"The retail market for TiVo days are numbered...enjoy it while it lasts"..???

"I find your use of humor disturbing" #VADERLIVES

 

All kidding aside, going back to the original question, get the Tivo's ,technology migrations are never as fast as predictions and are gradual. Not to mention using external usb drives with boxes is it's own level of pain sometimes.

 

Being able to pause live TV, replay sections of sporting events, etc., are not dependent on a local DVR - that's just been the way it was supported in the last decade. This can all be done via IP (either multicast or OTT) with nothing more than a Roku or AppleTV box.

Yes, people used VCRs before DVRs. The use case for both were the same - to store and replay transient content. Skipping commercials, even with VCRs, was enough of a factor for the studios to sue (the oft-cited "Betamax Decision"). DVRs were just easier to use, and pausing live TV was a bonus.

We can certainly have a debate about the future of OTA broadcasting. But ATSC 3.0 is essentially IP distribution as well. I can easily see broadcasters becoming another source of wireless broadband. But whatever happens, you can count on them devoting as little effort and technology as possible to "free TV" (instead making it available on-demand - for a fee) and focusing instead on what carries a premium fee - broadcast advertising is becoming worthless to advertisers and so broadcasters need a new revenue stream to stay in business. So again, unless the broadcasters cooperate and actively support TiVo use with their content, I don't see a future for them there.

Finally, on the issue of "caps" and net neutrality. This is why net neutrality is so important. Without it, ISPs will negotiate contracts with the video distributors to pay for access to their network. (The users, of course, will end paying for it through higher fees for Netflix, Hulu, etc.) Once negotiated, that providers data will be zero rated (exempted from the cap).

 

That really depends on the area. In mine they certainly don't look like they did in 2001. My HD recordings from back then look superb. But they still look decent in my area today. Easily much better than the cable channels on FiOS and Comcast in my area.

 

Yes. As I said, the longer you use it, the less your monthly cost of ownership. Use it for 30 years and your monthly cost drops down to about a dollar, ha! Although I wouldn't bet that all of your major local stations with be broadcasting in HD on ATSC 1.0 in 10 years from now, much less 30. I picked a 3-yr timeframe because that's not a huge commitment and I doubt anything bad will happen with ATSC 1.0 in that amount of time. Perhaps we'll see some SD subchannels disappear on ATSC 1.0 by mid-2021, and overall picture quality drop on some channels, but then those things can and do already happen anyhow, even before the start of ATSC 3.0.

Keep an eye on T-Mobile. Awhile back, they acquired a bunch of lower frequency (600 MHz) wireless spectrum, the kind that travels well over long distances. This is poised to finally make them a competitor in rural markets. They're already deploying new towers that give them coverage across big chunks of rural America.

One of the things they want to do with their wireless network is offer a streaming TV service, which is supposed to launch later this year. T-Mobile TV will be available to use with any internet connection but I'm sure they'll offer to bundle it in with their mobile phone service. It wouldn't surprise me, though, if they sell the TV service packaged with access via their wireless network specifically for home use -- i.e., stick a T-Mobile antenna in your window and connect a small T-Mobile box to your TVs and you can stream T-Mobile TV for a set monthly price without worrying about how much data you're using.

As the T-Mobile CEO said in the recent Sprint acquisition announcement, there are three business lines that are increasingly merging: wireless mobile phone, home broadband/internet, and TV. AT&T and Verizon are already players in all three. Comcast and Charter cable have traditionally just done the latter two but they're getting into mobile service now too. So I think T-Mobile likewise plans to compete in all three areas. Maybe it'll be an option where you live by the end of this year...

 

It's interesting that in all the predictions of the future, some of them acting as if it has already happened and is set in stone, nobody has mentioned 5G. 5G will change the entire game. The players, the way it is played, everything. And no I don't mean the fake Gen5 Dish is advertising. Depending exactly how it plays out, the laughable 3Mbps may become a much better 3Gbps. (Although expectations should be kept low for the third-world backwater that is the US internet...maybe expect speeds of around 500Mbps to be common at first.) Of course, this is one of the technologies TiVo is not currently equipped to handle, but if one believes IP is the unarguable future method of delivery, 5G has a seat at the table, if not the head.

 

5G is not a miracle as people will find out when it rolls out in the real world, most cell phone companies don't have consistent 4g service. 5g is a part of the puzzle but the puzzle has 300 pieces. Wireless has it's own set of problems. In 5 years we'll still be arguing about this.

 

I think there is a bright future in the OTA market, plus TiVo has it's patent troll-ish stuff going on too that generates lots of cash for doing nothing. CableCard will die with IP, but cable itself is dying too. Local DVRs are already much less important, and will become so as the good content has mostly moved to OTT SVOD, with some on OTA. However, with OTA, DVRs are critical, so smaller, lower priced DVRs have a future with OTA.

How OTA plays out depends on how many channels convert to ATSC 3.0 and when that happens. Some big broadcasters have talked a lot about 3.0, but I'm still not convinced there is going to be any widespread transition, since it costs a lot of money to give away a free product to more people, which makes no business sense. As much as I love new tech, I full acknowledge that the best business move for the broadcasters is to stay on 1.0, do nothing to improve coverage, and let cable and vMVPDs pay retrans fees to serve customers who can't get a 1.0 signal.

This is just not true. It varies widely by market and channel, and some have already repacked in markets large and small alike. In fact, the highest bitrate channels are usually O&O in large markets, but other channels are sharing. The original channel shares are all in very small markets, but now it's showing up in big markets too. So it depends on the market, as pretty much every one is a different situation.

If they start pulling crap like that, then OTA is basically dead.

 

Cite? I've never seen anything official from Comcast on this. Agree that it will probably happen but it's all been speculation as to when/if they will do it.

And how long QAM delivery will last is equally subject to speculation.

 

Last year Comcast announced they would be very aggressive in switching to IP delivery. And claimed they would switch within a year or so. But that never happened.

 

The use of technology/future technology is a lot like restaurants in a small town not near a big city...It's what you can find vs. what you want sometimes.

 

Before the quiz show Scandal of 1960, advertisers used to own the TV shows and their ads were integrated in the show. Looking at unedited reruns of the Jack Benny show and others and you'll see what I mean. Listen to Burns and Allen radio shows on Sirius XM and you'll see what I mean.
That was prohibited after the quiz show scandals because the sponsors wanted to fake the shows and Congress made a law that sponsors cannot own shows anymore. However we all know that advertisers pay for spots in movies to show their ketchup or their beer or whatever faces camera. The only thing that will save Free TV is for advertisers to be able to integrate their products into the show as they did in the 1950s. They wouldn't be able to own the show but they could advertise as part of the story ... only that will save Free TV.

 

Cite? Coming up with Instant TV (or whatever they're calling it) has nothing to do with the future of QAM.

 

Light reading: Comcast: All-IP Video Target Is Q1 | Light Reading

It's from the internet so it must be true.

 

That's unfortunate. So as of 2016 our TiVo's won't work any more?

 

That story was true. Comcast has had an all-IP system in place for years now and, as that story predicted, that all-IP system is now operational across Comcast's entire footprint. (The headline of the story was that the all-IP system would be extended to the last bits of Comcast's geographic footprint in Q1 2016.)

But it's important to understand what "all-IP" means. Comcast essentially runs their entire TV system -- all linear channels, DVR, on-demand -- simultaneously on two different delivery tracks. One is the traditional QAM system (with local DVR) and the other system is "all-IP" (with cloud DVR). Some screens (e.g. TVs with an old pre-X1 STB or a TiVo) are 100% served by the QAM system. Some screens (e.g. TVs with a Roku or phones/tablets/computers) are 100% served by the newer "all-IP" system. Some screens (e.g. TVs with an X1 STB) are served by a hybrid combo of both system.

I can understand how one would misconstrue the term "all-IP" in the headline to mean "no more QAM, only IP". It doesn't mean that. All the story says:

To be clear, this does not mean that all of Comcast's subscribers will receive their pay-TV services in IP in the near term. There is still a large base of legacy set-tops in the field, and Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) will continue to deliver QAM-based video for some time to come.

Rather, "all-IP" means that it's a complete delivery system -- offering all of Comcast's content across its entire footprint -- that relies only on IP, not on QAM. But it's not their ONLY delivery system. That's the $64k question: how long will Comcast continue to devote resources to operating two parallel delivery systems before they kill off the traditional QAM system?

 

Tivo keeps me locked into Comcast and I'm pretty content. I bet there is more brand loyalty to cable via tivo users then non-tivo users.

If they blow it up, I'll probably look at going back to satellite or streaming only plans. Something for the cable co's to consider.

 

My thoughts as well. We have Gig AT&T in my neighborhood but Tivo is what keeps me from switching. If I had to pay for digital outlets and all the other fees to Comcast I would think hard.

 

I'm pretty much stuck with Comcast anyway, since I live in a condo and have no access to satellite dishes or other providers. So the fact that Comcast and TiVo go together is a major bonus. If they "split up," I'd have to stick with Comcast. Which would well and truly suck.