# "The retail market for TiVo days are numbered...enjoy it while it lasts"..???



## Intheswamp (Nov 15, 2017)

Ok, I don't frequent the forum *nearly* as much as I did when I was researching about buying my Roamio OTA or soon afterwards when I was setting it and my Mini Vox up. I've been using Hyrda since the beginning, it worked, I know no better, I'm ignorant, it's the best/worst UI ever created on the planet. Ok, so no debate on all that...I was figured "what the hey?" and went with the flow. Not worried about discussing that. 

But, in a thread reporting a new TE4 update, New TE4 update starting to roll out, I stumbled across the below quoted message (middle part removed for briefness). This highly concerns me, especially coming from a long-time Tivo user. The bolded and underlined part is what triggered the little alarm in my pea-brain to go off. Whether it is a false alarm or not, I don't know.

My situation is that I've been planning on buying two more Roamio OTA for my daughters. They are both cord-cutters but neither have DVR capabilities. They're both in good shape (courtesy of Daddy) antenna-wise and currently receive OTA and also stream content. The DVR will give them the ability to not miss their favorite network shows and local news reports...basically what I use my Roamio for. I had purchased a couple of the CM Stream+, but they were RMA'd back to CM due to too much tech needed to use them...and my daughters need a working solution...not a solution to work on. But, I digress... So, I've been waiting on a Tivo Roamio sale to come along.

BUT...the quote below from a long-time Tivo user seems to say that the "retail market days" (me!) are limited. I don't want to invest a chunk of change that's going to be a useless piece of silicon and silver traces. I can't believe other people are still investing in Tivo's if this is the case, but I'm a newcomer to Tivo so what do I know? Any thoughts on the "retail" future of Tivo's boxes, maybe expressly the OTA boxes? Would I be better off buying some iView PSIP boxes a couple of USB hard drives and tell my daughters to "figure it out"? 

Sorry to ramble about this, but two of the Roamios would be a large chunk of change for us and we want to invest in something that will be useful for our daughters for several years down the road.

Thanks,
Ed



Diana Collins said:


> Personal opinion from someone that started with Series 1...
> <snip...>
> You may say, "Well, if they don't care about retail users like me, why should I care about them?" Well, that is correct...you shouldn't. Everyone needs to make decisions based on their own circumstances and goals. *The retail market for TiVo days are numbered...enjoy it while it lasts* - using whatever UI you prefer.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Tivo is hitting a technological wall. Cable users account for 2/3 of their retail customers. Cablecards will *eventually* go extinct as systems move to IPTV, and there's currently no standardized technology to replace it to make a retail cable DVR possible after that point.

Tivo has said they will support cable DVRs as long as there are cablecards. They can't commit to anything beyond that.

That being said, providing guide data to existing customers is cheap. They now own the data and its delivery, so they can continue to deliver data to existing customers from hell to breakfast, in all of the universe, in perpetuity. I don't think folks (cable or OTA) have anything to worry about at all as far as basic data support goes. There's no reason for them not to continue to do it for many years to come.

Now, OTA has its own unique "problem", and that's the ATSC 3.0 standard which will allow for 4K OTA. Existing Roamios and Bolts don't support it and they would need to be replaced with a new box. But as long as ATSC 1.0 airwaves are still transmitting, those customers will be fine. This will also probably be for a long time, though some of the "lesser" channels will be going away in a couple years as the airwaves are repackaged.

Tivo has hinted at a possible 2019 product that supports ATSC 3.0 (and I'm betting it'll also still support cablecard), so they aren't finished with retail yet. I think buying a Tivo OTA box is still a viable option.


----------



## johnfasc (Dec 24, 2014)

You realize VCRs are still in use? I am not a techno freak but thinking a DVR would still record and playback as long as it is in working condition. You may not have the guide as you know it. But I think that quote was just a general statement that everything does not last forever. Go ahead and splurge, you can always save bucks by going the refurbished route. Besides your daughters are worth it!!


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Give that current new TiVo’s use specific inputs that are starting to phase out, they will not last past the full transition to IPTV and ATSC 3.0. Until then (and that is still some distance away for the majority of customers), TiVo is a great solution. Unless they come up with workable adaptors of some kind, a new approach will be needed or TiVo will fade away. 

I’d comfortably buy one today, though, since the usefulness of consumer electronics is becoming a shorter window. 

Using a VCR in a digital world needs adaptors and they exist. Will the same be true for a Bolt?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

We really really need a doom & gloom forum.


----------



## Intheswamp (Nov 15, 2017)

JoeKustra said:


> We really really need a doom & gloom forum.


Need a moderator for it??? 

Or, rather than a doom&gloom forum a GMC forum....gray-matter-challenged???? 

But seriously, I wasn't trying to spread doom and gloom, just that inquiring mind of mine.....


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Intheswamp said:


> But seriously, I wasn't trying to spread doom and gloom, just that inquiring mind of mine.....


I take very little seriously. There is a need to have a forum for non-TiVo discussions. Too bad we don't have one.

But:
The Future of the Pay TV Industry
How TIVO can survive the inevitable IP Apocalypse
Rumor: Comcast may go all-IP for new subs by year-end
Tivo's back up plan for ATSC 3.0 or NO CABLE CARD

see?


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

This is not intended to say everything is perfect and will last forever. There are indeed some technical challenges ahead, some of which I have no doubt TiVo will handle, and some I doubt they will.

That said, the death of TiVo has been predicted since about a week after the first box was bought. There was some dude (I want to say his name was Sean, but you know what they say about memory being the second to go) who constantly spammed the Usenet group with the phrase "Dead company walking".

Almost two decades later TiVo's still around, Sean is not.

The main takeaway from this should be will TiVo be around forever? No. Will it disappear tomorrow? No. Are there technological changes ahead? Yes. Did TiVo weather the change from analog to digital, and from SD to HD? Yes.

Additionally, cablecards could all disappear off the face of the planet tomorrow and your Roamio OTA won't notice.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Agreed. 

But remember there are two things going on. Cable cards will go away eventually but OTA is changing as well.


----------



## gigaquad (Oct 25, 2004)

On the CableCard vs IP delivery thing, didn't the FCC decide that cable companies MUST support set-top boxes way back in the early 2000's? If the stupid, buggy, horrible implementation known as CableCards go away and the FCC upholds its ruling that set-top boxes are a consumer right, then I'm sure Tivo will have a solution. I'm not the least bit worried as of this moment.


Edit: After further research, Tivo has been in talks (and agreements) since 2014 with Comcast to deliver IP content to Tivos. And Comcast agreed to provide CCs up until the delivery method could be standardized.


----------



## ManeJon (Apr 14, 2018)

On the other side - at the moment Spectrum (at least in this state) doesn't offer whole home and only offers DVR's with 2 tuners. There really isn't much other choice these days - No one has a perfect solution but no whole home and only 2 tuners isn't a solution at all.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

Intheswamp said:


> Sorry to ramble about this, but two of the Roamios would be a large chunk of change for us and we want to invest in something that will be useful for our daughters for several years down the road.


I think the bottom line is this: if you and your daughters are happy with the way that a Roamio OTA works for them today, and you're comfortable spending the required amount of money to buy them, I don't think you have any reason to be worried.

I don't see anything on the horizon that would stop those boxes from working. Yes, it's possible that in the future TiVo will decide to completely get out of the business of selling new retail DVRs. But as long as the company exists, they'll have to keep offering program guide data for those retail DVRs they sold in the past with "lifetime" service. As pointed out above, TiVo now owns that guide data. (TiVo merged with Rovi, the guide data provider, over a year ago.) I can't imagine the courts allowing TiVo to get out of providing ongoing free guide data for working DVRs with "lifetime" service that are less than, say, 8 years old. Even if TiVo stops selling retail DVRs, the company will still be around for a long time because retail DVRs are now just a small part of their overall business, which has deals with place with large pay TV providers around the world.

As for the next generation of OTA TV that's on the horizon -- ATSC 3.0 -- it's true that it won't work with today's TiVos, including the Roamio OTA. But I wouldn't expect ATSC 3.0 broadcasts to begin in your area (Mobile?) until late 2019 or early 2020. And since ATSC 3.0 is optional, some stations may not start using it until much later. Meanwhile, the FCC is going to require that stations continue to broadcast in the current ATSC 1.0 format for several more years. So maybe come 2020 or 2021 your daughters will want to upgrade to a newer OTA DVR that can tune in and record the new ATSC 3.0 signals (which will offer better picture quality). But their Roamio OTAs will still work the same as always with the "regular" ATSC 1.0 channels, which should still be around, at least for the main networks, until the middle of the next decade.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

The problem with continuing to broadcast in ATSC 1.0 is that many stations will combine to broadcast on the same frequency for ATSC 1.0. While using their normal frequency to switch to ATSC 3.0. So stations will be even more bitstarved or might not even have an HD option for ATSC 1.0 any more.

So while you will technically be able to receive a broadcast with ATSC 1.0, it will be crap quality.


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

Yeah, the price of an all-in Roamio OTA should fully amortize within a few years and any value you get out of them after that is gravy.

The crap quality comment above is not a given and would likely only apply to the very largest markets if it comes to fruition. I don’t believe small and mid size markets are likely to see any worse picture quality on ATSC 1.0 than they currently have.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

As the person that made the original comment, let me expand on it a bit...

First, let's consider cablecard based DVRs. With the elimination of the requirement that any operator provided unit include a cablecard for CA control, getting cablecards and getting them properly activated and paired is becoming more and more difficult. Comcast (the largest cable company in the nation) has already announced plans to move to all IP delivery. Altice/Cablevision has the same plan. Verizon has piloted an all IP system and has gone back to polish it some more. Add in the cord cutter phenomenon, and the fact that TiVo never captured more than a tiny fraction of the home DVR market, plus the cord-cutting trend, and TiVo's market gets really small. At some point, continuing to maintain the manufacturing, warehousing and shipping will get too expensive to support. The IP delivery systems have no standard authentication process - conditional access will be proprietary to the cable provider and they have no incentive to allow third party boxes to use their method (it took a FCC rule-making to get cablecards in the first place). I'm not saying this will happen soon...but the end of cable DVRs in general, and TiVo's in particular, is coming - probably in 5 to 10 years, unless you are served by a small independent provider (in which case it might take 15 years).

Now, OTA DVRs. While there is a small market for these devices today, they face ATSC 3.0 issue. Not only will new tuners be needed, the ATSC 3.0 tuners will be expensive, and there is a distinct possibility (some might say probability) that at least some ATSC 3.0 services will be monetized and so, again, TiVo can be left out in the cold because of conditional access control issues. Imagine a network affiliate offering a 480p or 720p feed on their "open" channel, but charging a monthly fee for access to the 4K feed (lacking congressional rule-making, there is nothing to stop them.

Finally, OTT services like Netflix, Prime Video, etc. There is no reason to believe that the migration of entertainment to OTT/on-demand services will abate in any way. Over the long term more and more content will be sold that way. We could end up with Sports and News being the only thing NOT delivered strictly as on-demand. In that world, there are few people that even need a DVR, of any kind, shape or brand.

DVRs were a reaction to burgeoning advertising breaks and the availability of cheap digital video encoders. Cord cutting is a reaction to burgeoning cable rates. Both problems are addressed by On-Demand or PPV. That is were we are headed, and without some major event that changes the course of the market, it is a world that has no need of DVRs, TiVo or otherwise.


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

I know more than one person who got a TiVo explicitly for, and ONLY for, sports. Trickplay is a sports lover's dream. I'm going to have to disagree and say that saying the world of sports has no need for a DVR is as true a statement as the Earth is flat. While some people may believe it, the facts don't play out that way.

Exactly how and why DVRs came into existence can be disputed, but there were ways of recording TV and skipping commercials before it happened. The capacity was usually quite limited, and you HAD to watch the most recent recording to create space, or swap tapes. At the time of creation, the "killer app" of DVRs wasn't even increased capacity, but the ability to watch recordings "out of order", and the trickplay giving you control of Live TV as well.

Some people believe on-demand is where we're headed. The antenna installers making their living installing antennas think it's not quite cut and dried as that.

To get things back on track, is TiVo dying? Yes. So am I. So are you. So are we all. Plan accordingly and appropriately. Generally this means you don't really have a pressing need to cancel this weekend's plans. If a Roamio OTA currently fits your needs, feel free to buy it. Assuming your needs remain, it will fit your needs tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, and so on.

One final thought, in response to the idea that there is no reason to believe the migration to on demand will abate in any way...there are entire websites dedicated to the discussion of internet speed throttles and caps. If there is anything in all of this that is uncertain, it's exactly this issue. Even the supposed death of net neutrality (which itself is not an actual death, the issue is by NO means settled) has been delayed. Nobody can predict where this is going.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

series5orpremier said:


> Yeah, the price of an all-in Roamio OTA should fully amortize within a few years and any value you get out of them after that is gravy.


Yeah. Let's say you pay $400 for a new Roamio OTA with lifetime service. In three years, you decide to switch to something else that better suits your wants/needs and you net $75 selling the Roamio OTA used on eBay after fees and shipping costs. (Lifetime service stays with a Tivo even as it switches owners.) So you paid $325 for use of the TiVo for 36 months, which works out to $9 per month (not including whatever sales tax you originally paid on the TiVo). Of course, if you keep and use the TiVo for less time, it works out to spending more per month; use it longer, then less per month.

Is it worth spending $9 per month on a TiVo when you can get Hulu (with limited ads that can't be skipped) for $8 per month (or ad-free for $12 per month)? Hulu offers next-day on-demand content from ABC, NBC and Fox, plus a slew of other stuff (original series, mini-series and docs, uncut Hollywood movies, past seasons of broadcast and cable series). But it's missing next-day access to current CBS series, which you could record with a TiVo. Meanwhile, you can get free access to recent content from PBS and The CW using their own apps, so you don't really need a DVR for that. (The CW app forces you to watch ads, though.) And of course you can still watch live local OTA channels for free using the tuner already built into your TV.

I'm not arguing in favor of either a Roamio OTA or Hulu, necessarily. But I am saying that spending around $9 per month to use a TiVo for the next few years seems to be a reasonable entertainment expense compared to the closest comparable streaming replacement.



Diana Collins said:


> Verizon has piloted an all IP system and has gone back to polish it some more.


Have you heard anything more about this? Last I heard, the entire managed IPTV project was dead after they killed the beta last year. I think Verizon (like AT&T) is moving on from the concept of managed IPTV in favor of a next-gen OTT service that can be deployed nationwide. Verizon is supposed to have their new OTT TV service ready in time to bundle it with fixed 5G home internet service in Sacramento in a few months.



Diana Collins said:


> Not only will new tuners be needed, the ATSC 3.0 tuners will be expensive, and there is a distinct possibility (some might say probability) that at least some ATSC 3.0 services will be monetized and so, again, TiVo can be left out in the cold because of conditional access control issues. Imagine a network affiliate offering a 480p or 720p feed on their "open" channel, but charging a monthly fee for access to the 4K feed (lacking congressional rule-making, there is nothing to stop them.


Remains to be seen how expensive these tuners will be. I think broadcast groups like Sinclair, Nexstar, etc. know that if 3.0 is going to succeed, they have to get tuners into consumers' hands. The concept of broadcaster-subsidized tuners has been floated in the past. We'll see. Anyhow, I'm doubtful that the main 3.0 feed of any major network is going to be as low as 480p. 1080p HDR has repeatedly been mentioned by networks and broadcast groups as the likely format for 3.0, at least in the first few years. I can imagine an upgrade to 4K (via a broadband-delivered upgrade signal) costing money, or at least an opt-in to targeted advertising.



Diana Collins said:


> Finally, OTT services like Netflix, Prime Video, etc. There is no reason to believe that the migration of entertainment to OTT/on-demand services will abate in any way. Over the long term more and more content will be sold that way. We could end up with Sports and News being the only thing NOT delivered strictly as on-demand. In that world, there are few people that even need a DVR, of any kind, shape or brand.
> 
> DVRs were a reaction to burgeoning advertising breaks and the availability of cheap digital video encoders. Cord cutting is a reaction to burgeoning cable rates. Both problems are addressed by On-Demand or PPV. That is were we are headed, and without some major event that changes the course of the market, it is a world that has no need of DVRs, TiVo or otherwise.


Yep. Well put.


----------



## series5orpremier (Jul 6, 2013)

By “any value you get out of them after that is gravy” I was mainly referring to the value of continuing to use them as DVRs for ASTC 1.0 broadcasts (effectively for free), which is what most people will be doing. Use them a total of ten years in your example, even if you throw them away afterwards, and the monthly cost drops to well below $3.50/month.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

JoeKustra said:


> We really really need a doom & gloom forum.


Humor in the TCF forums?! You risk the moderators kicking you off TCF.

Too funny.


----------



## foghorn2 (May 4, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> The problem with continuing to broadcast in ATSC 1.0 is that many stations will combine to broadcast on the same frequency for ATSC 1.0. While using their normal frequency to switch to ATSC 3.0. So stations will be even more bitstarved or might not even have an HD option for ATSC 1.0 any more.
> 
> So while you will technically be able to receive a broadcast with ATSC 1.0, it will be crap quality.


They pretty much are crap quality already!


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

CloudAtlas said:


> Humor in the TCF forums?! You risk the moderators kicking you off TCF.
> 
> Too funny.


 "I find your use of humor disturbing" #VADERLIVES


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

All kidding aside, going back to the original question, get the Tivo's ,technology migrations are never as fast as predictions and are gradual. Not to mention using external usb drives with boxes is it's own level of pain sometimes.


----------



## Intheswamp (Nov 15, 2017)

stile99 said:


> <snip>
> One final thought, in response to the idea that there is no reason to believe the migration to on demand will abate in any way...there are entire websites dedicated to the discussion of internet speed throttles and caps. If there is anything in all of this that is uncertain, it's exactly this issue. Even the supposed death of net neutrality (which itself is not an actual death, the issue is by NO means settled) has been delayed. Nobody can predict where this is going.


This is where I'm at...and where probably tens (hundreds?) of thousands more people are at. I live in a rural area with a single ISP...Centurystink,er,...link. No other choices unless I want to do a satellite subscription (No!). When we ended a decade's old relationship with DISH back at the first of the year I *upgraded* to the max DSL speed that Centurystink offered me....a blazing 3Mbps!!!! 3Mbps. Sheesh. Do you know how well that works for streaming content??? How well it works when someone is surfing the net and someone else is trying to stream a movie? How well it works on Centurystink's corroded copper lines when we get a light rain? I *can* stream shows, sometimes they stream good, sometimes they don't...it really panics my 2-1/2 year old granddaughter when suddenly "Sophia The First" suddenly has a spinning circle on the screen and the drama unfolding has stopped!!!! And live sports?...well, that's yet to be seen. I'm intending to subscribe to SlingTV this fall for college football...I've got a feeling that will be a decisive moment regarding streaming for me.

So, for me and people like me (both daughters and those thousands of other people) who are "speed challenged", OTT is/will not be a great thing...we still need OTA reception with things as they are. Of course the noble project to get "high-speed broadband internet to everyone"...well, I haven't heard much about that lately.

But, whatever the case on the above, I appreciate all of the feedback that has been given. I feel, from reading through the replies, that a Roamio OTA will be viable for several years to come so I most likely will be saving aluminum cans until the next Tivo sale comes up. We will see...


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

stile99 said:


> I know more than one person who got a TiVo explicitly for, and ONLY for, sports. Trickplay is a sports lover's dream. I'm going to have to disagree and say that saying the world of sports has no need for a DVR is as true a statement as the Earth is flat. While some people may believe it, the facts don't play out that way.
> 
> Exactly how and why DVRs came into existence can be disputed, but there were ways of recording TV and skipping commercials before it happened. The capacity was usually quite limited, and you HAD to watch the most recent recording to create space, or swap tapes. At the time of creation, the "killer app" of DVRs wasn't even increased capacity, but the ability to watch recordings "out of order", and the trickplay giving you control of Live TV as well.
> 
> ...


Being able to pause live TV, replay sections of sporting events, etc., are not dependent on a local DVR - that's just been the way it was supported in the last decade. This can all be done via IP (either multicast or OTT) with nothing more than a Roku or AppleTV box.

Yes, people used VCRs before DVRs. The use case for both were the same - to store and replay transient content. Skipping commercials, even with VCRs, was enough of a factor for the studios to sue (the oft-cited "Betamax Decision"). DVRs were just easier to use, and pausing live TV was a bonus.

We can certainly have a debate about the future of OTA broadcasting. But ATSC 3.0 is essentially IP distribution as well. I can easily see broadcasters becoming another source of wireless broadband. But whatever happens, you can count on them devoting as little effort and technology as possible to "free TV" (instead making it available on-demand - for a fee) and focusing instead on what carries a premium fee - broadcast advertising is becoming worthless to advertisers and so broadcasters need a new revenue stream to stay in business. So again, unless the broadcasters cooperate and actively support TiVo use with their content, I don't see a future for them there.

Finally, on the issue of "caps" and net neutrality. This is why net neutrality is so important. Without it, ISPs will negotiate contracts with the video distributors to pay for access to their network. (The users, of course, will end paying for it through higher fees for Netflix, Hulu, etc.) Once negotiated, that providers data will be zero rated (exempted from the cap).


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

foghorn2 said:


> They pretty much are crap quality already!


That really depends on the area. In mine they certainly don't look like they did in 2001. My HD recordings from back then look superb. But they still look decent in my area today. Easily much better than the cable channels on FiOS and Comcast in my area.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

series5orpremier said:


> By "any value you get out of them after that is gravy" I was mainly referring to the value of continuing to use them as DVRs for ASTC 1.0 broadcasts (effectively for free), which is what most people will be doing. Use them a total of ten years in your example, even if you throw them away afterwards, and the monthly cost drops to well below $3.50/month.


Yes. As I said, the longer you use it, the less your monthly cost of ownership. Use it for 30 years and your monthly cost drops down to about a dollar, ha! Although I wouldn't bet that all of your major local stations with be broadcasting in HD on ATSC 1.0 in 10 years from now, much less 30. I picked a 3-yr timeframe because that's not a huge commitment and I doubt anything bad will happen with ATSC 1.0 in that amount of time. Perhaps we'll see some SD subchannels disappear on ATSC 1.0 by mid-2021, and overall picture quality drop on some channels, but then those things can and do already happen anyhow, even before the start of ATSC 3.0.



Intheswamp said:


> This is where I'm at...and where probably tens (hundreds?) of thousands more people are at. I live in a rural area with a single ISP...Centurystink,er,...link. No other choices unless I want to do a satellite subscription (No!).


Keep an eye on T-Mobile. Awhile back, they acquired a bunch of lower frequency (600 MHz) wireless spectrum, the kind that travels well over long distances. This is poised to finally make them a competitor in rural markets. They're already deploying new towers that give them coverage across big chunks of rural America.

One of the things they want to do with their wireless network is offer a streaming TV service, which is supposed to launch later this year. T-Mobile TV will be available to use with any internet connection but I'm sure they'll offer to bundle it in with their mobile phone service. It wouldn't surprise me, though, if they sell the TV service packaged with access via their wireless network specifically for home use -- i.e., stick a T-Mobile antenna in your window and connect a small T-Mobile box to your TVs and you can stream T-Mobile TV for a set monthly price without worrying about how much data you're using.

As the T-Mobile CEO said in the recent Sprint acquisition announcement, there are three business lines that are increasingly merging: wireless mobile phone, home broadband/internet, and TV. AT&T and Verizon are already players in all three. Comcast and Charter cable have traditionally just done the latter two but they're getting into mobile service now too. So I think T-Mobile likewise plans to compete in all three areas. Maybe it'll be an option where you live by the end of this year...


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

It's interesting that in all the predictions of the future, some of them acting as if it has already happened and is set in stone, nobody has mentioned 5G. 5G will change the entire game. The players, the way it is played, everything. And no I don't mean the fake Gen5 Dish is advertising. Depending exactly how it plays out, the laughable 3Mbps may become a much better 3Gbps. (Although expectations should be kept low for the third-world backwater that is the US internet...maybe expect speeds of around 500Mbps to be common at first.) Of course, this is one of the technologies TiVo is not currently equipped to handle, but if one believes IP is the unarguable future method of delivery, 5G has a seat at the table, if not the head.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

5G is not a miracle as people will find out when it rolls out in the real world, most cell phone companies don't have consistent 4g service. 5g is a part of the puzzle but the puzzle has 300 pieces. Wireless has it's own set of problems. In 5 years we'll still be arguing about this.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

I think there is a bright future in the OTA market, plus TiVo has it's patent troll-ish stuff going on too that generates lots of cash for doing nothing. CableCard will die with IP, but cable itself is dying too. Local DVRs are already much less important, and will become so as the good content has mostly moved to OTT SVOD, with some on OTA. However, with OTA, DVRs are critical, so smaller, lower priced DVRs have a future with OTA.

How OTA plays out depends on how many channels convert to ATSC 3.0 and when that happens. Some big broadcasters have talked a lot about 3.0, but I'm still not convinced there is going to be any widespread transition, since it costs a lot of money to give away a free product to more people, which makes no business sense. As much as I love new tech, I full acknowledge that the best business move for the broadcasters is to stay on 1.0, do nothing to improve coverage, and let cable and vMVPDs pay retrans fees to serve customers who can't get a 1.0 signal.



series5orpremier said:


> The crap quality comment above is not a given and would likely only apply to the very largest markets if it comes to fruition. I don't believe small and mid size markets are likely to see any worse picture quality on ATSC 1.0 than they currently have.


This is just not true. It varies widely by market and channel, and some have already repacked in markets large and small alike. In fact, the highest bitrate channels are usually O&O in large markets, but other channels are sharing. The original channel shares are all in very small markets, but now it's showing up in big markets too. So it depends on the market, as pretty much every one is a different situation.



Diana Collins said:


> Imagine a network affiliate offering a 480p or 720p feed on their "open" channel, but charging a monthly fee for access to the 4K feed (lacking congressional rule-making, there is nothing to stop them.


If they start pulling crap like that, then OTA is basically dead.


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Diana Collins said:


> Comcast (the largest cable company in the nation) has already announced plans to move to all IP delivery.


Cite? I've never seen anything official from Comcast on this. Agree that it will probably happen but it's all been speculation as to when/if they will do it.

And how long QAM delivery will last is equally subject to speculation.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

slowbiscuit said:


> Cite? I've never seen anything official from Comcast on this. Agree that it will probably happen but it's all been speculation as to when/if they will do it.
> 
> And how long QAM delivery will last is equally subject to speculation.


Last year Comcast announced they would be very aggressive in switching to IP delivery. And claimed they would switch within a year or so. But that never happened.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

The use of technology/future technology is a lot like restaurants in a small town not near a big city...It's what you can find vs. what you want sometimes.


----------



## Furmaniac (Apr 3, 2018)

Diana Collins said:


> Being able to pause live TV, replay sections of sporting events, etc., are not dependent on a local DVR - that's just been the way it was supported in the last decade. This can all be done via IP (either multicast or OTT) with nothing more than a Roku or AppleTV box.
> 
> Yes, people used VCRs before DVRs. The use case for both were the same - to store and replay transient content. Skipping commercials, even with VCRs, was enough of a factor for the studios to sue (the oft-cited "Betamax Decision"). DVRs were just easier to use, and pausing live TV was a bonus.
> 
> ...


Before the quiz show Scandal of 1960, advertisers used to own the TV shows and their ads were integrated in the show. Looking at unedited reruns of the Jack Benny show and others and you'll see what I mean. Listen to Burns and Allen radio shows on Sirius XM and you'll see what I mean.
That was prohibited after the quiz show scandals because the sponsors wanted to fake the shows and Congress made a law that sponsors cannot own shows anymore. However we all know that advertisers pay for spots in movies to show their ketchup or their beer or whatever faces camera. The only thing that will save Free TV is for advertisers to be able to integrate their products into the show as they did in the 1950s. They wouldn't be able to own the show but they could advertise as part of the story ... only that will save Free TV.


Diana Collins said:


> Being able to pause live TV, replay sections of sporting events, etc., are not dependent on a local DVR - that's just been the way it was supported in the last decade. This can all be done via IP (either multicast or OTT) with nothing more than a Roku or AppleTV box.
> 
> Yes, people used VCRs before DVRs. The use case for both were the same - to store and replay transient content. Skipping commercials, even with VCRs, was enough of a factor for the studios to sue (the oft-cited "Betamax Decision"). DVRs were just easier to use, and pausing live TV was a bonus.
> 
> ...


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> Last year Comcast announced they would be very aggressive in switching to IP delivery. And claimed they would switch within a year or so. But that never happened.


Cite? Coming up with Instant TV (or whatever they're calling it) has nothing to do with the future of QAM.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Light reading: Comcast: All-IP Video Target Is Q1 | Light Reading

It's from the internet so it must be true.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

JoeKustra said:


> Light reading: Comcast: All-IP Video Target Is Q1 | Light Reading
> 
> It's from the internet so it must be true.


That's unfortunate. So as of 2016 our TiVo's won't work any more?


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

JoeKustra said:


> Light reading: Comcast: All-IP Video Target Is Q1 | Light Reading
> 
> It's from the internet so it must be true.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> That's unfortunate. So as of 2016 our TiVo's won't work any more?


That story was true. Comcast has had an all-IP system in place for years now and, as that story predicted, that all-IP system is now operational across Comcast's entire footprint. (The headline of the story was that the all-IP system would be extended to the last bits of Comcast's geographic footprint in Q1 2016.)

But it's important to understand what "all-IP" means. Comcast essentially runs their entire TV system -- all linear channels, DVR, on-demand -- simultaneously on two different delivery tracks. One is the traditional QAM system (with local DVR) and the other system is "all-IP" (with cloud DVR). Some screens (e.g. TVs with an old pre-X1 STB or a TiVo) are 100% served by the QAM system. Some screens (e.g. TVs with a Roku or phones/tablets/computers) are 100% served by the newer "all-IP" system. Some screens (e.g. TVs with an X1 STB) are served by a hybrid combo of both system.

I can understand how one would misconstrue the term "all-IP" in the headline to mean "no more QAM, only IP". It doesn't mean that. All the story says:

_To be clear, this does not mean that all of Comcast's subscribers will receive their pay-TV services in IP in the near term. There is still a large base of legacy set-tops in the field, and Comcast Corp. (Nasdaq: CMCSA, CMCSK) will continue to deliver QAM-based video for some time to come._

Rather, "all-IP" means that it's a complete delivery system -- offering all of Comcast's content across its entire footprint -- that relies only on IP, not on QAM. But it's not their ONLY delivery system. That's the $64k question: how long will Comcast continue to devote resources to operating two parallel delivery systems before they kill off the traditional QAM system?


----------



## brimorga (Oct 22, 2016)

Tivo keeps me locked into Comcast and I'm pretty content. I bet there is more brand loyalty to cable via tivo users then non-tivo users.

If they blow it up, I'll probably look at going back to satellite or streaming only plans. Something for the cable co's to consider.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

brimorga said:


> Tivo keeps me locked into Comcast and I'm pretty content. I bet there is more brand loyalty to cable via tivo users then non-tivo users.
> 
> If they blow it up, I'll probably look at going back to satellite or streaming only plans. Something for the cable co's to consider.


My thoughts as well. We have Gig AT&T in my neighborhood but Tivo is what keeps me from switching. If I had to pay for digital outlets and all the other fees to Comcast I would think hard.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I'm pretty much stuck with Comcast anyway, since I live in a condo and have no access to satellite dishes or other providers. So the fact that Comcast and TiVo go together is a major bonus. If they "split up," I'd have to stick with Comcast. Which would well and truly suck.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

gigaquad said:


> On the CableCard vs IP delivery thing, didn't the FCC decide that cable companies MUST support set-top boxes way back in the early 2000's? If the stupid, buggy, horrible implementation known as CableCards go away and the FCC upholds its ruling that set-top boxes are a consumer right, then I'm sure Tivo will have a solution. I'm not the least bit worried as of this moment.
> 
> Edit: After further research, Tivo has been in talks (and agreements) since 2014 with Comcast to deliver IP content to Tivos. And Comcast agreed to provide CCs up until the delivery method could be standardized.


DVRs are a niche and standalone DVRs with 4 or more tuners even more of a niche.

Comcast aggressively pushes their X1 and it's sufficient for most people. They eventually get raped on the service charges, after their initial promo deal runs out. But it allows people to avoid spending high 3-figure or even 4 figure to get a Tivo setup for their home.

So for the people who stay with cable, most either don't bother with DVRs or get whatever the cable company offers them, even if they spend $300 a year on DVR fees.

For cord-cutters, there is no need for DVRs (well I would argue there always is) but maybe there could be a niche that captures streams and then allows you to FF through commercials. Though I don't know why a service like Hulu, which has commercials in their lowest subscription tier, would offer a client for such products.

If the US ever gets last-mile competition, then the stranglehold of the cable companies may loosen. Supposedly AT&T and Verizon will be offering home 5G in a couple of years. That could accelerate cord-cutting, as people can cut off any relationships with cable companies at that point.

But that assumes 5G will be as fast as advertised and priced competitively, without caps. With 4K HDR streaming, caps can start to become an issue. Of course the 5G providers will also try to sell TV packages along with the data.

However it may be wishful thinking to expect disruption in the home Internet market. If it comes though, companies like Tivo will have to find a business model.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

wco81 said:


> For cord-cutters, there is no need for DVRs (well I would argue there always is) . . . .


But of course there is.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

wco81 said:


> If the US ever gets last-mile competition, then the stranglehold of the cable companies may loosen. Supposedly AT&T and Verizon will be offering home 5G in a couple of years. That could accelerate cord-cutting, as people can cut off any relationships with cable companies at that point.
> 
> But that assumes 5G will be as fast as advertised and priced competitively, without caps. With 4K HDR streaming, caps can start to become an issue. Of course the 5G providers will also try to sell TV packages along with the data.


Verizon is saying that they will launch 5G home internet service in Sacramento, plus maybe a couple more markets, before the end of this year (likely in Nov. or Dec.). We'll probably see AT&T do the same late this year or early 2019, although I don't think AT&T is going to be as aggressive about using 5G for home service as Verizon; AT&T's main focus will remain expanding their fiber-to-the-home network. I do expect that 5G home internet will be priced to compete against cable broadband and the competition will be good for consumers.

Here's the Samsung equipment that Verizon will use for 5G home service:
Samsung's 5G Home Router Hits the FCC, Gets Verizon a Step Closer...


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

Mikeguy said:


> But of course there is.


Some people insist the only true cord cutting is OTA, in which case saying there is no need for a DVR is just plain silly. However, even when the definition is expanded to include streaming, even then a DVR is quite useful. The programs aren't 'recorded', of course, making the R part irrelevant, but one of the good things about the TiVo interface is it will bookmark and maintain 'season passes' for streaming. So you can set up a onepass for, for example, Stranger Things, and it is right there in the familiar interface. When you are done watching an episode, you 'delete' it, and you still know where you left off because the rest are still listed.

I find the people who keep insisting there is no need for a DVR for the most part use their DVR one way and won't acknowledge that perhaps someone else uses theirs in a different way.


----------

