# Engadget Review



## rmpearl (Oct 3, 2004)

Engadget has chimed in on their review of the Tivo Mini:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/03/11/tivo-mini-review/


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Looks like SP and ToDo management are missing from the Mini according to the review:


> One of only six of the main menu options on the Premiere, this particular item is the key to what we call DVR maintenance. This means it isn't possible to review the To Do List, manage your Season Passes or to even determine why a show didn't record from the Mini.


Which contradicts posts by some early users of the Mini. I'm confused.


----------



## dsnotgood (Aug 26, 2010)

moyekj said:


> Looks like SP and ToDo management are missing from the Mini according to the review:
> 
> Which contradicts posts by some early users of the Mini. I'm confused.


Most of these "journalists " know little of what they type. That goes for all news sites and especially TV . Trust the word of the stranger on the tivo forum than the "journalist" . At least the stranger on the net doesn't have a history of blatantly lying to you and giving false information.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

> The TiVo Mini is smaller than the TiVo Stream and its trapezoid shape is unlike any other device from TiVo.


These are smaller that the Stream? Wow! that is small.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

magnus said:


> These are smaller that the Stream? Wow! that is small.


Yeah, it is tiny... which explains the odd shape, they don't want you (foolishly) stacking anything on top of it.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

I love seeing some of the people post there comments there. If you dont like it dont buy it.. Someone does need to alert engadget to the SP and To do not being correct 

and then all of the idiots complaining about No WiFi. I do like that engadget does defend that saying no other TV extender supports Wifi(C31 genie and Joey or any cable MR extender)


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

compnurd said:


> Someone does need to alert engadget to the SP and To do not being correct


It seems like none of the review units have supported this. Ben even mentions the option on the screen is missing. I wonder if they are running the same version as those who bought them off the shelf.


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

I seem to recall reading about a way to mount the Mini behind the TV and extending the IR. Looking at the port configuration on the back, it doesn't seem possible. Seems like the bluetooth slide remote is the only currently supported method of controlling the Mini if IR line-of-sight isn't available.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

sbiller said:


> I seem to recall reading about a way to mount the Mini behind the TV and extending the IR. Looking at the port configuration on the back, it doesn't seem possible. Seems like the bluetooth slide remote is the only currently supported method of controlling the Mini if IR line-of-sight isn't available.


Since IR bounces off walls, it may very well work behind a tv without direct line of sight. I have a Roku mounted on the back of one of my tvs and it works just fine with IR. It is possible there will be some type of IR extender available.


----------



## Philmatic (Sep 17, 2003)

magnus said:


> These are smaller that the Stream? Wow! that is small.


That's not possible:

TiVo Mini: 6.09" x 6.09" x 1.3" (WxDxh)
Tivo Stream: 4" x 4" x 1.05" (WxDxh)



sbiller said:


> I seem to recall reading about a way to mount the Mini behind the TV and extending the IR. Looking at the port configuration on the back, it doesn't seem possible. Seems like the bluetooth slide remote is the only currently supported method of controlling the Mini if IR line-of-sight isn't available.


I remember seeing a TiVo provided TV bracket that matches the Mini, maybe it's a separate purchase?


----------



## Austin Bike (Feb 9, 2003)

I had a friend recommend getting a 4"x4" velcro adhesive patch for mounting an apple tv on the back side of a TV. that might work as well, depending on how the bottom/feet are machined.


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

dsnotgood said:


> Most of these "journalists " know little of what they type. That goes for all news sites and especially TV . Trust the word of the stranger on the tivo forum than the "journalist" . At least the stranger on the net doesn't have a history of blatantly lying to you and giving false information.


Joined in 2010 and talking all that crap? Would you mind linking to one post or story I've ever posted online that is a "blatant lie."


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

bdraw said:


> Joined in 2010 and talking all that crap? Would you mind linking to one post or story I've ever posted online that is a "blatant lie."


Ya know Ben, some people just can't handle having their baby being called "ugly". The reality is that if people don't take TiVo to task on this stuff (missing Netflix, tuning lag, dynamic tuner allocation) then they won't improve.

Some of us (me) appreciate the review work you guys are doing.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Philmatic said:


> That's not possible:
> 
> TiVo Mini: 6.09" x 6.09" x 1.3" (WxDxh)
> Tivo Stream: 4" x 4" x 1.05" (WxDxh)
> ...


Article says that it is smaller. I would think that it is wrong but thought it was very odd that it would be smaller.


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

jmpage2 said:


> Ya know Ben, some people just can't handle having their baby being called "ugly". The reality is that if people don't take TiVo to task on this stuff (missing Netflix, tuning lag, dynamic tuner allocation) then they won't improve.
> 
> Some of us (me) appreciate the review work you guys are doing.


I get that, but personal attacks or blanket statements about the media aren't helping.

Thanks for the kind words, I appreciate forums like this. Got my start writing posts at places like this.


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

magnus said:


> Article says that it is smaller. I would think that it is wrong but thought it was very odd that it would be smaller.


That sentence changed meaning during editing. Thanks to you Philmatic for calling it out, I appreciate the correction and have already fixed it.


----------



## dsnotgood (Aug 26, 2010)

bdraw said:


> Joined in 2010 and talking all that crap? Would you mind linking to one post or story I've ever posted online that is a "blatant lie."


Wow. I am saying that I trust the stranger on the net MORE than the news media..Engadget included. Re read what I said...

Btw... I was correct. The poster on the tivo forum was correct..Engadget was wrong.


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

dsnotgood said:


> Wow. I am saying that I trust the stranger on the net MORE than the news media..Engadget included. Re read what I said...
> 
> Btw... I was correct. The poster on the tivo forum was correct..Engadget was wrong.


 Could be they are both "right". Since tivo.com video on the Mini doesn't show anything about ToDo & SP management and none of the reviews on the Mini mention that functionality I'm inclined to believe that it is TiVo's intent NOT to have that functionality for the Mini. Could be that "cmonroe" who had early access to a Mini activated it as a Premiere instead, so the back end account config for the device is messed up. Also could mean the capability could be taken away for those that do indeed have it once the config is fixed. That would also imply though that it is possible to have the capability which makes it a head scratcher as to why not include that capability... I'm still confused I guess.

BTW, when I first got a Premiere I transferred over a 3 year pre-pay subscription to it and there were capabilities mysteriously missing on it when I was first using it. After head scratching and contacting 2nd level support at TiVo they figured out the Premiere was incorrectly configured in my account (essentially configured as an S3 unit instead of a Premiere) and they had to update the back end configuration for that device on my account to get things working properly. So looks like back end settings can have quite significant effect on functionality that you see.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

compnurd said:


> I love seeing some of the people post there comments there. If you dont like it dont buy it.. Someone does need to alert engadget to the SP and To do not being correct
> 
> and then all of the idiots complaining about No WiFi. I do like that engadget does defend that saying no other TV extender supports Wifi(C31 genie and Joey or any cable MR extender)


U-Verse does, but that's what's possible when you compress your video so hard that it looks like YouTube a few years back...


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

dsnotgood said:


> Wow. I am saying that I trust the stranger on the net MORE than the news media..Engadget included. Re read what I said...
> 
> Btw... I was correct. The poster on the tivo forum was correct..Engadget was wrong.


Engadget is a web site with many authors. You are saying I'm wrong with no proof, I clearly posted a screen shot without the "Manage Recordings and Downloads" menu used to access the To Do list. I also tried to use the TiVo Central shortcuts for Season Pass manger & ToDo List (1&2) which just results in error bongs.

I asked TiVo PR about it and this is the response I received "We are looking at adding local management of season passes on Mini in a future release."

You still haven't posted a link to anything I've written that was a "blatant lie."


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

bdraw said:


> Engadget is a web site with many authors. You are saying I'm wrong with no proof, I clearly posted a screen shot without the "Manage Recordings and Downloads" menu used to access the To Do list. I also tried to use the TiVo Central shortcuts for Season Pass manger & ToDo List (1&2) which just results in error bongs.
> 
> I asked TiVo PR about it and this is the response I received "We are looking at adding local management of season passes on Mini in a future release."
> 
> You still haven't posted a link to anything I've written that was a "blatant lie."


Maybe read someone else's review first?

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=501876&page=2

Post 31 and there are a couple of others confirming functionality


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Didn't Engadget have an earlier level of the Mini software than the poster who got the box early from Best Buy? It's quite possible that both are correct - the function didn't exist, but does now.

We'll certainly know for sure in a few days when the next wave of owners come online. I got a note from TiVo earlier today that my Mini had shipped.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> Didn't Engadget have an earlier level of the Mini software than the poster who got the box early from Best Buy. It's quite possible that both are correct - the function didn't exist, but does now.
> 
> We'll certainly know for sure in a few days when the next wave of owners come online. I got a note from TiVo earlier today that my Mini had shipped.


+1


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

compnurd said:


> Maybe read someone else's review first?
> 
> http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=501876&page=2
> 
> Post 31 and there are a couple of others confirming functionality


Your experience is certainly different than mine.










You can see that the "Manage Recordings and Downloads" menu is completely missing from the TiVo Central Menu.

For the record, I want to be wrong about this. I think it is a critical error to leave out anything that would make the experience on the mini inconsistent with that of the Premiere.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

bdraw said:


> For the record, I want to be wrong about this. I think it is a critical error to leave out anything that would make the experience on the mini inconsistent with that of the Premiere.


What version of the OS are you running?

Some users reported updating upon setup.

I wonder if this was the reason for the delay (though if it is, not advising the press of it seems beyond crazy)


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

SullyND said:


> What version of the OS are you running?
> 
> Some users reported updating upon setup.
> 
> I wonder if this was the reason for the delay (though if it is, not advising the press of it seems beyond crazy)


Some of the users also activated the Mini as if it was a regular TiVo and even went as far as picking the Premiere monthly fee since no other option was available. This to me says the system flagged their boxes as Premieres rather than Minis even though they have since corrected it.

We know TiVo can add and remove features based off the box type which is how MSOs are missing some apps that we have.


----------



## Bwatford141 (Jan 5, 2012)

I activated mine on 3/9 (as a mini) and do not have access to season pass manager or TD list. I also have the same software version as cmonroe (20.2.2.1-01-6-A92). This must have something to do with him activating it as a premier.


----------



## bdraw (Aug 1, 2004)

Bwatford141 said:


> I activated mine on 3/9 (as a mini) and do not have access to season pass manager or TD list. I also have the same software version as cmonroe (20.2.2.1-01-6-A92). This must have something to do with him activating it as a premier.


My review unit is the same version number.


----------



## CoxInPHX (Jan 14, 2011)

Bwatford141 said:


> I activated mine on 3/9 (as a mini) and do not have access to season pass manager or TD list. I also have the same software version as cmonroe (20.2.2.1-01-6-A92). This must have something to do with him activating it as a premier.


The YouTube video created by "cmonroe" and posted by Dave clearly shows his Mini does not have "Manage Recordings and Downloads", unless this is his second Mini, and not the first one which was initially activated as a Premiere.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5sK4bM14iA[/media]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7ykNCF7G_8[/media]


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

Yes, at this point I'm convinced ToDo list + SP Manager functions are NOT supposed to be available via the Mini which along with Netflix missing is disappointing.


----------



## abqdan (Aug 29, 2012)

I wish I could add the Mini to my setup, but it requires an XL4. Since I've cut the cable, and use only an antenna for broadcast stations, I don't have that option. I hope at some point Tivo will wise up and add an antenna option to the XL4; then the cable-cutters can use this device.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

abqdan said:


> I wish I could add the Mini to my setup, but it requires an XL4. Since I've cut the cable, and use only an antenna for broadcast stations, I don't have that option. I hope at some point Tivo will wise up and add an antenna option to the XL4; then the cable-cutters can use this device.


There's no "antenna option" that could be added to the XL4, it would require a full OTA setup.

I highly doubt that TiVo is going to reverse gears and start retrofitting tuners to the current models. Your best bet would be that a new model offers an OTA option for cord cutters, but I am very skeptical that we will ever again see a new TiVo model with OTA tuners.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> There's no "antenna option" that could be added to the XL4, it would require a full OTA setup.
> 
> I highly doubt that TiVo is going to reverse gears and start retrofitting tuners to the current models. Your best bet would be that a new model offers an OTA option for cord cutters, but I am very skeptical that we will ever again see a new TiVo model with OTA tuners.


Well they have applied to the FCC for a waiver to leave Analog out of an OTA product so that seems to indicate they are looking at a digital only OTA product so I wouldn't write off OTA just yet.


----------



## L David Matheny (Jan 29, 2011)

jmpage2 said:


> Your best bet would be that a new model offers an OTA option for cord cutters, but I am very skeptical that we will ever again see a new TiVo model with OTA tuners.


I have more faith in TiVo's judgment and instinct for self-preservation than you do. They're not stupid enough to write off the growing OTA market and put themselves totally at the mercy of the cable companies.


----------



## Austin Bike (Feb 9, 2003)

Do you have stats on the growing OTA market? I know more people are cutting the cable but I thought they were replacing it with netflix, hulu, etc.

I found this:

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Over-The-Air-Broadcast-Users-Surge-119987



> The firm also found that 6% of U.S. TV homes, or around 6.9 million homes, have canceled pay-TV service


If 6% have canceled pay-TV, that means 94% still have it. I'd put my development dollars around the 94% bucket first. Especially if the profile of the OTA person is:



> with 70% of those citing cost-cutting as their motivation for pulling the pay-TV plug


Tivo's model might be one of those things they would be willing to cut. Roku has a better model for the cost cutter who wants to access content at a lower price.


----------



## DaveDFW (Jan 25, 2005)

Austin Bike said:


> Do you have stats on the growing OTA market? ... If 6% have canceled pay-TV, that means 94% still have it. I'd put my development dollars around the 94% bucket first.


That survey does say that 6% cancelled cable service last year, but for your example to work, 100% of the public would had cable previously.

What they're really stating is that 6% of households cancelled cable, and those households join all the households that were OTA in prior years. That combined group of OTA-only households is up to 17.8%.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

What about households like mine that have OTA and cable?


----------



## DaveDFW (Jan 25, 2005)

aaronwt said:


> What about households like mine that have OTA and cable?


"17.8% of all U.S. households with TVs use over-the-air signals to watch TV programming; this compares with 15.0% of homes reported as broadcast-only last year."

It sounds like the 17.8% figure is OTA-only households. It's not entirely clear, because the first half of the statement says "use over-the-air" and the second half says "broadcast-only."

Edit: I overlooked the subeading of NAB's press release:

"17.8% of homes exclusively OTA reliant"

https://www.nab.org/documents/newsroom/pressRelease.asp?id=2761


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

aaronwt said:


> What about households like mine that have OTA and cable?


or OTA and Satellite - heck it hasn't been that many years that you could even get locals on Satellite.

I only have OTA and access to people with Satellite do cable operators rebroadcast all the sub channels (satellite does not)? Seems like someone must believe someone is watching all those sub-channels as they seem to have plenty of advertising.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

atmuscarella said:


> or OTA and Satellite - heck it hasn't been that many years that you could even get locals on Satellite.
> 
> I only have OTA and access to people with Satellite do cable operators rebroadcast all the sub channels (satellite does not)? Seems like someone must believe someone is watching all those sub-channels as they seem to have plenty of advertising.


They seem to broadcast them here on Comcast and FiOS. I know several people that watch them. Including me recently. Lately I've been watching CoziTv which is on a local subchannel. They have been running the Six Million Dollar Man and the Bionic Woman several times a week. So I have been watching a few episodes each week. I used to love watching those shows in the 70's. Although it's alot more funny watching them now.


----------



## Austin Bike (Feb 9, 2003)

DaveDFW said:


> "17.8% of all U.S. households with TVs use over-the-air signals to watch TV programming; this compares with 15.0% of homes reported as broadcast-only last year."
> 
> It sounds like the 17.8% figure is OTA-only households. It's not entirely clear, because the first half of the statement says "use over-the-air" and the second half says "broadcast-only."
> 
> ...


Ah, fun with numbers, that's why all of this stuff is so difficult.

But, even so, 17.8% OTA reliant, means that 82.2% is the "pay" market, so it is still worth focusing there first.

The OTA market is *probably* broken into the following sub-segments:

1. My dad ("why would I pay for TV when I can get it for free") - not a Tivo target demographic.
2. The angry people ("I'm mad as hell for having to pay monthly for crap and I'm not gonna take it any more") - Also not a Tivo demographic
3. The apathetic ("yeah, I know there is more out there but all of this stuff is a hassle and I don't understand it") Basically the OTA equivalent of people that have been renting the same cable boxes for their tube TVs for 20 years (i.e. my sister) - Could be a Tivo demographic but they would need to do a hard sell job (i.e. expensive marketing)
4. The people who can't afford anything above OTA (whether they want it or not) - Not a Tivo demographic.
5. The techie crowd who is cutting the cable and finding alternatives - defnitiely a Tivo demographic.

I am in tech marketing (but not the tivo world) so I can't really say out of the 17.8% how much are in #5 vs. the other 4 groups. I would guess (with no facts to back it up) that #3 and #4 are the largest chunk of the OTA market. In 2011 the poverty threshold was ~15% of the population. Based on the fact ~96% of the population has a TV, if you assume the 4% without are below the poverty line, then the other 11% have TVs. That slice of 96% is ~11.5%, meaning that basically all of the other groups have to share ~6%.

While the OTA market may be growing quickly, I think it boils down to how you define it and increases off of small numbers can be big.

But, again, this is not my expertise, I am just fascinated by numbers and statistics. You can always get them to say whatever you want if you torture them enough.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

atmuscarella said:


> or OTA and Satellite - heck it hasn't been that many years that you could even get locals on Satellite.
> 
> I only have OTA and access to people with Satellite do cable operators rebroadcast all the sub channels (satellite does not)? Seems like someone must believe someone is watching all those sub-channels as they seem to have plenty of advertising.


Yeah, cable has them all. What a waste of bandwidth those things are, all garbage, and obviously not HD. They should cut those things off nationwide and go to straight up 19mbps HD streams. That would make antennas even more awesome.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

dsnotgood said:


> Most of these "journalists " know little of what they type. That goes for all news sites and especially TV . Trust the word of the stranger on the tivo forum than the "journalist" . At least the stranger on the net doesn't have a history of blatantly lying to you and giving false information.


I just got mine hooked up today and you can't manage SP from it, just like the Engadget article reported.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Austin Bike said:


> Ah, fun with numbers, that's why all of this stuff is so difficult.
> 
> But, even so, 17.8% OTA reliant, means that 82.2% is the "pay" market, so it is still worth focusing there first.
> 
> ...


My GF is a #1 "why would I pay for TV when I can get it for free". But she loves her Series 3 TiVos with OTA channels. She would not want to go back to watching TV without a TiVo.


----------



## abqdan (Aug 29, 2012)

No evidence, but I suspect cable-cutters are more reliant on Tivo than cable subscribers. Cable customers typically have access to On Demand Services, so a DVR is no longer as necessary. With OTA, I need to time shift pretty much everything I watch, so for that the Tivo (or some equivalent) is essential. Hulu has limited access to broadcast programming, and that is at the whim of the content provider. Content providers rarely provide streamed content of their shows on their own websites, or only provide one episode; some stream just a few shows of a new series to hook the public into going to cable to watch it (like Psych for example).

With OTA, many shows are 'stacked' on the most popular days/slots, so I could do with at least three tuners to cover everything I want to watch. I hope Tivo will not abandon OTA customers completely; if they do, that will leave some room for another company to develop such a DVR, or else users will be forced to build their own.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

abqdan said:


> No evidence, but I suspect cable-cutters are more reliant on Tivo than cable subscribers. Cable customers typically have access to On Demand Services, so a DVR is no longer as necessary. With OTA, I need to time shift pretty much everything I watch, so for that the Tivo (or some equivalent) is essential. Hulu has limited access to broadcast programming, and that is at the whim of the content provider. Content providers rarely provide streamed content of their shows on their own websites, or only provide one episode; some stream just a few shows of a new series to hook the public into going to cable to watch it (like Psych for example).
> 
> With OTA, many shows are 'stacked' on the most popular days/slots, so I could do with at least three tuners to cover everything I want to watch. I hope Tivo will not abandon OTA customers completely; if they do, that will leave some room for another company to develop such a DVR, or else users will be forced to build their own.


i have never between all of the cable companies and even sat companies used On Demand. no one in my family has.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

abqdan said:


> No evidence, but I suspect cable-cutters are more reliant on Tivo than cable subscribers. Cable customers typically have access to On Demand Services, so a DVR is no longer as necessary. With OTA, I need to time shift pretty much everything I watch, so for that the Tivo (or some equivalent) is essential. Hulu has limited access to broadcast programming, and that is at the whim of the content provider. Content providers rarely provide streamed content of their shows on their own websites, or only provide one episode; some stream just a few shows of a new series to hook the public into going to cable to watch it (like Psych for example).
> 
> With OTA, many shows are 'stacked' on the most popular days/slots, so I could do with at least three tuners to cover everything I want to watch. I hope Tivo will not abandon OTA customers completely; if they do, that will leave some room for another company to develop such a DVR, or else users will be forced to build their own.


OnDemand is a supplement to a DVR, not a replacement. Something like 75% of content isn't available, even on XoD, which has the biggest selection. I'm CableCard, so I don't have XoD, and I really don't miss it.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

L David Matheny said:


> I have more faith in TiVo's judgment and instinct for self-preservation than you do. They're not stupid enough to write off the growing OTA market and put themselves totally at the mercy of the cable companies.


We'll see what they do. I haven't watched on OTA broadcast in years, so it doesn't matter to me.

One of the main motivators of "cord-cutters" is cutting costs. Hard to see someone thumbing their nose at even "lifeline" cable and then ponying up hundreds of dollars for TiVo hardware and paying monthly fees, but I'm sure those people are out there. Whether or not there are enough of them for TiVo to make a go at it is another question.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> We'll see what they do. I haven't watched on OTA broadcast in years, so it doesn't matter to me.
> 
> One of the main motivators of "cord-cutters" is cutting costs. Hard to see someone thumbing their nose at even "lifeline" cable and then ponying up hundreds of dollars for TiVo hardware and paying monthly fees, but I'm sure those people are out there. Whether or not there are enough of them for TiVo to make a go at it is another question.


of course they're out there - and growing. I figured my capital costs when going OTA were paid back in 4 months of not having to pay my $100+ sat bill. My monthly savings net of my TIVo subs is still enough that I'm happy with my downgrade.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Jebberwocky! said:


> of course they're out there - and growing. I figured my capital costs when going OTA were paid back in 4 months of not having to pay my $100+ sat bill. My monthly savings net of my TIVo subs is still enough that I'm happy with my downgrade.


Ya there are blenty of us, I dumped Pay TV years ago and have bought 3 HD TiVos, a blu-ray play, HTPC, 50" plasma TV, very good receiver, and upgraded speakers in my 7.1 speaker system since then. Just because someone doesn't think pay tv is worth paying for doesn't mean they are not interested in a good DVR, in fact I would say a good OTA DVR helps make giving up pay tv easier.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

atmuscarella said:


> Ya there are blenty of us, I dumped Pay TV years ago and have bought 3 HD TiVos, a blu-ray play, HTPC, 50" plasma TV, very good receiver, and upgraded speakers in my 7.1 speaker system since then. Just because someone doesn't think pay tv is worth paying for doesn't mean they are not interested in a good DVR, in fact I would say a good OTA DVR helps make giving up pay tv easier.


Your idea of "plenty" and TiVos might not be the same. If the cost for TiVo to include OTA is minimal than I'm sure they will continue courting consumers like yourself and add the feature.

On the other hand, if the cost to offer OTA capability is substantial and TiVo is continuing their cozy-up relationship with MSOs then I rather doubt another OTA TiVo is in the pipeline.

Consumers tend to radically under-estimate the cost for businesses to add features to hardware. If it costs TiVo even $5 to put OTA capability in their next hardware box it results in a $20 cost bump to them at retail (or a $20 additional loss if hardware prices stay what they are today).

To put it another way... the 95+ percent of consumers who don't give a rat's ass about OTA are footing the bill for the consumers who do want it.


----------



## innocentfreak (Aug 25, 2001)

Jebberwocky! said:


> of course they're out there - and growing. I figured my capital costs when going OTA were paid back in 4 months of not having to pay my $100+ sat bill. My monthly savings net of my TIVo subs is still enough that I'm happy with my downgrade.


Satellite is outrageously expensive. My bill hit $150 with DirecTV just before I dropped them and that didn't include internet. My current FiOS bill is $120 which includes 75/35 internet and the top TV package. If I dumped TV it would save me maybe $40 a month.

My drop from DirecTV to FiOS covered my cost to purchase TiVos.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> To put it another way... the 95+ percent of consumers who don't give a rat's ass about OTA are footing the bill for the consumers who do want it.


You have no idea what percentage of TiVo's customers want OTA tuners in their DVRs and don't worry us OTA only users foot the bill for cable only people also - I have no more need for the cable tuners/cable card support plus the development costs for both in my TiVo DVRs than you do for the OTA tuners and their development costs in yours. However I am guessing having supported both cable & OTA is the only reason TiVo could continue on so I am good with it. Now that they have cable partners developing for cable users will be more cost effective and I am good with that, if they do develop another unit with OTA I am sure they will do it because they believe it will be more profitable than not so you should be good with that.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

My Satellite cost were around $115/month after continuing to get them to give me concessions under the threat of leaving.

To duplicate what I had with DTV would have cost even more to get it through cable. A lot more.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

atmuscarella said:


> You have no idea what percentage of TiVo's customers want OTA tuners in their DVRs and don't worry us OTA only users foot the bill for cable only people also - I have no more need for the cable tuners/cable card support plus the development costs for both in my TiVo DVRs than you do for the OTA tuners and their development costs in yours.


I think you have a very skewed view of how many active subscribers are using OTA and more importantly, how many of those are interested in an equipment upgrade.

Only TiVo knows for sure... but I would be willing to bet that OTA is in the minority and even if there's been a small surge of cable cutters, that won't be changing anytime soon.

Stop taking it personally. Fortunately the costs either way are relatively low, but they can swing the decision when the sale of hundreds of thousands of units over several years are at stake. A single large MSO could buy more units in one quarter than TiVo would sell to certain demographics in the product lifetime..... so timing is also a factor (if OTA would delay delivery of a new platform for example).

All we are doing here is tuesday morning quarter-backing their decisions, when we don't have access to the data they have that drives the decision making.

As I said, I don't have a dog in this fight, but if cable card users handily outsell potential OTA users, then adding the OTA feature WILL cost the cable card crowd money, in some fashion.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

atmuscarella said:


> You have no idea what percentage of TiVo's customers want OTA tuners in their DVRs and don't worry us OTA only users foot the bill for cable only people also - I have no more need for the cable tuners/cable card support plus the development costs for both in my TiVo DVRs than you do for the OTA tuners and their development costs in yours. However I am guessing having supported both cable & OTA is the only reason TiVo could continue on so I am good with it. Now that they have cable partners developing for cable users will be more cost effective and I am good with that, if they do develop another unit with OTA I am sure they will do it because they believe it will be more profitable than not so you should be good with that.


I have no need for cable tuners or cable cards. I've not used satellite or cable since 2006. I've save lots of money thanks to Tivo but if there were another product that had OTA tuners and had more features that I was looking for then I'd consider moving on to something else.

I'm not interested in paying for something monthly when there is plenty to watch on regular TV. Only channels that I even miss are ESPN and SYFY. And SYFY from what I hear is not so good anymore anyway.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

The concept that OTA and cable people are at war here is looking at it the wrong way. A unit that can use both is mutually beneficial, in terms of selling more units from the same development costs, flexibility down the road, and resale value.

I'm not giving up cable anytime soon. The only thing I'd like is one that could handle both OTA and cable at the same time. What I'm wondering is why a cable-only premiere couldn't have an add-on 2-tuner USB adapter for the OTA folks, and also allow it to be used with cable at the same time. OTA is a great backup for cable after a storm, or during the storm with a generator if all utilities are down.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

I'm not saying that those things shouldn't happen, simply that if they aren't happening that a likely reason is that OTA users won't generate enough profit for TiVo to justify the development.


----------



## mr_smits (Dec 17, 2009)

jmpage2 said:


> Only TiVo knows for sure... but I would be willing to bet that OTA is in the minority and even if there's been a small surge of cable cutters, that won't be changing anytime soon.


The cable cutters crowd is growing. In general, it is younger and more technologically savvy crowd that is doing this. Anecdotal evidence: the number of people I know that have cut the cord is increasing each year. All are <40 years old.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

mr_smits said:


> The cable cutters crowd is growing. In general, it is younger and more technologically savvy crowd that is doing this. Anecdotal evidence: the number of people I know that have cut the cord is increasing each year. All are <40 years old.


Yes, and many of those users aren't going to pay for TiVo either. Those "young" "savvy" users get their content by and large from bit torrent.... a.k.a, they pirate it.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> I'm not saying that those things shouldn't happen, simply that if they aren't happening that a likely reason is that OTA users won't generate enough profit for TiVo to justify the development.


The rumors are that TiVo is likely developing several updated DVRs one is likely a 6 tuner cable DVR and another that is a combined OTA/cable DVR with an unknown number of tuners. Do you have some inside information that the rest of us don't? Beyond the rumors I have no idea what TiVo is actually developing, but we do know they have applied to the FCC for some waivers one of which is to remove analog from a OTA device which seems to conflict with your opinion that Tivo isn't developing something for OTA.

Also where did you get the data from that shows OTA users don't generate enough revenue/profit for TiVo to justify continued product support?


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

I don't have any data, just the observation that the last TiVo model that they released eliminated OTA.

If OTA was a critical business component for TiVo then it is somewhat hard to fathom why they would have released a product that eliminated OTA capability entirely, especially when it could have very easily been accomplished via something like an outboard USB tuner box.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Bigg said:


> What I'm wondering is why a cable-only premiere couldn't have an add-on 2-tuner USB adapter for the OTA folks, and also allow it to be used with cable at the same time. OTA is a great backup for cable after a storm, or during the storm with a generator if all utilities are down.


You have mention 2 things that I think could be interesting. First if as the roomers indicate TiVo is developing a new combine OTA/cable DVR that is digital only there would be no reason it could not use all the tuners at one time -the reason the current dual tuner DVRs are limited to only using 2 at a time is because of the hardware restriction of only being able to record 2 analog channels at one time.

The other thing of interest is the possibility of moving the tuners out of the DVR. They could certainly do that now In fact I have HDHomerun tuners on my network now that there is no reason a TiVo DVR couldn't record from. Also if they actually replace cable cards with a software only solution and make all pay tv providers use it TiVo would again have access to Satellite which require 2 more types of tuners. I would think it would be easier at that point to make the DVR tunerless and let users buy what ever tuners they wanted.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> I don't have any data, just the observation that the last TiVo model that they released eliminated OTA.
> 
> If OTA was a critical business component for TiVo then it is somewhat hard to fathom why they would have released a product that eliminated OTA capability entirely, especially when it could have very easily been accomplished via something like an outboard USB tuner box.


It is not hard to understand at all and several people have explained it in detail. The current Premiere Q, 4, XL, & Elite DVRs where primarily developed for Cable Companies and had several hardware limitations to keep the costs down while moving to 4 tuners.

The first was no analog for cost reasons and the second was to leverage the current Premiere platform as much as possible again for cost reasons, which meant no more than 4 tuners total. So the end result is the Premiere Q, 4, XL, & Elite which are 4 tuner digital only cable DVRs. Technically TiVo could have made a 4 tuner digital OTA only DVR on the same platform but they didn't and I think they were correct in not doing it.

The rumors indicate the updated platform will also be digital only, but the other hardware is going to be updated enough to handle more than 4 tuners. What we will actually end up with is unknown but the rumors are that 6 or even 8 tuners will be workable.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

You know that the current hardware family was developed primarily for cable companies how exactly?

I agree, rumors point to a _possible_ return to a digital only OTA tuner being included in a future model.

However, until TiVo releases it, this is all speculation.

What is FACT and not speculation is that the last several products that TiVo have released have not had OTA tuners, and the assertion that this is primarily because they are for the MSO market is simply your opinion, unless you have proof otherwise. I would imagine that TiVo have sold far more 4 tuner boxes at retail then they have sold to MSOs.

You seem to view this as some kind of epic "cable" vs. "OTA" argument, when I don't care either way what TiVo does. I simply see that TiVo seems to have gone in a direction OTHER than OTA with their last few products and reasons why they might have decided to drop OTA altogether.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

atmuscarella said:


> You have mention 2 things that I think could be interesting. First if as the roomers indicate TiVo is developing a new combine OTA/cable DVR that is digital only there would be no reason it could not use all the tuners at one time -the reason the current dual tuner DVRs are limited to only using 2 at a time is because of the hardware restriction of only being able to record 2 analog channels at one time.
> 
> The other thing of interest is the possibility of moving the tuners out of the DVR. They could certainly do that now In fact I have HDHomerun tuners on my network now that there is no reason a TiVo DVR couldn't record from. Also if they actually replace cable cards with a software only solution and make all pay tv providers use it TiVo would again have access to Satellite which require 2 more types of tuners. I would think it would be easier at that point to make the DVR tunerless and let users buy what ever tuners they wanted.


Moving RVU to tuners is something that's not going to happen for a while, but it will be great when it does, as it would let you use a third-party DVR with any content source. What I'm thinking is a TiVo-sold USB adapter that has 2 OTA tuners in it so that they would sell a CableCard box, and OTA users could add one or two USB dongles to get 2 or 4 OTA tuners, or cable users could have both (although that would be tricky software wise in terms of priority scheduling on one source or another...).

Of course having a totally detached system gets more interesting, as you could have a tuner box with 6, 8, 12 or more tuners, a storage/server box, and then thin client boxes, each of which is upgradable on it's own, and the tuner box would determine the programming source... This would basically be the equivalent of using HDHR's, a headless MCE PC and Ceton Echos for the actual interaction with the system.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

jmpage2 said:


> I don't have any data, just the observation that the last TiVo model that they released eliminated OTA.
> 
> If OTA was a critical business component for TiVo then it is somewhat hard to fathom why they would have released a product that eliminated OTA capability entirely, especially when it could have very easily been accomplished via something like an outboard USB tuner box.


That's not really what happened. TiVo Developed the Premiere platform as a 2 tuner unit. It had support for 4 physical tuners, 2 cable and 2 OTA, and the ability to encode 2 analog streams. Then one of their cable partners asked them if they could make a 4 tuner unit so they adapted the platform they already had by replacing the two OTA tuners with cable tuners and disabling the analog capabilities because it could only encode 2 streams at a time. They call it the Premiere Q and it was originally released only to their MSO partners. Then they realized there was a potential market it for it at retail so they released it as the Premiere Elite. (later renamed to XL4)

If the next generation unit supports 6 tuners then they could do the opposite and swap 3 of them for OTA and create a 3 tuner unit that supports both OTA and cable. That would also give it 1 extra tuner that could be dedicate to network streaming allowing it to be compatible with the Mini without ruining the user experience.

I think this scenario is very likely to happen. In fact they may even use a platform that supports more then 6 tuners and release a full blown 4 tuner box with cable and OTA support. Not sure if a Broadcom SOC exists that can do that though.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

jmpage2 said:


> You know that the current hardware family was developed primarily for cable companies how exactly?


The current platform was NOT developed for cable companies. The Premiere Q/Elite/XL4 was TiVo's best attempt at adapting the platform to meet the cable company's needs.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> You know that the current hardware family was developed primarily for cable companies how exactly?


As Dan203 explained it the Premiere platform was not developed for cable operators but the Premiere Q which lead to the Premiere 4/XL/Elite was.



jmpage2 said:


> I agree, rumors point to a _possible_ return to a digital only OTA tuner being included in a future model.
> 
> However, until TiVo releases it, this is all speculation.


Agreed



jmpage2 said:


> What is FACT and not speculation is that the last several products that TiVo have released have not had OTA tuners, and the assertion that this is primarily because they are for the MSO market is simply your opinion, unless you have proof otherwise. I would imagine that TiVo have sold far more 4 tuner boxes at retail then they have sold to MSOs.


No idea about the numbers, but a person who follows TiVo stock closely (sbiller) said how many Premiere 4 & XLs had been sold I think it was 50,000 (corrected based on other posts sorry for the first error), I do not remember seeing how many the cable partners had deployed.



jmpage2 said:


> You seem to view this as some kind of epic "cable" vs. "OTA" argument, when I don't care either way what TiVo does. I simply see that TiVo seems to have gone in a direction OTHER than OTA with their last few products and reasons why they might have decided to drop OTA altogether.


Well I am not anti cable/pay tv per say, it just isn't for me right now. Some of my responses have been to disagree with some of your statements not because I am arguing people should be for OTA or against cable. I have no opinion on where people should get their video content that is a personal choice based in individual preferences and situations.


----------



## DaveDFW (Jan 25, 2005)

atmuscarella said:


> No idea about the numbers, but a person who follows TiVo stock closely (sbiller) said how many Premiere 4 & XLs had been sold I think it was 400,000, I do not remember seeing how many the cable partners had deployed.


Hmm. I can't find the official figures, but I think the number of four-tuner Tivos in service is much lower--perhaps 50,000?


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Why does CableCard kill the ability for the same tuners to handle OTA or cable? I know a lot of tuners out there can do ClearQAM or ATSC-8VSB...

EDIT: Typo


----------



## CoxInPHX (Jan 14, 2011)

DaveDFW said:


> Hmm. I can't find the official figures, but I think the number of four-tuner Tivos in service is much lower--perhaps 50,000?


Sam estimates that the number of 4 Tuner Premieres is 50,000.
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/8...nexpected-impact-on-retail-subscriber-numbers

I am unsure if that number includes MSOs or is just retail. Looks to me it is just retail though.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

The other 350K must come from the TiVo Elite boxes.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Bigg said:


> Why does CableCard kill the ability for the same tuners to handle OTA or cable? I know a lot of tuners out there can do ClearQAM or ATSC-8VSB


From jafa, the inventor of the HDHomerun...


jafa said:


> QAM for digital cable is almost the same world wide vs 8VSB which is a small market.
> 
> As a result the chip companies are doing interesting things with QAM, nothing with 8VSB.
> 
> ...


While there are devices that can do either or they're not really using the same tuner internally. They're splitting the signal and sending the ATSC down a different path.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> From jafa, the inventor of the HDHomerun...
> 
> While there are devices that can do either or they're not really using the same tuner internally. They're splitting the signal and sending the ATSC down a different path.


You're saying every TV out there has two tuners, one for regular OTA, and one for cable-specific QAM?


----------



## sbiller (May 10, 2002)

CoxInPHX said:


> Sam estimates that the number of 4 Tuner Premieres is 50,000.
> http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/8...nexpected-impact-on-retail-subscriber-numbers
> 
> I am unsure if that number includes MSOs or is just retail. Looks to me it is just retail though.


Just retail.

It would be a different and almost impossible analysis to estimate the number of Premiere boxes and their composition with TiVo's Tier 2/3 partners. Fortunately, TiVo reports the number of gross adds and churn rate each quarter which makes this analysis possible.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Bigg said:


> You're saying every TV out there has two tuners, one for regular OTA, and one for cable-specific QAM?


Yes. Internally they use two separate chips to decode QAM and ATSC.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Bigg said:


> You're saying every TV out there has two tuners, one for regular OTA, and one for cable-specific QAM?


Not necessarily, not all TVs had QAM when we started going digital. But I am guessing at this point most new TVs have both.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

atmuscarella said:


> Not necessarily, not all TVs had QAM when we started going digital. But I am guessing at this point most new TVs have both.


Every TV I've ever seen in the past 5 years or so has had OTA PLUS support for ATSC-QAM. They must be using two chips. That's pretty nuts. Why don't they make a single chip to do both?


----------

