 3. If you look at the last 10 years or so, there have been significant, but not huge gains in the spectral efficiency of wireless services. Going from EVDO and HSPA+ to LTE gained some spectral efficiency, but it wasn't ground-breaking. Much of the additional bandwidth came from wider channels (especially for Verizon moving from 1.25mhz EVDO to 10mhz LTE). OFDMA is somewhat more efficient and better in many ways than CDMA, which is used by both EVDO and HSPA+, but it's not an order of magnitude. OFDMA is more robust under heavy load, but there's not actually that much more spectral efficiency, it just doesn't bomb out nearly as quickly. Much of the additional bandwidth added to the wireless systems has been through the deployment of more towers and more spectrum, not huge gains in efficiency.

Quote:
Throughput will continue to advance. You are the only fixated on LTE. There are newer, more robust, systems coming, not the least of which is LTE-Advanced. Technologies like Artemis' that allow frequency reuse WITHIN a cell are going to vastly increase the number of distinct streams that can be delivered over a wireless network.
We'll see. There will be some forward progress, but for the foreseeable future, it's not going to increase the bandwidth available by two orders of magnitude, which is what would be needed to do widespread wireless video distribution. Some sort of competitive wireless home internet in suburban, exurban and rural areas will come halfway in-between now and video, probably a lot closer to now than video, since the amount of bandwidth required is far lower, although still quite a bit larger than that capacity available today in even moderately developed areas.

Quote:
Will the cable companies go wireless? Maybe, maybe not. The fact is that it doesn't matter - the VIEWERS will be going wireless, with or without them. Sooner or later that financial equation will become such that HBO, Showtime, AMC, TNT, and every other creator of original content, including the broadcast networks, will be able make more money selling their content directly to viewers than they make from cable companies. Long before that happens, I wouldn't be surprised to see them go to a two tier approach: free access if you have a cable sourced subscription, and a monthly fee paid direct if you don't.
They may go direct to consumer, but that has nothing to do with wireless distribution. That would come in through a land-based internet connection, which of course brings in the issue of net neutrality. But that really has nothing to do with wireless delivery of video. You can watch HBO Go on your phone today, and have a really crappy user experience, just as you would if you could buy HBO directly from HBO over the internet.

Quote:
The cable companies are very aware of thsi fact. Comcast is one of my customers and they make no secret of the fact that they consider linear video a legacy, and declining, business. They are morphing into broadband companies. Verizon and AT&T are morphing into WIRELESS broadband companies.
Not because of lack of demand for it, but because they are getting killed on the carriage fees, while it takes more and more bandwidth, versus HSI that takes relatively little bandwidth and costs relatively little to provide. HSI is their biggest cash cow now, even if it looks cheaper to the consumer.

Quote:
The bandwidth and technology to do IP-based distribution is coming, and in many cases is already here. The advantages to IP distribution, even of linear video content, are just too overwhelming for the cable companies to NOT pursue it.
AT&T has been doing IPTV deliver for 5 years with 802.11q VLANs and QoS, but their system was built for it from the ground up, they didn't convert an existing system with legacy equipment in the field to replace. Their system could actually have been good if they had done FTTH, which would have allowed them to open the bandwidth on TV channels way up, and offer gigabit internet.

That being said, there's no reason for the cable companies to go to IP, and they don't want to spend the money. You're saying that they are somehow going to replace almost EVERY box out there (with the exception of some of the new X1 boxes, which *might* be able to handle IP video), when they haven't even been able to convert to linear MPEG-4 over QAM, which a majority of the HD equipment out there already supports, and which wouldn't affect their SD channels or equipment? You're nuts.

Quote:
Perhaps the most ludicrous comment you have made so far:
You took it out of context. I was referring to the ludicrous idea of a multicast satellite delivery of content, like is done today in real-time, but in faster than real-time. It would be an immensely costly endeavor for zero benefit to anyone.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2014, 11:45 PM   #254
Johncv
Registered User
 
Johncv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Chula Vista, CA
Posts: 1,299
What happen when (no longer if) AT&T buy DirecTV?
__________________
Johncv

HDTiVo
27-inch iMac with i7 quad core processor
Johncv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 12:13 AM   #255
trip1eX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by JosephB View Post
Not necessarily. I watch Netflix, sure, but actually not as much as a lot of people my age or younger (I'm 31).

Most of my "on demand" viewing is watching things I've recorded with my TiVo. If the industry moves towards all VOD, then I'll be mostly OK. Right now Netflix rarely ever has anything I search for, I end up having to settle for some suggestion.

However, my "just want to watch random content" sessions are usually out of frustration of trying to decide. Sure, people will just randomly choose something on demand, but I actually prefer to just sit down and have to select something that is on right now. It's just a psychological thing, maybe I'm weird. I get analysis paralysis and it's nice to just turn on the TV and select a channel and there's something on, that I didn't have to decide on out of a million choices.
YOu're splitting hairs. There really isn't a difference between selecting something "on" now in a Tv Guide vs just selecting something randomly on a VoD service like Netflix.

My cabletv tuners are pretty slow. They are probably marginally faster than how fast Netflix can load a new show. They aren't so much faster that I can drop the probably without actually timing the two.

Netflix has many "channels" in the form of categories like "you might like this because you watched this" or "dirty foreign thrillers" or ....

I'm not really seeing the difference. And since something like Netflix is all software based then they could create new ways to show off content fairly easily. And could even duplicate cable tv channels (if they had the rights to the same content.)

They could even solve your needs one better by having a big red panic button for those that can't decide what to watch. Hit it and a show starts playing. They could program the button to load random shows from random starting points. They could have options to load content at the beginning of popular scenes. etc.

Last edited by trip1eX : 05-13-2014 at 12:41 AM.
trip1eX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 12:31 AM   #256
trip1eX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelblue32 View Post
There is basically a generational divide. My parents are in their 60s, and even though they have the ability to watch on-demand or time-shifted content, they choose not to. They just watch whatever is on the linear channels. Whereas I have some younger cousins in their teens who almost never watch linear channels. They only watch on-demand, recorded, or internet video content. I'm in my 30s and sort of in-between. I watch probably 70% on-demand or time shifted, and the other 30% linear channels.
I don't think it is as big of a generational divide as you think. My parents took to a Tivo like a fish to water. My Dad turned 70 a few days ago. Anecdotal, but remember the VCR has been mainstream since ...the early 80s maybe earlier. ...so time-shifting tv has been around for awhile. 35 years or so.

Last edited by trip1eX : 05-13-2014 at 12:43 AM.
trip1eX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 02:05 PM   #257
Diana Collins
Registered User
 
Diana Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City Suburbs
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
Not because of lack of demand for it, but because they are getting killed on the carriage fees, while it takes more and more bandwidth, versus HSI that takes relatively little bandwidth and costs relatively little to provide. HSI is their biggest cash cow now, even if it looks cheaper to the consumer.
I beg to differ. According to the Consumer Electronics Association’s (CEA) latest (mid 2013) “U.S. Household Television Usage” report, the number of U.S. households that receive cable TV programming through cable, satellite, and fiber connections have fallen to 83% – down from 88% in 2010. The CEA cited non-TV devices such as computers, tablets, and smartphones, as well as streaming services as a major factor in the drop in cable subscribed households. The same report found that 28% of U.S. households now watch some TV content via the internet, with 4% using the internet to exclusively access TV content.

The demand for cable TV is declining, and the decline is accelerating.
Diana Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 02:30 PM   #258
Dan203
Super Moderator
 
Dan203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Nevada
Posts: 24,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johncv View Post
What happen when (no longer if) AT&T buy DirecTV?
Has no effect on CableCARD. Both DirecTV and AT&T Uverse have special exemptions from CableCARD mandate.
__________________
Dan Haddix
Super Moderator
Developer for VideoReDo
Dan203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 06:53 PM   #259
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
I beg to differ. According to the Consumer Electronics Association’s (CEA) latest (mid 2013) “U.S. Household Television Usage” report, the number of U.S. households that receive cable TV programming through cable, satellite, and fiber connections have fallen to 83% – down from 88% in 2010. The CEA cited non-TV devices such as computers, tablets, and smartphones, as well as streaming services as a major factor in the drop in cable subscribed households. The same report found that 28% of U.S. households now watch some TV content via the internet, with 4% using the internet to exclusively access TV content.

The demand for cable TV is declining, and the decline is accelerating.
There is some movement because of people who don't really watch much TV leaving now that the prices are much higher. However, that's not that big of a trend. Comcast shouldn't worry about cord cutters, they should worry about AT&T, Verizon, DirecTV, DISH, local fiber, overbuilders (ok fine, that's my town, and a few cities).

The biggest streamers of them all are the ones using HBO Go, WatchESPN, and other services that are tied to a cable or satellite subscription. I don't think Comcast has anything to worry about there. Heck, much of the streaming I have done is through those services, with some streaming through VUDU, Amazon, and Netflix. The only thing streaming is killing is Comcast's awful VOD rentals.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 10:18 PM   #260
unitron
Registered User
 
unitron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: semi-coastal NC
Posts: 13,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelblue32 View Post
There is basically a generational divide. My parents are in their 60s, and even though they have the ability to watch on-demand or time-shifted content, they choose not to. They just watch whatever is on the linear channels. Whereas I have some younger cousins in their teens who almost never watch linear channels. They only watch on-demand, recorded, or internet video content. I'm in my 30s and sort of in-between. I watch probably 70% on-demand or time shifted, and the other 30% linear channels.
My mom is old enough to have been your parents' mother, and I can't remember the last time she watched anything that wasn't time shifted, and I pretty much only might look at CNN or CNBC live.

My father, however, wasn't much for watching anything on VCR, and were he still with us would probably still be switching channels on the TV's tuner every few minutes.
__________________
(thisismysigfile)


"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."

Darth TiVo, 14 February, 2011
unitron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-13-2014, 10:26 PM   #261
Diana Collins
Registered User
 
Diana Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City Suburbs
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigg View Post
There is some movement because of people who don't really watch much TV leaving now that the prices are much higher. However, that's not that big of a trend. Comcast shouldn't worry about cord cutters, they should worry about AT&T, Verizon, DirecTV, DISH, local fiber, overbuilders (ok fine, that's my town, and a few cities).

The biggest streamers of them all are the ones using HBO Go, WatchESPN, and other services that are tied to a cable or satellite subscription. I don't think Comcast has anything to worry about there. Heck, much of the streaming I have done is through those services, with some streaming through VUDU, Amazon, and Netflix. The only thing streaming is killing is Comcast's awful VOD rentals.
On what do you base these comments?? Point to a survey that shows the decline in cable/satellite/fiber tv households is due to "people who don't really watch much TV." In fact, all surveys and research point to streaming as being a viable alternative for many viewers. If it was not so, we would not be discussing Aereo in another thread!!
Diana Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2014, 04:49 AM   #262
unitron
Registered User
 
unitron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: semi-coastal NC
Posts: 13,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
On what do you base these comments?? Point to a survey that shows the decline in cable/satellite/fiber tv households is due to "people who don't really watch much TV." In fact, all surveys and research point to streaming as being a viable alternative for many viewers. If it was not so, we would not be discussing Aereo in another thread!!
If you're talking about streaming as an alternative to cable, I don't think Aereo should be lumped in with NetFlix or whatever, as Aereo isn't really an alternative to cable TV, it's an alternative way to get just broadcast TV instead of a direct antenna connection.

Which is not to say that a combination of streaming and Aereo aren't being used as an alternative to cable, but Aereo by itself is just a way to put your antenna in a better location.
__________________
(thisismysigfile)


"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."

Darth TiVo, 14 February, 2011
unitron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2014, 04:04 PM   #263
Diana Collins
Registered User
 
Diana Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City Suburbs
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by unitron View Post
If you're talking about streaming as an alternative to cable, I don't think Aereo should be lumped in with NetFlix or whatever, as Aereo isn't really an alternative to cable TV, it's an alternative way to get just broadcast TV instead of a direct antenna connection.

Which is not to say that a combination of streaming and Aereo aren't being used as an alternative to cable, but Aereo by itself is just a way to put your antenna in a better location.
I was referring to Aereo in combination with other streaming solutions as being an alternative to cable or satellite. If streaming were not an increasing popular way to get TV entertainment (at the expense of a cable subscription) I doubt many people would pay any attention to Aereo. Without that driver, Aereo would just be a way to get broadcast TV on you tablet or other mobile device. Interesting, but not earth shattering. Aereo eliminates one of the big barriers to people going to an all streaming option.
Diana Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2014, 04:54 PM   #264
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
On what do you base these comments?? Point to a survey that shows the decline in cable/satellite/fiber tv households is due to "people who don't really watch much TV." In fact, all surveys and research point to streaming as being a viable alternative for many viewers. If it was not so, we would not be discussing Aereo in another thread!!
Much of the content on cable isn't available online without a cable subscription, so the people who have "cut the cord" a) didn't watch much TV in the first place, b) stopped watching much of the content they were watching, or c) just started pirating it instead. Yes, by the torrent numbers coming off of GoT, there are some people who are just pirating, but most of the "cord cutters" just didn't watch much TV in the first place.

Streaming is huge BECAUSE of movies and cable. Movies are better quality, cheaper, etc, streaming, and then WatchESPN and HBO Go are part of a cable subscription...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
I was referring to Aereo in combination with other streaming solutions as being an alternative to cable or satellite. If streaming were not an increasing popular way to get TV entertainment (at the expense of a cable subscription) I doubt many people would pay any attention to Aereo. Without that driver, Aereo would just be a way to get broadcast TV on you tablet or other mobile device. Interesting, but not earth shattering. Aereo eliminates one of the big barriers to people going to an all streaming option.
Aereo is way over-hyped. It's targeting a narrow market that doesn't want cable and can't get OTA the traditional way. That's not to say that it's not bad, or it can't be successful (if the Supreme Court doesn't legislate from the bench against them), but they are fundamentally serving a small niche market.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2014, 04:59 PM   #265
trip1eX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 796
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Collins View Post
I beg to differ. According to the Consumer Electronics Association’s (CEA) latest (mid 2013) “U.S. Household Television Usage” report, the number of U.S. households that receive cable TV programming through cable, satellite, and fiber connections have fallen to 83% – down from 88% in 2010. The CEA cited non-TV devices such as computers, tablets, and smartphones, as well as streaming services as a major factor in the drop in cable subscribed households. The same report found that 28% of U.S. households now watch some TV content via the internet, with 4% using the internet to exclusively access TV content.

The demand for cable TV is declining, and the decline is accelerating.
Hhhhmm 4% of households use internet exclusively to access tv content. Yet the number of households having cable tv dropped by 5 percentage points since 2010?

IT seems 1 of those 5 percentage points stopped watching tv then. And it would also mean that in 2010 0% used internet exclusively for tv content.


Eh cable is a great deal for the right households and thus this "move" towards internet tv will only go so far as it is right now.

I've run the math many times for "cutting the cord" and it has never made sense.

It only makes sense if you don't watch sports, live alone and don't watch much tv. OR just want to stick to the man.
trip1eX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2014, 09:34 AM   #266
Diana Collins
Registered User
 
Diana Collins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: New York City Suburbs
Posts: 1,336
Quote:
Originally Posted by trip1eX View Post
Hhhhmm 4% of households use internet exclusively to access tv content. Yet the number of households having cable tv dropped by 5 percentage points since 2010?

IT seems 1 of those 5 percentage points stopped watching tv then. And it would also mean that in 2010 0% used internet exclusively for tv content.


Eh cable is a great deal for the right households and thus this "move" towards internet tv will only go so far as it is right now.

I've run the math many times for "cutting the cord" and it has never made sense.

It only makes sense if you don't watch sports, live alone and don't watch much tv. OR just want to stick to the man.
Two different measures. Of all US households, 88% had some form of multichannel video service in 2010. By 2013 that had dropped to 83% (each 1% represents about 1.2 million households). As a separate measure, 28% of all US households get at least some video via the internet (whether they have cable or not), and 4% of all US households say they ONLY use streaming services. That 4% is not neccessarily derived from the 5% that dropped cable, but comes from the 17% that didn't have any cable or satellite subscriptions in 2013.

And the 17% aren't neccessarily not watching TV, they could just be watching OTA only.
Diana Collins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2014, 07:18 PM   #267
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Historically, the split was about 20/60/20 OTA/cable/satellite. Not sure where the trend is going, other than that telcoTV is eating up a little bit of cable marketshare. Which is also a weird measure, since it's based on what company is behind it, as FIOS is cable, and Verizon is more like Comcast than RCN or WOW, but I digress.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2014, 09:55 PM   #268
Dan203
Super Moderator
 
Dan203's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Nevada
Posts: 24,346
Yeah currently they count FIOS as a teleco which isn't really fare. It's basically identical to cable in it's current form. AT&T uverse is different but they only have 2.1M subscribers, so they don't even account for 2%
__________________
Dan Haddix
Super Moderator
Developer for VideoReDo
Dan203 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 07:26 AM   #269
aaronwt
HD Addict
 
aaronwt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Northern VA(Woodbridge)
Posts: 13,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan203 View Post
Yeah currently they count FIOS as a teleco which isn't really fare. It's basically identical to cable in it's current form. AT&T uverse is different but they only have 2.1M subscribers, so they don't even account for 2%
At the end of 1Q2014, Uverse had 5.7 million TV customers and 11 million internet customers. And 4.1 million voice customers.

"....SERVICE GROWTH: U-verse hits 11.3 million total subscribers ? 5.7 million U-verse TV customers. ? 4.1 million U-verse Voice connections. ? 11.0 million U-verse High Speed Internet customers. ? AT&T U-verse bundles available in 142 markets (MSAs) across 22 states. ? About 90 percent of U-verse TV sales in the first quarter also included High Speed Internet. ? About two-thirds of U-verse TV customers have a triple- or quad-play bundle. ? AT&T U-verse now has annualized total revenues of nearly $14 billion. ? About 60 percent of U-verse broadband subscribers have a plan delivering speeds up to 12 Mbps or higher (as of 1Q14). SERVICE EVOLUTION: Continued innovation in apps and speed ? Introduced the U-verse KIDS! app, a smartphone and tablet application that displays kid-friendly channels and remote controls for the TV**. ? Added even more live TV channels to the U-verse App for smartphones and tablets. ? Brought customers closer to Sochi with the U-verse Olympic TV App, an on-screen interactive app with NBCUniversal's real-time medal counts, athlete bios, Team USA reports, Olympic news and more. ? Announced plans to expand AT&T's ultra-fast fiber network to up to 100 candidate cities and municipalities nationwide, including 21 new major metropolitan areas. ? Launched open APIs for the Android platform that will help developers create more unique apps for U-verse TV. U-verse Update: 1Q14 AT&T U-verse Reports Record Wireline Consumer Revenue Growth U-verse TV Subscribers in Service (in millions) U....."
__________________
Roamio Pro
TiVo Mini x3
Roamio Basic OTA
39TB unRAID1--53TB unRAID2--36TB unRAID3
XBL/PSN: WormholeXtreme

Last edited by aaronwt : 05-17-2014 at 07:34 AM.
aaronwt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2014, 09:13 PM   #270
Bigg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Hartford- New Haven CT
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan203 View Post
Yeah currently they count FIOS as a teleco which isn't really fare. It's basically identical to cable in it's current form. AT&T uverse is different but they only have 2.1M subscribers, so they don't even account for 2%
I'm not so sure that I would go that far, as Verizon is still a telco. My point is just that it's a really weird way to count. I would almost say the most valuable way to count would be cable incumbent, cable overbuilders, and telcoTV. Although that's still a flawed measure, since it doesn't tell you anything about the market share of telcos or overbuilders in the areas that they actually serve, since cable is everywhere telcos are, but telcos definitely aren't everywhere cable is, sometimes by town or region, and sometimes by street or building.

U-Verse is a weird case too, as there are still a ton of crossboxes that don't have VRADs but are in towns that have U-Verse, so they would be really easy expansion targets, as the rest of the infrastructure is already there. FIOS isn't as easy to expand, and is only seeing meaningful expansion in NYC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aaronwt View Post
At the end of 1Q2014, Uverse had 5.7 million TV customers and 11 million internet customers. And 4.1 million voice customers.

"....SERVICE GROWTH: U-verse hits 11.3 million total subscribers ? 5.7 million U-verse TV customers. ? 4.1 million U-verse Voice connections. ? 11.0 million U-verse High Speed Internet customers. ? AT&T U-verse bundles available in 142 markets (MSAs) across 22 states. ? About 90 percent of U-verse TV sales in the first quarter also included High Speed Internet. ? About two-thirds of U-verse TV customers have a triple- or quad-play bundle. ? AT&T U-verse now has annualized total revenues of nearly $14 billion. ? About 60 percent of U-verse broadband subscribers have a plan delivering speeds up to 12 Mbps or higher (as of 1Q14). SERVICE EVOLUTION: Continued innovation in apps and speed ? Introduced the U-verse KIDS! app, a smartphone and tablet application that displays kid-friendly channels and remote controls for the TV**. ? Added even more live TV channels to the U-verse App for smartphones and tablets. ? Brought customers closer to Sochi with the U-verse Olympic TV App, an on-screen interactive app with NBCUniversal's real-time medal counts, athlete bios, Team USA reports, Olympic news and more. ? Announced plans to expand AT&T's ultra-fast fiber network to up to 100 candidate cities and municipalities nationwide, including 21 new major metropolitan areas. ? Launched open APIs for the Android platform that will help developers create more unique apps for U-verse TV. U-verse Update: 1Q14 AT&T U-verse Reports Record Wireline Consumer Revenue Growth U-verse TV Subscribers in Service (in millions) U....."
That's very interesting. I'm not sure how I feel about U-Verse doing so well. On the one hand, I wish it was a complete flop because they implemented such inferior infrastructure. On the other hand, it's good to see the cable companies get some fires lit under the asses to get them moving on upgrades, even if I myself would never consider U-Verse, even aside from their lack of support for TiVo.

I'd like U-Verse a lot more if AT&T would step up to the plate and push the fiber farther out. Many places in CT are all overhead and are really low-hanging fruit for full GPON rollouts, and many neighborhoods that are underground could have VRADs installed close to where the copper goes under, which, combined with pair bonding, would push the speeds way up. The same goes for MDUs, where they could push FTTB out, basically a pair-bonded VRAD in the building, which should get some pretty impressive pair bonded speeds. Any of those solutions would also allow them to have a second, higher bitrate set of HDs that didn't look like total crap.
__________________
My Place: Premiere XL4 Lifetime 3/26/13 XFinity
3 TiVo Mini's on MoCA
Formerly Win MCE 3TB Ceton4 XFinity
Parents: XFinity Motorola AnyRoom DVR
80 HR Series 2 Lifetime 4/11/04 DEAD as of 11/2010
Bigg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVo® is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:41 AM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |