# Why are the S3's so expensive when you can rent the DVR for $10/month



## mrdazzo7 (Jan 8, 2006)

I love Tivo and I love their functionality, but I can't figure out why Series 3's are so highly priced when most people I know are renting HDDvr's from the cable company for an extra 10/mo without the extra equipment to buy...Why are the S3's *that* much different? 

Im frustrated because I bought an S2 dual tuner a few months ago, then unexpectedly upgraded to an HD Tv, but now I can't record any of the HD channels.... Plus I'm not spending $800, I just think that's so up there. Is there a reason why it's so expensive compared to the cable company's DVR's?


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

Can the Cable DVR record 2 shows at a time?
Can the Cable DVR record from Cable or antenna?
Analog and Digital cable? HD from Cable? (ok, these ones it can do)
Analog (NTSC) and Digital (ATSC) and High Definition from an antenna?

Does the Cable DVR have TiVo? Season Passes? Wishlists? Suggestions?

This is why the Series3 is a bit more money.


phox


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

Not to mention that you'd be foolish to pay 800 for the box. Look around here on the forum, lots of people are finding them for the mid-600's.


----------



## Stanley Rohner (Jan 18, 2004)

Even $600 seems a little over-priced plus the $12.95/month just for the privledge of using it just so you can say - I have a TiVo.


----------



## Arcady (Oct 14, 2004)

I don't use a TiVo so I can say "I have a TiVo." I use a TiVo because it IS a TiVo. Simple as that.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

A It's not the POS cableCO PVR that many of us hate
B We're very fond of the Tivo interface and feel it adds that much value
C We love the Tivo implementation of Season Passes, Wishlists, etc
D It's meant to be the top of the Tivo line, it's priced accordingly, and built quite well.
E Because Tivo rocks! 

But as mentioned by others, you can find it cheaper.
Also to phox, yup, the Moto boxes are Dual tuner and can record 2 HD streams at the same time.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

Stanley Rohner said:


> Even $600 seems a little over-priced plus the $12.95/month just for the privledge of using it just so you can say - I have a TiVo.


That's not why I use it - mostly Diane's reasons, but basically because it just works the way it is supposed to. Unlike any cable company DVR that I've ever used.


----------



## DeathRider (Dec 30, 2006)

phox_mulder said:


> Can the Cable DVR record 2 shows at a time?


Yes



> Can the Cable DVR record from Cable or antenna?


Does it need to if the Cableco carries alll the OTA channels? Mine does. I guess if it didn't (reading some won't carry FOXHD)



> Analog and Digital cable? HD from Cable? (ok, these ones it can do)


N/A



> Analog (NTSC) and Digital (ATSC) and High Definition from an antenna?


Same as above, does it need to, if the cableco carries all the local channels?



> Does the Cable DVR have TiVo? Season Passes? Wishlists? Suggestions?


Most seem to do a version of Season Pass. Wish lists or Suggestions, not that I know.



> This is why the Series3 is a bit more money.


Cable Company DVRs I would thing are highly subsidized. They don't have to do any advertising, have a large captive audience. The cost can be amortized across _all_ cable subscribers, wethr they have a DVR or not. They can give it away at a loss, making some up from subs, or just to crush the comptition (like whan Japanese car companies were accused of "dumping" their cars years ago.

Cable Co doesn't have to worry about barrirs to entry, plus the fact they have tried to stifle competition/innovation pretty much every step of the way. All monopolies do that, just look at Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA, Intel, ect.

If I wasn't able to transfer my Lifetime Sub, I would have been very tempted to just get the cable DVR to record HD programs and my S2 for everything else.


----------



## CheezWiz (Dec 30, 2006)

Are you sure it is just $10 per month, look for hidden fees:
Charter in TN:

HDTV DVR - $6.95 each ($473 to buy, I paid $510 for my S3 Tivo)
IIS Fee - $3.00 (required for DVR)
DVR Service Fee - $6.99

$16.94 / Month + Taxes

I pay now:
Series 2 Pre-Pay 3 years - $8.30/month (Free S2 Box) (no Tax)
Series 3 Monthly - 6.95/month ($510.00 for S3) (no Tax)
2x Cable Cards - $3.00/month (small tax)

$18.25/month for 2 DVR's

Considering the text of this article, how can I complain?
http://ce.seekingalpha.com/article/23282


----------



## gwsat (Sep 14, 2006)

For those strictly interested in economy, a cable company HD DVR is a MUCH better value than is the TiVo. My Scientific Atlanta 8300HD DVR has two tuners and records HD telecasts from cable that, when played back, look identical to those recorded and played back on an S3. Further, like the S3, the 8300HD has two cable tuners but thats where the comparison ends. So why do so many of us who had cable company HD DVRs decide to buy an S3 anyway? Heres why I have ordered an S3.

TiVos software is in a class by itself: intuitive, easy to use, and almost entirely non-stressful. The S3 also has two HD OTA tuners, and will allow you to integrate a list of OTA programming with its list of cable programs. In stark contrast the 8300HD has no OTA tuner and no capacity to either record or provide you with a schedule of upcoming OTA programs. Worse, the Scientific Atlanta software automatically erases the buffer when you change channels and wont automatically let you watch a show you are recording from the beginning if you want to do it after the broadcast starts; it will also kick you out of a recording you are watching when the recording ends. There is no way to navigate from within a recorded program except via the Fast Forward and Fast Reverse controls. And thats just the bad stuff I can think of off the top of my head. There is more, I promise.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: You get what you pay for.


----------



## DeathRider (Dec 30, 2006)

gwsat said:


> TiVos software is in a class by itself: intuitive, easy to use, and almost entirely non-stressful. The S3 also has two HD OTA tuners, and will allow you to integrate a list of OTA programming with its list of cable programs. In stark contrast the 8300HD has no OTA tuner and no capacity to either record or provide you with a schedule of upcoming OTA programs. Worse, the Scientific Atlanta software automatically erases the buffer when you change channels and wont automatically let you watch a show you are recording from the beginning if you want to do it after the broadcast starts; it will also kick you out of a recording you are watching when the recording ends. There is no way to navigate from within a recorded program except via the Fast Forward and Fast Reverse controls. And thats just the bad stuff I can think of off the top of my head. There is more, I promise.
> 
> EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: You get what you pay for.


Mybrother's Moto box lets you watch the program afrom the beginning after it starts. When the hdd was actiing up (saying it was recording a certain channel, the channel wouldn't show if you manually changed to it during the recording.

What I didn't like was the sluggishness of the remote, and the fact that after I unchecked all the channels he wasn't receiving, they all still showed up in the guide


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Why? Because it is better. And easily worth the money to me.

I drive a 550i because I really enjoy driving, and it is the best car for the money. I enjoy watching TV, and a TiVo is simply the best DVR for the money.

BTW, I also have two cableco DVRs, so I know of what I speak. BTW-II, my cableco DVRs both record two shows at once, as does my S3. But only the S3 has dual live TV buffers behind the playing of a recording. Just so many little differences.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

astrohip said:


> But only the S3 has a live TV buffer behind the playing of a recording. Just so many little differences.


Forgot the Buffer.

Does the Cable Company DVR have dual buffers?

phox


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

CheezWiz said:


> Are you sure it is just $10 per month, look for hidden fees:
> Charter in TN:
> 
> HDTV DVR - $6.95 each ($473 to buy, I paid $510 for my S3 Tivo)
> ...


Charter in NV:

HD DVR Rental: $11.99
DVR Service Fee: $6.95

$18.94 / Month + Taxes


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

phox_mulder said:


> Does the Cable Company DVR have dual buffers?


Dual :up: Corrected my post!


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

mrdazzo7 said:


> I love Tivo and I love their functionality, but I can't figure out why Series 3's are so highly priced...


The latest and greatest top-of-the-line product always commands the big sticker price. I would expect the see the price drop to some extent over time. Going HD is still an expensive venture, but HD TV's and related hardware should come down in price as the new technology becomes standard fare.

When considering the hardware cost of cable HD DVR versus S3 TiVo, the difference is mostly whether you pay up-front or over time. You could buy your S3 with a payment plan and get similar monthly cost as a DVR Rental. But, you'd own the S3 in the end. You'll always be renting the cable DVR.

As far as service fees, cable and TiVo are similar. Using TiVo's 3 year pre-pay, the equivalent montly cost is a little over $8 per month. Cable charges DVR service fees pretty close to that.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

Cablevision charges an extra $10/mo over the cost of a standard cable decoder for the 8300 - no hidden additional fees. It has two tuners and a buffer. It's fine. But as mentioned above, it is not nearly as user friendly as a Tivo which clearly has the better (best) user interface. I have both. Why? because the S3 is undependable. I don't know if it's the fault of the cable cards or of the tivo itself, but the problems (documented in other threads) are significant. In a perfect world I'd have two S3's that worked as expected, but for now.........

And of course $800 is too much for the S3 (even the currently available discounted prices aren't cheap). But those of us who are early adopters of new technology expect to pay for our impatience rather than waiting for the inevitable price drops that always come in time.


----------



## jhimmel (Dec 27, 2002)

I recently got FiOS TV service and figured I would REALLY try to get by with the DVR they provided. After 1 day with the service, I had recorded a small handful of HD movies and programming, and was informed that the unit was 95% full already!

Between the anemic storage (and no way to expand) and the lack of Wishlists (which I use heavily) - on top of the CRAPPY user interface, I went ahead and ordered an S3.

That's why.

It's a silly question anyway. If it's not worth it to you, or you can't afford it, don't buy it.
Obviously the TiVo S3 adds value over the crap that is provided from Cable/FiOS. How much is that worth to you? Only you can decide.

It will come down in price, if you want to wait. For me, though - life is too short to suffer with what Verizon provided. I paid (somewhat heavily) for an improved day-to-day entertainment experience. It's that simple.

Jim H.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

mrdazzo7 said:


> I love Tivo and I love their functionality, but I can't figure out why Series 3's are so highly priced when most people I know are renting HDDvr's from the cable company for an extra 10/mo without the extra equipment to buy...Why are the S3's *that* much different?
> 
> Im frustrated because I bought an S2 dual tuner a few months ago, then unexpectedly upgraded to an HD Tv, but now I can't record any of the HD channels.... Plus I'm not spending $800, I just think that's so up there. Is there a reason why it's so expensive compared to the cable company's DVR's?


1) It's NOT $10/month. It's $10/month once you pay the $65-$75 a month for the package that allows you to get the DVR. I pay $3.50/mo for cable and get my HD OTA. ($13.50/mo for basic, then I get $10 off of my cable modem..)

2) They suck.

3) They don't hold much. My Series3 with a 500 Gig HD holds 65 hours of HD. Eventually I'll be able to double it with an external drive!!

4) It's not $800, more like $600 online.

5) It's only $8ish a month if you prepay for 3 years.

6) I sold my HR10-250 from DirecTV for $425, my SD DirecTiVo's for $100/each. I broke even buying the S3.

7) TiVo Rocks!!


----------



## Krenath (May 14, 2002)

The cable company DVRs suck. Pure and simple. Whether it's a Scientific Atlanta or a Motorola, the primitive user interface is enough to drive a person nuts after struggling with getting it to do tasks that are quite simple with a Tivo.

If you can't bear to part with your dollars and think maybe you can tolerate the cable company DVR, if you think the feature set of the cable company DVR even comes close to that of the Tivo, then by all means do so. Don't listen to people on the forum tell you about what they can do with their Tivos that you can't do with your DVR because it'll just make you sad and jealous.

After having lived with one for way to long while waiting for a HD Tivo, I'd nearly pay the cable company a monthly fee just to keep their DVR away from me.

Even with the glitches I've experienced with my Tivo so far in the week I've had it, I'm glad I have it and I'm very glad the cable company DVR is out of my life.


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

On the other side of the fence...

Can the S3 view on demand / PPV programming?

That's pretty much all the Cableco DVR has on the S3. We don't even have on demand yet here but when Cox Phoenix gets around to it I'll probably get one of their non-DVR STBS for this functionality.

I love the S3. Even with the hardware problems I've had with S3 #2 (2nd replacement is on the way now), I don't regret the cash outlay. Just add MRV and it would be just about perfect.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> I pay $3.50/mo for cable and get my HD OTA.


Then you are missing a LOT of good programming, on HD NET and Discovery HD in particular. You'll spend a grand on an HD DVR, but won't spend the extra bucks each month to have programming that's worth watching.



> 4) It's not $800, more like $600 online.


No one is buyng Series 3's for $600, online or anywhere else. Yeah, a FEW have found some bargains, but I've been shopping for several weeks and haven't found one for less that about $670 - from a company I would actually BUY one from. $670 is not "like $600", it's "like $700."


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Shawn95GT said:


> Can the S3 via on demand / PPV programming?


This is actually one major reason the cable companies offer DVR's at all - people with DVR's buy twice as much PPV programming as those without.

If there were more PPV in HD, I might partake of some of it myself. For now I'm going the "enhanced definition DVD" route and renting my movies from NetFlix and Blockbuster online, so the ability to access on-damand (which even the cable co DVR's will not record) and pay-per-view programming isn't a value-add for me.

Depending on what they start offering though, it could BECOME an issue for me. And I guess I hate to be completely blocked out from it, just in case there's something on that I really want to see, that's not out on "enhanced definition DVD" yet.


----------



## drwtsn32 (May 22, 2003)

I would love to get an S3. But there's no way I will until it supports On Demand. Even then I may be hard-pressed to spend that much on an S3 when I can rent a Moxi for only a few dollars more than the TiVo subscription.

Yeah, the Moxi is slow as dirt, but that is supposed to be fixed in the next software update. Plus the next software update enables USB 2.0 external HD support.


----------



## skanter (May 28, 2003)

I've kept my S2 and use it for SD, use the SA8300 only for HD. I've added an eSATA drive to the 8300 for about 70 hrs. of HD content. While not quite as good as Tivo's, the 8300 interface is fine and does the job. I might even get rid of the S2 as I don't watch much SD any more.

Will I buy an S3? Don't know yet, but I don't really feel any great need to at this point.


----------



## Shawn95GT (Oct 7, 2005)

drwtsn32 said:


> I would love to get an S3. But there's no way I will until it supports On Demand. Even then I may be hard-pressed to spend that much on an S3 when I can rent a Moxi for only a few dollars more than the TiVo subscription.


That'll be a long wait. Why do you need a DVR for OnDemand anyways? That seems to defeat the purpose of OnDemand.

Don't get me wrong... I'd love to be able to do PPV / VoD on my S3s but I know it isn't wasn't gonna happen before I bought my first box.

Shawn


----------



## Jerry_K (Feb 7, 2002)

It just works. And my lovely wife loves TiVo. I get HD and pay nothing to any cable or satellite company for that. (I am paying dearly to DirecTV for SD but that is on TiVo as well) 

So far I am ahead about half the price of the first TiVo Series 3 by not paying one thin dime to the rip off cable company here on the Isle of Kent. Tonight I got 6 High Def shows that either or both my lovely wife and I like recorded on the TiVo.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

If Digeo makes the improvements to their product that they are claiming, I'll feel bad, but even if Digeo offers the new features, Charter can, and probably will, disable them. 30-second skip for sure, and I'll be VERY surprised if they enable the USB port for external storage.

I too have been trying to convince myself to wait it out, but the 11 hour capacity of the rented DVR is just totally inadequate, I can't record ABC or CBS because I have to get them OTA, and my thumb is getting tired from all the button presses I have to make with the Moxi. I have never purchased an on-demand or ppv program outside of a hotel, preferring to rent a DVD, so that feature isn't tying me to the cable companies box.

Bottom line, I just broke down and ordered an S3.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

phox_mulder said:


> Can the Cable DVR record 2 shows at a time?


Yes, and they could YEARS before an SA TiVo could. Dual tuner functionality is old hat in the DVR world. UTV did it first in 01 followed by DirecTv with their TiVo integrated unit. Only TiVo customers have been without this feature.



> Can the Cable DVR record from Cable or antenna?
> Analog and Digital cable? HD from Cable? (ok, these ones it can do)
> Analog (NTSC) and Digital (ATSC) and High Definition from an antenna?


Uhhh, many people get cable to put their antenna away, but you sure got the cableco DVR's there, not OTA.



> Does the Cable DVR have TiVo? Season Passes? Wishlists? Suggestions?


In a way that is suitable to the VAST MAJORITY of people. Sorry folks, but MOST people in the marketplace, couldn't care less about suggestions and wishlists. Everyone's been doing SP's for years.



> This is why the Series3 is a bit more money.
> 
> phox


A bit? $670 plus $20/ month unless you want to commit. (you don't have to with the cableco, they aren't as worried as TiVo).

Admit it phox, you made your post not from experience, but from what you've read here right? You obviously don't have a clue that other DVR makers were improving their products while TiVo was spending 5 years trying to figure out how to offer dual tuners to cable users.


----------



## George Cifranci (Jan 30, 2003)

Billy66 said:


> Uhhh, many people get cable to put their antenna away, but you sure got the cableco DVR's there, not OTA.


Yeah, many people do get cable to put away their antenna. But guess what? There are markets such as here in Columbus Ohio where we don't get all the HD local channels because of disputes between the cable co and the station owners. Here in Columbus we don't get the ABC HD or FOX HD channels. So for a year while I had Time Warners piece of f**king sh*t SA 8300HD DVR I couldn't record anything from those 2 local channels. I could watch them since my HDTV has a tuner in it, but no way could I record them. Now that I have my TiVo S3 I can record those channels along with all the channels I get via cable.



Billy66 said:


> In a way that is suitable to the VAST MAJORITY of people. Sorry folks, but MOST people in the marketplace, couldn't care less about suggestions and wishlists. Everyone's been doing SP's for years.


I think they would care if they ever got to experience those features, especially Wishlists.



Billy66 said:


> Admit it phox, you made your post not from experience, but from what you've read here right? You obviously don't have a clue that other DVR makers were improving their products while TiVo was spending 5 years trying to figure out how to offer dual tuners to cable users.


Experience!? Are you kidding me!!?? More than a few of us have had to use the cable companies HD DVR's for some time now (me for over a year) in order to record HD programming! We have had plenty of experience! I had to suffer using that piece of mediocre crap called a Scientific Atlanta 8300HD DVR using Passport Software. You know, the one where you can't search for more than 3 days in advance unless you fast forwarded through the guide for a bit to force it to download more data?? The one that only had about 25 hours of record time that isn't expandable (it had a eSata port that wasn't activated by the cable co) so you had to constantly pick and choose what you had to delete in order to make room for other things? The one that seemed to be too stupid to figure out the difference between episodes of shows and recorded duplicates? The one with the mediocre interface? The one that is about to get the new Navigator software that Time Warner is rolling out that won't show program descriptions?? The one that crashed and rebooted? The one that had issues with its HDMI port? etc...etc... Give me a break!

My experience with the SA 8300HD was so bad that I was willing to pay $680 (plus another $500 for a 750GB HD upgrade). After I got my cable cards installed in the S3 I returned that POS SA 8300HD to the cable company in record time.

My experience with the SA 8300HD was so bad that even with the little bugs that the TiVo S3 currently has it feels like heaven compared to the cable company DVR.

So don't pretend you know what our "experience" with cable company DVR's is like pal.

"Improvements" my ass.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

While SP's are kind of available on the cable company's box they don't hold a candle to TiVo's. In my area and the software availavble on the SA 8300 you cannot set it up to record first run only, there is no 28 day rule so it will continue to repeat recordings that you already saw, conflicts can easily occure and you would not be aware of them and nothing will get recorded.

Reliability of the SA 8300 is very much into question. Mine frequently missed programs and you could count on two to three times a week getting a partial recording. I went through 3 machines in two years and had the same problem each time. Since I have got my S3 I've had two partial recordings and I narrowed that down to amber alerts interrupting the recording. Cable company does that, not the S3.

Analog programs are viewed with far better pq then with my cable company's DVR. It also comes with 12 hours more disk space for recording HD plus you can control the quality of analog programs so you can record even more analog if you choose.

Wishlist are a very important factor if you never used it before you will love it. No need to set up a different season pass for each new "Survivor".

I owned a cable company DVR for over 2 years and I was so happy when TiVo came out with the S3 that I didn't hesitate to purchase it at 800.00. All I wanted was a DVR that worked. TiVo does that. And in fact my cable bill came down 14.00 a month after I got rid of their pos box.

Billy 66, do you even own an S3?


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

George Cifranci said:


> My experience with the SA 8300HD was so bad that I was willing to pay $680 (plus another $500 for a 750GB HD upgrade). After I got my cable cards installed in the S3 I returned that POS SA 8300HD to the cable company in record time.
> 
> My experience with the SA 8300HD was so bad that even with the little bugs that the TiVo S3 currently has it feels like heaven compared to the cable company DVR.
> 
> ...


uhh, where'd you get *our* from internet tough guy? Go back and read a bit, it was phox's experience with the cableco DVR that I questioned. He didn't seem to know what it did or didn't do.

Nice rant though.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

Billy66 said:


> Go back and read a bit, it was phox's experience with the cableco DVR that I questioned. He didn't seem to know what it did or didn't do.


Why don't you go back and read a bit? All phox did was ask a series of questions. He never made any assertions about his level of experience with a cable company DVR.

Of course, why let the facts get in the way of a personal attack? Is it possible for you to make a post without one?


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

hookbill said:


> Billy 66, do you even own an S3?


Hey Hook,

I think I came off seeming to say that *I think* a cableco DVR is better than an S3. I'm not saying that. I am intimately familiar with the Tivo interface and features since software version 1.21.

But I do NOT own an S3. I'm here watching and some day I may. You will note, that I don't post about bugs that the S3 has or speak in any way that is specific to the S3.

I'm a bit of a detractor lately. Partially to keep the fanboy base at bay. But I'm watching and have a current situation that is always under evaluation.

This thread is germane to that because compared to most (all?) integrated solutions, the S3 appears to be quite expensive.

I responded to phox because he did rip a box that it appears he knows very little about.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

GoHokies! said:


> Why don't you go back and read a bit? All phox did was ask a series of questions. He never made any assertions about his level of experience with a cable company DVR.
> 
> Of course, why let the facts get in the way of a personal attack? Is it possible for you to make a post without one?


Hokies,

Where did I attack phox personally? I just pointed out that it appears he hasn't used one.

He wasn't simply asking questions. he posed the questions and then offered the summary from those questions that were to be reasons to pay more for the S3. he wasn't asking anything.



> Is it possible for you to make a post without one?


Now, this is the second time you've attacked me personally the last time you winked out on a technicality, but it's not needed, we can discuss this without it.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

Billy66 said:


> Hokies,
> 
> Where did I attack phox personally? I just pointed out that it appears he hasn't used one.
> 
> He wasn't simply asking questions. he posed the questions and then offered the summary from those questions that were to be reasons to pay more for the S3. he wasn't asking anything.


I'm sorry, the rest of us must be wrong then - attacking someone's credibility must not be a personal attack at all. You got pretty defensive when hookbill questioned yours, but I suppose that's different.



> Now, this is the second time you've attacked me personally the last time you winked out on a technicality, but it's not needed, we can discuss this without it.


I honestly don't remember, I just call them like I see them. I'm curious what "technicality" I slipped by on though.

I certainly don't look on this as a "personal attack" either. If you don't like being accused of making personal attacks, then I suggest you stop making them.

If you have operated an S3 and a cable company DVR, then you would understand the difference. Since you don't, might I suggest a little more time reading this thread and a little less dragging it further off course with your uncalled for personal attacks.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

GoHokies! said:


> I'm sorry, the rest of us must be wrong then - attacking someone's credibility must not be a personal attack at all. You got pretty defensive when hookbill questioned yours, but I suppose that's different.
> 
> I honestly don't remember, I just call them like I see them. I'm curious what "technicality" I slipped by on though.
> 
> ...


Should I NOT question his credibility based on what was posted? Again, how was my way of asking him an attack? You say the rest of us, it seems like it's you that thought it was an attack, George that thought it was me questioning every S3 user's experience, and Hook simply recounting his own.

I responded to hook and I tried to be clear. I stand by my knowledge of the TiVo software and interface.

You seem so angry GoHokies! Was it really that I suggested phox didn't know much about cableco DVR's or is it because I questioned how long it took tiVo to provide that feature for cable users?



> I honestly don't remember, I just call them like I see them. I'm curious what "technicality" I slipped by on though.


It starts here and then later you step back saying you weren't calling me a name... http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=4697312&highlight=Billy66#post4697312

If you want to fight more, send me a PM and we can have a blast.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

For the record I was just recounting my experience with my favorite punching bag, the SA 8300. I did perceive Billy's post as being pro cable anti S3. I merely asked if he actually owned an S3 because I had thought he didn't.

Personally I didn't feel his response was defensive to me, he answered my question.

I still however feel that best people to speak on this particular subject is someone who has experienced them both. Adding "expertise" and "knowledge" isn't quite the same as ownership and experience.

And my experience again is cable box=pos, S3=wonderful.


----------



## drwtsn32 (May 22, 2003)

Shawn95GT said:


> That'll be a long wait. Why do you need a DVR for OnDemand anyways? That seems to defeat the purpose of OnDemand.


On Demand has many shows and episodes available that are not on the normal schedule. Otherwise, yeah, I could just record it and watch later.


----------



## drwtsn32 (May 22, 2003)

haysdb said:


> If Digeo makes the improvements to their product that they are claiming, I'll feel bad, but even if Digeo offers the new features, Charter can, and probably will, disable them. 30-second skip for sure, and I'll be VERY surprised if they enable the USB port for external storage.


Why wouldn't they enable it? Charter has so far enabled all the other extra features on the device: Games, DVI, etc. Personally, the lack of 30 second skip doesn't bother me at all. I have been able to get by with the lame 9 hour HD/80 hour SD recording capacity, but 4.1 finally has support for external USB 2.0 which will be nice.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

I hear ya hook. The question for the OP and many is if it is worth $XX more than their other choice. I've been lulled to sleep on cheap DVR service with Sat(lifetime for as many boxes). So it's a barrier.

Anyway, I was more responding to phox than trying to say the cableco DVR is better than any version of TiVo. I don't believe it to be true.

But seriously Hook, is there anything new in the TiVo part of the S3 that I wouldn't have actual experience with? I've used dual tuners for several years, had OTA integration on an HR10, experienced all TiVo SA features on an SA series 2. Is there something new I would learn about the S3 by using it, that I haven't learned from all of the other versions of tivo I've used since 1999? That's a serious question.

Thanks


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

phox_mulder said:


> Forgot the Buffer.
> 
> Does the Cable Company DVR have dual buffers?
> 
> phox


Yes, the Moto iGuide does.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

Billy66 said:


> I hear ya hook. The question for the OP and many is if it is worth $XX more than their other choice. I've been lulled to sleep on cheap DVR service with Sat(lifetime for as many boxes). So it's a barrier.
> 
> Anyway, I was more responding to phox than trying to say the cableco DVR is better than any version of TiVo. I don't believe it to be true.
> 
> ...


Well, you may know this already specially since I already mentioned it but when you actually see the picture difference on analog channels between the SA 8300 and the S3 I don't believe you can fully appreciate it. Also pq on HD is a world of difference. Remember I'm not talking about anything but cable here. I claim no knowledge of OTA other then what I read and I know nothing about the HR10.

So while I'm not questioning your knowledge I still say that if you haven't owned the S3 and a cable DVR you still don't have full knowledge of what the true difference is. And that's not to say you don't have a right to post your opinion based on what you know.


----------



## gwsat (Sep 14, 2006)

Shawn95GT said:


> On the other side of the fence...
> 
> Can the S3 view on demand / PPV programming?
> 
> That's pretty much all the Cableco DVR has on the S3. We don't even have on demand yet here but when Cox Phoenix gets around to it I'll probably get one of their non-DVR STBS for this functionality.


While the S3 wont work with the cable companys On Demand Channel, it WILL handle Pay-Per-View programming. Its only limitation is its inability to let you order through your S3 with the press of a button on your remote. Instead, you must call the cable company, order the PPV program you want, note the time it will be shown and channel on which it will be shown, and set the S3 for the appropriate time and channel. Thats no big deal, it seems to me.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

Thanks again hook. I did, as you guessed, discount any PQ difference.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

drwtsn32 said:


> Why wouldn't they enable it? Charter has so far enabled all the other extra features on the device: Games, DVI, etc. Personally, the lack of 30 second skip doesn't bother me at all. I have been able to get by with the lame 9 hour HD/80 hour SD recording capacity, but 4.1 finally has support for external USB 2.0 which will be nice.


I am lumping Charter in with Cox, with whom I have many years of experience. I have only been with Charter for a couple of months, so that's probably not fair. However, my exerience with Charter tech support has been hair pulling, just like Cox, so it's easy to put them in the same basket.

Does ANYONE support external hard drives? Or rather, does ANY cable company currently enable the external hard drive port? Maybe once one of them does, they all will, but it will mean extra tech support headaches for the cable companies, so it wouldn't surprise me to see them not enable that feature. What's in it for them?


----------



## dt_dc (Jul 31, 2003)

haysdb said:


> Does ANYONE support external hard drives? Or rather, does ANY cable company currently enable the external hard drive port?


Just about any cable company that uses the Scientific Atlanta boxes (and recent enough firmware) has external eSATA hard drive capabilities. No cable company I know of really 'supports' the feature ... but it does work.

The SARA software supports external drives reasonably well ... before switching to FiOS I was on Cox with an 8300HD running SARA with external hard drive attached. Friends in the area had the same box / software / external drive with Comcast. The Passport software, from reports, supports external drives as well but with a couple little 'glitches'.

For the Motorola hardware ... supposedly there is currently a (Motorola) issue with their eSATA ports / support ... which (again, supposedly) Motorola is working to address / fix. Note: I don't have anything official on this but I've heard it through the grapevine from enough places that I'm starting to believe it.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

> Also pq on HD is a world of difference.


You have had both units, so you would know better than I, but how would there be a difference in picture quality on HD? The boxes BOTH just record the data stream then replay it. The quality of HD should be identical.

I will partially answer my own question. The cable box will convert the video from it's native format to whatever you specify, be that 720p or 1080i. There could definitely be differences in the quality of that deainterlacing and scaling. I have mine set to just output all HD in it's native format, letting my TV do the upconversion to 1080 when that's necessary, and I have absolutely NO complaints about the picture quality from the Moxi.

Another reason the quality could be different is if you are connected via component, in which case there's a digital-analog conversion taking place inside the box. There could be a difference there.

Still, I am skeptical that the quality of HD is going to be much different between ANY two cable boxes. The two that I have had, two different Motorola platforms, have both had outstanding picture quality in HD and I will be shocked if the S3 is any better.


----------



## ADG (Aug 20, 2003)

I see no difference in picture quality (HD or SD) between the SA and the Tivo. Both are connected to my Sony 40V2500 via HDMI and both display excellent pictures. The only difference I do notice is the following: both units output to a number of sets in the rest of the house (rca & s-vid to modulators to rf), and when the source is the SA the scaling on the non-HD sets in the house is excellent while the Tivo distorts slightly, regardless of the display mode setting (panel, full or zoom). This isn't a complaint since the units are certainly not designed for this type of use, it's simply an observation.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Still, I am skeptical that the quality of HD is going to be much different between ANY two cable boxes. The two that I have had, two different Motorola platforms, have both had outstanding picture quality in HD and I will be shocked if the S3 is any better.


Well, your absolutely wrong and I'll explain why. First their the S3 has THX technology, the only DVR with type of technology. This guarantees that there will be no compromise in the video signal. When you watch HD through the SA 8300 you frequently have freezes, dropouts, etc. Not with the S3 (all though I will admit some people complain). I personally have not seen anything like the amount of drop outs that I saw on my old SA 8300. If I do see a drop out it's less then a second. Sometimes the SA 8300 the whole show would be barely watchable.

I had my SA 8300 hooked up along with my S3 and there was a definite difference in clarity of the picture. No mistaking it. The S3 delivers a better picture.

And the reason for this is technology and design. Now is the S3 expensive? For sure, but if you want a reliable DVR with superior pq there is no beating the S3. Also I emphasize the word RELIABLE. I went through 3 SA 8300, not one better then the other.


----------



## mikebridge (Sep 18, 2000)

snob factor of THX certification?

service provider neutrality? recording space expansion (with some technical know how required). interface. promise of bells, whistles, and other shiny things in the future?


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

HD picture quality is dependent on the chip used to decode the MPEG stream. There can be a pretty big difference in the quality of HD produced by two boxes using different chips.

Case in point, the HD from the S3 is noticably better than the HR10 from DirecTV. I'm talking OTA, so no other differences. I'm watching on a 60" 1080p SXRD set, ISF calibrated.

The SA and Moto boxes uses even older HD chips than the HR10 (last I knew), so their pictures will look worse to the trained eye.

To Joe Consumer watching on some Best Buy Special HD TV, you probably won't see a difference. To someone who cares about HD picture quality, watching on a calibrated 1080p set, you will most definitely see a difference.


----------



## FlippedBit (Dec 25, 2001)

mrdazzo7 said:


> I love Tivo and I love their functionality, but I can't figure out why Series 3's are so highly priced ...


All new generation TiVos have been expensive when they first came out. Figure out what the S3 is worth to you and then wait. You will eventually be able to get it at the price you want. Maybe even free with a service contract.

So the answer to your question is "because it is new". However, the question you should be asking is "what is the S3 worth to me and how long will I have to wait for the S3 to be available at that price?"


----------



## FlippedBit (Dec 25, 2001)

Stanley Rohner said:


> Even $600 seems a little over-priced plus the $12.95/month just for the privledge of using it just so you can say - I have a TiVo.


Right now you can get $8.31/month with 3 years prepaid. That is better than the $10/month some are paying for a cableco DVR. In less than 4 months the minimum price has dropped from $799 to less than $600, be patient grasshopper. I certainly didn't buy the S3 just so I can say I have one, I bought it because I wanted it. If you want one just so you can say you have one, then price is not your biggest issue.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

Why is the S3 so expensive? 

Because people are willing to pay that price. 

It's like "Why is a Mercedes so expensive when you can buy an Hyundai?"


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

I hear many of you complaining about the comcast DVR's having problems. I have had mine since last April and only problem hardware wise is a few times when the remote took a few seconds to send the signal. As far as softaware, yes the Tivo is a lot better. You can do more with it. I dont understand why Comcast doesnt have it available to network the DVR and beable to tell it to record programs by way of your computer. People talk about OTA vs cable. I enjoy watching good quaility TV. So when I got my 1080 42 inch TV I went with comcast's HD box. I was already paying for one of their packages and the HD content was included in that price. So it didnt cost me any more for HD. I do pay extra for their DVR. Would I like a S3? Yes I would but I cant see paying over $600 for it right now. Since I have a ser 2 hooked to a TV in another room the S3 would only cost me the additional $6.99 a month.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

One of the things no one has mentioned when talking pricing when comparing Comcast's DVR to S3 is what happens when some thing goes wrong. With Comcast you call up and they give you another box. With S3 you better had paid for an extended warrenty or you will be buying another one if the regular warrenty has run out. The 4 yr extended warrenty at Best buy is $50. I had a ser2 that quit after the regular warrenty ran out but my extended warrenty allowed me to not only get a replacement but because of the way Best buy handled the replacement I also got a $75 rebate. So when you are talking prices be sure to include the extended warrenty in the price.


----------



## RandyDtg (Apr 17, 2005)

Pinto versus Cadilac, hummn, I choose the Caddy.

TiVo, its a quality of life thing. My S3 is the best and only way to watch TV. If I couldn't have TiVo, I WOULD stop watching TV. Live TV sucks. My HD cable company DVR (SA8300HD) was horrible only because I had a TiVo S2 before it.

750 gig S3, the only way tah go, can yah imagine a 'Now Playing' list with hundreds of things to watch.......


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

This is a false dilemma here. We can't get HD DVR for anywhere near $10/month. First off, the rental fee is $20/month and there is a 6 month wait. Secondly, I have to spend an additional $13 in HD programming. $7 for some unknown reason to get HD locals even though I don't have to pay for them with regular cable cards. $6 because the HD Tier is required. So theoretically this would mean $33/month versus $3/month and after less than a year my lifetime xfer fee pays for itself.

Secondly, two of the five networks don't have HD on my cable company's line so I am one of those that has to use an OTA antenna to get HD on those channels. Without S3 I would get no HD on Fox or The CW.

Is there any cable company that lets you program the DVR online like tivo does? I've used that about 10 times in 2 months to catch a program I was going to miss otherwise due to being home late.

Are any of the DVRs even caught up to the original tivo when it comes to channel listings? I haven't seen a grid on a non-Tivo DVR that approaches the default Tivo grid for speed and ease of use.

While Tivo hasn't innovated a whole lot lately, they are still well ahead of other DVRs in all the ways that count. What does that say about those DVR companies? If tivo has been stagnant for 6 years and they still haven't caught up, that's pathetic.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

TAsunder said:


> This is a false dilemma here. We can't get HD DVR for anywhere near $10/month. First off, the rental fee is $20/month and there is a 6 month wait. Secondly, I have to spend an additional $13 in HD programming. $7 for some unknown reason to get HD locals even though I don't have to pay for them with regular cable cards. $6 because the HD Tier is required. So theoretically this would mean $33/month versus $3/month and after less than a year my lifetime xfer fee pays for itself.
> 
> Secondly, two of the five networks don't have HD on my cable company's line so I am one of those that has to use an OTA antenna to get HD on those channels. Without S3 I would get no HD on Fox or The CW.
> 
> ...


Yes, Amen to all you said plus the fact that many of their upgrades won't work on all cable system. Everyone in my area is still working with the same firmware they had last year. They tried once to upgrade but it created so much havic they downgraded immediately. And if I recall right all that upgrade had was an extra menu catagory, not that important and a faster fast forward which was actually too fast.


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

No, I've never had a Cable Company DVR.

I was merely stating what the S3 could do, assuming the CableCo DVR would lag behind in some areas.

Show me a CableCo DVR that can do all those things I mentioned,
I dare you, double dare you.

So far all I've heard is DVR A can do this, DVR B can do this, DVR C can do this, 
but none that can do it all.

Not to mention the very important fact, the Cable Company DVR isn't worth jack when you don't have Cable, completely useless.

I paid $650 for the S3, $199 to transfer lifetime.
I'll never have to pay another red cent to anyone, and will still have full functionality.

phox


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

Just thought of something else the Series3 can do, that I doubt a CableCo DVR can do.

Online Scheduling.

You're at work, someone mentions a program on that night, you really want to watch it but won't be home till after it's over, 2 minutes on TiVo.com and you'll get to see it.


phox


----------



## drwtsn32 (May 22, 2003)

haysdb said:


> Does ANYONE support external hard drives? Or rather, does ANY cable company currently enable the external hard drive port?


Yes, with the Moxi anyway. There's a small cable company in Bend, OR, (IIRC) that has already updated its users to the new Moxi software verison and external HD support works.



haysdb said:


> What's in it for them?


These companies know that hardware is important to retain their subscriber base. If their hardware starts to lag behind what is available in other markets (satellite, etc), they will lose customers. It's in their best interest to have more advanced DVRs.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

None of you seem to have addressed the question. You are all discussing why it's worth more, not why it costs more. 

The S3 is as expensive as it is because you are buying it. The cable company DVR is being bought by the cable company and then you are renting\leasing it. The answer has nothing to do with features or which is better. 

Besides the obivous that the Tivo is far better, once you buy something you own it. If it breaks you have to pay to replace or fix it. With a leased unit you can just return it and get another.


----------



## yunlin12 (Mar 15, 2003)

mrdazzo7 said:


> I love Tivo and I love their functionality, but I can't figure out why Series 3's are so highly priced when most people I know are renting HDDvr's from the cable company for an extra 10/mo without the extra equipment to buy...Why are the S3's *that* much different?
> 
> Im frustrated because I bought an S2 dual tuner a few months ago, then unexpectedly upgraded to an HD Tv, but now I can't record any of the HD channels.... Plus I'm not spending $800, I just think that's so up there. Is there a reason why it's so expensive compared to the cable company's DVR's?


You have the S2DT, so you know what Tivo is all about. What you don't know if how bad is the cable DVR? So why not just rent a cable DVR and compare, it'll only cost you $10/mo to try it. The only major different (IMHO) is the TTG and MRV. There are some other minor difference such as KidZone, one button delete/undelete folder, and 8.1 on the S2DT is zippier than 8.01c on S3.

Also since you already have the S2DT, you can get the S3 and put it on MSD, so your monthly sub fee will actually be lower than the cable DVR, which are usually ~$10/month.


----------



## yunlin12 (Mar 15, 2003)

HiDefGator said:


> None of you seem to have addressed the question. You are all discussing why it's worth more, not why it costs more.
> 
> The S3 is as expensive as it is because you are buying it. The cable company DVR is being bought by the cable company and then you are renting\leasing it. The answer has nothing to do with features or which is better.
> 
> Besides the obivous that the Tivo is far better, once you buy something you own it. If it breaks you have to pay to replace or fix it. With a leased unit you can just return it and get another.


1. S3 has 2 NTSC/ATSC tuner in addition to the 2 cable tuners that the cable DVRs have.

2. Some of the Motorola models (DCT-3412 and 3416) can only do digital cable, and not analog cable, where as S3 can do both analog and digital.

3. S3 also has 2 cable card slots, so it can work with any cable vendor, and Verizon FIOS, and not just locked down to one cable provider.

4. S3's hardware can decode MPEG2 and MPEG4, where as Motorola''s DVR (DCT-6412) can only do MPEG2. MPEG4 decoding takes a lot more muscle than MPEG2. Tivo add a BCM7411KPB0 chip to do the MPEG4/VC1 decoding.

5. S3 has a 250GB HDD compared to the typical 120-160GB HDD that Motorola DVRs have.

6. S3 has a nice (IMO) LED screen in front which displays which shows are being recorded, vs the big 7 seg LCD display on cable DVR's front.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

HiDefGator said:


> None of you seem to have addressed the question. You are all discussing why it's worth more, not why it costs more.


See post #55. It's expensive because people are willing to pay the price.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

haysdb said:


> Then you are missing a LOT of good programming, on HD NET and Discovery HD in particular. You'll spend a grand on an HD DVR, but won't spend the extra bucks each month to have programming that's worth watching.


I had HDNet and DiscoveryHD with DirecTV and never watched. I do miss ESPN HD and HBO-HD a little, but not $65-$75/month worth.

I could buy a new Series3 every year for that!!

And I DIDN'T spend a grand. I sold my HR10 for $425, my DirecTiVo's for $100/each, so I paid $0 for my S3. I only paid $299 for 3 years of service, and I pay $6.95/mo for the second one.



haysdb said:


> No one is buyng Series 3's for $600, online or anywhere else. Yeah, a FEW have found some bargains, but I've been shopping for several weeks and haven't found one for less that about $670 - from a company I would actually BUY one from. $670 is not "like $600", it's "like $700."


No one? Dell was selling them for under $600. Several people on here bought them. Personally I paid $679 with shipping, quite a ways back.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

> Why are the S3's so expensive when you can rent the DVR for $10/month


Because it's not $10/month for me. I'm paying Comcast $16.77/month right now for limited basic and 2 CableCards. If I want to get the Comcast DVR, I would have to pay $76.40/month.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Dear original poster.

Get a better job.

From smak

-smak-


----------



## TriBruin (Dec 10, 2003)

HiDefGator said:


> None of you seem to have addressed the question. You are all discussing why it's worth more, not why it costs more.
> 
> The S3 is as expensive as it is because you are buying it. The cable company DVR is being bought by the cable company and then you are renting\leasing it. The answer has nothing to do with features or which is better.
> 
> Besides the obivous that the Tivo is far better, once you buy something you own it. If it breaks you have to pay to replace or fix it. With a leased unit you can just return it and get another.


One very important other difference. Cable heavily subsidizes their costs to get you to rent their DVR.Now that I have upgraded one of TVs to HDTV, I wanted a HDTV DVR. I can not convince my wife that $650 is a reasonable investment. So I opted to upgrade my cable server (Enhanced Analog ~$50/mo. to Digital ~$70 + DVR & HD Fee). So, my net upgrade cost is more like $30/mo. In addition, Comcast now has a On-Demand box in front of me. I am sure they are hoping/expecting me to purchase some On Demand (not likely, but others like me probably would). Additional revenue for Comcast.

Comcast, Cox and others can afford to sell/rent their DVRs at a loss, know that other income is directly tied to it. Tivo can not, they must be profitable between the cost of Hardware & Service.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

RBlount said:


> One very important other difference. Cable heavily subsidizes their costs to get you to rent their DVR.Now that I have upgraded one of TVs to HDTV, I wanted a HDTV DVR. I can not convince my wife that $650 is a reasonable investment. So I opted to upgrade my cable server (Enhanced Analog ~$50/mo. to Digital ~$70 + DVR & HD Fee). So, my net upgrade cost is more like $30/mo. In addition, Comcast now has a On-Demand box in front of me. I am sure they are hoping/expecting me to purchase some On Demand (not likely, but others like me probably would). Additional revenue for Comcast.
> 
> Comcast, Cox and others can afford to sell/rent their DVRs at a loss, know that other income is directly tied to it. Tivo can not, they must be profitable between the cost of Hardware & Service.


Exactly!


----------



## QZ1 (Mar 24, 2003)

yunlin12 said:


> 1. S3 has 2 NTSC/ATSC tuner in addition to the 2 cable tuners that the cable DVRs have.
> 
> 2. Some of the Motorola models (DCT-3412 and 3416) can only do digital cable, and not analog cable, where as S3 can do both analog and digital.
> 
> ...


1. I get all of my Locals in HD from Cable, so I don't need the OTA tuners. Granted some areas don't get a few HD Locals from Cable.
2. The 3412 & 3416 are newer and All-Digital for a reason, they are for MSOs that are All-Digital Simulcasting, so no need for Analog tuners. If an area still doesn't have ADS they get the 6412 & 6416 for Digital/Analog.
3. That's a positive for Tivo, but irrelevant that the Cable DVR can't be moved, as they are just rented.
4. I don't know enough about MPEG specs., but possibly it is not needed for cable broadcasts, yet?
5. Absolutely, the Tivo is much better for HDD space.
6. I guess so, but some are complaining that it dims quickly, while the Motorola stays fully lit always.


----------



## TAsunder (Aug 6, 2003)

QZ1 said:


> 6. I guess so, but some are complaining that it dims quickly, while the Motorola stays fully lit always.


It's still pretty readable and extremely useful. One of the best features of the S3 coming from an S1 standpoint.


----------



## CTLesq (Jan 19, 2003)

Like housing in Manhattan, the cost of the S3 to a cable DVR relative. When people complain there is no affordable housing in Manhattan, I like to point out to them, yes, there is - just not affordable for you.

Sure, I could live in a 2,500 square foot colonial in suburbia for pennies on the dollar compared to my home in Manhattan. But I could also be eating dinner tonight at one of the garbage chain resturants the people in "Happy Hour" part of this site love so much.

Neither one is going to happen.

Love live the S3. Long live a price that keeps it expensive enough that the poor cannot afford it.

Craig


----------



## gusbear (Oct 24, 2004)

I don't think the question is _"Why is the TiVo so expensive_"? After all, that's a Linux-PC in there with a big chunk of storage, D/A and A/D video circuitry, television tuners, etc. Plus, you're getting the TiVo operating system.

The real question is: _"Why are Cable DVRs so cheap_?!?" They can record and time-shift, but are not as functional as the TiVos. And they generally have far less storage. But still, they're not trivial technology. Can you imagine renting a HDTV for $10/month? Or even a VCR?

It's the same reason you can get a variety of free (or $5) phones from your cellular provider: they subsidize the hardware with the monthly fees. Many American consumers prefer to take higher recurring costs over a big initial outlay, even when it can actually cost more in the long run. In Europe/Asia, they have much more advanced cellular phones because the providers don't subsidize the phones and therefore there is a competitive market for the hardware; in the US, phones are "free" and usually locked to your provider, making it difficult to market advanced phones to more than a fraction of users.

The same for the TiVo. We don't want the mediocre, subsidized DVR from the cable company. And I would guess that (TiVoS3 + Monthly Fees + OTA record + Basic Cable) over three years would actually be less than full cable plus their DVR.

Gus


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

CTLesq said:


> Love live the S3. Long live a price that keeps it expensive enough that the poor cannot afford it.
> 
> Craig


   

Now that counselor, was funny!


----------



## bareyb (Dec 1, 2000)

An S3 is a luxury item. There was a time in my life I could never have afforded one. Much less two like I have now. My slightly biased truth is that if you can at all afford it then get it. It's better than the Comcast DVR. I happen to have both. Could I use the Comcast DVR solely if I had to? Sure. Especially since I figured out how to get 30 second skip to work on it. It's a clumsy, non-intuitive, clunky thing to work, but it does the job. 

My thing is, that TV is the one non-essential item that I pay for that I actually use on a daily basis. It's SO nice having TiVo and HD. If you have an HDTV and can afford TiVo then TiVo is the way to go. Even if you have to give up buying something else for awhile. Good time of year to lose weight... Maybe give up food for a few weeks? It's all about priorities.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

hookbill said:


> Well, your absolutely wrong and I'll explain why. First their the S3 has THX technology, the only DVR with type of technology.


Hooey, TXH is a certification, NOT a technology. And just because a device does NOT have the TXH logo doesn't automatically mean it doesn't meet those very same specifications, but only means they haven't had their device certified, and there is a cost associated with doing that, and not every company finds it worth the cache' of having that logo on their device. [take a breath]

I'm not knocking TXH or THX certification, it IS a guarantee of quality, I'm just saying it only means the device in question meets those standards, not necessarily that some other device doesn't also.



> This guarantees that there will be no compromise in the video signal.


Well, not precisely, unless the TXH standard explicitly requires absolutely PERFECT performance, whatever that might mean. It's a set of benchmarks that a device must meet in order to earn the privilege of wearing the THX logo (and the privilege of paying money to Lucasfilm).



> I had my SA 8300 hooked up along with my S3 and there was a definite difference in clarity of the picture. No mistaking it. The S3 delivers a better picture.


I'm not arguing that point, as I have never owned an SA 8300. But it's unfair and incorrect to assert that the Tivo is superior to EVERY other cable box on the market in video and audio quality. [IF that is what you are saying.]



> if you want a reliable DVR with superior pq there is no beating the S3. Also I emphasize the word RELIABLE.


I can only speak to my own experience with a Motorola 6412 and a Motorola Moxi. Both were and are reliable devices, with impeccable video quality ON THE HD CHANNELS. But I will more-or-less concede this point, since we should be guaranteed that the Tivo will be AT LEAST AS GOOD and reliable as any cable company's offering.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> To Joe Consumer watching on some Best Buy Special HD TV, you probably won't see a difference. To someone who cares about HD picture quality, watching on a calibrated 1080p set, you will most definitely see a difference.


I'm no "golden eye" but oh how I would dearly love to participate in a double-blind test of HD video quality. NOT that I am arguing that there ARE differences in the video processors, only that I would like to see them for myself, under controlled conditions, and see how the golden eyes do in comparison.

Another point to make, if your cable box is feeding your TV a native signal (as mine is), the TV will be doing the deinterlacing and scaling, in which case it doesn't much matter what chip is in the DVR, but what chip is in your TV.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

dt_dc said:


> Just about any cable company that uses the Scientific Atlanta boxes (and recent enough firmware) has external eSATA hard drive capabilities.


I stand corrected. I was ignorant of that fact.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

RandyDtg said:


> TiVo, its a quality of life thing. My S3 is the best and only way to watch TV. If I couldn't have TiVo, I WOULD stop watching TV. Live TV sucks. My HD cable company DVR (SA8300HD) was horrible only because I had a TiVo S2 before it.


I am certainly hoping my quality of life improves once my Tivo arrives.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

TAsunder said:


> I haven't seen a grid on a non-Tivo DVR that approaches the default Tivo grid for speed and ease of use.


My "argument" to this, as elucidated elsewhere in another thread, is that Tivo (and ReplayTV) did their channel guides in "the obvious way" and then they sought are were granted patents. Everyone else has to do it some other way.

This is only a theory, I have absolutely no evidence, but if other companies COULD copy the "look and feel" of a Tivo, wouldn't they have?

Wish Lists etal would also have to be implemented in some other way.

This would explain why no one has caught up to Tivo on any of these features. I feel the same way about my ReplayTV. It's one of the few things my wife and I argued over in the divorce! She ended up with it, and it still works like a champ, although obviously not in HD.

Anyone have any links to exactly what Tivo does have patents on? [I haven't looked.  ]


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

hookbill said:


> Yes, Amen to all you said plus the fact that many of their upgrades won't work on all cable system. Everyone in my area is still working with the same firmware they had last year. They tried once to upgrade but it created so much havic they downgraded immediately. And if I recall right all that upgrade had was an extra menu catagory, not that important and a faster fast forward which was actually too fast.


Imagine Tivo's task then, to interoperate with ALL cable companies.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

drwtsn32 said:


> These companies know that hardware is important to retain their subscriber base. If their hardware starts to lag behind what is available in other markets (satellite, etc), they will lose customers. It's in their best interest to have more advanced DVRs.


Good argument. But I wonder if there is a battle for supremacy on that front, or if it's more a just wanting to stay even kind of thing? Will a significant number of subscribers go one way or another based on the quality of one company's DVR vs anothers? I don't know. Definitely some of us would, although that certainly wouldn't be the ONLY factor for me. All else being equal, yeah, I'd go with the company with the best equipment, but not if, for example, they offered much less in the way of HD programming.

Bottom line though, I would have to say I agree with that argument, and cable companies should be motivated, to at least some extent, to improve their offerings. Not as motivated as Tivo should be though, a company having to compete with "free" cable boxes.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

yunlin12 said:


> 1. S3 has 2 NTSC/ATSC tuner in addition to the 2 cable tuners that the cable DVRs have.
> 
> 2. Some of the Motorola models (DCT-3412 and 3416) can only do digital cable, and not analog cable, where as S3 can do both analog and digital.
> 
> ...


All good reasons, but riddle me this: how is MPEG4 an advantage when there is no MPEG4 to decode? If this codec were used by a cable company, every device without MPEG4 would go black, no? To partly answer my own question, if Tivo were to offer downloadable content, the superior compression of MPEG4 would make that content download quicker. It's a nice bit of "future-proofing."

WILL Tivo be offering such "on demand" programming? I mean, have they talked about it and maybe even indicated when it might be coming?


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> No one? Dell was selling them for under $600. Several people on here bought them. Personally I paid $679 with shipping, quite a ways back.


Oooh, SEVERAL people. The best real street price, outside of Guido's of New York, has been around $680 with shipping.

And I did admit that a few people had gotten really killer deals on an S3.

[I am buying from Guido's of California.]


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

c3 said:


> Because it's not $10/month for me. I'm paying Comcast $16.77/month right now for limited basic and 2 CableCards. If I want to get the Comcast DVR, I would have to pay $76.40/month.


Just thought I'd look at my Charter statement.

DVR Service 11.98

Hmmm, that's the only thing I will drop when I get my S3. I will still pay the $6.99 for the HD tier, because I watch a ton of stuff on HDNet, Discovery HD, ESPN HD, HBO HD, etc. I will still subscribe to digital cable for that same reason. Without that I'm limited to the 5 networks OTA in HD.

Hmmm, actually there isn't even an extra charge for digital cable listed on my bill. It must be part of the $42.99 "package" I bought when I subscribed.

$11.98.


----------



## yunlin12 (Mar 15, 2003)

haysdb said:


> All good reasons, but riddle me this: how is MPEG4 an advantage when there is no MPEG4 to decode? If this codec were used by a cable company, every device without MPEG4 would go black, no? To partly answer my own question, if Tivo were to offer downloadable content, the superior compression of MPEG4 would make that content download quicker. It's a nice bit of "future-proofing."
> 
> WILL Tivo be offering such "on demand" programming? I mean, have they talked about it and maybe even indicated when it might be coming?


I was simply posting the pieces that went into the S3 that would make the box cost more, not arguing whether the pieces that are add are actually useful or not. I sure hope Tivo make good use of the hardware, like HD MP4 TivoCast or something like that.


----------



## inaka (Nov 26, 2001)

phox_mulder said:


> No, I've never had a Cable Company DVR.
> 
> I was merely stating what the S3 could do, assuming the CableCo DVR would lag behind in some areas.
> 
> ...


That's all well and good, but if you're never paying a red cent to anyone going forward, then you'll also never be able to view Monday Night Football on ESPN HD, or other HD cable channels like TNT-HD, FSN-HD, MTV-HD, Discovery-HD, ESPN2-HD, etc., let alone HD OnDemand from Cable.

It just seems kind of funny how your posts say inflamatory things like "I dare you, double dare you" to find a CableCo DVR that can do *exactly* what a S3 TiVo can do, when you're personally obviously not even watching HD cable programming which is a HUGE minus to most people. I mean, who cares if you have a Wishlist or Suggestions when those with supposedly shoddy CableCo DVRs are able to view so much more programming in HD that you can for far less, since you personally elect to not pay for cable? Just seems like a slanted argument.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

haysdb said:


> All good reasons, but riddle me this: how is MPEG4 an advantage when there is no MPEG4 to decode?


Internet download?


----------



## phox_mulder (Feb 23, 2006)

inaka said:


> It just seems kind of funny how your posts say inflamatory things like "I dare you, double dare you"


Inflamatory?

So if I give you the rasberry, you'll report me?

thbbtttbbbbthhhbbbtt.

What if I say neener neener?



Inflamatory is the person who attacks the other person for giving his opinion.

phox


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

c3 said:


> Internet download?


Well, I did suggest that, in a way, in the form of some service Tivo might offer. The possibility of non-DRM protected downloads from the Internet is an intriguing idea. Or possibly multiple providers of content-protected movies as there is now with music downloads, where there are a dozen or more companies selling songs for 99 cents each.

My experience is the music downloads are still pretty hit or miss on the Windows side, but that's another topic altogether. Eventually they will get get the bugs worked out of the Digital Rights Managements stuff, and after that downloading video in addition to songs is a very small step. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's already being done, but not, I'm guessing, for high definition content. I have downloaded some Windows Media files in HD though, so may this future is not far off.

That'd be cool. The variety of video available could just be unbelievable given time. No need to mail DVDs around. And the cost of distribution would be MUCH lower since it would be almost completely automated on the server end.

Yeah, this will be big. MGEP4 good.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

haysdb said:


> Oooh, SEVERAL people. The best real street price, outside of Guido's of New York, has been around $680 with shipping.
> 
> And I did admit that a few people had gotten really killer deals on an S3.
> 
> [I am buying from Guido's of California.]


I guess you know more about Dell's sales volume than I do. I have no clue how many Dell has sold.

Anyway so what, you were asking why people bought it, I told why I bought it and how I ended up paying nothing for it.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> I guess you know more about Dell's sales volume than I do. I have no clue how many Dell has sold.
> 
> Anyway so what, you were asking why people bought it, I told why I bought it and how I ended up paying nothing for it.


Congratulations.

I was speaking in rather more general terms. ONE doesn't really count in the grand scheme of things, and a 1 day (or 2 day or whatever it was) offer from Dell is a blink-and-you'll-miss-it kind of thing.

Go to Amazon.com, pricegrabber, priceline, whatever source you want to use, and find a price lower than $680. From any "reputable" source.

Actually, as I've said, I've ordered mine from one those fly-by-night operations, but for most people, Amazon.com, Costco, the Tivo Community Store - those are what I am referring to as the "street price". Heck, even eBay auctions have been bringing $660 to $675 for the most part.

Yeah, I am "qualifying" what I meant, but you are taking ONE or a handful of examples and implying that those prices are available to anyone.

It's a silly argument. But then, I just enjoy arguing. And I don't necessarily care which side. You choose and I'll take the other.


----------



## inaka (Nov 26, 2001)

phox_mulder said:


> Inflamatory?
> 
> So if I give you the rasberry, you'll report me?
> 
> ...


I wouldn't know, I wasn't attacking you at all.

But here, how's this, "I dare you, double dare you to find a TiVo S3 that can do all the things a CableCo DVR when the S3 owner doesn't get cable tv programming."

You don't subscribe to cable, right?
If so, your S3 can't do what those so-called lowsy CableCo DVRs can either, it costs much more than the CableCo DVR, and that includes you not being able to even *view* any HD Cable programming like ESPN HD or HD On-Demand...big difference.

Like I said, it's a slanted argument.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

Where are you people getting these crazy prices for Comcast DVR's? If you have a HD TV then you are already paying for HD content or you are just wasting your money on a wide screen. The package I had before getting the Comcast DVR included, HBO, Showtime, The Movie Channel, all the non digital and digital channels (except for sports and Howard Stern) ,and the HD channels. However, since at the time I did not have an HD TV I didnt bother to get the HD converter box. I was using my Ser2 with it. When I bought my HD TV I went to the comcast office traded my non HD box for the converter box/DVR. Moved the Ser2 to a second TV in another part of the house. The monthly cost for me went up $9.95 a month. If I get a S3 the price goes down the $9.95. However, my package only gives me 1 cable card. The second one will cost me $5 a month. Then there is the $6.99 for a second Tivo account..I have a ser 2 hooked up in another room. So the difference is only $2 a month between the two for their service. The big cost is to buy the S3 and the extended warrenty. Bestbuy.com has the S3 for $799 and the 4 year extended warrenty for $49.99, basicely $850. You have to figure in the extended warrenty because you can get a replacement for the Comcast DVR for free. If you spread the cost over 48 months it costs $17.70 a month more for buying the S3. Add the additional $2 a month cost and it comes out to about $20 a month more for a S3 compared to the Comcast DVR.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

I don't know where people are getting these I-can-save-$30-a-month-by-switching-to-Tivo numbers either. They aren't comparing apples to apples IMO. My bill will go down $11.99/mo, the rental cost of the cable company DVR. Nothing else will change, except as you point out, they may well charge for the cable card, so there goes a good chunk of even THAT.

The S3 just can't be justified on the basis of cost. But there ARE other compelling reasons, at least for some, for BUYING a DVR as opposed to just using the "free" one the cable company provides.

In fact, I can't personally say whether I will feel like the Tivo is "worth the money" until I get it, because I have never owned a Tivo, but only a couple or three ReplayTV boxes and two Motorola DVR's. Never a Tivo. I'm "taking it on faith" that the better "user experience" makes it worth the money in my mind. I think it will or I wouldn't be forking out over a grand for an S3 + lifetime sub.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

c3 said:


> Because it's not $10/month for me. I'm paying Comcast $16.77/month right now for limited basic and 2 CableCards. If I want to get the Comcast DVR, I would have to pay $76.40/month.


I have already posted my numbers many times in this forum. Limited basic gives me all the contents *I want*. If I really want more HD channels, another $11.95 would give me *ALL* of the non-premium HD channels available from Comcast. You do the math.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

OK, just don't offer yourself as a typical example. I would find it very odd if the typical HDTV/S3 owner did not find it worthwhile to pay $6.95 (or whatever) for the HD tier.

On a tangential track...

Discovery HD has a an 11-part series starting in March called Planet Earth. They had a sort of sneak preview on a couple of nights ago called Planet Earth: Pole to Pole, or something like that. Absolutely AWESOME photography. Amazing. I would pay $6.95 a month just to see one episode of that each month.

Will cable companies continue to charge extra for digital cable when that's all there is?


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

haysdb said:


> OK, just don't offer yourself as a typical example. I would find it very odd if the typical HDTV/S3 owner did not find it worthwhile to pay $6.95 (or whatever) for the HD tier.


If you look around, there are many people with S3 and limited basic only.

I guess your "HD tier" is the equivalent of Comcast digital classic, which is the $11.95 I mentioned above. I did have it for the first few weeks after getting the S3 (and new HDTV), but I was spending way too much time in front of the TV that I canceled it.

Even with it, the difference is $76.40 - $16.77 - $11.95 = $47.68. Conservatively, a lifetime S3 can be bought for $680 + $500 = $1180. $1180 / $47.68 = 25 months. At the end of the 25 months, I have a lifetimed S3 worth many hundreds of dollars.


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> And I DIDN'T spend a grand. I sold my HR10 for $425, my DirecTiVo's for $100/each, so I paid $0 for my S3. I only paid $299 for 3 years of service, and I pay $6.95/mo for the second one.


Well, that's not quite true is it Adam1115? Don't get me wrong, I take similar upgrade paths as well, but let's break it down.

You sold your three TiVo's and received $625 right? Now that was presumably cash that you could spend anywhere on anything. You then use that to buy your TiVo. The money was spent and the cost was at least the $625 right? Only because you can't re-use that asset.

Now replace "I sold my 3 TiVo's for $625" with "I put in a day and a half of work in the office and earned $625". Does spending the $625 you earned at work make the S3 free? You see where I'm going.

You made an even switch on your entertainment system and got an upgrade that I think is really valuable to you, but not really free.


----------



## wackymann (Sep 22, 2006)

If my cable company's DVR had an option for upgrading the hard drive to 750 GB, and it would let me delete unwanted channels from the guide, and they would stop putting ads on my guide screen, and it had the ability to set up recordings via the internet, I'd probably go with it. Since all of those are impossible with my cable company, it's a clear choice for me.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

haysbd, why don't you take a look around at the internet and see what others have to say about the S3. Take a look a Cnet's review (the editors review) which rates it excellent.

It seems like you've already made up your mind about the S3. I suggest that you keep your Moto and return your S3. You don't seem happy with it. Unless your intent now is just to troll around here saying what a pos the S3, we all get your point. Kindly move on.


----------



## grahamster (Sep 24, 2006)

Do the math: I can lease a 35000 SUV for 400/month - Just over 1% of purchase price. I can rent a cable box for 12/month vs a purchase price of 800. Again just over 1% of purchase price. Doing this kind of comparison is useless. Just figure out if it is worth the month to YOU or not. I love mine!


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

grahamster said:


> Do the math: I can lease a 35000 SUV for 400/month - Just over 1% of purchase price. I can rent a cable box for 12/month vs a purchase price of 800. Again just over 1% of purchase price. Doing this kind of comparison is useless. Just figure out if it is worth the month to YOU or not. I love mine!


Exactly. I agree it's a lot of money to pay for a DVR but in MY case my frustration with the cable company DVR was so great I was willing to pay the money.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Billy66 said:


> Well, that's not quite true is it Adam1115? Don't get me wrong, I take similar upgrade paths as well, but let's break it down.
> 
> You sold your three TiVo's and received $625 right? Now that was presumably cash that you could spend anywhere on anything. You then use that to buy your TiVo. The money was spent and the cost was at least the $625 right? Only because you can't re-use that asset.
> 
> ...


Why would I have sold my HD-TiVo and then had nothing and spent it on something else?? 

I actually (like I said a few times but haysdb doesn't seem to be listening) spent $679 with shipping on the TCF store. Then bought a SD TiVo for $30 on Ebay (with shipping, it was a great deal but missing IR blasters).

I then sold my DirecTV HR10-250 for $425, my 3 SD DirecTiVo's for $100/ea, giving me $725 in my TiVo upgrade fund, easily covering my purchase.

I suppose you could argue that I spent money buying the DirecTV equipment, but it was nice that it was worth some money that I could recoup to offset this purchase...

I guess your point is I could've spent that on something else? And paid for a cable DVR? Well, then (like I also said earlier) I would have to upgrade the cable I pay $3.50 a month for to $65-$75 a month. Even if I had NO money from my DirecTV equipment, I would still have easily paid for the S3 in less than a year.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

What happened to the OP? Guess he's convinced and ran off to pick up a S3!!


----------



## Billy66 (Dec 15, 2003)

Adam1115 said:


> I guess your point is I could've spent that on something else? And paid for a cable DVR? Well, then (like I also said earlier) I would have to upgrade the cable I pay $3.50 a month for to $65-$75 a month. Even if I had NO money from my DirecTV equipment, I would still have easily paid for the S3 in less than a year.


Yep, just semantics. Like I said, I do the same thing for my own HT setup. The justification is that the output and input cancel each other out. Your S3 wasn't free, you just used a dedicated fund.

As to what you would have done? Maybe got a free HR20 and sold the HR10 just the same. {ducks and runs} 

Seriously though, way to mobilize what you had for what you wanted.


----------



## murrays (Oct 19, 2004)

haysdb said:


> I don't know where people are getting these I-can-save-$30-a-month-by-switching-to-Tivo numbers either. They aren't comparing apples to apples IMO. My bill will go down $11.99/mo, the rental cost of the cable company DVR. Nothing else will change, except as you point out, they may well charge for the cable card, so there goes a good chunk of even THAT.
> 
> The S3 just can't be justified on the basis of cost. But there ARE other compelling reasons, at least for some, for BUYING a DVR as opposed to just using the "free" one the cable company provides.
> 
> In fact, I can't personally say whether I will feel like the Tivo is "worth the money" until I get it, because I have never owned a Tivo, but only a couple or three ReplayTV boxes and two Motorola DVR's. Never a Tivo. I'm "taking it on faith" that the better "user experience" makes it worth the money in my mind. I think it will or I wouldn't be forking out over a grand for an S3 + lifetime sub.


I have my last charter bill here:
$6.95 for "Digital Receiver Service"
$14.99 for "DVR Service"
$6.99 for "HD Tier"

Buying the S3 with lifetime transfer will allow me to drop the $6.95 and $14.99 but add $3 for cable cards for a monthly savings of $18.94 or $227 per year.

I'm perplexed why people assume everything is a "commodity" with no difference in quality, usability or features. Do the cable DVR proponents here always buy the cheapest car, computer or TV they can find?

My S3 is clearly better than the Moxi it replaced which justifies the added "expense" IMHO (even though it will save me money in the long run).

-murray


----------



## JPinAZ (Jun 26, 2003)

Billy66 said:


> Everyone's been doing SP's for years.


But not everyone does them well, or even right.

The POS SA8300HD we had before we received the S3 as a Christmas gift had two tuners, but would "allow" 3 recordings for the same time. Then when it came time to record the shows, it wouldn't record any of them. And there's no place you can look to find out why your shows weren't recorded. It wouldn't do this only when a show's time slot was moved (which might not be so bad, since it probably doesn't happen often) but would also let you set up a new recording when you already have two recordings scheduled.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

JPinAZ said:


> But not everyone does them well, or even right.
> 
> The POS SA8300HD we had before we received the S3 as a Christmas gift had two tuners, but would "allow" 3 recordings for the same time. Then when it came time to record the shows, it wouldn't record any of them. And there's no place you can look to find out why your shows weren't recorded. It wouldn't do this only when a show's time slot was moved (which might not be so bad, since it probably doesn't happen often) but would also let you set up a new recording when you already have two recordings scheduled.


That's because that pos didn't have the capability of telling you there was a conflict. Which is why we love our S3's so much.


----------



## Pennyco (Mar 8, 2005)

At the risk of sounding nasty, I'm going to come out and say it. Some of you folks need to get a life. I agree with the original post. $800 or even $600 is way to much to pay for an S3 when you can get what you need for a few bucks a month from your cable company. And many of you TiVo cultists need to check your facts on the cable company DVRs, they do more than you think. Yes, TiVo is much better then the cable company DVRs, but not that much. And many of the features that the TiVo cultists brag about are techie things like buffers and support for all kinds of different input types etc... All you need is support for the type that you have! What's the point of paying a premium for "just in case" features? On the other hand, we need early adopters to work out the bugs and help TiVo with some revenue to recover their costs before bringing their prices down to reasonable levels, so for that I thank you. But I don't need TiVo right now just to brag about having TiVo. And I'm not planning on attending a Star Trek convention anytime soon so I can hang out with you folks and brag about high end TiVo features. I'll wait until TiVo gets their act together or or get TiVo through their new Comcast partnership.


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

> I don't know where people are getting these I-can-save-$30-a-month-by-switching-to-Tivo numbers either. They aren't comparing apples to apples IMO. My bill will go down $11.99/mo, the rental cost of the cable company DVR. Nothing else will change, except as you point out, they may well charge for the cable card, so there goes a good chunk of even THAT.


The ability of the S3 to grab HD OTA can be factored-in. If you give up a few cable HD channels and get HD OTA only, the savings are pretty big that way.

I plan to go with Charter's basic digital package and get my HD OTA. Going with the Moxi, I'd incurr rental and service fees for the box plus fees for HD service. That amounts to a considerable chunk of change. Granted, I will lose channels like HDNet and Discovery HD, but I think the savings are worth it. I'll still get a decent amount of HD content from my local OTA broadcasters. I also have my upconverting DVD player which isn't true HD, but it comes pretty close. I don't think I'll be lacking and I'll be saving around $30 per month on my cable bill. That justifies the up-front cost for an S3 pretty darn quick.


----------



## jkovach (Feb 17, 2000)

mrdazzo7 said:


> Why are the S3's so expensive when you can rent the DVR for $10/month ?


Why are cars so expensive when you can rent a Ford Focus for $200/month?


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

Pennyco said:


> At the risk of sounding nasty, I'm going to come out and say it. Some of you folks need to get a life. I agree with the original post. $800 or even $600 is way to much to pay for an S3 when you can get what you need for a few bucks a month from your cable company. And many of you TiVo cultists need to check your facts on the cable company DVRs, they do more than you think. Yes, TiVo is much better then the cable company DVRs, but not that much. And many of the features that the TiVo cultists brag about are techie things like buffers and support for all kinds of different input types etc... All you need is support for the type that you have! What's the point of paying a premium for "just in case" features? On the other hand, we need early adopters to work out the bugs and help TiVo with some revenue to recover their costs before bringing their prices down to reasonable levels, so for that I thank you. But I don't need TiVo right now just to brag about having TiVo. And I'm not planning on attending a Star Trek convention anytime soon so I can hang out with you folks and brag about high end TiVo features. I'll wait until TiVo gets their act together or or get TiVo through their new Comcast partnership.


Apparently you decided to just jump in here with a set opinion without understanding why some of us decided to pay 800.00 for the S3. I didn't do it just because it was TiVo or to brag that I had an S3. I wanted a reliable DVR. My cable company could not provide that for me. After two years of frustration with the "it's just like a TiVo" SA 8300 I was more then happy to shell out the almost 1 grand I spent on my S3.

And as others have pointed out it's just like buying a different car. You want to drive a Kia fine it gets you from one point to another. You want to drive a Lexus it basically does the same thing, but a Lexus is far more reliable then a Kia and it has better features.

Good luck with your Comcast TiVo. I'll bet it will be far better then that pos you have now.


----------



## murrays (Oct 19, 2004)

Pennyco said:


> $800 or even $600 is way to much to pay for an S3 when you can get what you need for a few bucks a month from your cable company.


As I pointed out earlier, I save $19/mo or $228 per year.

Please tell us, how much would you spend for a better product that saved you $228 per year??

-murray


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

Here is a cost comparison according to Charter's web site for my service area.

Basic Digital with HD Tier, HD DVR (Moxi), and one digital receiver (for 2nd TV);

Digital Package: $39.99 
Family and Information Tier: $0
Charter HDTV(TM): $3.00 
Charter DVR(TM): $11.99 
HDTV Digital Tier: $7.99 
1 Room HD & DVR: $0 
Digital Receiver: $6.95 

Total Per Month: $69.92 

Basic digital with two cable cards and one digital receiver;

Digital Package: $39.99 
Family and Information Tier: $0
Digital Receiver: $0
2 Cable Cards: $3

Total Per Month $42.99 

Savings: $26.93

Less equivalent monthly TiVo subscription fees with 3 yr. pre-pay: $18.52

All things considered, I think it's worth losing a few HD channels, but having an S3 instead of a Moxi.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

haysdb said:


> Oooh, SEVERAL people. The best real street price, outside of Guido's of New York, has been around $680 with shipping.
> 
> And I did admit that a few people had gotten really killer deals on an S3.
> 
> [I am buying from Guido's of California.]


Try buy.com. I have another S3 coming tomorrow, about $638 shipped.


----------



## SNJpage1 (May 25, 2006)

<<<<<<If you look around, there are many people with S3 and limited basic only.

I guess your "HD tier" is the equivalent of Comcast digital classic, which is the $11.95 I mentioned above. I did have it for the first few weeks after getting the S3 (and new HDTV), but I was spending way too much time in front of the TV that I canceled it.

Even with it, the difference is $76.40 - $16.77 - $11.95 = $47.68. Conservatively, a lifetime S3 can be bought for $680 + $500 = $1180. $1180 / $47.68 = 25 months. At the end of the 25 months, I have a lifetimed S3 worth many hundreds of dollars>>>>>

Why would you buy a S3 if all you are getting is basic channels. If you dont want HD get a duel tuner Ser2. Seems to me a lot of people are going about it the wrong way. The S3 is for HD content. If you arent going to record any HD content then get the ser2.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

SNJpage1 said:


> Why would you buy a S3 if all you are getting is basic channels. If you dont want HD get a duel tuner Ser2. Seems to me a lot of people are going about it the wrong way. The S3 is for HD content. If you arent going to record any HD content then get the ser2.


Please, I'm/we're not stupid. Limited basic includes 6 local HD channels: FOX, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, and another one (KRON).


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Why is BUYING something more expensive than RENTING something?

I think that's pretty obvious.

Do you see why?

-smak-


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

hookbill said:


> haysbd, why don't you take a look around at the internet and see what others have to say about the S3. Take a look a Cnet's review (the editors review) which rates it excellent.
> 
> It seems like you've already made up your mind about the S3. I suggest that you keep your Moto and return your S3. You don't seem happy with it. Unless your intent now is just to troll around here saying what a pos the S3, we all get your point. Kindly move on.


Your buttons are easily pushed.

I spent a LOT of time researching the S3. And I have one on order. However, having never owned a Tivo brand DVR, and reading all of the positive comments, I didn't ask about certain features that were important to me because I just ASSUMED they were there. Not being able to view the channel guide while simultaneously watching the current show in a PIP window? I'll "get used to it", but it is embarrassing to discover that the Moxi box I have been "bashing" does at least a couple of things "considerably" better than the Tivo, and some OTHER things I have complained about on the Moxi exist on the Tivo as well (like not remaining in pause mode, as if it knows better than I what I want it to do).

As for whether I am "welcome" here, well, just who decides that, anyway? You?


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Adam1115 said:


> I actually (like I said a few times but haysdb doesn't seem to be listening) spent $679 with shipping on the TCF store. Then bought a SD TiVo for $30 on Ebay (with shipping, it was a great deal but missing IR blasters).
> 
> I then sold my DirecTV HR10-250 for $425, my 3 SD DirecTiVo's for $100/ea, giving me $725 in my TiVo upgrade fund, easily covering my purchase.


If you feel you can justify the expenditure by selling other assets of equal value, that's fine with me. I do that too - if I sell THIS, or these three things, then I can buy that. It really has nothing to do with anything though.

You HAD three Tivo's (and presumably 3 TV's in 3 different rooms, but I don't know that, and you now have one. What are you going to sell to replace the other two Tivo's?

I own two cars, a full-size van and a pocket rocket. If I sell both of them and buy another with the proceeds, can I claim the new car was free?


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Your buttons are easily pushed.
> 
> I spent a LOT of time researching the S3. And I have one on order. However, having never owned a Tivo brand DVR, and reading all of the positive comments, I didn't ask about certain features that were important to me because I just ASSUMED they were there. Not being able to view the channel guide while simultaneously watching the current show in a PIP window? I'll "get used to it", but it is embarrassing to discover that the Moxi box I have been "bashing" does at least a couple of things "considerably" better than the Tivo.


I think part of the problem of your reception here is that you're complaining about things that it's clear you have no knowledge of. Once you get the S3, then you'll have some valid things to complain about. Show in a PIP window? Most people here would view that as a large step backward. Get the S3 and see what you think; until then you're just displaying lack of knowledge. (There is a valid complaint for a small number of people associated with the guide and show, but it's not what you describe.)


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

CraigHB said:


> Savings: $26.93


And nothing in HD except what you can recieve OTA. Look, that's FINE if you don't want Discovery HD, HD-Net, ESPN HD, etc, but you can't just eliminate a dozen HD channels and claim that nothing has been sacrificed for that $26.93.



> I think it's worth losing a few HD channels



Discovery HD
HD-Net
ESPN HD
TNT HD
HBO HD
Cinemax HD
You don't watch these channels, fine. The first three channels probably account for 60-70% of what I watch.

All this means, really, is that your financial equation is going to be different than mine. I have to admit it's a crazy argument:

"I saved $30."

"Oh yeah, well *I* only saved $15, so you are full of sh*t."

Oh yeah? yah. Oh Yeah? Yah. Oh YEAH? YAH! Well...your moma wears army boots.

Yep, the pot is calling the kettle black. But then, *I'm* just here to provide some objectivity and "balance" to the argument. What fun is it if everyone is on the same side?


----------



## CTLesq (Jan 19, 2003)

haysdb - can I buy you?

Thanks

Craig


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

CrispyCritter said:


> I think part of the problem of your reception here is that you're complaining about things that it's clear you have no knowledge of.


True, very true. Enlighten me. What happens when you are watching a recorded show and you press the channel guide to see what's on? Do you then jump right back to where you were?

If you press pause in the middle of something and walk away, getting interested in something else for 30 minutes or 45 minutes or an hour, what does the Tivo do?



> Show in a PIP window? Most people here would view that as a large step backward.


OK, what does the Tivo do that is superior to what the Moxi does? Do a semi-transparent overlay maybe, or....what? The last time I saw a Tivo channel guide was about 10 years ago, and the big electronics stores do not have live demos of the S3, so no, I haven't even SEEN one in action. My purchase decision has been based, mostly, on what I have learned HERE.



> There is a valid complaint for a small number of people associated with the guide and show, but it's not what you describe.


Tell me again what features of the Tivo I have described? And correct me where I have made mistatements.

As a person ignorant of what the Tivo can do, I'm just asking.

If you've been paying attention (and who would be), on balance I haven't argued FOR or AGAINST the Tivo. I'm doing a lot of both, presenting both sides. That's because I've gone back and forth back and forth for the last month, trying to decide whether it was worth it TO ME. The Tivo does THIS really well, but yeah, it doesn't do THAT very well. There are a lot of people here firmly on one side of the fence or the other. I thought there was room here for a fence straddler, from the perspective of someone HONESTLY TRYING TO SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE FENCE!

SERIOUSLY, if I have made incorrect statements, PLEASE correct me. I am not Not NOT here to give innacurate information. If I do, correct me. I am not above amending a past post to append a comment (say THAT three times fast), ala


> Edit: It turns out I was completely wrong about such and such. I'm leaving my original post as is, but I don't want anyone to be mislead by my mistatement of fact. Yadda yadda yadda.


I was a *prospective buyer*, I am now an *owner in waiting* (S3 on order), and will soon be a Tivo *owner* (technically I already am), with some actual FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE of the actual product I have debated buying for so long. I'm asking questions. I'm sharing knowledge I've learned along the way.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

CTLesq said:


> haysdb - can I buy you?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Craig


Everything is for sale for the right price.

I'm a consultant.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

haysdb said:


> True, very true. Enlighten me. What happens when you are watching a recorded show and you press the channel guide to see what's on? Do you then jump right back to where you were?
> 
> If you press pause in the middle of something and walk away, getting interested in something else for 30 minutes or 45 minutes or an hour, what does the Tivo do?


You go back to where you left off. Each recorded program has its own resumption point.

If you hit pause in the middle of a recorded program, it will stay there forever (I think, because I usually don't do it). If you pause live TV, it will start moving at the end of the 30-minute buffer.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

c3 said:


> You go back to where you left off. Each recorded program has its own resumption point.
> 
> If you hit pause in the middle of a recorded program, it will stay there forever (I think, because I usually don't do it). If you pause live TV, it will start moving at the end of the 30-minute buffer.


Does it start playing live again, or does it just start purging the oldest video in the buffer?

Hold on, I just had an epiphany. Allow me to argue the case for WHY the Tivo does what it does when it encounters this scenario (or what I THINK it does...), and why that's the only intelligent way to handle the situation:

When the "buffer" gets full, it HAS to do SOMETHING. Period. Full stop.

It either HAS to
STOP RECORDING, or
Start THROWING AWAY the portion of the program that YOU WERE WATCHING when you hit the pause button.
In fact, what it does is start purging the buffer, and the most intelligent thing it can do at that point is TO SHOW IT TO YOU as it's being deleted. If you aren't watching, it's effectively just purged, but if you are in a position to resume watching the paused program, it avoids throwing anything away at all.

I will offer a couple of thoughts on how this behavior might be "tweaked" (without knowing for sure exactly how it works now...):
Make this behavior configurable. Maybe I want it to STAY WHERE I LEFT IT, even if that means quietly deleting the oldest stuff in the buffer. For someone else the "right" behavior might be to stop recording. "Freeze the buffer." And then of course, there is the current behavior. Trouble is, sometimes I might want it one way and sometimes another. THAT capability (basically I want it to read my mind) would be tricky to implement!
Why is the buffer limited to...whatever it's "hard limit" is? Seems to me it should only be limited by the amount of free-space available. If you have a humongous hard drive, and haven't changed channels, you might have the last DAY or two in the buffer. I think maybe allowing the buffer to grow infinitely large is not the right way to do it, but here again, how about a little slider somewhere in the setup controlling the size of the buffer? 30 minutes, 60 minutes, 6 hours, all the way up to "use all available (free) space"
If when it automatically starts playing again, it does so at at full volume (???), I'd suggest semi-muting the audio when it restarts just so you don't scare the crap out of the cat who happens to be walking right in front of the TV at that precise moment, in case you had your audio system volume on '10' when you hit the pause button. How you would handle the user interface there, how you return gracefully and intuitively to full volume, I don't have a quick answer for. Maybe it could just do sort of a THX intro thing, where the volume comes back up not-quite-all-at-once. If that's what it actually DOES NOW, then that's brilliant. Actually, that's how the radio in my car works when it's turned on and off - it's not an "abrupt" on or off, but a really "soft" one.

Bottom line from me here is an admission that something I criticized as a potential "misfeature" may in fact be the most intelligent way to do it.


----------



## 1283 (Sep 8, 2000)

It continues to record live TV and throws the oldest portion away. After a while, you'll be watching "live - 30 minutes" TV.

In the past 6+ years, I have hardly watched much live TV or used the live TV guide. If I want to watch something, even something I see on live TV, I record it. That way, I'm not limited by the live TV buffer.


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

haysdb said:


> Discovery HD
> HD-Net
> ESPN HD
> TNT HD
> ...


Well, you're right and I'm right. The thing is, a lot of this price bantering is subjective. In my case, those channels are not particularly important to me. For me, it's worth saving some money to do without them. For someone else, maybe it's better to go with the cable HD package and Moxi DVR. My point is that TiVo HD is not necessarily an expensive way to go. It's considerably cheaper if you can live with HD via OTA broadcast only.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Your buttons are easily pushed.
> 
> IAs for whether I am "welcome" here, well, just who decides that, anyway? You?


It's not up to me at all. It's up to you. You make your bed, you sleep in it don't you?


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

haysdb said:


> True, very true. Enlighten me.


No, I choose not to. As I said, people will have negative reactions when you go around offering strong opinions without knowing anything. If that's your standard method of getting more information, then you should expect such reactions.


----------



## GoHokies! (Sep 21, 2005)

haysdb said:


> Bottom line from me here is an admission that something I criticized as a potential "misfeature" may in fact be the most intelligent way to do it.


I other words, having actual knowledge of the product you are slagging may have caused you to look like less of a fool.

Like has been stated time and time again, why don't you wait until you actually get your S3 set up to learn how it operates and them speak intelligently (and perhaps a little less rudely) about the topic?

Craig, you don't want to buy this guy, you're way classier. At least (most of) your statements are grounded in actual knowledge of what you're talking about.


----------



## ashu (Nov 8, 2002)

CrispyCritter said:


> No, I choose not to. As I said, people will have negative reactions when you go around offering strong opinions without knowing anything. If that's your standard method of getting more information, then you should expect such reactions.


+1
Troll Ignored.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Billy66 said:


> Yep, just semantics. Like I said, I do the same thing for my own HT setup. The justification is that the output and input cancel each other out. Your S3 wasn't free, you just used a dedicated fund.
> 
> As to what you would have done? Maybe got a free HR20 and sold the HR10 just the same. {ducks and runs}
> 
> Seriously though, way to mobilize what you had for what you wanted.


You're right, I COULD'VE gotten a free HR20, if I agreed to stay for 2 more years. But since I already had basic cable and didn't pay DirecTV in the end for the HD-Pack I decided to save $65-$75 a month.

Even if you take out the fact that I sold my DirecTV equipment to pay for the S3, I will pay for it in less than a year by switching the the analog cable I already have and using free OTA.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Would someone please quote at least one of my posts which stated inaccurate information? Except for the ONE earlier where I sort of flipped a breaker? I already know THAT post must have contained at least one misstatement or y'all wouldn't be reacting the way you are.

Out of my 57 posts to this point, how many make inaccurate or misleading statements?

Bottom line, if you are going to flame me for not knowing what I'm talking about, then prove it. Here is your opportunity to totally embarrass me by posting a whole collection of my BS.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Would someone please quote at least one of my posts which stated inaccurate information? Except for the ONE earlier where I sort of flipped a breaker? I already know THAT post must have contained at least one misstatement or y'all wouldn't be reacting the way you are.
> 
> Out of my 57 posts to this point, how many make inaccurate or misleading statements?
> 
> Bottom line, if you are going to flame me for not knowing what I'm talking about, then prove it. Here is your opportunity to totally embarrass me by posting a whole collection of my BS.


Sorry. I don't have the time to do this. Anyone else want to?

All I know is you appear pretty hostile in most of your post that I have read. This one included.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Bottom line, if you are going to flame me for not knowing what I'm talking about, then prove it. Here is your opportunity to totally embarrass me by posting a whole collection of my BS.


I choose not to.


----------



## gwsat (Sep 14, 2006)

Let me preface this by saying exactly where I am coming from, in order not to inflame the, as another poster neatly put it, TiVo fanboy base. In some ways I am a TiVo fanboy, too. I bought an S1 in 2000 and used it exclusively until Cox OKC finally offered the SA 8000HD for rent in 2004. I got and installed my S3 earlier this week and I am loving it.

All the foregoing said, I find nothing wrong with either the predictability or reliability of the SA 8300HD. In fact I still have one hooked up to another HDTV in my house. My cable company has implemented the first run flag, so the 8300HD allows the recording of first run programs only. When one tries to set up three shows to record at once, it puts up an error dialog, which REQUIRES that one of the shows be eliminated. Further, its very cheap compared to the S3. I paid nearly $700 for my S3 plus TiVos $199 charge to transfer my S1s Lifetime Service to my S3. I suggest that this number is pretty close to the average price paid by all S3 owners, maybe a bit lower.

Finally, though, I am thankful that I could afford the S3, although it is dramatically more expensive than Coxs SA 8300HD. As I noted earlier in the thread, you get what you pay for.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

gwsat said:


> Let me preface this by saying exactly where I am coming from, in order not to inflame the, as another poster neatly put it, TiVo fanboy base. In some ways I am a TiVo fanboy, too. I bought an S1 in 2000 and used it exclusively until Cox OKC finally offered the SA 8000HD for rent in 2004. I got and installed my S3 earlier this week and I am loving it.
> 
> All the foregoing said, I find nothing wrong with either the predictability or reliability of the SA 8300HD. In fact I still have one hooked up to another HDTV in my house. My cable company has implemented the first run flag, so the 8300HD allows the recording of first run programs only. When one tries to set up three shows to record at once, it puts up an error dialog, which REQUIRES that one of the shows be eliminated. Further, its very cheap compared to the S3. I paid nearly $700 for my S3 plus TiVos $199 charge to transfer my S1s Lifetime Service to my S3. I suggest that this number is pretty close to the average price paid by all S3 owners, maybe a bit lower.
> 
> Finally, though, I am thankful that I could afford the S3, although it is dramatically more expensive than Coxs SA 8300HD. As I noted earlier in the thread, you get what you pay for.


Having that first run flag makes a big difference in the SA 8300. It probably avoids many conflicts. In my case I didn't have that flag (it's actually implemented in the channel guide-all SA 8300's are capable of using it if it's there).

And I'll be the first to admit I experienced more problems with the S3 then others did in my area. Still, they were very real problems, partial recordings, unforseen conflicts not to mention the quality of my recordings was horrid. I didn't realize how bad it was until I got the S3.

Anyway counselor, I think deep down you really are a TiVo fanboy.


----------



## gwsat (Sep 14, 2006)

hookbill said:


> Having that first run flag makes a big difference in the SA 8300. It probably avoids many conflicts. In my case I didn't have that flag (it's actually implemented in the channel guide-all SA 8300's are capable of using it if it's there).
> 
> And I'll be the first to admit I experienced more problems with the S3 then others did in my area. Still, they were very real problems, partial recordings, unforseen conflicts not to mention the quality of my recordings was horrid. I didn't realize how bad it was until I got the S3.
> 
> Anyway counselor, I think deep down you really are a TiVo fanboy.


Oh, yeah, I proved I was a TiVo fanboy when I spent nearly $900 to replace a trouble free SA box that was costing me only $10 a month. In addition to that, a couple of years ago, I bought a D*TiVo HD DVR for my son who is a D* subscriber in another market. That one cost $1,000.

Despite my fondness for TiVos, I am the first to concede that buying an S3 cant be justified economically if, but only if, ones cable company implementation of its own DVR is stable. After all, an HD DVR really isnt an HD DVR if it cant be relied upon to work, which would pretty clearly make the S3 the only game in town.


----------



## sammick (Mar 1, 2003)

I dumped the Motorola box Comcast gave us here in Seattle--I hated the Microsoft software--it was just not intuitive the way that Tivo is--

In addition occasionally ALL our recorded shows would just disappear and my wife would blame ME!---

Tivo is expensive and is certainly a luxury, but it works!!


----------



## DeathRider (Dec 30, 2006)

I was at my friends house in NJ. They have Patriot (used to be RCN).

I thought my brother's DVR was suggish...the Moxi Patriot box was 20x worse


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

gwsat said:


> Despite my fondness for TiVos, I am the first to concede that buying an S3 *cant* be justified economically if, but only if, ones cable company implementation of its own DVR is stable. After all, an HD DVR really isnt an HD DVR if it cant be relied upon to work, which would pretty clearly make the S3 the only game in town.


I'm pretty sure you meant *can*, otherwise this paragraph doesn't make sense.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

hookbill said:


> I'm pretty sure you meant *can*, otherwise this paragraph doesn't make sense.


The first sentence was awkward, but it made sense. He claims you can't justify the cost of a TiVo if the cable company has a cheaper DVR, provided the cable DVR is reliable.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Pennyco said:


> At the risk of sounding nasty, I'm going to come out and say it. Some of you folks need to get a life. I agree with the original post. $800 or even $600 is way to much to pay for an S3 when you can get what you need for a few bucks a month from your cable company. And many of you TiVo cultists need to check your facts on the cable company DVRs, they do more than you think. Yes, TiVo is much better then the cable company DVRs, but not that much. And many of the features that the TiVo cultists brag about are techie things like buffers and support for all kinds of different input types etc... All you need is support for the type that you have! What's the point of paying a premium for "just in case" features? On the other hand, we need early adopters to work out the bugs and help TiVo with some revenue to recover their costs before bringing their prices down to reasonable levels, so for that I thank you. But I don't need TiVo right now just to brag about having TiVo. And I'm not planning on attending a Star Trek convention anytime soon so I can hang out with you folks and brag about high end TiVo features. I'll wait until TiVo gets their act together or or get TiVo through their new Comcast partnership.


Hey, Mr. PennyTroll, even though you only have 5 posts, you hit the nail on the head. Yes, I bought a TiVo to impress friends & neighbors (well, if I had any). But so what? I even put the empty S3 box outside a few days before trash pickup, then bring it back in right before they come, so I can put it out again. I bet my neighbors think I have lots of S3's; they prolly think I'm super-rich or something.

And I name drop my TiVo every chance I get. When people at work talk about some TV show, I jump in even if I don't watch it, just to mention my TiVo. These ladies at work were talking about "Menopause: It's Not Just for Women Anymore", and I butted in to say I hadn't seen it yet, but it was waiting for me on my Hi Def TiVo.

Beam me up, Scotty!


----------



## CraigHB (Dec 24, 2003)

So, I guess buying an S3 TiVo because some of us really like the interface and want a reliable product is not a good enough reason to spend the money? Hey, it's still cheaper than the laptop computer I bought a couple months ago. Personally, I'm more motivated to spend $1000 on a TiVo + sub than forever pay my cable co $30 per month more for a digital HD package and Moxi DVR. Now if I had Comcast as a provider, I *would* do that for a CTiVo. I guess I'm just a big TiVo fanatic.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

Some can justify it, some can't. I finally decided I could, but I wrestled the decision to the turf before I decided, and I won't be completely sure until I've had the S3 for awhile, and maybe not even then.

Each person is going to have to make that decision on their own. This thread is not going to provide any black and white answers.

It still irritates me the implication that a Moxi (or whatever) is going to cost the typical subscriber an extra $30 a month vs. an S3 w/lifetime sub. Yes, for some of you, that's true. My own cable bill will drop $11.99 a month.

Somewhat off-topic here, but somewhat on, does the talk about "switched digital" and two-way cablecards scare anyone else? Unless there is some way to upgrade the S3 to support two-way cablecards, a cable company switch to a switched digital network could leave me unable to receive some HD channels. Here is a thread on the subject. I have not read all of it yet, so maybe my concerns about obsolescence are unwarranted.


----------



## murrays (Oct 19, 2004)

haysdb said:


> It still irritates me the implication that a Moxi (or whatever) is going to cost the typical subscriber an extra $30 a month vs. an S3 w/lifetime sub. Yes, for some of you, that's true. My own cable bill will drop $11.99 a month.


I've said before, my cable bill dropped $19/mo going from Moxi to S3 and it will drop another $7/mo when I drop the HD tier over the summer months.

An added bonus, I got to watch the BCS championship game in HD which Sinclair/Charter wouldn't let me do with the Moxi. Also looking forward to 24 in HD 

For us with a lifetime sub to xfer, it was tough NOT to justify getting the S3. As I told my wife, when we get a second HD TV, the old TiVo won't be very useful and the Moxi simply couldn't take it's place due to the limited capacity and lousy image quality on the analog cable channels.

-murray


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

hookbill said:


> haysbd, why don't you take a look around at the internet and see what others have to say about the S3. Take a look a Cnet's review (the editors review) which rates it excellent.
> 
> It seems like you've already made up your mind about the S3. I suggest that you keep your Moto and return your S3. You don't seem happy with it. Unless your intent now is just to troll around here saying what a pos the S3, we all get your point. Kindly move on.


I've got both a Series 3 and a Moto DCT 6412 with MS s/w. The Series 3 has Lifetime Service which cost the equivalent of $500. while Comcast charges $11.95 monthly for the Moto. Comcast has stated that they'll charge $1.50 a month extra for the second CableCARD for the Series 3, but as of yet hasn't done so.

I had bought a second Series 3, but after getting "ripped off" on a Lifetime Service transfer from eBay, returned it.

When Comcast offers TiVo s/w on the Moto, I'll try it as long as I can drop it at any time.

All things are never equal but 12 bucks a month for a DVR with no contract, no commitment, and no maintenance is a heck of a lot better than paying $600. + $12 to $20 w/term commitment or $1100. for Lifetime!

DVR preferences are largely a matter of personal choice. Many DVR users are perfectly content with a cheap DVR without TiVo's search engine, service commitment or maintenance concerns. The most basic DVR is by nature much more convenient than a VCR.


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

CrispyCritter said:


> Show in a PIP window? Most people here would view that as a large step backward.


I'd much rather deal with NOT watching or listening to an ongoing show while going through menu's than not having the ability to see or at least hear an ongoing show in the background. Hey that's what a paws button is for! (It even works for the dog.)


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

c3 said:


> It continues to record live TV and throws the oldest portion away. After a while, you'll be watching "live - 30 minutes" TV.
> 
> In the past 6+ years, I have hardly watched much live TV or used the live TV guide. If I want to watch something, even something I see on live TV, I record it. That way, I'm not limited by the live TV buffer.


Your way is obviously better than mine. There'll I'll be watching the news live, as the giant meteor crashes into the earth obliterating all life, while you'll never know what hit you!

But you're right; TiVo isn't the best DVR if a viewer likes to watch TV without pre-recording everything.


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

QZ1 said:


> ...some are complaining that (the S3 display) dims quickly, while the Motorola stays fully lit always.


Absolutely the stupididiest "feature" of the S3! An "adjustable display" which automatically resets to dimmer than dim unless the user pushes a remote button.


----------



## hookbill (Dec 14, 2001)

haysdb said:


> Somewhat off-topic here, but somewhat on, does the talk about "switched digital" and two-way cablecards scare anyone else? Unless there is some way to upgrade the S3 to support two-way cablecards, a cable company switch to a switched digital network could leave me unable to receive some HD channels. Here is a thread on the subject. I have not read all of it yet, so maybe my concerns about obsolescence are unwarranted.


It's been talked about a great deal. Here's how I look at it. It's going to come but for me I think it's going to take a while to get here. It doesn't scare me, it just means that certain channels that may not be that popular will be put on SDV. It also probably means that new HD channels may not be available to S3 owners.

That's why it's important that YOU go to the link at the top of the page and express your concern to the FCC about SDV. I know some areas that are in full blown use of it and while it won't make your S3 obsolete it does limit growth and is another attempt by the cable companies to force you to buy their products.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

hookbill said:


> That's why it's important that YOU go to the link at the top of the page and express your concern to the FCC about SDV.


While I am not anxious to be put in a position where I can't receive all of the available HD content with my S3, the bigger picture is that this will allow my cable company to provide a LOT more JHD content. I would rather they do that, and offer the additional channels, than to _not_ do that and not offer the additional channels. Of course, there are alternatives to SDV, such as dropping some of the crap they're wasting bandwidth on now. ;-)

If they would move just the video on demand channels, which almost by definition require an STB that would work with SDV, that might free up enough bandwidth to buy a year or two.

I would THINK, that when broadcast analog gets turned off, that cable would be quick to drop the analog versions of the channels, which would free up so much bandwidth that the whole issue should pretty much go away.

Bottom line for me is I'll stop fretting over it. I think the impact of SDV will be quite small.

Sorry for wondering off-topic. Please return to your regularly scheduled programming.


----------



## haysdb (Dec 11, 2002)

murrays said:


> For us with a lifetime sub to xfer, it was tough NOT to justify getting the S3.


Not even _I_ can argue with that.


----------

