# Tivo Celebrates Court's Ruling



## Cutty (Sep 8, 2007)

Very favorable news today.............

http://seekingalpha.com/article/72013-tivo-celebrates-while-echostar-may-mourn?source=i_email


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

Without blogspam

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/080411/aqf044.html?.v=42


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good. <shrug>

In any case, what does this ruling actually mean - nothing. Tivo will make a few bucks, the patents will be worked around (if not already done) and Tivo will still be out of business in a few years due to stagnation (IMO of course).


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

It's easy to force out Tivo using tactics like $5 DVR fees and free boxes until Tivo is no longer around.... but what will happen when they're not.... well kiss that $5 DVR fee bye bye. You'll be looking at much higher DVR fees and wondering how this all came about.

Yes, I do applaud Tivo for insisting that companies be held accountable for stealing their technology.



Mark Lopez said:


> I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good. <shrug>
> 
> In any case, what does this ruling actually mean - nothing. Tivo will make a few bucks, the patents will be worked around (if not already done) and Tivo will still be out of business in a few years due to stagnation (IMO of course).


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good. <shrug>
> 
> In any case, what does this ruling actually mean - nothing. Tivo will make a few bucks, the patents will be worked around (if not already done) and Tivo will still be out of business in a few years due to stagnation (IMO of course).


Competition and theft are two very different things. What's the matter Mark? Not worried that this further opens some vulnerability for your beloved DirecTV?


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Mark Lopez said:


> I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good...


Good grief. THAT? is how you interpret this? That would explain a lot of the head-scratching that follows reading your posts.

I agree the DTV bashing was about not continuing with Tivo, a product that has a super-fervent following (and probably for good reason), but I don't see how that has any relationship whatsoever to competition. Competition may or may not be good, but that is beside the point in this case.

DTV simply switched to a new DVR vendor, an arbitrary decision driven by corporate greed, and not at all driven by competition or its merits. The Tivo fanatics were bashing DTV for taking away what they loved, plain and simple. They had no axe to grind regarding DTV stifling competition. There never was any competition, because both products, other than for a microscopic overlap period, were never offered as a choice in competition with each other. First it was just the one, then it was just the other.

Bottom line, folks can bash DTV for their choice to supplant Tivo, and they can claim competition is good. But there is no connection between the two at all.

The lawsuit has nothing at all to do with competition either, other than it might have a secondary affect of increasing it rather than limiting it. It is wholly about patent issues, actually. Tivo fans applaud the issue simply because they agree that EchoStar raped Tivo's technology, and even non-Tivo fans generally expect everyone to play fair or pay the price for not playing fair. So they are understandably pleased to see justice served.

They also probably believe that competition is good, as you say, and that if EchoStar would have to compete by coming up with their own technology rather than stealing Tivos' and cloning it, then there really would be competition. Overturning the lawsuit would be what would stifle competition, not upholding it.

So as much as you attempt to make a connection between DTV subs pissed by losing Tivo and happy about Tivo winning a lawsuit and point to competition as some sort of thread holding them together implying a disconnect in their logic , there appears to be no connection, no thread, whatsoever. The only disconnect apparent seems to be within your misplaced rant.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

The fact that seems to escape some above is that DirecTV and TiVo have an agreement that basically prevents a lawsuit from happening between the two. Dish and TiVo didn't have any relationship at all and Dish has been found to have violated TiVo's patents by a court of law, meaning that Dish has been found to willingly have stolen the use of TiVo's technology.

This decision can be summed in this way:

Good for TiVo: yes
Bad for Dish: yes
No change for DirecTV: yes


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

bdowell said:


> The fact that seems to escape some above is that DirecTV and TiVo have an agreement that basically prevents a lawsuit from happening between the two.
> 
> ...meaning that Dish has been found to willingly have stolen the use of TiVo's technology.
> 
> ...


It might indeed have escaped some, but that (second part of quote above) is a very long jump to a conclusion. It is a definite grey area (which is why it ended up in court in the first place) so simply declaring that as the gospel might be somewhat unfounded and unsupported. I find myself in the grey area as well, leaning one minute to your conclusion and the next to the conclusion that maybe great minds think alike, and that there can be better ways to solve things when similar technology originates organically in multiple settings simultaneously.

I would add to your sum up this:

Good for HR10 lovers: yes, because the agreement allowed Tivo and DTV to have an amicable divorce, rather than one along the order of the Mills/McCartney-esque shenanigans between Tivo and EchoStar. Instead of DTV immediately boat-anchoring all HR10's in a blind rage, they have insured support through 2010. Cooler heads prevailed in this case.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

magnus said:


> It's easy to force out Tivo using tactics like $5 DVR fees and free boxes until Tivo is no longer around.... but what will happen when they're not.... well kiss that $5 DVR fee bye bye. You'll be looking at much higher DVR fees and wondering how this all came about.


You really think DVR fees are low because of Tivo? No way. Tivo doesn't have that kind of influence. Why are DirecTV DVR fees low? Tivo is not viable for DirecTV customers.

DVR fees are low because DVR users tend to stay with the company they have the DVR from. And DVR fees are low because they are a conduit to PPV and Pay On Demand.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Yes, I do. It's just like Bill Gates making software cheap until he drives out the competition. Then when no one is looking... bam... suddenly I'm the only one with the software... well, then pay me the big bucks.

DVR fees are low from the providers because they want to make sure that you're using a box that they can control. When there is no longer a choice... you can expect that fee to be increased. It's a simple as that.



TonyD79 said:


> You really think DVR fees are low because of Tivo? No way. Tivo doesn't have that kind of influence. Why are DirecTV DVR fees low? Tivo is not viable for DirecTV customers.
> 
> DVR fees are low because DVR users tend to stay with the company they have the DVR from. And DVR fees are low because they are a conduit to PPV and Pay On Demand.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

20TIL6 said:


> Competition and theft are two very different things. What's the matter Mark? Not worried that this further opens some vulnerability for your beloved DirecTV?





TyroneShoes said:


> Good grief. THAT? is how you interpret this? That would explain a lot of the head-scratching that follows reading your posts.


I realize that competition and theft are technically two different things. But the end result is the same (competing DVRs). And the same Tivo zealots who claim that competition is good (when they saw Tivo booted out) are the same ones who would like all Tivo competition to be gone so that Tivo and only Tivo is the only DVR around. They are so fanatic about it, that any competition regardless of how it comes about, scares the crap out of them.

In any case, I still stand by my previous statement that this will have zero effect on Tivo's ultimate demise.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

magnus said:


> It's easy to force out Tivo using tactics like $5 DVR fees and free boxes until Tivo is no longer around.... but what will happen when they're not.... well kiss that $5 DVR fee bye bye. You'll be looking at much higher DVR fees and wondering how this all came about.
> 
> Yes, I do applaud Tivo for insisting that companies be held accountable for stealing their technology.


HR10 or HR20 you still pay the 4.99 per unit no matter what, they are just named differently.

owned - DVR fee
Leased = leasing fee

Have multiple HR2X's and a HR10 on the account get charged for each on of them.

Funny - in patent infringement cases the word "theft" cannot really be applied. It really depends on the judges interpetation of the patent wording as compared to the suite. This whole thing could easily have gone the opposite direction if the judge did not feel it was the same thing.

At least one good thing has come out of this - the DLB arguement now has a certified legal (if it is not overturned) for not being included in the new devices.

Curious on how you justify the statement - "much higher DVR fees" - might as well call the HR10 dead and gone already as compared to the HR2X, I only get OTA and a couple of HD channels on the HR10 in the garage right now, while it might not be a dead unit, it is not very far away from it.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I think you are confused with what happens today and what will happen in the future.

They charge the $5.99 DVR fee for all boxes now but you can expect that fee to go up.



sjberra said:


> HR10 or HR20 you still pay the 4.99 per unit no matter what, they are just named differently.
> 
> owned - DVR fee
> Leased = leasing fee
> ...


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Yes, this is true. What will is the unfair practices that satellite and cable use to make sure that you are using their equipment.... and when that happens you can expect prices to rise... there is no doubt of that.



Mark Lopez said:


> In any case, I still stand by my previous statement that this will have zero effect on Tivo's ultimate demise.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> In any case, I still stand by my previous statement that this will have zero effect on Tivo's ultimate demise.


More than anything, going forward, TiVo is an advertising platform in a world where broadcast advertising is broken and in pieces all over the floor. No other DVR provider is solving this. In fact, the generics are further breaking the model that feeds the content to them by not addressing this and helping to adapt the advertising model.

Wish as you may (for whatever agenda you might have Mark), but there is no demise of TiVo coming. Sorry to pop your balloon.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

magnus said:


> I think you are confused with what happens today and what will happen in the future.
> 
> They charge the $5.99 DVR fee for all boxes now but you can expect that fee to go up.


Maybe. Everything goes up eventually. But DirecTV's competition is cable and Dish and whatever they charge. Right now DirecTV is cheaper then both so yea, they might go up in a year or two. Has nothing to do with Tivo.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

magnus said:


> They charge the $5.99 DVR fee for all boxes now but you can expect that fee to go up.


Link please, or any credible proof. Oh wait, there is none.



20TIL6 said:


> Wish as you may (for whatever agenda you might have Mark), but there is no demise of TiVo coming. Sorry to pop your balloon.


Yeah, you are right. After 10 years I can see the continued growth. Sorry, no agenda, just looking at the real world without the Tivo blinders on.

snips


> Net loss was ($8.2) million
> 
> For the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008, TiVo anticipates ....... a net loss in the range of ($9.0) million to ($12.0) million
> 
> Additionally, the monthly churn rate was 1.3% compared to 1.0% in the year-ago


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

magnus said:


> Yes, I do. It's just like Bill Gates making software cheap until he drives out the competition. Then when no one is looking... bam... suddenly I'm the only one with the software... well, then pay me the big bucks.
> 
> DVR fees are low from the providers because they want to make sure that you're using a box that they can control. When there is no longer a choice... you can expect that fee to be increased. It's a simple as that.


You've got the competition and the reasons for pricing wrong.

Tivo is not *the* competitor for DirecTV or Dish. Tivo won't work on them so it is not a direct competitor. Few people, despite the big noises made here, choose their TV provider based upon the DVR. The content, the overall price is what DirecTV and Dish deal with. Tivo is such a small driver or you would hear a cable company say...come with us and you can use your Tivo!

And given that Tivo costs a lot more than the 5 bucks most cable companies and satellite companies (BTW, I pay 5 bucks for THREE DirecTV DVRs) why did they price it so low?

Why? Because they want to get customers to buy them/lease them so they can sell them PPV and VOD. That has been stated many, many times.

And if the industry is trying to drive Tivo out of business, why does DirecTV have an ongoing relationship with them and why would any cable company enter into an agreement with them.

Tivo is a good product and helped drive the industry to new technology but it never drove pricing (it is the most expensive solution, not the cheapest. And most expensive solutions don't drive the market price down. That is like saying a Lamborghini is driving the price of a Saturn down) and it never will.

In fact, it is not even a player in driving pricing today.

THAT is the point you missed.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

TonyD79 said:


> Tivo is such a small driver or you would hear a cable company say...come with us and you can use your Tivo!


Actually, there is one commercial here that uses the phrase "Better than Tivo" as a selling point for their DVR.  And I haven't heard of any 'slander' law suits over it.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Does this increase the possibility of Directv reaching a new agreement with Tivo before their current agreement runs out in 2010? Haven't heard a peep out of Directv since Malone took over but we'll keep checking.


----------



## Gregor (Feb 18, 2002)

Mark Lopez said:


> Actually, there is one commercial here that uses the phrase "Better than Tivo" as a selling point for their DVR.  And I haven't heard of any 'slander' law suits over it.


IIRC, that's a Dish ad. Wonder how long that'll be aired?


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

shibby191 said:


> Right now DirecTV is cheaper then both so yea, they might go up in a year or two. Has nothing to do with Tivo.


Depends on your market and packages. For me, WOW cable was significantly cheaper than DirecTV and DTV has increased prices twice since I left.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

nrc said:


> Depends on your market and packages. For me, WOW cable was significantly cheaper than DirecTV and DTV has increased prices twice since I left.


We're referring to the DVR fee, not programming. There may very well be some cable companies out there cheaper but very few. There are 4 different cable companies around here and their DVR is at least $10 a month *per DVR*. Dish and especially DirecTV are cheaper then that.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

Mark Lopez said:


> In any case, what does this ruling actually mean - nothing. Tivo will make a few bucks, the patents will be worked around (if not already done) and Tivo will still be out of business in a few years due to stagnation (IMO of course).


Welcome to the ranks of the "TiVo is doomed" trolls: wrong about TiVo since 1999.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> Does this increase the possibility of Directv reaching a new agreement with Tivo before their current agreement runs out in 2010? Haven't heard a peep out of Directv since Malone took over but we'll keep checking.


Yes and no. I'm sure DirecTV and Tivo will renew the agreement they have today which is to keep the current DirecTivo fleet going and why not, no reason not too unless DirecTV plans to convert SD to MPEG4 and if they do it's a long way off. Ultimate TV's are still going 5+ years after they stopped being made after all.

As for hearing anything out of DirecTV since Malone took over, I know you were in the threads on this but I'll refresh you. At their investor meeting, after Malone took over, they showed their 2-5 year plan. Their plan is to go to the HD DVR as the only receiver they give out to new subs (SD or HD) by 2010. One receiver to rule them all. And that is the HR20/21 or probably it's successor by then. Tivo is no where to be found in their long term plans. Sure things could change but if you announce something like this to investors as your 5 year plan it would be a pretty big turn around to do something else.

As for the prospect of Tivo suing DirecTV, they could, after their current contract is up in 2 years since part of that contract is that they won't sue each other. But if they do then of course DirecTV can then counter sue with their ReplayTV patents they just bought and it would be in court for quite some time. Tivo doesn't really have the cash to be able to go thru a long contracted fight when they already couldn't beat the Replay patents when Tivo sued Replay way back when. DirecTV has much deeper pockets then Tivo plus the patents that Tivo couldn't beat the first time so it would be interesting to see if Tivo would do this.

As for the cable companies, I don't see Tivo suing them either. I mean they have struggled for years to get into the cable world and have finally got a toe hold with Comcast and Cox. I'm sure they want to do the same with the other cable co's. You don't make friends by suing them and you don't sue your current partners. But all depends if the Tivo lawyers thing they can make more money by forcing license agreements with cable vs. working with them as they are now.

We shall see.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

nrc said:


> Welcome to the ranks of the "TiVo is doomed" trolls: wrong about TiVo since 1999.


Welcome to the ranks of the 'Tivo can do no wrong' pom-pom waivers, or the ranks of the 'DirecTV are evil bastages' trolls (take your pick).

i.e., pot, meet kettle.

For the record, I don't expect TiVo will be gone as they will likely, at the bare minimum, continue as a software development company that partners with others to continue selling product, but I also don't bash DirecTV or complain that they no longer offer TiVo products for new customers (and barely seem to wish to continue to offer service to existing customers).

Things change. The companies will adapt and move on, or they'll get left behind because they can't find enough customers to pay for services/products.

If TiVo can keep going, great for them (and for my wife's IRA, which has some TiVo stock I bought for her in it, but I digress....)

If Dish takes it on the chin, well, they deserve it, and should get smacked hard for it.

As to DirecTV, again, this TiVo court decision really matters not for them at this point, though I would offer up that if DirecTV really cared to put the screws on Charlie Ergen and company, they could reach into their own deep pockets and buy TiVo for themselves. I've thought for a long, long time that DirecTV should buy TiVo, but they never seemed to care to. They may still not care to, and may not feel they need to, but keeping them from potentially 'merging with' or being bought out by a competitor would make a lot of sense. It might not change a thing when it comes to DirecTV's DVRs, but it would certainly hurt Dish Network to have to write a big check over to their competitor.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Where did I say that there is proof? I am talking of a future where you are stating that Tivo would be out of business. If you are expecting your DVR fee to be $5.99 for all the DVRs you would have on D*.... then you are sadly mistaken.



Mark Lopez said:


> Link please, or any credible proof. Oh wait, there is none.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I think that you have it backwards. Tivo is the reason why you're getting 3 boxes for $5.99 for the DVR fee (or at the least Tivo is a very good reason why this is true).

PPV would still be around and could be utilized by standard receivers. So, you're point about this makes little sense.



> And given that Tivo costs a lot more than the 5 bucks most cable companies and satellite companies (BTW, I pay 5 bucks for THREE DirecTV DVRs) why did they price it so low?
> 
> Why? Because they want to get customers to buy them/lease them so they can sell them PPV and VOD. That has been stated many, many times.


Tivo won't work on them because D* and E* keep them out. If D* and E* would have an open standard for their content like cablecard then Tivo's could be a viable option to their DVRs. It all boils down to these guys wanting to make sure that you're only using their equipment.


> Tivo won't work on them so it is not a direct competitor.


I think the point that is being missed here is that Tivo should be allowed to compete. However, D* and E* are prohibiting them from doing so. Tivo should be a player in a technology that they created.



> In fact, it is not even a player in driving pricing today.
> 
> THAT is the point you missed.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

bdowell said:


> Welcome to the ranks of the 'Tivo can do no wrong' pom-pom waivers, or the ranks of the 'DirecTV are evil bastages' trolls (take your pick).


There's nothing in my posts to support those characterizations. I didn't leave DirecTV because they're "evil bastages" I left them because they no longer provide value and service that caused me to evangelize for them for over a decade. I hang out here on a TiVo forum because I use and enjoy their product, but you don't see me going to DirecTV forums bashing them or boosting TiVo there.



> As to DirecTV, again, this TiVo court decision really matters not for them at this point, though I would offer up that if DirecTV really cared to put the screws on Charlie Ergen and company, they could reach into their own deep pockets and buy TiVo for themselves. I've thought for a long, long time that DirecTV should buy TiVo, but they never seemed to care to.


The problem with that thinking is that TiVo isn't for sale. It can't be bought on the open market because of poison pill provisions and DTV can't afford or justify the cost of a hostile purchase.

I think this decision does matter to DirecTV because I don't believe that they'd have bothered to purchase ReplayTV if they didn't feel that they needed something to help protect them against TiVo's patents. I don't think that their immediate concern is TiVo suing them, it's TiVo taking a hard line in renewing their agreement, which could then leave them unsupported and open to future suits.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

bdowell said:


> Welcome to the ranks of the 'Tivo can do no wrong' pom-pom waivers, or the ranks of the 'DirecTV are evil bastages' trolls (take your pick).
> 
> i.e., pot, meet kettle.





nrc said:


> There's nothing in my posts to support those characterizations. I didn't leave DirecTV because they're "evil bastages" I left them because they no longer provide value and service that caused me to evangelize for them for over a decade. I hang out here on a TiVo forum because I use and enjoy their product, but you don't see me going to DirecTV forums bashing them or boosting TiVo there.


You did check which sub-forum of these forums you were in before you posted that answer, right?

And you've participated in many discussions in this particular sub-forum in the past and could easily be characterized as someone that is 'pro' TiVo, no? (consider what the answer would be if asked of pretty much any other reader here*)

(*with the exception of RS4...)

Not to belabor the point, but for someone that isn't a pom-pom waiver for TiVo you do put in a lot of words in defense of them, and/or promoting them in the DirecTV related areas of this forum.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

magnus said:


> I think that you have it backwards. Tivo is the reason why you're getting 3 boxes for $5.99 for the DVR fee (or at the least Tivo is a very good reason why this is true).


No, no, no and no!!!

The deal was the same when TIVO was the DirecTV DVR. How is that competition from Tivo?

Give it up. Tivo is not driving prices down.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Mark Lopez said:


> ...the same Tivo zealots who claim that competition is good (when they saw Tivo booted out) are the same ones who would like all Tivo competition to be gone so that Tivo and only Tivo is the only DVR around. They are so fanatic about it, that any competition regardless of how it comes about, scares the crap out of them...


Why, I will never begin to know, but you seem to have a chronic tendency to grossly mischaracterize the Tivo "zealots" as moronically-obsessed, flag-waving, unthinking sheep that will always have a pavlovian response to even the word "Tivo". I think you could not be more wrong, and you do yourself no favors by not giving them credit for having minds of their own and for dismissing them out of hand.

I think they are actually not "Tivo" zealots, but zealots for DVR stability, DVR expansion capability, and most of all for a DVR interface that is user-friendly, based on common sense, and that has the features that folks actually want, and which makes sense to them when they interface with it. I think they are likewise "anti-zealots" for anything that heads in the opposite direction of that.

The fact that they love everything Tivo and hate everything not Tivo has nothing at all to do with Tivo itself and everything to do with their zealousness for the things the Tivo platform has and their contempt for everything every other DVR platform does not have. The fact that the badge happens to read "Tivo" has nothing at all to do with their loyalty, misplaced or not, and has everything to do with the simple coincidence that it is also the name of the single company that gave them what they wanted. We cant blame the zealots for the fact that no other company has been able to even come close to these sorts of goals.

That said, I think there are few among the "Tivo zealots" who are also DTV subs that would not have welcomed a true Tivo-killer DVR platform with open arms, especially if it had been the DVR platform that is currently being shoved down their throats. The considerable reluctance for Tivo owners to part with their equipment is based solely on that equipment's competence and the replacements' lack of same, not any misplaced loyalty. On the contrary, their well-placed loyalty is not to Tivo, but to whoever can provide a top-league product. And so far, that category only has one name, and the name just happens to be "Tivo". Deal with it.

History tells a different story, but if it had gone another way and the HR2x platform had come out of the gate a truly evolutionary/revolutionary product that basically left everything Tivo in its considerable dust, all of the "zealots" would be saying "Tivo who?" and would have been quite happy to move on. Now that the HR2x platform has finally become more of a contender than pretender, a lot of them finally are. Loyalty, shmoyalty. People are fickle by nature.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

bdowell said:


> You did check which sub-forum of these forums you were in before you posted that answer, right?


Yes. This is a the DirecTV HDTV TiVo topic on the Tivocommunity TiVo forum. This is not a DirecTV forum.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Ok, if you say so. 



TonyD79 said:


> No, no, no and no!!!
> 
> The deal was the same when TIVO was the DirecTV DVR. How is that competition from Tivo?
> 
> Give it up. Tivo is not driving prices down.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

nrc said:


> Welcome to the ranks of the "TiVo is doomed" trolls: wrong about TiVo since 1999.


So you call me a troll even though you don't even have DirecTV anymore and continue to post your pro-Tivo stuff here (in the DirecTV DVR section). Got it.



nrc said:


> Yes. *This is a the DirecTV* HDTV TiVo topic on the Tivocommunity TiVo forum. *This is not a DirecTV* forum.




In any case the question that was asked of you was why you were even posting here when you don't even have DirectTV, since this is the sub furum dedicated for DirecTV related DVRs. And in case you didn't notice the sticky at the top, the non-Tivo models can be discussed here too, so it does not make it a strickly DirecTV Tivo only forum.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

TyroneShoes said:


> Why, I will never begin to know, but you seem to have a chronic tendency to grossly mischaracterize the Tivo "zealots" as moronically-obsessed, flag-waving, unthinking sheep that will always have a pavlovian response to even the word "Tivo". I
> 
> I think they are actually not "Tivo" zealots, but zealots for DVR stability, DVR expansion capability, and most of all for a DVR interface that is user-friendly, based on common sense, and that has the features that folks actually want, and which makes sense to them when they interface with it. I think they are likewise "anti-zealots" for anything that heads in the opposite direction of that.


The problem with your statement is that those who I use the term Tivo lemming or Tivo zealot on are those who have never even tried the competition. IMO it's hard to take a credible stance on stability, features etc., when you have never even tried the unit. So IMO they are indeed 'moronically-obsessed' if they are so confident that nothing else can possible be better, that they won't even try it.

BTW, both of my HR20s are still working flawlessly. My 'new and improved' HR10 with 6.3f now locks up practically daily since getting the update. Of course the Tivo zealot response would be that I must have a failing drive as Tivo software is so 'stable'.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> Link please, or any credible proof. Oh wait, there is none.
> 
> Yeah, you are right. After 10 years I can see the continued growth. Sorry, no agenda, just looking at the real world without the Tivo blinders on.


Hey Mark, look what I found printed in the inside of my TiVo blinders.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/03/technology/simons_tivowalkup.fortune/index.htm

Man these TiVo blinders, so reliable, so feature-rich, so easy to use. You should look into getting a pair.... of TiVo blinders that is.

Wait a minute... here it comes... almost there..... <shrug>


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

magnus said:


> I think you are confused with what happens today and what will happen in the future.
> 
> They charge the $5.99 DVR fee for all boxes now but you can expect that fee to go up.


5.99 single reoccuring monthly fee for dvr
+ 4.99 a moth mirror/lease fee

still have no idea why you are stating that the 5.99 a month will go up, just because Tivo won a lawsuit that has nothing to do with a price increase, TIVO is a manufacturer, not the inventor of DVR. Replay had theirs out a full two months before TIVo hit the streets in 1999.

If you have inside information on a price increase and the reasoning behind it,would love to see the documentation. No I am not confused with what the future will bring, there is a 50/50 chance that prices will go up, but then again there is a 50/50 chance that prices will stay the same. Agin this lawsuite has 0 to do with price increases, at least for directv, they have been phasing out the TIVO units for a couple of years now.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

sjberra said:


> TIVO is a manufacturer, not the inventor of DVR. Replay had theirs out a full two months before TIVo hit the streets in 1999.


First of all, ReplayTV did not have their DVR out before TiVo. TiVo shipped March 31, 1999. ReplayTV shipped in April. 
http://sec.edgar-online.com/2000/03/28/16/0001012870-00-001647/Section14.asp

Second, while TiVo didn't invent the DVR (and neither did ReplayTV if that's what you're suggesting), they have patents on fundamental aspects of the DVR. ReplayTV has few patents (only two that I can find) and they're not nearly as fundamental to the DVR concept. One of them covers something similar to wish lists but it appears to tie it to their concept of "channels" which was an awkward and confusing part of their user interface.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

Mark Lopez said:


> In any case the question that was asked of you was why you were even posting here when you don't even have DirectTV, since this is the sub furum dedicated for DirecTV related DVRs. And in case you didn't notice the sticky at the top, the non-Tivo models can be discussed here too, so it does not make it a strickly DirecTV Tivo only forum.


Your artful attempts to obfuscate the truth notwithstanding, this is a TiVo forum. This is the sub-topic for DirecTV DVRs running TiVo software.

You need to work on your reading comprehension. The sticky at the top of the forum states:


> This forum topic is specifically designed for discussion involving DirecTV TiVo products. Comparisons and contrasts to non-TiVo products is permitted, as well as questions about other DirecTV products (such as the HR20) *as they relate to TiVo products* is fine. *Discussion about non-TiVo DVR products in general is discouraged, as the discussion here, and throughout the TiVo Community forums, should be focused on TiVo products.*


Discussion of other DirecTV DVRs is permitted _as they relate to TiVo_ products. This is for the benefit of TiVo owners considering their options, not for the ongoing support of DirecTV or its DVRs.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

nrc said:


> First of all, ReplayTV did not have their DVR out before TiVo. TiVo shipped March 31, 1999. ReplayTV shipped in April.
> http://sec.edgar-online.com/2000/03/28/16/0001012870-00-001647/Section14.asp
> 
> Second, while TiVo didn't invent the DVR (and neither did ReplayTV if that's what you're suggesting), they have patents on fundamental aspects of the DVR. ReplayTV has few patents (only two that I can find) and they're not nearly as fundamental to the DVR concept. One of them covers something similar to wish lists but it appears to tie it to their concept of "channels" which was an awkward and confusing part of their user interface.


Funny what I see is this

ReplayTV is a brand of digital video recorder (DVR), a term synonymous with personal video recorder (PVR). It is a consumer video device which allows users to capture television programming to internal hard disk storage for later viewing (sometimes called time shifting). The *first ReplayTV model launched in January 1999, two months ahead of rival TiVo. Currently, ReplayTV sells a PC edition of their product.*

ReplayTV was founded in 1997 and purchased by SONICblue in 2001.

On March 23, 2003 SONICblue filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and on April 16 sold most of its assets, including ReplayTV, to the Japanese electronics giant D&M Holdings. SONICblue was fighting a copyright infringement suit over the ReplayTV's ability to skip commercials when it filed for bankruptcy.

On December 19th, 2005, Digital Networks North America announced that it was exiting the hardware business as soon as current inventory is sold out. ReplayTV would then concentrate on PC software sales of its DVR technology in a partnership with Hauppauge Computer Works, a manufacturer of Television cards for PCs.[1]

On December 13, 2007, D&M Holdings sold most of the assets of ReplayTV to DirecTV.[2]

The technological underpinnings of hard-disk based video recorders were tested on July 8, 1965, when CBS explored the possibilities of instant freeze-frame and rewind for sports broadcasts. Ampex released the first commercial hard disk video recorder in 1967. The HS-100 recorded composite analog video onto a 14" diameter hard disk rotating at 1800 rpm (one frame per track) using Frequency modulation. It stored up to 30 seconds[1] at 30 frames per second, could record continuously, and could play back in reverse, at up twice the normal speed, by frame, or at any speed in between, with a variable speed control lever.

In 1985, while working at Honeywell's Physical Sciences Center, David Rafner first described a drive-based DVR designed for home TV recording, time-slipping, and skipping commercials. U.S. Patent 4,972,396 focused on a multi-channel design to allow simultaneous independent recording and playback. Broadly anticipating future DVR developments, it describes possible applications such as streaming compression, editing, captioning, multi-channel security monitoring, military sensor platforms, and remotely piloted vehicles.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I am suggesting that if Marky Mark is correct and Tivo is on it's way out.... then your DVR fee WILL go up (and then it won't be by a few bucks).

When there is no competition... then you can expect prices to go up and that's just the facts.

I mean really do you expect that your DVR fees are always going to be structured like this? Heck, if you really think that all you are currently paying for true DVR fees is $5.99 then you're mistaken.

How do you think they can afford to drop your package price by $20 for 6 months if you threaten to leave? Well, it's because they are already over charging for the service.

No inside information here... just common sense.



sjberra said:


> 5.99 single reoccuring monthly fee for dvr
> + 4.99 a moth mirror/lease fee
> 
> still have no idea why you are stating that the 5.99 a month will go up, just because Tivo won a lawsuit that has nothing to do with a price increase, TIVO is a manufacturer, not the inventor of DVR. Replay had theirs out a full two months before TIVo hit the streets in 1999.
> ...


----------



## samo (Oct 7, 1999)

> The first ReplayTV model launched in January 1999, two months ahead of rival TiVo. Currently, ReplayTV sells a PC edition of their product.


You are talking about technicality here. Replay was first to manufacture DVR, TiVo was first to sell the unit online, Dish was first to have DishPlayer in B&M retail.
Each one of them can claim to be first. The truth is that all 3 became available in about the same time. All 3 were developed independently by TiVo, Replay and Microsoft.
TiVo patent is for specific implementation that separates and recombines audio and video streams. Apparently, Dish used similar technique on second generation (5XX) DVRs and TiVo took the full advantage of that and convinced 12 technically illiterate people and a judge who rules 80% in favor of patent holder that Dish infringed on TiVo patent.
It is a fair game, if corporation can extort money from another to benefit their shareholders and board of directors - they should. It is also a fair game for Dish to use every possible legal tactics to prevent this.
But it has nothing to do with who invented DVR. It also has nothing to do with why TiVo is losing money and subscribers.
The truth of the matter is that TiVo and Replay TV business models were impossible to implement and sustain. TiVo got lucky and managed to go public while dot.com bubble was going strong. Almost a billion of other people money down the drain, TiVo is still losing money 9 years later. Replay wasn't quick enough to go public and was sold to D&H on a auction for $40 million.
The only healthy DVR makers today are satellite and cable box manufacturers because their business model is based on profit made on programming subscriptions.


----------



## PrincetonTech (Apr 13, 2008)

Mark Lopez said:


> In any case, I still stand by my previous statement that this will have zero effect on Tivo's ultimate demise.


I think that you forget that Dish will have to soon pay to Tivo approximately 230 million for patent infringement. It goes up 6 million per month for each month that Dish stalls.

After that, the flood of lawsuits towards all the cable companies will begin. Tivo is going to be extremely healthy in the future. No chance of going out of business.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

sjberra said:


> Funny what I see is this
> 
> ReplayTV is a brand of digital video recorder (DVR), a term synonymous with personal video recorder (PVR)...


What's funny is that you think Wikipedia is a more accurate source than the company's own SEC filings.

Both TiVo and ReplayTV were founded in 1997. Both TiVo and ReplayTV first showed their products at the 1999 CES show in January. TiVo shipped products in March, ReplayTV shipped in April.

Neither TiVo or ReplayTV _invented_ the DVR. The concept was patented in 1991 by Eric and Romi Goldwasser. TiVo now has exclusive rights to that patent.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

magnus said:


> I am suggesting that if Marky Mark is correct and Tivo is on it's way out.... then your DVR fee WILL go up (and then it won't be by a few bucks).
> 
> When there is no competition... then you can expect prices to go up and that's just the facts.
> 
> ...


The point where you are wrong is - there IS competition, see a lot of other providers offering DVR services on their content, end users can always go to another provider

If you do a little research the concept of "dropping the package price by 20.00 if you threaten to leave" is past, there have been a number of threads on various forums that the repsonse to the statement "give me this or I leave" was - "ok, I will cancel your service as of today and send out recovery boxes".

Common sense would indicate that they would not raise the DVR cost simply because there are other options available. Personally have been using more and more of the Home Media PC and netflix - and no I wil not have a issue with bandwidth throttling, I pay a few extra dollars for static IP and business class internet connection to the house, since my job depends on it and aq 4 hour SLA outage clause.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

PrincetonTech said:


> After that, the flood of lawsuits towards all the cable companies will begin. Tivo is going to be extremely healthy in the future. No chance of going out of business.


Only if the cable DVRs actually infringe or Tivo thinks they do. There isn't just one way to do a DVR.

Plus I highly doubt Tivo is going to sue their current partners Comcast and Cox (I'm sure they have a "no sue" clause just like they do with DirecTV). I guess they could go after Time Warner and the others. But again it all depends if they want willing partners in the other cable companies or forced partners via a lawsuit.

However, if a cable company DVR actually does infringe then Tivo will have to sue to protect it's patent. Or they can simply sign a licensing deal.


----------



## parzec (Jun 21, 2002)

Mark Lopez said:


> I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good. <shrug>


Gee, maybe DirecTV pirates should now be considered legal "competitors" and allowed to offer their products on the open market.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

parzec said:


> Gee, maybe DirecTV pirates should now be considered legal "competitors" and allowed to offer their products on the open market.


<sigh> It's a shame people can't understand a simple analogy.

Here let me try again so even my dog can understand.

Tivo fanatics cry that DirecTV not offering a Tivo based unit is bad because it reduces competition and claim fees will go up etc.

Those same Tivo fanatics dance in the street because Tivo wins some patent issue which in theory (but unlikely) could force all competitors out of business resulting in the same monopoly they were whining about above. But I don't hear them proclaiming that if Tivo was the only DVR available that their prices would not also increase.

Do you understand now? It had nothing to do with theft, but the consequences of not having or not having competition. When Tivo is on the short end, they cry. When Tivo is on the other end, they jump with glee.


----------



## fasTLane (Nov 25, 2005)

That *is* dog logic.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> <sigh> It's a shame people can't understand a simple analogy.
> 
> Here let me try again so even my dog can understand.
> 
> ...


Well Mark, I consulted with my dog about this as well and he had a different perspective.

Between barks and various snarls, he said that TiVo's patent victory would most likely only ensure that the use of their intellectual property would be negotiated and properly licensed. Others could, and probably would continue with their own platforms. And continue to offer competitive features as key differentiators.

Then he whimpered a bit as he admitted that the DVR market is much too large for a single provider. But it is ripe for licensing agreements, which would surely result in a fractional expense adjustment for those not choosing to go with the TiVo platform outright.

I actually questioned him about that fractional expense due to licensing. Wouldn't that prohibit independent platforms from flourishing? I mean, at the root of it all, they would still be tied to paying for that foundational TiVo IP. But he pointed to precedent in the video game console industry. All the players we know now, and knew during the first explosion of that market, they all paid licensing to Magnavox for their patented IP. And that market grew and morphed without restriction. He asked, when was the last time you played a game on a Magnavox Odyssey console?

We laughed, I gave him a treat. He's such a good dog. I think I will let him poo in the neighbor's yard. He seems to enjoy that.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Mark Lopez said:


> The problem with your statement is that those who I use the term Tivo lemming or Tivo zealot on are those who have never even tried the competition. IMO it's hard to take a credible stance on stability, features etc., when you have never even tried the unit. So IMO they are indeed 'moronically-obsessed' if they are so confident that nothing else can possible be better, that they won't even try it...


OK, Mark. I think we may have reached some common ground, even though I took your daily rant to be directed at everyone who seems to have the impression that Tivo makes DVRs in a league far above the competition, not just those who have no frame of reference. So I guess what that means is you were not referring to myself (even though I am a staunch supporter of both platforms) or most of the regular posters who actually DO have that frame of reference. Fair enough.

But, it is not that simple to have that frame of reference. You need to either take the leap of faith and own both platforms for a reasonable time, or you need to sift very carefully through the minefield of posters and figure out if the horror stories on the platforms you don't have experience with are accurate. The problem for the great many Tivo lovers who have not yet made the leap of faith (or desperation) is that once you make it, it is difficult to leap back, especially without a 2-year commitment to something relatively within the realm of the fear of the unknown.

But savvy consumers will learn to interpret the postings, including the horror stories and the blind loyalties. A combination of a greatly-improved HR2x, a devalued HR10 (due to software woes and its inability to get the new HD channels) and in no small part the hard work of some at DBSTalk, have made that dilemma a lot easier to deal with.

I think if you look around, there are no longer very many "Tivo zealots" that fit your definition of not having any idea what the competition is about, as there seemed to be a year ago or two years ago. So you can probably give up that rant. I think it was relevant two years ago, but I don't think it is any more.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Mark Lopez said:


> <sigh> It's a shame people can't understand a simple analogy....Do you understand now? It had nothing to do with theft, but the consequences of not having or not having competition. When Tivo is on the short end, they cry. When Tivo is on the other end, they jump with glee.


Maybe no one seems to understand your "simple" analogy because rather than being simple it is convoluted, a real stretch, and just doesn't make any sense. To us it looks like the obviously-crazy guy screaming about how everyone but him is insane. How on God's green earth does competition have anything at all to do with any of this? (don't bother, that's rhetorical -- it doesn't).

I think its all even much simpler than what you attribute it to.

There are a lot of folks who think Tivo got a raw deal and that if there were justice in the world, that the guys who made far and away the best PVR platform ever should be on top, and should be reaping the benefits and rewards of having a better idea and implementation than everyone else, especially since the features in question were stolen intellectual property, and were being used much-more successfully within a competing DVR platform that had a captive, built-in audience. People would be very-understandably unhappy to see Tivo fail just because business is typically unfair, and just because having the best product is no guarantee of success. And not just "zealots", but anyone would feel that way.

It's nothing new, did Beta succumb to VHS because VHS was superior? I hardly think anyone would agree. Does the fact that Windows is the OS running on 95% of computers mean that it's in any significant way superior to the Mac OS running on the other 5%? Nobody will agree to that with a straight face either. What happens in business is rarely fair, and when it finally is, for once, that makes people happy, "zealots" and non-zealots alike.

People in general see Tivo's lack of acceptance as unfair. And if people agree on one thing, it's that everyone should play fair. Likewise, when Tivo wins a lawsuit such as this, people naturally see that as justice being served, as the system working the way it actually should work, for once. That makes them understandably happy. All of them.

It's just as simple as that. Reading into that some convoluted theory about how it relates to competition makes no sense to anyone in your audience.


----------



## cgove1 (Dec 21, 2004)

TonyD79 said:


> You really think DVR fees are low because of Tivo? No way. Tivo doesn't have that kind of influence. Why are DirecTV DVR fees low? Tivo is not viable for DirecTV customers.
> 
> DVR fees are low because DVR users tend to stay with the company they have the DVR from. And DVR fees are low because they are a conduit to PPV and Pay On Demand.


Not me. 5 DirecTv (4 DVR's) going back today. I've had DirectV for many, many years. They turned me on to TIVO HD with the HR10-250 that I paid 1K for several years back. It finally wore out and had to be replaced. Now that Comcast offers TIVO the choice was easy. Had 4 TIVO HD DVR's from Comcast installed last weekend. So far so good. I'll stay with TIVO, I don't care who delivers the signal.

Funny thing is I switched to DirecTV because I used to care who provided the service and I never gave TIVO a second thought until they indroduced me to it with the HR10-250.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

TyroneShoes said:


> OK, Mark. I think we may have reached some common ground, even though I took your daily rant to be directed at everyone who seems to have the impression that Tivo makes DVRs in a league far above the competition, not just those who have no frame of reference. So I guess what that means is you were not referring to myself (even though I am a staunch supporter of both platforms) or most of the regular posters who actually DO have that frame of reference. Fair enough.
> 
> But, it is not that simple to have that frame of reference. You need to either take the leap of faith and own both platforms for a reasonable time, or you need to sift very carefully through the minefield of posters and figure out if the horror stories on the platforms you don't have experience with are accurate. The problem for the great many Tivo lovers who have not yet made the leap of faith (or desperation) is that once you make it, it is difficult to leap back, especially without a 2-year commitment to something relatively within the realm of the fear of the unknown.
> 
> ...


I love how you and Mark carry on with your superior attitude about how much more intelligent you are because you've tried more than one dvr. Answer me this Mr Intellectual - if Direct has such a superior product, why is there is no trial period? 

Ok Mr High and Mr Mighty (I'll let you and Mark decide who is whom), let's talk some common sense. With the advent of the internet, one can gather a great deal of information of a product. You guys might want to look into the internet so you won't have to go out and buy every product you want to know anything about, because according to your logic, that's the only way to fly.

You guys crack me up with those attitudes


----------



## parzec (Jun 21, 2002)

Mark Lopez said:


> <sigh> It's a shame people can't understand a simple analogy.
> 
> Here let me try again so even my dog can understand.
> 
> ...


The problem with your argument is its false premise. Tivo people want the Tivo option under DirecTV because the software is better and easier to use than the HR2X. (yes, I have both so this is an informed opinion), not because of some general feeling on the benefits of competition. You have committed a common logical fallacy. This is simple and should make sense to your dog and most single-cell organisms. Can you understand it?


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RS4 said:


> Answer me this Mr Intellectual - if Direct has such a superior product, why is there is no trial period?


Because they don't have to? LOL

If the day comes that DirecTV is no longer growing or research indicates that having a trial period makes sense for them then I'm sure you'll see them revisit this.

But the fact is that despite the no trial and despite that most customers are not under a commitment churn is at record lows and they are still signing up new customers at nearly a million a year.

So in other words they don't need to have a trial period to attract new customers and that is all a trial period is used for. This is business. Not who is "superior". But if the day comes (and it will) they are no longer growing at the rate they want to be then they will revisit the commitments and trial periods among other things. Only makes business sense.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

I've had the Directv HD dvr for 3 months now. I kept the HDtivo connected. I'll keep checking this thread as long as there is any hope of Directv allowing a Tivo option in the future. I've been following this story for years and still have not read any reason why it's in Directvs' economic interest to not allow a Tivo option. Tivos' win over the Dish helps keep that hope alive.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> I've been following this story for years and still have not read any reason why it's in Directvs' economic interest to not allow a Tivo option.


Actually you've been given many reasons in other threads but you just choose to ignore them. Your choice.


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

shibby191 said:


> Actually you've been given many reasons in other threads but you just choose to ignore them. Your choice.


A bit disheartening when your considerable efforts have not been 100% effective?


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

Cudahy said:


> I've had the Directv HD dvr for 3 months now. I kept the HDtivo connected. I'll keep checking this thread as long as there is any hope of Directv allowing a Tivo option in the future. I've been following this story for years and still have not read any reason why it's in Directvs' economic interest to not allow a Tivo option. Tivos' win over the Dish helps keep that hope alive.


Cudahy,

Do you have options other than DirecTV? I'm guessing you are locked into a two year contract since your HR20/21 landed.

The sad fact is that NONE of these established companies hold their customers' wishes with high regard. When they were just starting out and hungry for business, yes, but once they reach sustaining share in their market, they just don't care any longer.

In DirecTV's case, I think executive management and executive wannabe's have had their noses up and in between Murdoch's cheeks for so long that they have forgotten what the fresh scent of great customer satisfaction smells like.

At the end of the day, all you can do is decide how much consumer control is worth to you, and exercise your spending according to that.

You might find that there is no longer a perfect solution. But whatever the give and take, the satisfaction of completely owning your consumer spend can make it worthwhile. And you are no longer personally lining the pockets of a company that fails to meet your requirements of service.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

20TIL6 said:


> A bit disheartening when your considerable efforts have not been 100% effective?


I wonder if Shibby has a quota of how many replies need to be answered?


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

RS4 said:


> I wonder if Shibby has a quota of how many replies need to be answered?


If so, I am wondering if it is a shared quota.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

LOL. I actually don't post here all that often in these types of threads but I had to reply to that one. I mean, hold out hope all you want, there is nothing wrong with that. But to say there have been no business reasons given why DirecTV shouldn't get back with Tivo is just plain putting your head in the sand. But it's all been hashed before over and over again, no reason to bring it all back point by point. I just had to wonder if he had totally ignored those other threads that he posted the same question in or just chose to ignore the answers given.

I also have to wonder why he hasn't made the same choice others have. If Tivo is the strongest force in your life then why suffer, go to greener pastures if they exist. If DirecTV has wronged you so much that it's lowering your quality of life the by all means, leave and be happy. DirecTV isn't for everyone. If it was there wouldn't be anyone else to switch to.


----------



## Flogduh (Feb 1, 2001)

20TIL6 said:


> Well Mark, I consulted with my dog about this as well and he had a different perspective.
> 
> Between barks and various snarls, he said that TiVo's patent victory would most likely only ensure that the use of their intellectual property would be negotiated and properly licensed. Others could, and probably would continue with their own platforms. And continue to offer competitive features as key differentiators.
> 
> ...


OWNED:up: Priceless as well!


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

RS4 said:


> I love how you and Mark carry on with your superior attitude about how much more intelligent you are because you've tried more than one dvr. Answer me this Mr Intellectual - if Direct has such a superior product, why is there is no trial period?
> 
> Ok Mr High and Mr Mighty (I'll let you and Mark decide who is whom), let's talk some common sense. With the advent of the internet, one can gather a great deal of information of a product. You guys might want to look into the internet so you won't have to go out and buy every product you want to know anything about, because according to your logic, that's the only way to fly.
> 
> You guys crack me up with those attitudes


By your same logic - If Ferrari F40 is such a superior product why do they not have a trial period? You mean I have to lease it before I can drive it for more then 10 minutes? God that is such a unfair thing....

Both product have the same type of trial period, you can look and test drive IF you have enough disposable income for the car, and you can watch a Directv device in you local Best Buy for the same amount of time, only it is free to test drive it, the sales person will even hand you a remote to change channels


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

sjberra said:


> By your same logic - If Ferrari F40 is such a superior product why do they not have a trial period? You mean I have to lease it before I can drive it for more then 10 minutes? God that is such a unfair thing....
> 
> Both product have the same type of trial period, you can look and test drive IF you have enough disposable income for the car, and you can watch a Directv device in you local Best Buy for the same amount of time, only it is free to test drive it, the sales person will even hand you a remote to change channels


Does the Ferrari F40 work with cable or satellite As I recall, this discussion is about dvrs and the video industry. But, I'll continue with your analogy - Ferrari F40 is probably considered by most people to be in the top of it's class, however, anyone who has done even a small amount of research will soon find out that HR2x from D* started in the Yugo class, but may now be up to the Chevys. I doubt if even the D* army would consider the HR2x to be in the same class as the Ferrari


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Hmmm, this poor chap is trapped by the Tivo 3 year commitment. Poor guy. 

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=390102


----------



## 20TIL6 (Sep 7, 2006)

shibby191 said:


> Hmmm, this poor chap is trapped by the Tivo 3 year commitment. Poor guy.
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=390102


Try again...

He had 30 days to cancel before finding himself 'trapped'. And he's not switching because of the TiVo. He's switching because he feels his cable provider is lacking in HD. Over a year later.

30 days is plenty of time to determine if you like or dislike TiVo.

The simple fact that DirecTV does not give you any trial period whatsoever, to see if you like or dislike their device/service....well, you can keep applying that lipstick if you want.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

I've read hundreds of responses over the past 2 years about why it's not in Directvs' interest to offer a Tivo HD option. The only one that made any sense was that Directv(at least under Murdoch)didn't care about losing 100 to 300 thousand subscribers over the next few years; it was just no big deal to them. Of course that answer was that it actually was in Directvs' interest but that they didn't care about it. It still seems logical to me that Malone might actually think that a few hundred thousand subscribers do matter. There's no sign of that yet, but I'll keep checking.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

Cudahy said:


> I've read hundreds of responses over the past 2 years about why it's not in Directvs' interest to offer a Tivo HD option. The only one that made any sense was that Directv(at least under Murdoch)didn't care about losing 100 to 300 thousand subscribers over the next few years; it was just no big deal to them. Of course that answer was that it actually was in Directvs' interest but that they didn't care about it. It still seems logical to me that Malone might actually think that a few hundred thousand subscribers do matter. There's no sign of that yet, but I'll keep checking.


believe the last state of the union address by Directv actually showed they where gaining more new subscribers then they where losing becasue of the TIVO HD boxes being phased out so not really sure this will mean anything on the ROI factor


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Getting more new subscribers than they're losing is irrelevant to the question.
No one on this board knows how many Tivo subscribers have/will move to cable to keep Tivo but whatever it is - it's lost customers because they don't allow a Tivo alternative.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

And the cost to keep Tivo is millions in R&D and support (the big one). All to keep a few thousand customers? It's obviously not worth it or at least the bean counters have said so. I don't understand why you can't understand the huge cost savings by having just one UI to support.

And as has been pointed out to you, at the investor day...after Malone took over...DirecTV layed out their roadmap for the next 3-5 years. All the receiver models are being pared down to just one. One receiver that everyone will get and it will be an HD DVR. So the HR20/21 platform and it's later generation will be the one receiver that everyone will get. SD or HD they will get it. This is planned to be in effect by mid to end 2009.

So they already are down to just one similar UI on all their latest receivers and will follow that pattern to just one receiver type period. Tivo is obviously not in any of those plans.

But hey, keep ignoring all that if you want. Hope springs eternal!


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

RS4 said:


> I doubt if even the D* army would consider the HR2x to be in the same class as the Ferrari


Having known several Ferrari owners in my time, I suspect the HR20 is far more reliable than the Ferrari.


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

RS4 said:


> I love how you and Mark carry on with your superior attitude about how much more intelligent you are because you've tried more than one dvr. Answer me this Mr Intellectual - if Direct has such a superior product, why is there is no trial period?
> 
> Ok Mr High and Mr Mighty (I'll let you and Mark decide who is whom), let's talk some common sense. With the advent of the internet, one can gather a great deal of information of a product. You guys might want to look into the internet so you won't have to go out and buy every product you want to know anything about, because according to your logic, that's the only way to fly.
> 
> You guys crack me up with those attitudes


Your and your fricking trial crap. A Benz is is a superior to a Chevy. Yes Mercedes-Benz does not have a trial period.

Till a few Months ago, Cingular/AT&T wireless is SUPERIOR to verison here. There was not 30 day grace period. Why does Verison offer one? Because the service sucks so bad, they know you will WANT to leave in less than 30 days.

DTV is confident in thier prodcust that they don't need it. Get it?


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> And the cost to keep Tivo is millions in R&D and support (the big one). All to keep a few thousand customers? It's obviously not worth it or at least the bean counters have said so. I don't understand why you can't understand the huge cost savings by having just one UI to support.
> 
> And as has been pointed out to you, at the investor day...after Malone took over...DirecTV layed out their roadmap for the next 3-5 years. All the receiver models are being pared down to just one. One receiver that everyone will get and it will be an HD DVR. So the HR20/21 platform and it's later generation will be the one receiver that everyone will get. SD or HD they will get it. This is planned to be in effect by mid to end 2009.
> 
> ...


One U/I huh? So, that must mean they are getting rid of all the DTivos by mid 2009, according to your logic - what's that another 2 million or so boxes Somehow I think you might want to reconsider this line of thought - D* should be training you better, if you want to be part of their army


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

RS4 said:


> One U/I huh? So, that must mean they are getting rid of all the DTivos by mid 2009, according to your logic - what's that another 2 million or so boxes Somehow I think you might want to reconsider this line of thought - D* should be training you better, if you want to be part of their army


I thought the TiVo's were so good... no one had to call and get support on them?

And yes... One fairly common UI...
As those that are calling about UI questions and usage, are primarily (the vast vast majority of users)... are using newer equipment, are new customers with newer equipment.... not those that are still using their 10 year old RCA boxes.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RS4 said:


> One U/I huh? So, that must mean they are getting rid of all the DTivos by mid 2009, according to your logic - what's that another 2 million or so boxes Somehow I think you might want to reconsider this line of thought - D* should be training you better, if you want to be part of their army


Ummm, did I say anything about *current* users and their receivers. Uhhh, no. They moved to one UI 2-3 years ago on all new receivers. Nothing new there.

I specifically said what was said exactly in the presentation (and I'll go slow and spell it out for you): If by mid 2009 they only have one receiver available, let's say the HR21, then all *NEW* customers will get that receiver only. Any current customers calling in for *replacements or upgrades* will only get that receiver. Why? Because it's the only one in production.

Has *nothing* to do with the old DirecTivo's or the old RCA receivers or the old Sony receivers or old Hughes receivers or the old Ultimate TV receivers that users may still be using. I have no idea where you are getting that from.

The strategy is to simply make only one piece of hardware available and thru attrition eventually the majority of subs will have it. So perhaps by 2015 or so they could potentially switch SD over to MPEG4 as well a lot easier if the majority of their subs have MPEG4 capable equipment.
It's also a strategy so that everyone gets a DVR, period. And even if you don't have HD now, your receiver is HD cabable which then lowers replacement costs because guess what, you already have all you need.

Wow, what a concept.


----------



## ebockelman (Jul 12, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> So they already are down to just one similar UI on all their latest receivers and will follow that pattern to just one receiver type period. Tivo is obviously not in any of those plans.


One receiver type != One UI.

If Directv were consistent in wanting one UI, the HDPC-20 would not be on the table.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

RS4 said:


> With the advent of the internet, one can gather a great deal of information of a product.


Yes you can. Including a lot of FUD and misinformation. Just look at what people find when they read your posts. Which is why some people need to call those people on their half-truths and lies.

If anyone who never had a DVR did a search on both the HR10 and the HR2x, they would find just as many gripes about both, and just as much ravings for both. So it's up to the person to make their decisions based on what they find credible and what they find to be just pointless ranting. So, who do you think they will find more credible, someone who has actually used both, or someone who not only has never used one, but does not even have the service anymore and only rants for the sake of ranting? Do you not realize that you are doing more harm to your 'cause' than good?


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

ebockelman said:


> One receiver type != One UI.
> 
> If Directv were consistent in wanting one UI, the HDPC-20 would not be on the table.


The HDPC-20 is a completely different product...
It is not a set-top box.
It is not targetted at the same consumer base that we are discussing here.
It is an option for those that want to use a home PC/media center an option.

But for their IRD receiver set-top units... they are most definently working to have a consistant core UI.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

You can go to your local dealer and test drive a Benz. Some car dealers, in some parts of the country, will even let you take a test vehicle home overnight.

Cell phone service varies from one location to another. Many parts of the country Verizon has superior service to Cingular/AT&T. Check Consumers. Verizon gives you a trial period so if you don't get good service where you live and work you won't have a comittment. They have confidence in their product.

Companies that have confidence in their product have nothing to lose by offering a trial period--Companies that are afraid too many customers may not like the product and will bail have less motivation to offer a trial period

*GET IT?*



gio1269 said:


> Your and your fricking trial crap. A Benz is is a superior to a Chevy. Yes Mercedes-Benz does not have a trial period.
> 
> Till a few Months ago, Cingular/AT&T wireless is SUPERIOR to verison here. There was not 30 day grace period. Why does Verison offer one? Because the service sucks so bad, they know you will WANT to leave in less than 30 days.
> 
> *DTV is confident in thier prodcust that they don't need it. Get it?*


----------



## ebockelman (Jul 12, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> The HDPC-20 is a completely different product...
> It is not a set-top box.
> It is not targetted at the same consumer base that we are discussing here.
> It is an option for those that want to use a home PC/media center an option.
> ...


True, it not a set-top box. But it also shows that Directv isn't interested in just one box/one UI.

Yes, their core set-top box may have one UI, but there will be multiple UIs that participate in the Directv platform.

I do disagree with the consumer base. I think many people that participate in these forums want the HDPC-20. It helps Directv fit the higher-end that the HR20/21 don't serve as well.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

ebockelman said:


> I do disagree with the consumer base. I think many people that participate in these forums want the HDPC-20. It helps Directv fit the higher-end that the HR20/21 don't serve as well.


The people in the forums... and specifically those intrested in the HDPC-20 product are a very small portion of their 17million customer base.

And going back to the HDPC-20... and it's UI

The UI is being designed by Microsoft.... DirecTV is just involved with the physical tuner aspect of it...

At this point... we don't know much about "who" is goint to be responsible for the support of the product... Microsoft or DirecTV.


----------



## ebockelman (Jul 12, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> The people in the forums... and specifically those intrested in the HDPC-20 product are a very small portion of their 17million customer base.


Agree, but it's clearly a large enough market to warrant its development.



ebonovic said:


> And going back to the HDPC-20... and it's UI
> 
> The UI is being designed by Microsoft.... DirecTV is just involved with the physical tuner aspect of it...
> 
> At this point... we don't know much about "who" is goint to be responsible for the support of the product... Microsoft or DirecTV.


If Microsoft's past practices give us any hints, it will be Directv.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

ebonovic said:


> I thought the TiVo's were so good... no one had to call and get support on them?
> 
> And yes... One fairly common UI...
> As those that are calling about UI questions and usage, are primarily (the vast vast majority of users)... are using newer equipment, are new customers with newer equipment.... not those that are still using their 10 year old RCA boxes.


Oh yeah, I believe that. For one thing, we all know the U/I on the DTivo is very easy to use, so what is there to call about?

It seems the DTivo's have been pretty steady until the last set of software updates... not like the home grown version that seems to require weekly updates, and we still are seeing folks reporting basic issues... so there is no doubt in my mind that D* is spending all of the millions Shibby is talking about on supporting their own boxes, and very little on the DTivos Hence, my suggestion that D* is not going to be saving millions that he mentioned in Tivo support.


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

lew said:


> You can go to your local dealer and test drive a Benz. Some car dealers, in some parts of the country, will even let you take a test vehicle home overnight.
> 
> Cell phone service varies from one location to another. Many parts of the country Verizon has superior service to Cingular/AT&T. Check Consumers. Verizon gives you a trial period so if you don't get good service where you live and work you won't have a comittment. They have confidence in their product.
> 
> ...


A 10 min test drive around the block? Yeah, Chevy had that take it home thing. Worked out well did it not? No longer around.

Should D* give us a trail? Sure. Needed? Probably not. I bet 95%+ of people could care less what DVR D* gives them. We are talking about a small group of tech geeks here.

How many years before Verizon gave you a 30 day trial? they were in out market for 5 yrs before they did. It's a gimmick to try them out. Most people when they join a cellphone network stick to it for the most part. Until the number portability, very, very few people ever switched unless service was that bad! My sister has been in the cell industry for close to 12 yrs!


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

RS4 said:


> Oh yeah, I believe that. For one thing, we all know the U/I on the DTivo is very easy to use, so what is there to call about?


What's so hard about it? Are you mentally challenged? I am DEAD SERIOUS on this one. How easy do you need a DVR GUI to be? Do you want a GUI like my kids V-Tech Kiddie stuff on her Leap Frog?? 

Dude, you have very serious issues. Get out of the house more and stop watching TV unless you are truly in capable of, then which I am sorry.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

shibby191 said:


> Ummm, did I say anything about *current* users and their receivers. Uhhh, no. They moved to one UI 2-3 years ago on all new receivers. Nothing new there.
> 
> I specifically said what was said exactly in the presentation (and I'll go slow and spell it out for you): If by mid 2009 they only have one receiver available, let's say the HR21, then all *NEW* customers will get that receiver only. Any current customers calling in for *replacements or upgrades* will only get that receiver. Why? Because it's the only one in production.
> 
> ...


Uh, no dude. You said *"And the cost to keep Tivo is millions in R&D and support (the big one)." *

As I stated above, I hardly think that is the case, because I bet all of the r&d and support money goes to the D* boxes.

No, what you and many of the army fail to understand is that if D* were truly interested in keeping those of us that have left or are planning to leave, they could have come up with ways of teaming with Tivo to support this top tier of customers - anything from revenue sharing or giving a technology license to Tivo to develop their own Tivo HD that is capable of picking up satellite.

What you always point out is that they were willing to let us go - even though most of us were probably in the very top tier of customers they are looking for. So, in essence, you are saying they willing to spend millions obtaining this very tier of customers they are letting go. No, that doesn't make economic sense. Instead, Mr businessman, it shows a company that can't plan their way out of a paper bag.

You talk about their growth - and of course that's the case. But the real question is how much more growth would they have had if they had held on to their highest-tier clients? And my guess is that number could could have been quite large. *"Wow, what a concept."*

The thing that makes no sense with any of this in my mind is why is D* so arrogant that they are willing to throw away the very same customers they are trying to hold on to? The only conclusions I come to is just pure arrogance or just plain dumb planning.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

lew said:


> You can go to your local dealer and test drive a Benz. Some car dealers, in some parts of the country, will even let you take a test vehicle home overnight.
> 
> Cell phone service varies from one location to another. Many parts of the country Verizon has superior service to Cingular/AT&T. Check Consumers. Verizon gives you a trial period so if you don't get good service where you live and work you won't have a comittment. They have confidence in their product.
> 
> ...


So you can go to Best Buy or Circuit City and test drive a HR2X your point is?

As far as the overnight goes, only if you credit score is in the top 10 percentile or you can put a hefty security deposit down.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

gio1269 said:


> What's so hard about it? Are you mentally challenged? .


Are you really going to ask that in a thread where you posted this? 



gio1269 said:


> Your and your fricking trial crap. A Benz is is a superior to a Chevy. Yes Mercedes-Benz does not have a trial period.
> 
> Till a few Months ago, Cingular/AT&T wireless is SUPERIOR to verison here. There was not 30 day grace period. Why does Verison offer one? Because the service sucks so bad, they know you will WANT to leave in less than 30 days.
> 
> DTV is confident in thier prodcust that they don't need it. Get it?


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

RS4 said:


> Uh, no dude. You said *"And the cost to keep Tivo is millions in R&D and support (the big one)." *
> 
> As I stated above, I hardly think that is the case, because I bet all of the r&d and support money goes to the D* boxes.
> 
> ...


But the major point is - why worry about the minority for the HD viewers, would cost more to retool the unit then it would bring in for revenue. Why do you automaticly assume that their "highest tier client" prefers the Tivo Windows 3.0 interface?

You are making assumptions and voicing personal opinions as facts. The bottom line is their holdings are growing, this has been shown in their state of the company addresses, so evidently the loss of the HR10 users is a lot less then you are putting across. Plan on utilizing the Protection plan to replace the last remaining Hr10 that is installed in the garage when it dies - which given the way it is running will be RSN


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

nrc said:


> Are you really going to ask that in a thread where you posted this?


Did I offend you? If you are MC, I am sorry!

Which part do you not get?



> DTV is confident in their product that they don't need it. Get it?


Ok, maybe I was kidding to a certain pint here. But I don't think 95%+ of people really care whether it's a Tivo or a another just as good overall DVR w/D*. It the tech geeks that get all whipped up.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

sjberra said:


> But the major point is - why worry about the minority for the HD viewers, would cost more to retool the unit then it would bring in for revenue. Why do you automaticly assume that their "highest tier client" prefers the Tivo Windows 3.0 interface?
> 
> You are making assumptions and voicing personal opinions as facts. The bottom line is their holdings are growing, this has been shown in their state of the company addresses, so evidently the loss of the HR10 users is a lot less then you are putting across. Plan on utilizing the Protection plan to replace the last remaining Hr10 that is installed in the garage when it dies - which given the way it is running will be RSN


My point has been that Direct is growing in spite of themselves. As has been pointed out in this thread and many many others, the majority of consumers don't pay attention to the dvr. If in fact they did the research, they might reach a different conclusion. I've had several people contact me to say they were glad they checked out this forum ahead of making the decision.

But, you are wrong when you say that I voice my opinions as facts. I have continually pointed to the polls that have in fact showed that Tivo users prefer the Tivo. Then of course is the thread after thread here, at dbstalk, and other places, of folks saying they wished they could have stayed with the Tivo, but had no choice. That my friend, is no overwhelming endorsement for the Direct dvrs like we have seen of the Tivo dvrs in the past on these Tivo forums.

At the same time that you say I'm not speaking from facts, where are the facts that back up *"would cost more to retool the unit then it would bring in for revenue."*? I don't believe there any - at least none I've seen on the net, so why do you say such things?


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

gio1269 said:


> Did I offend you? If you are MC, I am sorry!


No, I thought it was wonderful.


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

RS4 said:


> My point has been that Direct is growing in spite of themselves. As has been pointed out in this thread and many many others, the majority of consumers don't pay attention to the dvr. If in fact they did the research, they might reach a different conclusion. I've had several people contact me to say they were glad they checked out this forum ahead of making the decision.
> 
> But, you are wrong when you say that I voice my opinions as facts. I have continually pointed to the polls that have in fact showed that Tivo users prefer the Tivo. *Then of course is the thread after thread here, at dbstalk, and other places, of folks saying they wished they could have stayed with the Tivo, but had no choice.* That my friend, is no overwhelming endorsement for the Direct dvrs like we have seen of the Tivo dvrs in the past on these Tivo forums.
> 
> At the same time that you say I'm not speaking from facts, where are the facts that back up *"would cost more to retool the unit then it would bring in for revenue."*? I don't believe there any - at least none I've seen on the net, so why do you say such things?


And there are tons more threads of people pretty much saying thank god and greyhound it is gone. Your comment about pointing out polls is true, but then again you also tend to gloss over the polls that do not support your statements.

At the end of the day, enjoy your Tivo and comcast cable, you now have exactly what you wanted, a tivo with low number of HD channels available


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

nrc said:


> No, I thought it was wonderful.


Thanks! That Mug tells me everything I need to know...


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

sjberra said:


> And there are tons more threads of people pretty much saying thank god and greyhound it is gone. Your comment about pointing out polls is true, but then again you also tend to gloss over the polls that do not support your statements.
> 
> At the end of the day, enjoy your Tivo and comcast cable, you now have exactly what you wanted, a tivo with low number of HD channels available


Well if you've had any kind of statistics training, you would know there are polls, and then there are 'polls' in name only. It all depends on how the question was asked - 'do you still beat your wife?' yes/no - This is a perfect example - the poll is slanted from the beginning.

You jab about the low HD channels is once again misleading. It doesn't matter how many hd channels there are from a service - what matters is how many do you watch? I typically have 20-25 programs in my HD folder at any one time, so I always have plenty of HD programming to watch In addition to that, the SD signal is superior to the low-quality SD from Direct, so overall my cable experience provides a much better service than Direct.:up:

And, I was able to stay with the Tivo and have no contract to worry about - unless of course I want to sign up for a year and enjoy more savings - imagine that... a valid reason for having a contract, something for both sides....something Direct never even thought about.


----------



## rickmeoff (Aug 25, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> The problem with your statement is that those who I use the term Tivo lemming or Tivo zealot on are those who have never even tried the competition.




youve called *me* a tivo lemming before, and ive owned (and enjoyed) an hr20 for over a year now.

of course, you were calling folks 'tivo lemmings' before you had even leased an hr20 yourself, so i guess that isnt surprising, lol.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

rickmeoff said:


> youve called *me* a tivo lemming before, and ive owned (and enjoyed) an hr20 for over a year now.
> 
> of course, you were calling folks 'tivo lemmings' before you had even leased an hr20 yourself, so i guess that isnt surprising, lol.


Please post a link to any post where I specifically called you (by name) a lemming. Now if you took a general comment personally because the shoe fit, well.....

And yes, I used the term lemmings before I owned/leased one and even before I tried one. But the point was that these people were unwilling to take off the Tivo blinders (i.e. act like a lemming) and just blindly believe that no other DVR could possibly be worth a darn. At least I had an open mind about it and used the unit (before leasing) and found it to be quite easy to use, and at least or more functional than my 2 HR10s.

So I fail to see your point other than to once again try and discredit anyone who does not agree with you (the same thing you and others accuse me of). Go figure.


----------



## rickmeoff (Aug 25, 2006)

Mark Lopez said:


> Please post a link to any post where I specifically called you (by name) a lemming. Now if you took a general comment personally because the shoe fit, well.....
> 
> And yes, I used the term lemmings before I owned/leased one and even before I tried one. But the point was that these people were unwilling to take off the Tivo blinders (i.e. act like a lemming) and just blindly believe that no other DVR could possibly be worth a darn. At least I had an open mind about it and used the unit (before leasing) and found it to be quite easy to use, and at least or more functional than my 2 HR10s.
> 
> So I fail to see your point other than to once again try and discredit anyone who does not agree with you (the same thing you and others accuse me of). Go figure.


you dont seem to have the where-with-all to comprehend what others are saying, and constantly utilize a very wide brush when referring to those who like their tivos more than their hr20s and post about it here.

there are quite a few people who enjoy their tivos, and are willing to try (and accept) another dvr (ie., they have an open mind). and many of those people have been offended by your ongoing 'lemming/zealot' posts (ive corresponded with 3 of them via pm), yet will not post publicly because they view debating with you as a complete 'waste of time,' being that your mind doesnt seem capable of seeing anything other than what you want to see.

other than rs4, please post a link to the tivo lemmings you speak of that have bad mouthed the hr2x.........yet have never leased one for themselves (or even 'messed with one in a store').

im not trying to 'discredit anyone who does not agree with' me: only you. youre the only one i (and others) seem to have a problem with due to your constant name-calling of folks who prefer tivo.... these phantom people who bash the hr2x without ever trying one.

and being a happy hr20 owner, that says a lot. sounds like a section 8 for the hr2x army, lol.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

A lot of people prefer the HR20, a lot prefer the HDtivo. The only relevant question is whether Directv will ever again give subscribers a choice.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

rickmeoff said:


> you dont seem to have the where-with-all to comprehend what others are saying, and constantly utilize a very wide brush when referring to those who like their tivos more than their hr20s and post about it here.
> 
> there are quite a few people who enjoy their tivos, and are willing to try (and accept) another dvr (ie., they have an open mind). and many of those people have been offended by your ongoing 'lemming/zealot' posts (ive corresponded with 3 of them via pm), yet will not post publicly because they view debating with you as a complete 'waste of time,' being that your mind doesnt seem capable of seeing anything other than what you want to see.
> 
> ...


Rick,

Mark has no concept of debating. His only intention has been to bad mouth any of us who disagree with him. So, to try to maintain a decent conversation with him is quite impossible.

He continues to call me names when I have pointed out several times that D* refused to let me try the HR2x at my home - yet I am closed minded


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

Mark Lopez said:


> I love it. The Tivo fanatics bash DirecTV for not continuing to offer a Tivo model, claiming competition is good. But then they applaud law suits like this that prevent the same type of competition they say is good. <shrug>


WEIRD!

You come to a TiVo forum and people post about good news for the company that might put them on the road to profit!

I guess you think this forum should be full of people who hate tivo?

I'm sure if you hit the Dish Network forums, you'll find PLENTY of anti-tivo posts? Maybe you should start there?



Mark Lopez said:


> The problem with your statement is that those who I use the term Tivo lemming or Tivo zealot on are those who have never even tried the competition.


And of course by 'try out the competition', you mean sign up to pay for DirecTV service fo *TWO YEARS*. Because there is no trial period for DirecTV.

But you are free to try out TiVo for 30 days and cancel.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

Adam1115 said:


> And of course by 'try out the competition', you mean sign up to pay for DirecTV service fo *TWO YEARS*. Because there is no trial period for DirecTV.
> 
> But you are free to try out TiVo for 30 days and cancel.


I've read on the forum where people have gone to Circuit City or Best Buy, and simply _tried out_ the HR20 (never having _physically_ had one in their posession, mind you) ...and actually felt that this gave them enough viable information about the unit to vehemently declare its superiority over the HR10.

So by that definition, I would imagine if your local BB had one hooked up, you could bring a lawn chair ...set up some Season Passes (Series Links) and wait to see if they recorded consistently and properly. 

When I first got my HR20....well over a year ago ...it was a total disaster. The unit was terrible for the first 6-8 months and we went through 4 of them!

It's gotten a lot better since then, but still is far from perfect (it still misses quite a few recordings ...or "records" them and they're not actually there when you go to watch them).

I've grown to like the unit, however (and all the new HD content!), but we still keep 2 HR10's as backups.

But that 2 year contract period ...coupled with the newer hefty ETF if you don't like the unit and want to get _out_ of the contract, is a bit much IMO. They should _definitely_ give you a at least a 30 day trial.

And I gave up a long time ago on trying to have _any_ type discussion with somebody who's _only _purpose is to stir the pot. It's like trying to talk with my mother-in-law: she's _always_ right ...unless she isn't, which is more often than not. And when she gets caught being "wrong" she resorts to going on the offensive with labelling and name-calling (me and the wife call it "throwing curve balls." My MIL is one heck of a pitcher!).


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

RS4 said:


> Well if you've had any kind of statistics training, you would know there are polls, and then there are 'polls' in name only. It all depends on how the question was asked - 'do you still beat your wife?' yes/no - This is a perfect example - the poll is slanted from the beginning.
> 
> You jab about the low HD channels is once again misleading. It doesn't matter how many hd channels there are from a service - what matters is how many do you watch? I typically have 20-25 programs in my HD folder at any one time, so I always have plenty of HD programming to watch In addition to that, the SD signal is superior to the low-quality SD from Direct, so overall my cable experience provides a much better service than Direct.:up:
> 
> And, I was able to stay with the Tivo and have no contract to worry about - unless of course I want to sign up for a year and enjoy more savings - imagine that... a valid reason for having a contract, something for both sides....something Direct never even thought about.


realy happy you got all that you wanted but not all you deserved, hey at least I still have a hr10 running along with my other hr20's.

Interesting comments about the polls, funny thing is - what you say exactly can be pointed at the pro HR2X polls, the anti-HR2X polls, the pro Hr10 polls, the anti-Hr10 polls. The interperted results are what the person wants to see. Yes I have had statistic trainings, I know that you can word anything to have the exact outcome that you want, hence my comment about you pointing out only the polls that prove your agenda. Statistical results can be anything that you want them to be.

Actually the comments aboout the number of HD channels IS valid, you may get the few that you watch on your provider, but some people have a broader taste and requirements for HD content, if the show fits, then by all mean wear it.


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

Cudahy said:


> A lot of people prefer the HR20, a lot prefer the HDtivo. The only relevant question is whether Directv will ever again give subscribers a choice.


That has to sum it up the best! It's just some of the Tivo diehards cannot accept the fact that some feel the HR20/21 is a better DVR from Tivo. Just because Tivo dominated the market for so long and really was the best DVR out there and in their minds nothing else could ever surpass it. If the HR20/21 DVR, Dish DVR where sooo bad and no where near Tivo, then D* and Dish would be out of the DVR business.

That fact is MOST. MOST customers will not care what DVR brad they have. If it records properly and pauses live TV they are fine. It's the small tech sector that gets all whipped up.


----------



## gio1269 (Jul 27, 2006)

Sir_winealot said:


> I've read on the forum where people have gone to Circuit City or Best Buy, and simply _tried out_ the HR20 (never having _physically_ had one in their posession, mind you) ...and actually felt that this gave them enough viable information about the unit to vehemently declare its superiority over the HR10.
> 
> So by that definition, I would imagine if your local BB had one hooked up, you could bring a lawn chair ...set up some Season Passes (Series Links) and wait to see if they recorded consistently and properly.
> 
> ...


Really what my main issues is the Tivo ""insert what ever here" cannot and will not accept the fact that the HR20/21 is possibly a better DVR. That's it!

Al I hear is it sucks, etc and I use a HR10 as a back-up. What did these people do when their HR10 missed recordings, locked-up, froze up, rebooted all by itself, etc? iss their shows? DVD-R back-ups? VCRs?

Come on. Look I had a SD D* Tivo for 2yrs+ and it was flawless. I mean flawless. Then when I bought a HDTV I realized I need to get a HD Tivo ASAP. Watching live tv with no way too pause, back-up etc with kids sucked.

When I was ready to buy, the HR20 just hit the market. I heard NOTHING but bad things about it. So thought about switching to Comcrap because there DVR was goling to be cheaper. D* offered me a HR10-250 for $299 to OWN it! I accepted and after some other issues it cost me $99. It was perfect and I was in HDTV heaven. I had my Tivo and lfe was good. 3 months later it would not boot up. No biggie D* replaced it ASAP and I was happy. Then came the 6.X updates. Now I was having issues with lock-up, bad pixelation, reboots and lot's of missed shows and others being deleted by accident.

I called D* and was very angry. I was told I could get there HR20 under the Protection plan for $19.99 shipped. I told them I did not want that piece of crap. I was told I had no choice after 2 HR10 were shipped to me and with the MPEG4 stuff coming it would be necessary.

So I gave in and ordered it. it took me 2 days to be totally comfortable with it and the wife about a week. We were so happy to a have a reliable DVR again, the HR10 was moved to the MB and the SDTivo put away.

Now. *MY* HR20 was been flawless recording wise and just running. No shows missed, no lock-ups, etc. The ONLY thing was a Optical port broke. Now sending it back and losing all 6 Star Wars HD movies sucked. But the secong unit again has been flawless. My HR21 whcih now replaces the HR10 has been the same.

Are there many issues with the HR20/21 DVRs? Sure. Just like there were a TON of issues with the HR10, SD D* Tivo, S3 and Tivo HD boxes or these forums might no exist. Issues and problems is why I came here. Sure a lot of posts and just about simple tricks and basic help.

Again my pint is the Tivo Zelots, lemmings, etc have blinders and will not nor EVER accept anything else being better than Tivo. Yes, from Day 1 I though the Tivo GUI loked so kiddie and corny looking. But it was easy to use.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

gio1269 said:


> ...It's just some of the Tivo diehards cannot accept the fact that some feel the HR20/21 is a better DVR from Tivo. Just because Tivo dominated the market for so long and really was the best DVR out there and in their minds nothing else could ever surpass it. If the HR20/21 DVR, Dish DVR where sooo bad and no where near Tivo, then D* and Dish would be out of the DVR business.
> 
> That fact is MOST. MOST customers will not care what DVR brad they have. If it records properly and pauses live TV they are fine. It's the small tech sector that gets all whipped up.


 I could not help noticing that your qualification is precisely "how well it works". I think if something doesn't work as well as what you replaced, you will not be happy with it, and I think this applies accross the board, not just to superusers. It becomes an emotional issue immediately once any freedom of choice is usurped, which is exactly why it's become a hot-button issue.

The "lemming" theory does have some validity. I love Tivo and the HR10 and when my 3rd died and was replaced by the HR20 approximately the first day it shipped in my market, I was aghast at how horrible it was, and I made sure everyone within shouting distance knew. I immediately sent it back and scrounged a 3rd HR10.

But 15 months later when that HR10 bit the dust, I tried the HR20 again, and it had improved so tremendously that it was like a completely different product. Originally a lame pretender, now a true contender.

But then how would I have known that if I hadn't made the leap? For all I knew it was the same POS it was in 2006. I don't think you can really blame folks for wanting to cling to their HR10s. In fact, I think that's pretty universal, pretty natural, and pretty human.

I also don't think DTV EVER gave us a choice. There was a natural transitional overlap period, but the train was always rolling towards replacing every HR10 with an HR2x in the minds of DTV, and I don't think that "choice" was ever really in their plans other than that, and never will be.

Further, I don't think you can say one platform is outright better than the other. Tivo runs rings around the HR2x in certain features (Ahem! slo-mo), while the HR2x platform has a lot of positives that leave Tivo in the dust. It turns out that having a combination of both is better than having multiples of either, something I intend to milk to the last dying breath of my HR10's.


----------

