# Looks like Best Buy is dumping TiVo



## dmk1974 (Mar 7, 2002)

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/streaming-media-devices/tivo/pcmcat748301693319.c?id=pcmcat748301693319

They used to list the Edge, but not anymore. And the Bolts are all showing on clearance now.


----------



## Jeeters (Feb 25, 2003)

I bought my Roamio and mini at Best Buy. I remember that only one particular store of the half dozen in my area carried them.

I didn't want to buy online direct from TiVo - was afraid of the box with TiVo logos all over just attracting a porch thief.


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

I think its more a case of Tivo having nothing to sell. The Edge is quite simply not a sellable product. I would the minis are soon to be gone with a new model in the works and the Bolts? Tivo will squeeze them for all the heavily discounted dollars they can get


----------



## squiredogs (Aug 14, 2006)

Is there a new Mini on tap?



mattyro7878 said:


> I think its more a case of Tivo having nothing to sell. The Edge is quite simply not a sellable product. I would the minis are soon to be gone with a new model in the works and the Bolts? Tivo will squeeze them for all the heavily discounted dollars they can get


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Sad. IIRC, all my TiVos that I didn't get online or used were from Best Buy.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Niche product with pricing competition from Amazon and Tivo.com. No surprise.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

dmk1974 said:


> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/streaming-media-devices/tivo/pcmcat748301693319.c?id=pcmcat748301693319
> 
> They used to list the Edge, but not anymore. And the Bolts are all showing on clearance now.


It doesn't show the TiVo Mini Vox as being on clearance. And the Bolt has been out almost five years now. I'm surprised it is still being sold.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

mattyro7878 said:


> I think its more a case of Tivo having nothing to sell. The Edge is quite simply not a sellable product. I would the minis are soon to be gone with a new model in the works and the Bolts? Tivo will squeeze them for all the heavily discounted dollars they can get


WHy isn't the Edge a sellable product? I know I would prefer to have an Edge over a Bolt. Just for the different form factor. But if the Edge isn't sellable then neither is the Bolt.

Although I like the Bolt because it can be used with either OTA or Cable(or at least that was the case with the WHite Bolt). While the edge needs a specific version to work with either OTA or cable.


----------



## OrangeTurtle (Jul 17, 2015)

the funny part is their "clearance" price isn't all that great of a price. I've seen better sale prices. Like others have said not a shock if BB drops it- Tivo is a niche product. I still like it and use it (despite underwhelming newer products), but know I'm not part of the masses.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/tivo-edge-2tb-ota-dvr-streaming-player-black/6385436.p?skuId=6385436

maybe stock is just super low due to corona supply chain issues so it automatically gets delisted from the site.

on the other hand the cable version only has 4 reviews since...last September?

And it's $950 with lifetime.


----------



## CommunityMember (May 22, 2020)

OrangeTurtle said:


> Like others have said not a shock if BB drops it- Tivo is a niche product.


BB regularly stops stocking products when they don't have great sales to justify the shelf space or that the manufacturer has decided no longer continue to pay the stocking/slotting fee (a pay to play game used to get lower volume/profit devices in the eyes of the consumers who walk the aisles(*) of retail establishments).

One can lament that TiVo will not longer be in the aisles at BB, but those that want one still can get one.

(*) Back when consumers regularly walked the aisles of Best Buy. In numerous locations one can do so again, but not everywhere, and typically only with various restrictions that tend to discourage random walking of the aisles looking for something interesting.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

trip1eX said:


> And it's $950 with lifetime.


And is absolutely ridiculous and unjustfiable in today's market. There's not enough rich people that want an old school DVR.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

slowbiscuit said:


> And is absolutely ridiculous and unjustfiable in today's market. There's not enough rich people that want an old school DVR.


In today's market? That is what kept me away for so many years.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

If I were in the market for a bolt, I'd buy one from craigslist or ebay, especially since the ones from Best Buy don't have all-in service on them.


----------



## mntvjunkie (May 13, 2009)

slowbiscuit said:


> And is absolutely ridiculous and unjustfiable in today's market. There's not enough rich people that want an old school DVR.


Yup. Especially when a cable company DVR is now often included at no additional charge. But even when there is a charge, it's $10 a month. That puts break even at almost 8 years, assuming it lasts that long and you don't need to replace anything. And at $10 a month, if a better box comes along, you just trade it in.

That all doesn't consider how easy streaming services are with cloud DVR capability.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

mntvjunkie said:


> ... And at $10 a month, if a better box comes along, you just trade it in.


Thats the big key if I was starting today however My TV event watching now favors streaming and I use Apple TV for that.
The wife records a lot of cooking shows and I haven't nudged her over yet to streaming options. She old school loops through the guide on her favorite channels.

About the only thing I use the Tivo for is Live TV AKA News and the late night guys before I fall off to sleep. I cannot see investing in them again if for some reason a tech shift required a box upgrade.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

zalusky said:


> I cannot see investing in them again if for some reason a tech shift required a box upgrade.


Very good point. When I jumped in, a lot of people were talking about ATSC 3.0. I could not see ATSC 3.0 displacing ATSC 1.0 within five years, so I bought three TiVos. That was in the summer of 2015. Five years later, ATSC 1.0 is still king. My last two Roamio/OTAs were only $199 all in, so I did not think much about anything -- proverbial no brainer. Still not sure ATSC 3.0 will catch, but, if it does, it will probably become important within five years. Still a no brainer for a $300 all in DVR. Not so much for a $900 DVR.

On the cable side, we are already seeing changes which would give me pause. On Demand, Cloud DVRs, and apps are no doubt already hitting TiVo's bottom line where it hurts.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

wizwor said:


> Very good point. When I jumped in, a lot of people were talking about ATSC 3.0. I could not see ATSC 3.0 displacing ATSC 1.0 within five years, so I bought three TiVos. That was in the summer of 2015. Five years later, ATSC 1.0 is still king. My last two Roamio/OTAs were only $199 all in, so I did not think much about anything -- proverbial no brainer. Still not sure ATSC 3.0 will catch, but, if it does, it will probably become important within five years. Still a no brainer for a $300 all in DVR. Not so much for a $900 DVR.
> 
> On the cable side, we are already seeing changes which would give me pause. On Demand, Cloud DVRs, and apps are no doubt already hitting TiVo's bottom line where it hurts.


And the possibility of some point in certain regions that Cable Cards are no longer supported would nuke the cable side of things fast. I don't do OTA because as I mentioned above I watch little broadcast. Other than the late night shows we are rarely on NBC/ABC/CBS and I get the PBS shows from the streamer.


----------



## mntvjunkie (May 13, 2009)

wizwor said:


> On the cable side, we are already seeing changes which would give me pause. On Demand, Cloud DVRs, and apps are no doubt already hitting TiVo's bottom line where it hurts.


Exactly. I have a lifetime Roamio that I bought in 2013 that is definitely on it's last legs. I won't be replacing it. Pre-roll ads gave me the first "pause" and being on the Xfinity footprint gave me the second pause. Xfinity has been adding more and more HDTV channels, but all are IPTV only.

That said, I'm cheap, so I am trying to get as much life out of the Roamio as I can. Once it fails, I'll be moving to X1 and not looking back. At 6 years, and having paid over $1000 for it "all in" I still haven't "broken even" on it. If I can squeeze one more TV season out of it, and replace it in 2021, it will have been as cheap as renting an X1 DVR. If not, it will have been at a "premium" despite being a slightly worse experience.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

slowbiscuit said:


> And is absolutely ridiculous and unjustfiable in today's market. There's not enough rich people that want an old school DVR.


There has never been enough people who want to buy dvrs, ever..


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Yeah, but price is a major turnoff for anyone considering one.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

slowbiscuit said:


> Yeah, but price is a major turnoff for anyone considering one.


Yes. But most people I know prefer ro pay many thousands for their DVRs and nor own them.
I know I've saved thousands over the last thirteen years with FIOS. By using TiVos.

Sent from my Galaxy S10


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

Another nail (be it a small one) for the TiVo coffin.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

aaronwt said:


> Yes. But most people I know prefer ro pay many thousands for their DVRs and nor own them.
> I know I've saved thousands over the last thirteen years with FIOS. By using TiVos.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S10


I have some pretty big social circles and not one of them includes another TiVo owner. If it ever come up in discussion over the years everyone balked at the idea of the huge upfront costs and/or continuing monthly fees. Or they thought whatever they got from the cable company was good enough. This is why TiVo never grabbed a huge market share, most average people just don't care enough to want one.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I have some pretty big social circles and not one of them includes another TiVo owner. If it ever come up in discussion over the years everyone balked at the idea of the huge upfront costs and/or continuing monthly fees. Or they thought whatever they got from the cable company was good enough. This is why TiVo never grabbed a huge market share, most average people just don't care enough to want one.


Yes. Most people I talk to balk at the price. Until you point out what they have been paying for their cable modem and DVRs over the last ten years. Then most people feel a little stupid once they realize how much they have actually been paying their cable company all this time. One person at work was paying over $700 a year with DVR and cable modem fees on Comcast. That is a crazy amount of money to pay each year to rent devices.

Sent from my Tab A 8.0


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

aaronwt said:


> Yes. Most people I talk to balk at the price. Until you point out what they have been paying for their cable modem and DVRs over the last ten years. Then most people feel a little stupid once they realize how much they have actually been paying their cable company all this time. One person at work was paying over $700 a year with DVR and cable modem fees on Comcast. That is a crazy amount of money to pay each year to rent devices.
> 
> Sent from my Tab A 8.0


Oh yeah I completely agree. But I think most people don't care, to them it's easier to get the box from the cable company and if there are problems let them deal with it and go get a new one. Same reason why lots of people preferred to pay for health insurance with a high premium each month with no deductible vs. the opposite.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

If not for the price.... TiVo probably would be *THE* most popular DVR. Many folks don't have 800-1000 dollars for a DVR. A very "niche" product.

Then again... people pay 1k for a cell phone!


----------



## ncbill (Sep 1, 2007)

tommiet said:


> If not for the price.... TiVo probably would be *THE* most popular DVR. Many folks don't have 800-1000 dollars for a DVR. A very "niche" product.
> 
> Then again... people pay 1k for a cell phone!


Unless things have changed the local cable company here charges $25/month plus tax (DVR fee plus monthly equipment fee) for each DVR

IIRC, there's no longer a "whole house" DVR option, either.

Versus buying a used Roamio with lifetime for $300 or less and paying $2.50/month to rent a CableCard/TA.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

ncbill said:


> Unless things have changed the local cable company here charges $25/month plus tax (DVR fee plus monthly equipment fee) for each DVR
> 
> IIRC, there's no longer a "whole house" DVR option, either.
> 
> Versus buying a used Roamio with lifetime for $300 or less and paying $2.50/month to rent a CableCard/TA.


The thing is most programs are now available through a streaming option whether you stream directly through a cable company app or direct to the provider. You still have to pay for the content this way or that way but the actual needs for a DVR are shrinking as internet gets faster and cheaper.

P.S. As a side note I usually don't rewatch things so the idea of buying or saving shows for some infinite period of time no longer makes sense for me. There are factions that like to do that but I suspect they are shrinking in numbers as time goes on. I do understand that some shows are hard to find.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

ncbill said:


> Unless things have changed the local cable company here charges $25/month plus tax (DVR fee plus monthly equipment fee) for each DVR
> 
> IIRC, there's no longer a "whole house" DVR option, either.
> 
> Versus buying a used Roamio with lifetime for $300 or less and paying $2.50/month to rent a CableCard/TA.


*Wrong.... Many cable co's have cloud based DVR options. That's as close to whole house as you can get. If you want a Whole House DVR with TiVo, it's going to cost you major bucks for each TV to connect to your DVR. *

*We are talking new.. Not used, no warranty Ebay stuff.* *So the cable boxes are the way to go for a lot of folks.*

Bottom line is TiVo is too expensive and cost too much for the mass public to buy.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Best Buy has marked these as clearance before.. Nothing new


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

zalusky said:


> The thing is most programs are now available through a streaming option whether you stream directly through a cable company app or direct to the provider. You still have to pay for the content this way or that way but the actual needs for a DVR are shrinking as internet gets faster and cheaper.


But shows *expire* off of streaming. I can and have watched shows YEARS later off of my Tivo.

I ALSO am streaming, but pretty much the first thing I check when I go there (e.g. Hulu) is expiring shows. I saw all of South Park was expiring.. so went online.. it's going to HBO Max.. Whew.. so when I decide to catch up on the last couple of seasons of SP, I will do it there. As a real world example, I'm within one episode of Bob's Burgers of caught up.. but at one point I had almost 2 full seasons unwatched. That show IS on Hulu, including old seasons. But other shows aren't. E.g. I misspoke and will probably "have" to watch my SD ("backup") recordings of a few eps of Schooled because only the most recent eps are avail streaming.. and those are something I'm likely to catch up on the most recent season because it was cancelled, so will likely go off of streaming altogether when the new season starts (...until the whole series goes to some streaming.. potentially)

It's really not having to even skip commercials that makes me use the streaming. If I had infinite storage, I'd just record everything. (Though the reason I got streaming in the first place was to use it at the gym, since for ME, both the standalone and built-into-my-tivo streaming doesn't work.)


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

mntvjunkie said:


> Exactly. I have a lifetime Roamio that I bought in 2013 that is definitely on it's [sic] last legs.


You should give more detail about what's wrong with it. It's LIKELY just the hard drive. Download the non-protected shows with kmttg, plop in a new 3 TB drive, and it will likely be good as new.. (You could also go through a more extensive process to copy the old drive contents to a new drive and "resize" it so the tivo realizes it's bigger.)


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

mattack said:


> But shows *expire* off of streaming. I can and have watched shows YEARS later off of my Tivo.
> 
> I ALSO am streaming, but pretty much the first thing I check when I go there (e.g. Hulu) is expiring shows. I saw all of South Park was expiring.. so went online.. it's going to HBO Max.. Whew.. so when I decide to catch up on the last couple of seasons of SP, I will do it there. As a real world example, I'm within one episode of Bob's Burgers of caught up.. but at one point I had almost 2 full seasons unwatched. That show IS on Hulu, including old seasons. But other shows aren't. E.g. I misspoke and will probably "have" to watch my SD ("backup") recordings of a few eps of Schooled because only the most recent eps are avail streaming.. and those are something I'm likely to catch up on the most recent season because it was cancelled, so will likely go off of streaming altogether when the new season starts (...until the whole series goes to some streaming.. potentially)
> 
> It's really not having to even skip commercials that makes me use the streaming. If I had infinite storage, I'd just record everything. (Though the reason I got streaming in the first place was to use it at the gym, since for ME, both the standalone and built-into-my-tivo streaming doesn't work.)


They do and they are usually somewhere in many cases. Justwatch/Reelgood can help with options but yes things disappear. There is so much available and new stuff that comes that I don't have time to look back at the stuff I missed. I am not saying things are currently perfect but I am suggesting we are transitioning fast to cloud solutions.

I do not see any reason to buy things anymore. I rarely ever watch things more than once and if I do its not a deliberate act.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I realize this is sort of ANTI my previous argument, but I _do_ "look back at the stuff I missed", and I do that with the MORE popular stuff, because I know it is likely to be available somewhere. So I stop watching a more popular show, even one *I* like more objectively, sometimes to make better use of the time I have to make sure I can complete a lower rated show that will eventually disappear.


----------



## CommunityMember (May 22, 2020)

tommiet said:


> If not for the price.... TiVo probably would be *THE* most popular DVR.


There was a time when "to TiVo it" was the way people spoke, even if one had an early VCR or the cable company DVR (which was usually a poor substitute for the TiVo capabilities in the early days). There are many innovations that TiVo introduced to the consumers. But with success comes imitation, and TiVo has not continued to out-innovate the competition to make themselves newly compelling all over again(*), so a cable companies STB/DVR (or ATV Live Channels, or Recast, or ...) is now arguably approximately equal to what TiVo offers for most people, and in some cases more flexible (because of partner/vendor apps).

TiVo pivoted to the custom provider STB and customer insight market for good financial reasons, because, as Willie Sutton said, that is where the money is. The TiVo consumer market now seems more like GE and lightbulbs, in that they are keeping it around for sentimental reasons rather than the profit it provides(**), and GE just recently sold the lightbulb business because if you can't be number one or two in a market, leading companies get out.

(*) They have, of course, chosen to use their past innovation as a revenue stream via their IP licensing, so rather than moving forward faster than their work-alikes, they move to hold others back. Sort of the same result, but not exactly the ways of the past of TiVo where they showed the way.

(**) There are a number of companies that continue a service that is not exactly profitable because the revenue stream looks good to the financial people who do not look too hard at the actual profitability of the offering (with higher revenue your costs of borrowing are much lower even if there is no profit)).


----------



## ncbill (Sep 1, 2007)

tommiet said:


> *Wrong.... Many cable co's have cloud based DVR options. That's as close to whole house as you can get. If you want a Whole House DVR with TiVo, it's going to cost you major bucks for each TV to connect to your DVR. *
> 
> *We are talking new.. Not used, no warranty Ebay stuff.* *So the cable boxes are the way to go for a lot of folks.*
> 
> Bottom line is TiVo is too expensive and cost too much for the mass public to buy.


Major bucks?...for additional TVs a used Mini w/ lifetime is a *one-time* cost of ~$75 off eBay.

With my cable provider, it appears their cloud DVR is not available with standard cable packages...only on the skinny bundles, and only for a whopping 50 shows kept for 90 days maximum.


----------



## dmk1974 (Mar 7, 2002)

ncbill said:


> Major bucks?...for additional TVs a used Mini w/ lifetime is a *one-time* cost of ~$75 off eBay.
> 
> With my cable provider, it appears their cloud DVR is not available with standard cable packages...only on the skinny bundles, and only for a whopping 50 shows kept for 90 days maximum.


Yeah, even a lifetime Roamio Pro on ebay is $400 or less. Plus ~$75/mini for extra TVs, you could have a 5-TV house all with access to the TiVo for $700 one-time. Xfinity for 5 TV's and DVR by me I think costs $50/mo just for those rental fees.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Remember the days when TiVo was hands down the better choice. It is a dirty sinking shame what Rovi did to this company and how it betrayed its customers.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It's funny this same thread about BestBuy "dumping" TiVo comes up every year or so, and yet they still sell them. Having a clearance sale of an old model doesn’t mean they're dumping TiVo. And the fact that the new model isn’t in stock just means it's out of stock.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

I just wish TiVo would cater more strongly to those of us who value the things that make TiVo special ... like the ability to copy programs from machine to machine, or to upgrade the capacity. There are pain points for DVR owners, like losing all their recordings during an upgrade or when a DVR needs to be replaced, or running out of space - or just having to pay a monthly fee. TiVo has some advantages in these areas, and they could do even more.

But frankly, I've skipped the entire Bolt and Edge line primarily due to compromises in the design like the 2.5" drive as well as the lack of recordable 4K/HDR programming. Well, we're almost there with ATSC 3.0 happening this year and cable companies experimenting with 4K.

I guess it's hard to tell the bean counters in a company to invest in the installed base, but often for a company like TiVo the best path for growth is by continuing to keep that installed base happy rather than throwing out new designs that make nobody happy. This is being tested again with the Stream 4K. If it had Mini-capability baked in at launch, it would have enhanced the whole eco-system and bought a whole lot more patience from existing customers excited to try out cheaper/smaller DVR extender with much more capable streaming options.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

jonw747 said:


> I just wish TiVo would cater more strongly to those of us who value the things that make TiVo special ... like the ability to copy programs from machine to machine, or to upgrade the capacity. There are pain points for DVR owners, like losing all their recordings during an upgrade or when a DVR needs to be replaced, or running out of space - or just having to pay a monthly fee. TiVo has some advantages in these areas, and they could do even more.
> 
> But frankly, I've skipped the entire Bolt and Edge line primarily due to compromises in the design like the 2.5" drive as well as the lack of recordable 4K/HDR programming. Well, we're almost there with ATSC 3.0 happening this year and cable companies experimenting with 4K.
> 
> I guess it's hard to tell the bean counters in a company to invest in the installed base, but often for a company like TiVo the best path for growth is by continuing to keep that installed base happy rather than throwing out new designs that make nobody happy. This is being tested again with the Stream 4K. If it had Mini-capability baked in at launch, it would have enhanced the whole eco-system and bought a whole lot more patience from existing customers excited to try out cheaper/smaller DVR extender with much more capable streaming options.


I had a really good idea for an app I tried to develop a few years back. The idea was to have a wizard like app that ran on your phone that would easily copy all your settings, SPs and recordings to a new TiVo to make the transition as easy as possible. Problem is that such an app would require a certificate for TiVo's mind/RPC server and after months of trying, and talking to more than a half dozen different people, I couldn't find anyone at the company who knew how to do that. One TiVo employee even admitted to me that the guy who setup and ran the developer program left after the Rovi merger and that they didn't think anyone took over after he left. So essentially there was no one left at the company who even knew how to issue a certificate for the server.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

ncbill said:


> Major bucks?...for additional TVs a used Mini w/ lifetime is a *one-time* cost of ~$75 off eBay.
> 
> With my cable provider, it appears their cloud DVR is not available with standard cable packages...only on the skinny bundles, and only for a whopping 50 shows kept for 90 days maximum.


Who said you had to keep your cable company? That's your choice. You said that _"*no* *one* had a whole house DVR solution_." No HULU in Western NC? Android apps don't work in Western NC? Many streaming services do have cloud based DVR. All my TV's have the ability to install apps for free or you can buy an Android device for about $30.00 bucks... I know your a TiVo guy, so you will need to pay $69.00 for an TiVo android device. Basically, I could get a whole house DVR solution with NO COST for hardware for ALL my TV's using HULU today.

You really looking for your local CC to provide a cloud based solution and most don't today. I also would like to see my CC do the same. But my issue is your comments that no one has a whole house dvr solution. Just not a true statement. Multiple options that don't include your TiVo. Ebay it and sign up for one of the cloud services.

I'm fine with my TiVo for now... But not blind to other options.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> I had a really good idea for an app I tried to develop a few years back. The idea was to have a wizard like app that ran on your phone that would easily copy all your settings, SPs and recordings to a new TiVo to make the transition as easy as possible. Problem is that such an app would require a certificate for TiVo's mind/RPC server and after months of trying, and talking to more than a half dozen different people, I couldn't find anyone at the company who knew how to do that.


" Of course not, do you know how hard it is to use the rotary dail phones at TiVo, let alone get it to turn fast enough to fill out your application? Surely, you ask too much.


----------



## cwoody222 (Nov 13, 1999)

jonw747 said:


> I just wish TiVo would cater more strongly to those of us who value the things that make TiVo special ... like the ability to copy programs from machine to machine, or to upgrade the capacity. There are pain points for DVR owners, like losing all their recordings during an upgrade or when a DVR needs to be replaced, or running out of space - or just having to pay a monthly fee. TiVo has some advantages in these areas, and they could do even more.
> 
> But frankly, I've skipped the entire Bolt and Edge line primarily due to compromises in the design like the 2.5" drive as well as the lack of recordable 4K/HDR programming. Well, we're almost there with ATSC 3.0 happening this year and cable companies experimenting with 4K.
> 
> I guess it's hard to tell the bean counters in a company to invest in the installed base, but often for a company like TiVo the best path for growth is by continuing to keep that installed base happy rather than throwing out new designs that make nobody happy. This is being tested again with the Stream 4K. If it had Mini-capability baked in at launch, it would have enhanced the whole eco-system and bought a whole lot more patience from existing customers excited to try out cheaper/smaller DVR extender with much more capable streaming options.


I've been a TiVo user since series 1.

I've never cared about transferring programs, even during buying new units. I've not once worried about upgrading or replacing my drives.

I don't worry about the size of the drive inside and I don't care about ATSC 3.0.

I think on forums like this we exaggerate the importance of the more geeky aspects of TiVo.

Most people just want an easy to use DVR that's better (and maybe cheaper in the long run) than their cable company offers. Or, the best OTA recorder they can get.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

Dan203 said:


> I had a really good idea for an app I tried to develop a few years back. The idea was to have a wizard like app that ran on your phone that would easily copy all your settings, SPs and recordings to a new TiVo to make the transition as easy as possible. Problem is that such an app would require a certificate for TiVo's mind/RPC server and after months of trying, and talking to more than a half dozen different people, I couldn't find anyone at the company who knew how to do that. One TiVo employee even admitted to me that the guy who setup and ran the developer program left after the Rovi merger and that they didn't think anyone took over after he left. So essentially there was no one left at the company who even knew how to issue a certificate for the server.


Yeah, an eager user base can also be kept happy by empowering them to fill in the gaps your team can't justify.

I guess there's always going to be friction as long as the content creators fundamentally oppose the whole idea of recording let alone copying their content.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

cwoody222 said:


> I've been a TiVo user since series 1.
> 
> I've never cared about transferring programs, even during buying new units. I've not once worried about upgrading or replacing my drives.
> 
> ...


Well, speaking for myself, I was happy enough with the ease of use and cost of Verizon's DVR, but when the hard drive started to fail, I decided I just didn't want to be stuck with no way to preserve my recordings. If I couldn't keep what I had, I might as well move to something else.

So, for instance, when the hard drive on my Roamio Pro started to fail, I was able to clone it to a new and bigger disk.

Maybe it would be a bigger deal to more people if it was actually easy to do...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I've had a few good ideas over the years TiVo has screwed up for me. Another one I had was basically a modified version of pyTivo that would allow you to share recordings with other users remotely. Basically the idea was to modify pyTivo to show shares containing the complete My Shows list of some remote TiVo. If you selected a show it would instruct the remote pyTivo to download it to that PC, decrypted and recoded to H.264 to reduce the size, then push it over to the local copy of pyTivo and download it onto your TiVo as if it were a file on your network. Then TiVo released Hydra and removed the whole PC to TiVo feature and I abandoned the idea. No use in spending time and effort developing something like that when the feature it depends on is being phased out and could be turned off at any moment.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Joe3 said:


> Remember the days when TiVo was hands down the better choice. It is a dirty sinking shame what Rovi did to this company and how it betrayed its customers.


Well maybe it's because I'm using the "old" stuff, but at least for me, it still is hands down better the majority of the time.. ESPECIALLY after finding about the hidden quick mode speedup.. (I switch between 1.5, 1.7 and once in a while 1.9 often. but mostly I use 1.9 to watch 'non performance' parts of American Idol or AGT then watch the performance at 1x.. lots of documentary/news I watch at 1.5x, and some at 1.7x)

Even though I went lifetime, I actually would make one time payments if specific bugs were fixed.. but even as it is, overall, I use my Tivo FAR more than I use any other way to view TV.. (Though when I use other means, I usually switch to Apple TV, since the Tivo provided streaming options, at least in my _old UI_ Premiere 4 and Roamio Pro, take WAY too long to launch AND have nothing even vaguely like the Tivo UI. Even if they were more VCR-like when dealing with streaming, they would be better.)


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> I've had a few good ideas over the years TiVo has screwed up for me. Another one I had was basically a modified version of pyTivo that would allow you to share recordings with other users remotely.


That's blatant copyright infringement, and is largely what got ReplayTV sued into oblivion.

Yes I realize there's Pirate Bay and a bajillion other places people can find stuff.. but someone with an actual way to be contacted, in the USA, would very likely be sued in a heartbeat.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

mattack said:


> That's blatant copyright infringement, and is largely what got ReplayTV sued into oblivion.
> 
> Yes I realize there's Pirate Bay and a bajillion other places people can find stuff.. but someone with an actual way to be contacted, in the USA, would very likely be sued in a heartbeat.


I wasn't going to maintain any sort of public registry. You would have had to have a direct link to someone else's pyTivo to make it work. So basically it would be less like BitTorrent and more like having a VPN into your friend/family's local network. I came up with the idea when I was copying some shows from my TiVo to my Sister's TiVo and had to physically go over there with a laptop to transfer them. I thought.... "this would be so much easier if she could just pull up my TiVos directly and grab whatever shows she wanted".

But it doesn't really matter at this point as I scrapped the idea.

I have other things I'd like to do with TiVo too but without the ability to get a proper mind/RPC certificate, and the uncertain future of TiVo To Go, I'm reluctant to put any more effort into it.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

Dan203 said:


> I've had a few good ideas over the years TiVo has screwed up for me. Another one I had was basically a modified version of pyTivo that would allow you to share recordings with other users remotely. Basically the idea was to modify pyTivo to show shares containing the complete My Shows list of some remote TiVo. If you selected a show it would instruct the remote pyTivo to download it to that PC, decrypted and recoded to H.264 to reduce the size, then push it over to the local copy of pyTivo and download it onto your TiVo as if it were a file on your network. Then TiVo released Hydra and removed the whole PC to TiVo feature and I abandoned the idea. No use in spending time and effort developing something like that when the feature it depends on is being phased out and could be turned off at any moment.


Would had been cool.

Ironic their new product is called the TiVo Stream 4K ... kind of shows what they think of the original "TiVo Stream" and their TiVo app; which would have been a fantastic feature if they could had adapted to network bandwidth even slightly as well as the old Slingbox did.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Dan203 said:


> I wasn't going to maintain any sort of public registry. You would have had to have a direct link to someone else's pyTivo to make it work. So basically it would be less like BitTorrent and more like having a VPN into your friend/family's local network. I came up with the idea when I was copying some shows from my TiVo to my Sister's TiVo and had to physically go over there with a laptop to transfer them. I thought.... "this would be so much easier if she could just pull up my TiVos directly and grab whatever shows she wanted".


It's certainly something that would have upset Big Entertainment, right? I shared antennas with a guy in New Jersey when the Simple TV DVR was still a thing. He installed a box on his antenna with my credentials and I installed a box on my antenna with his. It worked great. At the time, RSS was planning to launch in the UK and I was hoping to share internationally. I suggested they set up a registry which facilitated the process.


----------



## ncbill (Sep 1, 2007)

tommiet said:


> Who said you had to keep your cable company? That's your choice. You said that _"*no* *one* had a whole house DVR solution_." No HULU in Western NC? Android apps don't work in Western NC? Many streaming services do have cloud based DVR. All my TV's have the ability to install apps for free or you can buy an Android device for about $30.00 bucks... I know your a TiVo guy, so you will need to pay $69.00 for an TiVo android device. Basically, I could get a whole house DVR solution with NO COST for hardware for ALL my TV's using HULU today.
> 
> You really looking for your local CC to provide a cloud based solution and most don't today. I also would like to see my CC do the same. But my issue is your comments that no one has a whole house dvr solution. Just not a true statement. Multiple options that don't include your TiVo. Ebay it and sign up for one of the cloud services.
> 
> I'm fine with my TiVo for now... But not blind to other options.


I noted there was no longer a whole house option immediately after pointing out my local cable company charges $25/month per DVR.

It's clear I was referring to my local cable company.

My point was for those cable customers who want a DVR buying a Tivo (& Minis) remains cheaper than choosing the cable company's DVR.

I didn't mention streaming services at all...just what the local cable company offers.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

ncbill said:


> I noted there was no longer a whole house option immediately after pointing out my local cable company charges $25/month per DVR.
> 
> It's clear I was referring to my local cable company.
> 
> ...


I think his point is that a lot of people are bypassing the traditional DVR math, and just cutting the cord or running specific streaming apps that require very little expense beyond some form of broadband. And even the math which makes TiVo out to be a better deal is built on some underlying assumptions that have prevented it from becoming the clear winner.

In other words, TiVo is becoming a niche of a niche product ... if they can sustain enough revenue hopefully they can keep providing us that guide data and the few services we actually need, and then who cares about Best Buy; except they're being run by bean counters ... so ...


----------



## ncbill (Sep 1, 2007)

jonw747 said:


> I think his point is that a lot of people are bypassing the traditional DVR math, and just cutting the cord or running specific streaming apps that require very little expense beyond some form of broadband. And even the math which makes TiVo out to be a better deal is built on some underlying assumptions that have prevented it from becoming the clear winner.
> 
> In other words, TiVo is becoming a niche of a niche product ... if they can sustain enough revenue hopefully they can keep providing us that guide data and the few services we actually need, and then who cares about Best Buy; except they're being run by bean counters ... so ...


Sure, I should have made it clearer that Tivo still wins in the context of Tivo DVR vs. cable company DVR.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Anybody remember, Winamp?

Like TiVo today, some say the technology became too old and became obsolete, but oh how it was awesome.

By June 2000, Winamp had 25 million registered users and only a year later it was seen surpassing the 60 million user mark. Winamp was an immediate hit with early adopters who discovered how much better the music sounded at higher and higher bit rates than 128k standard.

If I recall correctly, the program had color-changing volume slider and a spectrum analyzer and access to an equalizer that alter frequency responses, playlist to help you arrange tracks. The GUI, was fun to use that came with customizing the look and feel of the player through skins and plugins. Oh, and Specifically, Winamp created a light show visuals of sound waves of the music you're listening to, real fun. The simplicity it had and lack of bloat.

TiVo was once fun like that. Winamp like TiVo today had mistakenly moved over and played dead over several years ago, as smartphones and wireless network technology advanced, on-demand streaming music services like Spotify started to come into favor as the manufacturing of the false idea that streaming was the Holy Grail of music, today's streaming services. Most of the public didn't realize it was the money changers in the music machine wanting their total domination back of who get to listen to what, when and how.

And like TiVo today, even with 40 million songs on tap, there's a significant gap between what I want to listen to and what is available on streaming at any given time.

Streaming rights are fluid meaning it is all controlled not by me or you. What is available today might not be there tomorrow and often times isn't because control has been taken out of our hands The hard to get obscure stuff, bit rate quality, gone. Early content from the local music scene, gone. Recordings from local concerts, gone. Albums created by family and friends in bands, gone and even some great artists that never got a record deal, yet put out an album or two, gone- isn't on streaming.

There are similarities in the story of Winamp and TiVo that doesn't bode well for our freedom to choose.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Joe3 said:


> Anybody remember, Winamp?
> 
> Like TiVo today, some say the technology became too old and became obsolete, but oh how it was awesome.
> 
> ...


it isn't that dire. something like youtube has given me more access to more obscure content than I ever had before. And digital sharing tools allow people to share content easier than before.

The reality with music before is i had around 200 cds. And had a bunch of cassette tapes before that. I even had a few albums. Otherwise I listened to the radio which really was just a form of "limited they choose for you" or "lowest common denominator" streaming.

It's hard for me to see how I'm so much worse off today with music streaming. If anything I'm overloaded with the musical options at my fingertips.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> I've had a few good ideas over the years TiVo has screwed up for me. Another one I had was basically a modified version of pyTivo that would allow you to share recordings with other users remotely. Basically the idea was to modify pyTivo to show shares containing the complete My Shows list of some remote TiVo. If you selected a show it would instruct the remote pyTivo to download it to that PC, decrypted and recoded to H.264 to reduce the size, then push it over to the local copy of pyTivo and download it onto your TiVo as if it were a file on your network.


ReplayTV had something very much like this and a DB was created to share shows via request, called poopli (which still exists for the few RTVs left). I used it many times with RTVs before I got into HD and moved on to Tivos.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

Joe3 said:


> There are similarities in the story of Winamp and TiVo that doesn't bode well for our freedom to choose.


The new business models are disruptive, but not necessarily profitable; and audiophile/videophile concerns have always been niche. It wouldn't surprise me if there were still thousands? millions? of people paying for HD and watching SD, because they don't understand how to use their equipment.

Small companies are best at filling niches, they just need to find it and dominate it.

HdHomeRun jumping on ATSC3 is interesting as it puts them well ahead of pretty much everybody. Those of us who adopt their devices might start adopting some new methods to watch and record TV. We'll just have to see how long it takes to get some quality programming and whether the networks can be bothered to provide something as good or hopefully better than 4K streaming services.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

jonw747 said:


> The new business models are disruptive, but not necessarily profitable; and audiophile/videophile concerns have always been niche. It wouldn't surprise me if there were still thousands? millions? of people paying for HD and watching SD, because they don't understand how to use their equipment.


Please explain this. You mean watching Netflix on an SD set or HD audio?


jonw747 said:


> Small companies are best at filling niches, they just need to find it and dominate it.


Until they fold. It's a rare small company that can capture and hold a niche. If there is some money to be made, google or some other giant will assimilate the innovator.


jonw747 said:


> HdHomeRun jumping on ATSC3 is interesting as it puts them well ahead of pretty much everybody. Those of us who adopt their devices might start adopting some new methods to watch and record TV. We'll just have to see how long it takes to get some quality programming and whether the networks can be bothered to provide something as good or hopefully better than 4K streaming services.


I just put three SD tuners on my network...again. I have a Lifetime Plex Pass and 40t of storage, but have never warmed up to Plex. Hoping third (or is it sixth?) time's a charm. All ATSC 1.0. Given the pathetic transition following the reverse auction and repack, I have no confidence that we will see anything meaningful in 4k anytime soon.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

wizwor said:


> Please explain this. You mean watching Netflix on an SD set or HD audio?


When my Dad first got an HDTV and an HD DVR, the first time I visited he had them set to the SD channels...he didn't realize that higher up in the channel list there were HD channels. And I guess the upscaling was enough of an improvement over his old (SD) setup that he didn't notice anything amiss.

Granted, this was a good 15 years ago...


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Oh, yeah. I've seen that. Adjusted favorites. Don't think we are talking millions, though. It surprises me that you can still buy digital to analog converters. I can't imagine someone hanging on to a CRT long enough for a converter to fail. Maybe people cutting the cord who still has a CRT or two? 

I have to admit I recycled my last CRT last summer. It was a Sony Wega 36" tube with a Wii in tow. Also had a converter (still sitting on the shelf) attached and, at one point, we were using a DTVPal DVR as a converter.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

jonw747 said:


> HdHomeRun jumping on ATSC3 is interesting as it puts them well ahead of pretty much everybody. Those of us who adopt their devices might start adopting some new methods to watch and record TV. We'll just have to see how long it takes to get some quality programming and whether the networks can be bothered to provide something as good or hopefully better than 4K streaming services.


Five of our local broadcasters here in Nashville (our affiliates for ABC, CBS, Fox, The CW and My Network TV) will begin broadcasting in ATSC 3.0 (via two different towers/stations) this Tuesday. Pretty sure they're just going to simulcast the same content they carry on their 1.0 feeds, although on 3.0 the encoding will be in HEVC and presumably less compressed, with better picture quality. Pretty sure the 720p channels will still be in 720p on 3.0 though. Not sure if the lone 1080i channel (our local CBS) will be encoded at 1080p on 3.0 or if they'll just keep it interlaced at 1080i.

I haven't ordered the HDHomeRun 3.0 tuner though. Waiting awhile to see how this plays out. Given the relatively small amount that I watch/record OTA any more, I don't know that it's worth my while to spend money on 3.0 tuners.

Anyhow, I don't expect the major networks to EVER offer anything better to their local affiliates for broadcast on ATSC 3.0 than what they offer their streaming platforms. Remember, ABC is a part of Disney, which owns Hulu. CBS All Access is obviously the streaming platform associated with the CBS network. NBC is owned by Comcast, which has Peacock as their own streaming service. So while we will likely see some of all of those networks begin producing content in 4K and/or HDR, I expect that they'll put those premium formats on their own streaming services at the same time, or even before, they begin offering them to local affiliates for free OTA distribution.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

jonw747 said:


> The new business models are disruptive, but not necessarily profitable; and audiophile/videophile concerns have always been niche. It wouldn't surprise me if there were still thousands? millions? of people paying for HD and watching SD, because they don't understand how to use their equipment.
> 
> Small companies are best at filling niches, they just need to find it and dominate it.
> 
> HdHomeRun jumping on ATSC3 is interesting as it puts them well ahead of pretty much everybody. Those of us who adopt their devices might start adopting some new methods to watch and record TV. We'll just have to see how long it takes to get some quality programming and whether the networks can be bothered to provide something as good or hopefully better than 4K streaming services.


The networks plan to have 1080P with HDR. Any UHD is only planned for special events.

Sent from my Galaxy S10


----------



## thyname (Dec 27, 2010)

4K HDR is possible with ATSC 3.0?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

thyname said:


> 4K HDR is possible with ATSC 3.0?


Yes. They use HEVC encoding and HLG HDR. The problem is UHD will take up a lot of bandwidth. So they will mostly do 1080P hdr with UHD HDR reserved for special things. At least that is what I've been reading is their plan. Because they still want to have a bunch if sub-channels. And ATSC 3.0 will allow them to have even more.

Sent from my Galaxy S10


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

And charge viewers for them.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

wizwor said:


> Please explain this. You mean watching Netflix on an SD set or HD audio?
> 
> Until they fold. It's a rare small company that can capture and hold a niche. If there is some money to be made, google or some other giant will assimilate the innovator.
> 
> I just put three SD tuners on my network...again. I have a Lifetime Plex Pass and 40t of storage, but have never warmed up to Plex. Hoping third (or is it sixth?) time's a charm. All ATSC 1.0. Given the pathetic transition following the reverse auction and repack, I have no confidence that we will see anything meaningful in 4k anytime soon.


I mean people buying/renting HD equipment, but only configuring it for SD or using the same old SD connection (like composite or s-video). Of course that's getting harder and harder to do as the old interfaces are phased-out, but don't buy something new until the something old breaks.

I get your concerns with ATSC 3, but my hope is more and more programming will trickle in over time.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

NashGuy said:


> Five of our local broadcasters here in Nashville (our affiliates for ABC, CBS, Fox, The CW and My Network TV) will begin broadcasting in ATSC 3.0 (via two different towers/stations) this Tuesday. Pretty sure they're just going to simulcast the same content they carry on their 1.0 feeds, although on 3.0 the encoding will be in HEVC and presumably less compressed, with better picture quality. Pretty sure the 720p channels will still be in 720p on 3.0 though. Not sure if the lone 1080i channel (our local CBS) will be encoded at 1080p on 3.0 or if they'll just keep it interlaced at 1080i.
> 
> I haven't ordered the HDHomeRun 3.0 tuner though. Waiting awhile to see how this plays out. Given the relatively small amount that I watch/record OTA any more, I don't know that it's worth my while to spend money on 3.0 tuners.
> 
> Anyhow, I don't expect the major networks to EVER offer anything better to their local affiliates for broadcast on ATSC 3.0 than what they offer their streaming platforms. Remember, ABC is a part of Disney, which owns Hulu. CBS All Access is obviously the streaming platform associated with the CBS network. NBC is owned by Comcast, which has Peacock as their own streaming service. So while we will likely see some of all of those networks begin producing content in 4K and/or HDR, I expect that they'll put those premium formats on their own streaming services at the same time, or even before, they begin offering them to local affiliates for free OTA distribution.


Live Sports will likely get the ball rolling. Even the HD transition with the mandate powering it took time. PBS was a pioneer then, and hopefully will be again and as for the Networks ... well ... they'll follow the money. So, it's just a matter of streaming subscriptions .vs. advertising $$$.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

aaronwt said:


> The networks plan to have 1080P with HDR. Any UHD is only planned for special events.


1080P+HDR will look great on my 65" OLED from 8+ feet ... if they don't bit-starve it.

I wonder if ABC/ESPN and FOX would finally transition away from 720p given the option of 1080p60? That would make for a very nice upgrade assuming they don't cheat and just upscale.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

jonw747 said:


> I mean people buying/renting HD equipment, but only configuring it for SD or using the same old SD connection (like composite or s-video). Of course that's getting harder and harder to do as the old interfaces are phased-out, but don't buy something new until the something old breaks.


Probably not a lot of people doing this. Significantly less expensive to buy/rent SD equipment. I would be interested to see some metrics.


jonw747 said:


> I get your concerns with ATSC 3, but my hope is more and more programming will trickle in over time.


Over time or over how much time is the key. I just don't think broadcasters think cord cutters are worth much investment.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

wizwor said:


> Over time or over how much time is the key. I just don't think broadcasters think cord cutters are worth much investment.


In the past, Broadcast fed the chain (what shows end up on cable, satellite, and streaming). It may continue to do so.


----------



## mattyro7878 (Nov 27, 2014)

The last time I was truly impressed was when I went from a 1080i flat screen to one of the first 1080p sets from Samsung. Of course back then the signal wasnt as compressed and bit-starved. Now I think I take the incredible 4k stream as well as 1080p from Blu Ray and the occasional UHD Blu Ray for granted. Getting jaded as time goes by. I have to admit there are times I say to myself "damn, that looks good". Xfinity is the least likely to wow me.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

mattyro7878 said:


> The last time I was truly impressed was when I went from a 1080i flat screen to one of the first 1080p sets from Samsung. Of course back then the signal wasnt as compressed and bit-starved. Now I think I take the incredible 4k stream as well as 1080p from Blu Ray and the occasional UHD Blu Ray for granted. Getting jaded as time goes by. I have to admit there are times I say to myself "damn, that looks good". Xfinity is the least likely to wow me.


With Xfinity converting everything to 720p, OTA 1080p60 may be a nice option for those programs which can be recorded OTA. I'm not ready to just switch to Plex as my DVR, but I don't mind using it to supplement what I record with my TiVo or watch via streaming services.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

jonw747 said:


> In the past, Broadcast fed the chain (what shows end up on cable, satellite, and streaming). It may continue to do so.


In the past, there were few other sources of programming. Now we are seeing original programming coming from streaming services, premium services, and even YouTube. That's not really the point, though. HDTV was a huge improvement over SD and if you did not get a new television or a converter, you had no broadcast television at all. For most people, 4K is not so great an improvement and, for at least five years, ATSC 1.0 will be mostly undiminished. Broadcasters will have to look out past those five years for substantial subscription (aka advertiser $). Even then, pulling the plug on ATSC 1.0 likely will lose viewers.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

wizwor said:


> In the past, there were few other sources of programming. Now we are seeing original programming coming from streaming services, premium services, and even YouTube. That's not really the point, though. HDTV was a huge improvement over SD and if you did not get a new television or a converter, you had no broadcast television at all. For most people, 4K is not so great an improvement and, for at least five years, ATSC 1.0 will be mostly undiminished. Broadcasters will have to look out past those five years for substantial subscription (aka advertiser $). Even then, pulling the plug on ATSC 1.0 likely will lose viewers.


And the ramp up for HDTV was still slow. What it comes down to is either the content providers, networks, and broadcasters are on board with the 4K transition or they're not. I suspect the answer is easy enough for the content creators - they will gladly use a 4K/HDR workflow (if not better) as soon as they can afford it.

One big difference, though, is that 4K televisions are already in homes well ahead of the broadcast transition. They can't tune ATSC 3 yet, but it's coming and the broadcasters making the transition will help kickstart the cable, satellite, and streaming video providers.

Maybe even TiVo ?!?!

Not sure what they'll do, but adding a means to record from a HDHomeRun would be simple enough if they can't be bothered to make a DVR with an ATSC 3 tuner.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

jonw747 said:


> One big difference, though, is that 4K televisions are already in homes well ahead of the broadcast transition. They can't tune ATSC 3 yet...


You cannot wave a magic wand and have them all tune ATSC 3.0. The driver behind ATSC 3.0 must be the consumer and I'm not sure this is something that will win them over.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

wizwor said:


> You cannot wave a magic wand and have them all tune ATSC 3.0. The driver behind ATSC 3.0 must be the consumer and I'm not sure this is something that will win them over.


The HD rollout took a long time. So, if you're willing to look at this in similar 2/5/10/15 year chunks, I think we'll see clear and steady progress as long as the major networks and major TV manufacturers do not flat out reject it. The broadcasters sure won't because ATSC 3 technology benefits them greatly regardless of whether they choose to take advantage of 4K.

And certainly don't get hung up on tuners. I mean, they are going to happen, but lots of people watch network TV without tuners. My feeling is just that we're not going to see more 4K or even 1080p60 w/HDR via cable/satellite and streaming until we see more of it on the broadcast side. For whatever reason, the tail isn't mature enough yet to wag the dog.


----------



## ncbill (Sep 1, 2007)

jonw747 said:


> The HD rollout took a long time. So, if you're willing to look at this in similar 2/5/10/15 year chunks, I think we'll see clear and steady progress as long as the major networks and major TV manufacturers do not flat out reject it. The broadcasters sure won't because ATSC 3 technology benefits them greatly regardless of whether they choose to take advantage of 4K.
> 
> And certainly don't get hung up on tuners. I mean, they are going to happen, but lots of people watch network TV without tuners. My feeling is just that we're not going to see more 4K or even 1080p60 w/HDR via cable/satellite and streaming until we see more of it on the broadcast side. For whatever reason, the tail isn't mature enough yet to wag the dog.


Money, money, money...many stations here had to change out antennas for the repack, plus COVID has killed revenues...my local PBS station lost their main transmitter, backup operates only at ~1/4 power, but apparently they can't afford to replace it right now.

ATSC 3.0 is coming to my (secondary or tertiary) market, but much more slowly than originally anticipated.


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

ncbill said:


> Money, money, money...many stations here had to change out antennas for the repack, plus COVID has killed revenues...my local PBS station lost their main transmitter, backup operates only at ~1/4 power, but apparently they can't afford to replace it right now.
> 
> ATSC 3.0 is coming to my (secondary or tertiary) market, but much more slowly than originally anticipated.


Makes sense, but there are economic benefits to using ATSC 3 including the ability to share towers/antennas with other broadcasters during the transition. I'm not thrilled about things like DRM based pay-TV, viewer tracking, or private internet services coming to the public airwaves, but they are incentives that will bring in more money for broadcasters.

PBS is of course another matter as far as their economic model. Maybe they won't be able to afford to lead the way this time (give or take what happens in November...).


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

jonw747 said:


> One big difference, though, is that 4K televisions are already in homes well ahead of the broadcast transition. They can't tune ATSC 3 yet, but it's coming and the broadcasters making the transition will help kickstart the cable, satellite, and streaming video providers.


There was a similar scenario with ATSC 1.0. There were TVs with HD displays and NTSC analog tuners. There were also extended definition ED displays with analog tuners.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

aaronwt said:


> The networks plan to have 1080P with HDR. Any UHD is only planned for special events.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S10


Does that mean that the other sub channels would be shut off during the special event?


----------



## jonw747 (Aug 2, 2015)

shwru980r said:


> There was a similar scenario with ATSC 1.0. There were TVs with HD displays and NTSC analog tuners. There were also extended definition ED displays with analog tuners.


Sort of ...

Pioneer introduced a 720p HD display in December of 1997 (it was VERY expensive) and HD broadcasting in the US started in 1998.

Whereas 4K/UHD TV's have been commodity purchases for years now. Can you still find a 1080 display?

Even 8K HDTV's are pretty affordable compared to HD TVs in the early days.

But I'm not counting "Enhanced Definition" TV's.


----------



## dmk1974 (Mar 7, 2002)

I see today that Best Buy has the Mini Vox for $129.98. About as low as I’ve ever seen those.


----------



## ericlhyman (May 19, 2001)

aaronwt said:


> Yes. They use HEVC encoding and HLG HDR. The problem is UHD will take up a lot of bandwidth. So they will mostly do 1080P hdr with UHD HDR reserved for special things. At least that is what I've been reading is their plan. Because they still want to have a bunch if sub-channels. And ATSC 3.0 will allow them to have even more.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy S10


ATSC 3 requires less bandwidth for 4K than current OTA standard does for HD.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

ericlhyman said:


> ATSC 3 requires less bandwidth for 4K than current OTA standard does for HD.


True. But they need the extra bandwidth for all the sub-channels. With ATSC 3.0 they will add even more sub-channels. Since that will bring in extra money.
Having UHD for the primary won't bring in any extra money. They will get the same amount with it just being HD. Besides, the largest percentage of money comes from the cable companies now. The money they have to pay to show the local channel on their cable systems.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

Best Buy stock price is up too.... Think dumping TiVo helped!

You folks know... I'm kidding, right?


----------



## Aaron Malloy (Oct 30, 2019)

tenthplanet said:


> There has never been enough people who want to buy dvrs, ever..


I bought my Tivo at Best Buy a few years back. When I finally ditched the OTA unit a number of months ago (because I was tired of the service fee), I expected it to be hard to get used to. But I was surprised to see that after a couple of weeks, I didn't even think about it.

I chalk that up not really watching anything live anymore, or caring to record something over-the-air for later viewing. I'm streaming 96% of what I watch. And anything that is over-the-air, I can easily find it somewhere with a streaming service.

I'm sure Tivo was great in the time before streaming, YouTube, etc. But right now, it's seeming more like a relic.


----------



## tommage1 (Nov 6, 2008)

Aaron Malloy said:


> I'm sure Tivo was great in the time before streaming, YouTube, etc. But right now, it's seeming more like a relic.


Not for me. I like season passes and wish lists, recording things and watching them later. I can live without streaming. Which is good as I only get 150GB and slow speed with DSL.


----------



## Intheswamp (Nov 15, 2017)

Yeah, for someone rural/remote/etc, the OTA boxes are great to have. I originally signed up for and pay for an "Up to 25mb connection" from Centurystink DSL and receive a 3mb download speed. They've gotten slick and actually do a speed test on your line or either map your location before quoting you a "deal" now. The Roamio OTA is excellent for our situation, no gripes at all about its intended use though here lately I've had some sporadic problems with "Can't Play Now" (or something like that) when I select a recording...and then it takes several minutes before you can leave that screen...a v117 message, if I recall correctly.

I can see that if you have access to a blazing fast internet connection the OTA ability might not be that important, but for minimum-speed, minimum-use internet connections the OTA versions are still very useful.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

tommage1 said:


> Not for me. I like season passes and wish lists, recording things and watching them later. I can live without streaming.


Many of the streaming services have DVR's. But VOD for me is replacing my DVR.

150GB should be plenty of speed for any streaming service. DSL also has some advantages over cable as its not a shared connection. You will always get 150. With cable to rate varies all the time.


----------



## tommage1 (Nov 6, 2008)

tommiet said:


> Many of the streaming services have DVR's. But VOD for me is replacing my DVR.
> 
> 150GB should be plenty of speed for any streaming service. DSL also has some advantages over cable as its not a shared connection. You will always get 150. With cable to rate varies all the time.


The 150GB is my data limit, not my speed. My speed is about 5 Mbps. Neither really good enough for streaming.


----------



## CommunityMember (May 22, 2020)

shwru980r said:


> Does that mean that the other sub channels would be shut off during the special event?


More likely they will just (in effect) bit-starve the remaining sub-channels, resulting in pictures that are there, but either of poor resolution (144p?) and/or with various visual artifacts (pixelation, etc.), depending on what choices the station engineer has chosen to specify to the encoder.

How to schedule and prioritize such special broadcasts are going to be one of the issues of negotiation between the (in many markets) shared transmitter from different station owners during the various transitions (first, likely, the shared ATSC 3.0 transmitter, through the migration to the last remaining shared ATSC 1.0 transmitter that maintains the mandated ATSC 1.0 broadcast for those stations).


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

tommage1 said:


> The 150GB is my data limit, not my speed. My speed is about 5 Mbps. Neither really good enough for streaming.


OUCH! You are correct. Not good enough for much of anything other than web surfing.


----------



## tommage1 (Nov 6, 2008)

tommiet said:


> OUCH! You are correct. Not good enough for much of anything other than web surfing.


It's not quite as bad as you think. When cable internet first came out around me I think it was about 6 Mbps, wow, that was FAST, when compared to a dial up modem  Now websites take advantage of faster speeds, by loading tons of pictures and videos off to the sides, many of them ads. When I do stream (maybe something on youtube) seems to work ok. Most SD stuff fine, 1080P can be iffy. Doubt would be able to do any 4K. The data cap a real issue, if streaming any HD, uncompressed, could go through 150GB in a week or two easily, maybe days. I've heard of people using a couple TB in a month, who knows, maybe some use more? By the way I have the fastest DSL available here, the tiers are 6/3/1.5 Mbps and I think 768 Kbps. And when you drop to lower tiers your data cap goes down also (at least it used to), I have the highest available, the 150GB.

But ya know all in all it's all good, for me at least. My Tivos are being used as DVRs, I can swap around and expand drives whenever I want (within the same device and other than my one Bolt), I get all the shows and movies I could want  Now if only we could go back to pre Rovi, the guide was actually good back then...........................


----------



## Riblet2000 (Feb 8, 2005)

tommage1 said:


> I The data cap a real issue, if streaming any HD, uncompressed, could go through 150GB in a week or two easily, maybe days.


All you have to do is snooze off with something like Netflix running in "play next" mode and you can easily blow through 100 GB in a few days. 2 megabits/second is almost 1 GB per hour.


----------



## chiguy50 (Nov 9, 2009)

tommiet said:


> DSL also has some advantages over cable as its not a shared connection. You will always get 150. *With cable to rate varies all the time.*


That has not been my experience with a cable modem and Xfinity HSI for the past 4+ years. I perform frequent speed tests and have always gotten my rated nominal speed plus 20% (currently 600Mbps nominal/720Mbps actual). So, at a minimum, YMMV regarding the speed rate variances.


----------



## Aaron Malloy (Oct 30, 2019)

tommage1 said:


> Not for me. I like season passes and wish lists, recording things and watching them later. I can live without streaming. Which is good as I only get 150GB and slow speed with DSL.


I can see how it would make sense for you.

Your data speed is quite low for 2020.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

CommunityMember said:


> More likely they will just (in effect) bit-starve the remaining sub-channels, resulting in pictures that are there, but either of poor resolution (144p?) and/or with various visual artifacts (pixelation, etc.), depending on what choices the station engineer has chosen to specify to the encoder.
> 
> How to schedule and prioritize such special broadcasts are going to be one of the issues of negotiation between the (in many markets) shared transmitter from different station owners during the various transitions (first, likely, the shared ATSC 3.0 transmitter, through the migration to the last remaining shared ATSC 1.0 transmitter that maintains the mandated ATSC 1.0 broadcast for those stations).


I think I would rather stay with ATSC 1.0 if they do this.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

chiguy50 said:


> That has not been my experience with a cable modem and Xfinity HSI for the past 4+ years. I perform frequent speed tests and have always gotten my rated nominal speed plus 20% (currently 600Mbps nominal/720Mbps actual). So, at a minimum, YMMV regarding the speed rate variances.


Think you need to read my post again.... I said "*cable rate varies all the time*." I didn't say it would be slower. I said *VARIES*.....

DSL has a dedicated connection to the CO. If your paying for "X" speed, you will always get "x" speed. No speed swing like cable. If your connection is always higher than what you pay for, that's great. But probably not the norm for most cable users. The point was cable speed varies vs DSL does not.

*Why Do Cable Internet Speeds Fluctuate?*


----------



## DouglasPHill (Feb 10, 2005)

Aaron Malloy said:


> I can see how it would make sense for you.
> 
> Your data speed is quite low for 2020.


lol - I live rural, speed 6MB (not a typo)


----------



## chiguy50 (Nov 9, 2009)

tommiet said:


> Think you need to read my post again.... I said "*cable rate varies all the time*." I didn't say it would be slower. I said *VARIES*.....
> 
> DSL has a dedicated connection to the CO. If your paying for "X" speed, you will always get "x" speed. No speed swing like cable. If your connection is always higher than what you pay for, that's great. But probably not the norm for most cable users. The point was cable speed varies vs DSL does not.
> 
> *Why Do Cable Internet Speeds Fluctuate?*


I can only repeat what I previously posted: I have had cable internet from Comcast for over four years at different speed tiers, from 25Mbps on up to gigabit. Over that time I have run frequent, even compulsive speed tests (usually at least daily) and have almost always seen a rock-steady reading. The only time I recall a variance of any significance was with gigabit, when my speeds would sometimes fall below 950Mbps. Otherwise, I always got the rated speed plus 20%. Always, without exception, at all times of day.

That is my empirical evidence to the contrary of your contention, although I can not speak for "most cable users." Granted, YMMV depending on location, provider, infrastructure, and gear, but from my standpoint Comcast HSI is as consistent and reliable as it gets.


----------



## Aaron Malloy (Oct 30, 2019)

DouglasPHill said:


> lol - I live rural, speed 6MB (not a typo)


That *is* rural. 

I pay $23 a month for Spectrum Internet through their cable (although I don't have their cable TV). My speeds are streaming-friendly and I have no data caps.


----------



## Intheswamp (Nov 15, 2017)

DouglasPHill said:


> lol - I live rural, speed 6MB (not a typo)


Shoot, your screaming fast!!!!! I'm at half of that speed....3MB, on a good day!!!


----------

