# Aereo vs TiVo



## buscuitboy (Aug 8, 2005)

I am in the Atlanta area and recently got a beta invite for the new Aereo TV service. Have been using it for about 2 weeks now (I think it goes live for everyone on July 1st). 

I must say, its actually a rather good service & I have been liking it. It includes cloud DVR service (20 or 60hrs) & while its definitely in its beginning stages & not perfect by any means, I think it has some promise. For now, it works mainly with standard browsers, Roku and Apple devices. I personally used it on a laptop and my wife's iPad and the image quality was pretty good. Of course, I realize this depends on your internet connection. I have a 40Mbs Comcast connection so I am sure this definitely helped. I would like to try it on a Roku at some point and see how easy it is. Its only for local channels (in certain markets), but maybe it will also paved the way for someone else to come up with a true a-la-cart internet TV package of some kind. 

Its not a direct threat (yet) to TiVo, but I do like the whole "cloud DVR" concept and would love to see TiVo go in a similar direction. I'm sure its not in the cards at all for their upcoming Series 5 line of DVRs, but maybe down the road they will incorporate something similar (like local programming only). Only time will tell.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

It will never be a direct threat to Tivo as long as it's only the local channels, the OTA-only users now have to be a small niche. I do enjoy the disruption that it's causing among the powers that be though, and I hope Intel can deliver their promised TV over the net service later this year (or next).


----------



## P42 (Jan 7, 2003)

For some folks Aereo will supply sufficient channels, particularly when some much other content is available via streaming. OTA may not be an option for them due to location, eg apartment dweller. And if they can get internet from a non-bundler (with blunders the cost of not getting basic cable with internet can often be just a few dollars), then it can make sense.

As for it been a threat to Tivo, not really but it does offer more choice to cord cutters.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

There IS a Roku channel for Aereo? 

That would make me a sub, over & above UVerse until I get OTA working well.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

My personal opinion is that TiVo will continue as is for as long as the cable/satellite industry is successful in preventing a meaningful alternative delivery system. 

When the cable/satellite industries stranglehold on content delivery is sufficiently removed TiVo will adapt to whatever we end up with. In fact that is what is going on now and has been since TiVo added the ability to stream Netflix and download podcasts.

It will be very interesting to see what happens over the next few years - of course it all seems to require reliable fast Internet access that isn't tied to a cable sub which isn't much of a reality for many of us.


----------



## buscuitboy (Aug 8, 2005)

slowbiscuit said:


> It will never be a direct threat to Tivo as long as it's only the local channels, the OTA-only users now have to be a small niche. I do enjoy the disruption that it's causing among the powers that be though, and I hope Intel can deliver their promised TV over the net service later this year (or next).


Yea, I don't think it will be a direct threat in the NEAR future, but if things evolve and Aereo expands beyond local TV channels, it could be a potential competitor. That is all I was trying to get across.



netringer said:


> There IS a Roku channel for Aereo?
> 
> That would make me a sub, over & above UVerse until I get OTA working well.


Yea, Roku is an option for Aereo. I personally don't have a Roku yet, but have thought about getting the new Roku 3. Might have to. Apple TV is an option too, but through Airplay.

From my account's support section, it looks like there is not a traditional Aereo "channel" for Roku though and the setup is a little different. Here is what it says for me:

*Please note: Aereo is a private channel and is not listed in the Roku channel store. Aereo is also only available for use within select areas.

Watching Aereo on your TV with Roku


Log in to aereo.com
Open your Aereo settings and click on Link with Roku.
There will be a link that will take you to Roku website to sign in, or if youre already signed in, to the Add Channel page.
Click the Yes, Add Channel button.
*


----------



## AMike (Oct 22, 2004)

I don't Aereo is a long term solution. An antenna would offer a better picture, plus you don't have to worry about the subscription fees. Plus, I think there is probably more litigation that is going to occur here as some broadcasters (CBS and Fox) have threatened to provide a cable/satellite only transmission.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/30/4...e-could-take-network-cable-only-in-a-few-days


----------



## Series3Sub (Mar 14, 2010)

Aereo is great for "cord cutters" who have no desire for any of the MVPD channels. One presumes they get their sports fix from the big leagues sites, although I don't know what they offer vs. an MVPD. But it is certainly not even a close alternative to those who want the "cable" channels and want to view the shows while they are HOT and new. TiVo is not in danger so long as the have a plan for the possibility of the day when most programming will be delivered via internet, and Netflix may not be around or bought out by then, if the dreaded DATACAPS can be eliminated, the whole "Cloud DVR" thing won't really take off.


----------



## ShayL (Jul 18, 2007)

I agree with P42. Other than apartment dwellers who can't use an OTA antenna and those who don't want one, I do not know who the customer base would consist of.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

ShayL said:


> I agree with P42. Other than apartment dwellers who can't use an OTA antenna and those who don't want one, I do not know who the customer base would consist of.


People like me who are looking at a $1200 investment in an OTA antenna on a tower, and mere mortals who don't want to set up their own DVRs.


----------



## P42 (Jan 7, 2003)

$1200? Ouch!


----------



## tchapin (Oct 11, 2001)

I tried Aereo and it was pretty good. I had two main issues:

1. Their guide stinks. It's hard to scan or search through.
2. We don't really watch anything on the channels that we get through it. Perhaps in the fall?

The quality was pretty good and the app on the Roku was fine.


----------



## buscuitboy (Aug 8, 2005)

While I am currently using Aereo on a free 3 month trial subscription for my area (Atlanta) & its working good, I now wonder how long they will truly last with the latest news of Samsung buying out Boxee for $30 million. 

Since they aren't real pleased in the first place with Aereo, I can see one of the big networks coming in and offering some insane amount to buy up Aereo TV (& Aereo accepting it) in order to simply eliminate competition. I see this happen all the time. 

They are TRYING to shut them down through the court system, but so far have been unsuccessful. They have threatened to even move some of their OTA broadcasts to cable only in the Aereo markets. 

I guess if its more cost effective to just buy them off & cheaper than what it would cost to keep taking them to court and/or possibly moving stations to cable, then it will be attempted. 

Yea, maybe they aren't truly worth the 50 million (hypothetical figure) they would give them, but they might figure to lose more than that if they don't buy them to get them out of the way.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

I wouldn't want a re-compressed signal that someone else has control over. I want my stuff stored locally, and I want control over it.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

Series3Sub said:


> Aereo is great for "cord cutters" who have no desire for any of the MVPD channels. One presumes they get their sports fix from the big leagues sites, although I don't know what they offer vs. an MVPD. But it is certainly not even a close alternative to those who want the "cable" channels and want to view the shows while they are HOT and new. TiVo is not in danger so long as the have a plan for the possibility of the day when most programming will be delivered via internet, and Netflix may not be around or bought out by then, if the dreaded DATACAPS can be eliminated, the whole "Cloud DVR" thing won't really take off.


 I think Data Caps are here to stay. And regrettably inexpensive internet service will be history in a few years. Aero will be dead before that.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tenthplanet said:


> I think Data Caps are here to stay. And regrettably inexpensive internet service will be history in a few years. Aero will be dead before that.


I'm not so sure. Comcast has had plans for caps for a while, but I think they will get whooped by Verizon if they do cap. Even at 300GB, streaming video isn't really affected, as you're not getting to 300GB just streaming.


----------



## P42 (Jan 7, 2003)

We do a lot of streaming, mostly Netflix, I would say it is how most TV is watch in our house, and some months we are well over 200GB for internet traffic, and there is no one torrenting etc so that is almost all streaming. 
Maybe we should use some DVDs more often


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

Bigg said:


> I'm not so sure. Comcast has had plans for caps for a while, but I think they will get whooped by Verizon if they do cap. Even at 300GB, streaming video isn't really affected, as you're not getting to 300GB just streaming.


 Verizon's Fios is not in that many markets and there are some they even pulled out of. And they don't seem to be expanding.
The wars are between Comcast, Time Warner, and ATT. 300GB is on the high side for a cap I expect them to go lower.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

P42 said:


> We do a lot of streaming, mostly Netflix, I would say it is how most TV is watch in our house, and some months we are well over 200GB for internet traffic, and there is no one torrenting etc so that is almost all streaming.
> Maybe we should use some DVDs more often


 Your case is not unusual, I have heard of a number of households that exceed 200GB.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

With Aereo, you would be streaming ALL of your programming, not just Netflix. With HD channels at 1.5 to 2 GB per hour, you will hit the Comcast home use cap. For full time streaming, you would need the uncapped commercial service which steps the price up a bit. (starts at about $60 a month for 15Mbit service ).

No, as long as the internet providers have the caps, a full time streaming solution will not be feasible.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tenthplanet said:


> Verizon's Fios is not in that many markets and there are some they even pulled out of. And they don't seem to be expanding.
> The wars are between Comcast, Time Warner, and ATT. 300GB is on the high side for a cap I expect them to go lower.


A couple of Comcast's most affluent markets have FIOS, and they don't change the rules by market (at least one thing they do right...), so FIOS can set the rules for all of Comcast.

For light to moderate users, Aereo wouldn't be anywhere near the 300GB limit that Comcast may or may not put in place at some point in the future.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

Well retransmission fees are a big part of what's driving up programming costs.

And of course, local TV has NFL and other major sports programming, which also is driving up programming costs.

You know how everyone wishes you can just get HBO Go directly from HBO?

Maybe as Netflix and other streaming services finance original content, you could go sign deals with several content providers and Aereo would get you the missing component which would be major sports.

Unless the broadcasters find a court that is willing to shut down Aereo. In the latest decision, one of the judges ruled that Aereo threatened the broadcasters business models, as if that's within his purview. Fortunately, he was in the minority but SCOTUS would probably side with the big money over the startup.


----------



## buscuitboy (Aug 8, 2005)

While I know this is HIGHLY unlikely, on some level, I would love to actually see TiVo maybe buy Aereo and then incorporate its functionality into one of its future line of DVRs. Could be an attractive option for a lot of people out there. Would also maybe help TiVo transition into the world of cloud DVR functionality. 

Of course, i am sure it would not make the cable companies happy either so that would most likely be a huge factor too.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

buscuitboy said:


> While I know this is HIGHLY unlikely, on some level, I would love to actually see TiVo maybe buy Aereo and then incorporate its functionality into one of its future line of DVRs. Could be an attractive option for a lot of people out there. Would also maybe help TiVo transition into the world of cloud DVR functionality.
> 
> Of course, i am sure it would not make the cable companies happy either so that would most likely be a huge factor too.


It's totally the opposite of TiVo's whole purpose as a DVR. The only type of cloud DVR that will really take off is from a cable, fiber or IPTV provider, where they have the bandwidth to do it on a private network.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

That's what Comcast is working towards with their X1 platform.

Makes sense, keep clients on minimal hardware specs, not load them up with multi terabyte drives. But there would be "infinite storage" in the cloud.

If they have any kind of competence with the UI and UX, Tivo could be in for a tough slog.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

Bigg said:


> I'm not so sure. Comcast has had plans for caps for a while, but I think they will get whooped by Verizon if they do cap. Even at 300GB, streaming video isn't really affected, as you're not getting to 300GB just streaming.


Comcast does not have 'plans' for data caps. They HAVE data caps for home use customers. 300GB/ mo. Only business class is uncapped and you pay extra for the privledge. Also be aware that going past the cap 3 times will get you a notice of violation of terms of service and termination. You cannot switch to business class once you have been terminated for violation of TOS. Its happened on a number of folks.

I understand Comcast does not enforce the caps in all areas. They DO in Houston and many other areas. Mostly where they are actively marketing business class service.


----------



## jcthorne (Jan 28, 2002)

wco81 said:


> That's what Comcast is working towards with their X1 platform.
> 
> Makes sense, keep clients on minimal hardware specs, not load them up with multi terabyte drives. But there would be "infinite storage" in the cloud.
> 
> If they have any kind of competence with the UI and UX, Tivo could be in for a tough slog.


Yes, the number of interesting ideas and applications for the use of unlimited network bandwidth and unlimited data volume far outweighs its availability.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

jcthorne said:


> Comcast does not have 'plans' for data caps. They HAVE data caps for home use customers. 300GB/ mo. Only business class is uncapped and you pay extra for the privledge. Also be aware that going past the cap 3 times will get you a notice of violation of terms of service and termination. You cannot switch to business class once you have been terminated for violation of TOS. Its happened on a number of folks.
> 
> I understand Comcast does not enforce the caps in all areas. They DO in Houston and many other areas. Mostly where they are actively marketing business class service.


That's semantics. A cap that they don't enforce is the same as not having one. I did like 3TB one month on bittorent, and they didn't care.


----------



## CrispyCritter (Feb 28, 2001)

Bigg said:


> That's semantics. A cap that they don't enforce is the same as not having one. I did like 3TB one month on bittorent, and they didn't care.


It's actually a cap that Comcast has officially suspended for most of the country. It's not a question of enforcement at all; there is no cap to enforce. There are a limited number of franchises in which they are experimenting with cap options, while they figure out what to do nationally. (They also reserve the right to take action if the situation warrants.)


----------



## buscuitboy (Aug 8, 2005)

CrispyCritter said:


> It's actually a cap that Comcast has officially suspended for most of the country. It's not a question of enforcement at all; there is no cap to enforce. There are a limited number of franchises in which they are experimenting with cap options, while they figure out what to do nationally. (They also reserve the right to take action if the situation warrants.)


I am with Comcast and this data cap suspension has been ongoing for years now. Probably since about 2010. Who knows if they will EVER put it back, but if they do implement 300GB per month, I am OK with this.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

jcthorne said:


> With Aereo, you would be streaming ALL of your programming, not just Netflix. With HD channels at 1.5 to 2 GB per hour, you will hit the Comcast home use cap. For full time streaming, you would need the uncapped commercial service which steps the price up a bit. (starts at about $60 a month for 15Mbit service ).
> 
> No, as long as the internet providers have the caps, a full time streaming solution will not be feasible.


I cut the cord a number of years ago. I currently have no OTA and use streaming pretty much exclusively for content (except for a few DVDs per month). We watch at least an hour of streaming per day, and many days it will be more like 3-4 hours. Both my wife and I work from home and do a lot of work on the internet, stream radio, use a VPN, etc... I still don't think I've ever broken 100GB in a month. My weekly average seems to hover around 15GB or so according to my router.

I don't stream in full HD, which I know would be a deal breaker for some (I actually find that HD degrades the experience, so I'm happy to do without it).


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

Bigg said:


> It's totally the opposite of TiVo's whole purpose as a DVR. The only type of cloud DVR that will really take off is from a cable, fiber or IPTV provider, where they have the bandwidth to do it on a private network.


But I wonder what the endgame for Tivo is when most people get TV on demand streaming via the internet, and there is no longer a need for a DVR? I still use my TiVo for Amazon downloads and had used it to play DVDs until the player started being too temperamental and noisy to use. Other than those limited use cases there isn't much an S2 is good for without a content source.

I know the newer models allow for streaming from some services, but besides the fact that I've read the streaming aspect is typically sub-optimal on TiVo, the current subscription model doesn't really make sense compared to something like Roku.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

dylanemcgregor said:


> But I wonder what the endgame for Tivo is when most people get TV on demand streaming via the internet, and there is no longer a need for a DVR? I still use my TiVo for Amazon downloads and had used it to play DVDs until the player started being too temperamental and noisy to use. Other than those limited use cases there isn't much an S2 is good for without a content source.
> 
> I know the newer models allow for streaming from some services, but besides the fact that I've read the streaming aspect is typically sub-optimal on TiVo, the current subscription model doesn't really make sense compared to something like Roku.


That's going to be a LONG time from now. TiVo's biggest threat it being cut out of the system, which they are only in because of federal law surrounding CableCard...


----------

