# Series 6 TiVo ULTRA UHDTV, UD



## zerdian1

I believe we will be seeing a new series of DVRs from TiVo using the new UHDTV 4K format.
I suspect it will probably look similar to the Roamio.
It will probably only have 6 tuners.
I do not know if it will be a device with about 6TB internal storage.
they may use some of the RAID technology of the MEGA with its hot swapable drives and RAID guarantee not to lose any data or programs even in the presence of a failed disk or fatal disk error.


----------



## mrizzo80

Welcome to the forums. Did you really work on the moon landings?


----------



## bradleys

Tivo may choose to release a minor updated Roamio model that can support UHD from streaming providers some time in the future - but 4k from cable is still a very, very long time away.

I actually expect them to wait and see what happens with the mpeg4 conversions (providers may skip this codec) to ensure the future state is covered.

All that said - no, a new series tivo is still a long way out.


----------



## slowbiscuit

LOL, 4K DVR for cable.

April Fools was a month ago, man.


----------



## telemark

What's the controversy- There's a press release.
http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=s870350


----------



## bradleys

I read that back in September... It doesn't change the fact that the only source for 4k content in the foreseeable future will be streaming providers.

I do see TiVo providing a minor series update with 4k capabilities, but once again the driver will be streaming services such as Netflix - not Linear cable or even broadcast TV.

I also suspsect this would be considered a minor update and still considered a Series 5 Roamio TiVo.

As for the other predictions, larger har drives are easy, but I don't suspect raid in anything but the Mega.

It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.


----------



## b-ball-fanatic

bradleys said:


> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.


Yeesh....Say it ain't so.


----------



## atmuscarella

bradleys said:


> I read that back in September... It doesn't change the fact that the only source for 4k content in the foreseeable future will be streaming providers.


And every new 4K TV will have those service built in so why would someone buy a TiVo just to duplicate them. Next up is likely going to be 4K blu-ray and 4K from the satellite companies but right now TiVo can not play in the satellite market. Son unless TiVo is going to release a 4K DVR with built in 4K blu-ray what's the point, at least until we get closer to 4K cable or OTA?

Now if Netflix/Amazon/Vudu allowed 4K downloads to a TiVo that might be worth something to people buying a 4K TV with to slow or less reliable Internet access (I think I read somewhere you will need about a 20Mbps stream for high quality 4K).


----------



## astrohip

bradleys said:


> It actually wouldn't surprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.


Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.

Zero. Chance.


----------



## atmuscarella

astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.
> 
> Zero. Chance.


I agree near zero chance. Where TiVo may find a home for a cloud DVR is with their MSO customers. There is allot of logic in a cable company moving their DVRs out of their customers homes and to the cloud.


----------



## bradleys

Streaming services are never going to allow downloadable content - they are desperately trying to get away from distributed content to control piracy - no, that will never happen.

@astrohip - TiVo is trying to consolidate legacy cable with modern streaming services. More and more content is going to be delivered via IP mechanisms. TiVo absolutely will include the new 4k Broadcom ship to support these and future streaming services. And as I said, it will be a minor update.

Why would you guys think TiVo would give up on the streaming services they have spent so much energy trying to deliver? That makes no sense.

As for the DVR in the cloud, it won't be that long and all content will be streaming only - maybe, 10 or 15 years and we will be migrating in earnest to cloud based / stream based on demand content.

Believe it or not, you are living in the glory days of content... It won't continue forever.


----------



## Mikeguy

astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.
> 
> Zero. Chance.


You mean, from the company that just (secretly) got rid of the Downloads Manager and has been playing passive aggressive on that issue, forcing people to stream the downloaded content instead? That company wouldn't go stream?

I find that hard to see as well, but, just sayin' . . . .


----------



## LoveGardenia

A cloud service from major studios in Hollywood?? I don't think so. As Apple has proven a cloud service can and will be hacked. Do you think those major studios would allow a cloud base service to be offered by any tv service that requires High Speed internet?


----------



## bradleys

What do you think Ultraviolet is? (Accessed via Vudu on the TiVo)


----------



## L David Matheny

bradleys said:


> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.





astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.


I absolutely agree. DVRs are to record content (on local hard drives) for later viewing, with commercial skipping, etc. If that goes away, then TiVo goes away. I hope they understand that.


----------



## bradleys

I don't think TiVo will abandon the local storage DVR, I think linear cable will abandon them...

Like Netflix, Vudu, Sling and the new Apple content service - their wont be anything for your TiVo to download.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/15...cost-below-40-to-compete-with-cable-providers

http://www.gizmag.com/sony-playstation-vue-details/36607/


----------



## LoveGardenia

bradleys said:


> What do you think Ultraviolet is? (Accessed via Vudu on the TiVo)


I forgot about that service.. my mistake.


----------



## Dan203

There will be no broadcast UHD anytime in the near future. Even with HEVC it's still going to require 25-30Mbps for UHD, which is more then ATSC even supports and would require an entire QAM on cable. I suspect it will be at least 2 more years before we start to see even prototype channels and at least 5 before there are enough to warrant a UHD DVR.


----------



## DG3

zerdian1 said:


> It will probably _only_ have 6 tuners.


I think people will somehow manage.


----------



## b-ball-fanatic

bradleys said:


> *I don't think TiVo will abandon the local storage DVR, I think linear cable will abandon them...*
> 
> Like Netflix, Vudu, Sling and the new Apple content service - their wont be anything for your TiVo to download.


Yeah, I think that's really the heart of it. TiVo isn't calling the shots here....they're just trying to keep up with an evolving landscape. Like music distribution before it, video distribution is rapidly becoming a streaming, on-demand, IP-based model. (Those of us with cable may one day look like our parents with their quaint landlines and long-distances plans.....)


----------



## atmuscarella

bradleys said:


> Streaming services are never going to allow downloadable content - they are desperately trying to get away from distributed content to control piracy - no, that will never happen.


I agree it is not going to happen but downloadable 4K content is about the only reason I see for having a 4K TiVo now, other wise TiVo might just as well wait until something else justifies a new DVR.



bradleys said:


> @astrohip - TiVo is trying to consolidate legacy cable with modern streaming services. More and more content is going to be delivered via IP mechanisms. TiVo absolutely will include the new 4k Broadcom ship to support these and future streaming services. And as I said, it will be a minor update.
> 
> Why would you guys think TiVo would give up on the streaming services they have spent so much energy trying to deliver? That makes no sense.


Why would a person buying a 4K TV that has all 4K streaming services built in spend money on a new TiVo if they already own a Roamio? I agree TiVo will go this route but there is little reason to rush unless the cost is no more than what they are selling now.



bradleys said:


> As for the DVR in the cloud, it won't be that long and all content will be streaming only - maybe, 10 or 15 years and we will be migrating in earnest to cloud based / stream based on demand content.
> 
> Believe it or not, you are living in the glory days of content... It won't continue forever.


I am afraid you maybe right. The deal I/we have now is too good to last long term. But I do not see anything changing in the near future that would indicate that TiVo next gen hardware isn't going to be anything but a further evolution of what we have now.


----------



## davezatz

LoveGardenia said:


> A cloud service from major studios in Hollywood?? I don't think so.


Cablevision, Charter, and others have been doing variations of cloud DVR for awhile. Some with cloud-based UIs, some with cloud-based storage. That battle has been fought and won.

Cloud storage for TiVo over Internet doesn't make much sense in retail for a lot of reasons. Cloud sotrage over a cable providers managed network could make sense for many other reasons, including things like reducing technician service visits and repair.


----------



## bradleys

atmuscarella said:


> Why would a person buying a 4K TV that has all 4K streaming services built in spend money on a new TiVo if they already own a Roamio? I agree TiVo will go this route but there is little reason to rush unless the cost is no more than what they are selling now. .


I look at Apps on a TV in the same way as I look at built in navigation in a car. The moment you drive off the lot, the maps are out of date!

The app engine on a TV is always going to lag behind the latest and greatest streaming devices. A TV just stays in place too long - I would rather TV's just do what they are designed to do.

Your argument holds water when talking about cheap streaming boxes... They get updated regularly and are cheap to upgrade for the next bigger and better model.

TiVo offers a pretty compelling option with convenience of a single input, but I think they made a mistake partnering with Opera as opposed to somebody like Google / Android.

Once Linear Cable dies - the number of Streaming options are going to explode - I would expect a combination of Google, Apple or even potentially Microsoft to dominate the future of content delivery.


----------



## sangs

bradleys said:


> I look at Apps on a TV in the same way as I look at built in navigation in a car. The moment you drive off the lot, the maps are out of date!
> 
> The app engine on a TV is always going to lag behind the latest and greatest streaming devices. A TV just stays in place too long - I would rather TV's just do what they are designed to do.


Our LG 4K TV updates its apps quite frequently - the ones that I care about anyway. And they all run more smoothly then they do on our Roamio Pro.


----------



## bradleys

sangs said:


> Our LG 4K TV updates its apps quite frequently - the ones that I care about anyway. And they all run more smoothly then they do on our Roamio Pro.


How long do you plan on keeping that 4k TV? Do you think the app engine in that 4K TV is going to be relevant at 50% of the effective life of that TV?


----------



## sangs

bradleys said:


> How long do you plan on keeping that 4k TV? Do you think the app engine in that 4K TV is going to be relevant at 50% of the effective life of that TV?


Well considering LG is also upgrading the software on these sets from webOS 1.0 to webOS 2.0 - for free - I've no reason to think they won't keep at it with the lesser apps. Besides, what great innovations are Netflix, Amazon, Vudu and Pandora going to implement in their streaming apps to make them so superior to the current versions? I'm watching 4K video through those apps right now. Some cosmetic interface change certainly isn't going to ruin my enjoyment. And I plan on keeping it for a while. It's 79-inches of UHD glory.


----------



## bradleys

sangs said:


> Well considering LG is also upgrading the software on these sets from webOS 1.0 to webOS 2.0 - for free - I've no reason to think they won't keep at it with the lesser apps. Besides, what great innovations are Netflix, Amazon, Vudu and Pandora going to implement in their streaming apps to make them so superior to the current versions? I'm watching 4K video through those apps right now. Some cosmetic interface change certainly isn't going to ruin my enjoyment. And I plan on keeping it for a while. It's 79-inches of UHD glory.


I am sure you made a good purchase and will love your TV for a long time.


----------



## sangs

bradleys said:


> I am sure you made a good purchase and will love your TV for a long time.


I'd better if I know what's good for me.


----------



## astrohip

bradleys said:


> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.
> 
> 
> astrohip said:
> 
> 
> 
> Zero chance.
Click to expand...

Many of you replied to my reply with something along the lines of "it's the future" and similar thoughts.

I don't disagree that streaming will become more important as time goes on. But my reply was to a very specific statement: "the *next *Series TiVo".

The next TiVo (S6?) will not be cloud based. Zero. Chance. (Is there an echo in here?). Someday, maybe. But not the next one.


----------



## Diana Collins

Well, I doubt TiVo will release a new hardware series until a successor to Cablecard is selected and starts to be deployed. You may see an "Ultra Roamio" that can play streaming UHD content, and you may see larger storage, but it will still be a series 5 box. I wouldn't expect to see a series 6 until late 2016, at the earliest.


----------



## atmuscarella

bradleys said:


> I look at Apps on a TV in the same way as I look at built in navigation in a car. The moment you drive off the lot, the maps are out of date!
> 
> The app engine on a TV is always going to lag behind the latest and greatest streaming devices. A TV just stays in place too long - I would rather TV's just do what they are designed to do.
> 
> Your argument holds water when talking about cheap streaming boxes... They get updated regularly and are cheap to upgrade for the next bigger and better model.
> 
> TiVo offers a pretty compelling option with convenience of a single input, but I think they made a mistake partnering with Opera as opposed to somebody like Google / Android.
> 
> Once Linear Cable dies - the number of Streaming options are going to explode - I would expect a combination of Google, Apple or even potentially Microsoft to dominate the future of content delivery.


I think we are pretty much in agreement. The main difference is what time period we are looking at. I am looking at this year and maybe next year and saying I see no need for a 4K TiVo. If I look past that I certainly see a need for 4K TiVo.

For me it still comes down to price if TiVo can produce a 4K Roamio Pro for about the same price of the current Pro model then it may make sense to produce a 4K unit now as that might allow them to continue to sell the Pro with a large price premium. If the cost is high now then they need to wait until some future hardware update to move to 4K.

What is unknown for now is if people buying high end 4K TVs will be looking for a DVR that can do cable or OTA or just a 4K streaming box. As neither cable or OTA are likely to be providing 4K content anytime soon it will be interesting to see if 4K TVs encourage people to "cut the cord" and move to streaming faster than people without 4K TVs or not.


----------



## telemark

Perhaps semantics, but the Ultra Tivo in the Press Release would be a new platform. It's substantially different than the Roamio line and I'd call it the biggest hardware change since the S2 vs S3 upgrade..


----------



## wmcbrine

telemark said:


> Perhaps semantics, but the Ultra Tivo in the Press Release would be a new platform. It's substantially different than the Roamio line and I'd call it the biggest hardware change since the S2 vs S3 upgrade..


Yeah, I'm not understanding these people calling it a "minor update".


----------



## atmuscarella

telemark said:


> Perhaps semantics, but the Ultra Tivo in the Press Release would be a new platform. It's substantially different than the Roamio line and I'd call it the biggest hardware change since the S2 vs S3 upgrade..


Having a large storage array doesn't mean it is a different platform. There is a good chance it is running on the same basic hardware (processor/memory etc.). Has anyone released anything about it other than the storage?


----------



## telemark

So the switch mentioned in the PR is from MIPS to ARM, which is the processor embedded in almost every smart phone (Android and iphone) and most streamers.

It would make it easier for TiVo to support Android apps like FireTV does, if they're convinced they should.


----------



## bradleys

wmcbrine said:


> Yeah, I'm not understanding these people calling it a "minor update".


I suppose it depends. If all we are talking about is the upgrade of a chip that would decode UHD for streaming services - then I don't see that as a series level release.

If they consolidate other changes / improvements, then maybe - but I don't see it. At least not in the near term. (24 to 36 months)


----------



## bradleys

telemark said:


> So the switch mentioned in the PR is from MIPS to ARM, which is the processor embedded in almost every smart phone (Android and iphone) and most streamers.
> 
> It would be easy for TiVo to support Android apps like FireTV does, if they're convinced they should.


I have said several times, a partnership with android would be a smart move - and yes, that would be significant.


----------



## zerdian1

mrizzo80 said:


> Welcome to the forums. Did you really work on the moon landings?


Yes
I did work on the moon landings, space missions manned and unmanned, space stations.
over time I became Chief Scientist in the government.


----------



## zerdian1

bradleys said:


> Tivo may choose to release a minor updated Roamio model that can support UHD from streaming providers some time in the future - but 4k from cable is still a very, very long time away.
> 
> I actually expect them to wait and see what happens with the mpeg4 conversions (providers may skip this codec) to ensure the future state is covered.
> 
> All that said - no, a new series tivo is still a long way out.


did you get pyTiVo to work on OSX 10.10?
I have not been able to find one that will load on OSX 10.10


----------



## telemark

There's a pytivo thread somewhere around here.

The curl that comes with 10.10 no longer works with Tivo's.
Any tools that depend on curl needs a patch, or curl rebuild.


----------



## zerdian1

TiVo is now 16 years old and next year will be the 17th.
TiVo has a new series about each 3 years, and we will be about ready in Jan 2016.
I still expect TiVo to introduce TiVo ULTRA around Christmas.
It may be a Roamio as you say, but I think each time TiVo introduced a new format, they made a new series.
I have seen 4K videos being ofered from my Dish Network Hoppers for movies last year.
Since the only thing I had that could utilize the 4K was my new (last year) 5K iMac. I did not select to see it. The price was higher than the 3D movies and about double what my HDTV movies were. I can not believe that ComCast and other cable organizations would leave Dish the only one offering UHDTV for very long.

But if I am going to go the Way of MEGA for $5K, I want to wait until Ultra comes out with the high capacity with all the new formats, so I will then get an TiVo ULTRA MEGA whether it is series 6 (ULTRA) or series 5 (Roamio).



bradleys said:


> Tivo may choose to release a minor updated Roamio model that can support UHD from streaming providers some time in the future - but 4k from cable is still a very, very long time away.
> 
> I actually expect them to wait and see what happens with the mpeg4 conversions (providers may skip this codec) to ensure the future state is covered.
> 
> All that said - no, a new series tivo is still a long way out.


----------



## telemark

If I were designing Mega, I'd make the motherboard and storage system separate so that the main system could be upgraded every few years.

As you point out, the way the have it now, many buyers would prefer to hold off on it.


----------



## gamo62

Dan203 said:


> There will be no broadcast UHD anytime in the near future. Even with HEVC it's still going to require 25-30Mbps for UHD, which is more then ATSC even supports and would require an entire QAM on cable. I suspect it will be at least 2 more years before we start to see even prototype channels and at least 5 before there are enough to warrant a UHD DVR.


By that time 8k will be the norm.


----------



## rainwater

astrohip said:


> The next TiVo (S6?) will not be cloud based. Zero. Chance. (Is there an echo in here?). Someday, maybe. But not the next one.


Actually, TiVo has spent the last year talking about nothing but their cloud service to MSOs. It is hard to imagine a scenario where they release new hardware in the next year that doesn't support it.


----------



## Dan203

gamo62 said:


> By that time 8k will be the norm.


8k is 4x the resolution of 4k, and HEVC is the best codec we've got right now. So we'd be looking at streams in the 100-120Mbs range. No way that's going to be "the norm" any time soon.


----------



## bradleys

zerdian1 said:


> TiVo is now 16 years old and next year will be the 17th.
> TiVo has a new series about each 3 years, and we will be about ready in Jan 2016.
> I still expect TiVo to introduce TiVo ULTRA around Christmas.
> It may be a Roamio as you say, but I think each time TiVo introduced a new format, they made a new series.
> I have seen 4K videos being ofered from my Dish Network Hoppers for movies last year.
> Since the only thing I had that could utilize the 4K was my new (last year) 5K iMac. I did not select to see it. The price was higher than the 3D movies and about double what my HDTV movies were. I can not believe that ComCast and other cable organizations would leave Dish the only one offering UHDTV for very long.
> 
> But if I am going to go the Way of MEGA for $5K, I want to wait until Ultra comes out with the high capacity with all the new formats, so I will then get an TiVo ULTA MEGA whether it is series 6 or series 5 (Roamio).


I just don't see a model change for another 24+ months and when we do get it 4k will not be the driving factor. If tivo smartens up and adopts android as their app service - then I can see a model change.

Dish and cable are different worlds. They don't have the bandwidth to handle 4k, hell they don't have the bandwidth to handle their current offerings.

I was reading a while back about the transition the mpg4 and that the cable providers might skip that codec and drop to another one (slips my mind). If that happened then it would drive a hardware change for tivo and warrant a model change... But 4k will only be available via steaming services like Netflix - and as long as that is true - is see no driving force for tivo to push out a new model.


----------



## Dan203

How would adopting Andorid as their app platform be smartening up? The Opera Store may not be the best, but HTML5 apps are a good choice for TV platforms because the apps are commonly available and the overhead to run them is relatively low. There are very few Android apps actually designed for a 10' UI with support for a remote. Plus Android apps run at a lower level so there is more chance that a poorly written app could take down the whole system, and TiVo's first priority should be to protect the main DVR system from rogue apps.


----------



## series5orpremier

I agree TiVo wouldn't be able to use the term "4K" for much more than marketing. Perhaps they could include a short 4k demonstration video(s) on a larger capacity hard drive, and perhaps that demonstration video(s) could be refreshed periodically by direct downloads from TiVo with the program data, but I don't think smart consumers would pay a premium for that nor be compelled to replace their current Roamios.


----------



## wmcbrine

telemark said:


> There's a pytivo thread somewhere around here.
> 
> The curl that comes with 10.10 no longer works with Tivo's.
> Any tools that depend on curl needs a patch, or curl rebuild.


pyTivo does not depend on curl.

I of course use OS X 10.10 myself as my main development platform, and I'm typing this from it right now. So yeah, pyTivo works on it.


----------



## Mikeguy

zerdian1 said:


> Yes
> I did work on the moon landings, space missions manned and unmanned, space stations.
> over time I became Chief Scientist in the government.


Off-topic, but:

You did a great job in designing the sets for the moon landings. And unlike in the movie "Gravity," you got the hair right in simulating astronauts in zero-gravity. 

On a separate note, a sincere thank-you for your laudable efforts, advancing our understandings and technologies, and stimulating our beliefs and imaginations. Especially in these days of unrest, it is achievements such as those that make one proud and make it worthwhile. :up:


----------



## astrohip

rainwater said:


> Actually, TiVo has spent the last year talking about nothing but their cloud service to MSOs. It is hard to imagine a scenario where they release new hardware in the next year that doesn't support it.


There is a difference between "supporting it" and being cloud based.


----------



## bradleys

Dan203 said:


> How would adopting Andorid as their app platform be smartening up? The Opera Store may not be the best, but HTML5 apps are a good choice for TV platforms because the apps are commonly available and the overhead to run them is relatively low. There are very few Android apps actually designed for a 10' UI with support for a remote. Plus Android apps run at a lower level so there is more chance that a poorly written app could take down the whole system, and TiVo's first priority should be to protect the main DVR system from rogue apps.


TiVo doesn't do apps... If Microsoft has taught us anything, Developers do not want to support too many app platforms. You would think that html5 would be generic enough for TiVo to remain independent, bi put we can all see they simply lag behind.

Fire TV won't lag behind for anything! If TiVo could were to leverage that same platform and develop an android compliant platform, they wouldn't have to waste time negotiating with content providers / testing new products.

I believe TiVo should focus on what they are good at and partner to extend services. They chose to do that with Opera - unfortunately that really doesn't generate a lot of value for them.


----------



## Dan203

But most Smart TVs and BD players with apps are also transitioning to HTML5, so this is becoming the norm. The biggest cause of delays when deploying apps for TiVo is the fact that they like to integrate them into search and OnePass. Switching to Android wouldn't change that. TiVo is one of only a few devices with a unified search across apps, and from my experience it is the best at it. That level of of integration requires extra work regardless of which language an app is written in.


----------



## zerdian1

I have not heard about the moon landing sets since Capricorn One days.

So when China or India go to the Moon in the near future, will they also use Hollywood sets or Hong Kong or Bollywood sets?

Hopefully, The USA NASA will be on our way to Mars in a decade. Needs Public support to get Administrative and Congressional support. Probably needs a space race with someone to get everyone to support it.

Once Russia Failed to get to Moon and gave up on going to the Moon, The Space Race was over. The USA cancelled Apollo 18, 19 and 20 missions. the three Saturn V rockets are still unused, except as museum pieces. The Space Shuttle was only to get to the space station as a stepping stone to get to Mars. In 30 years of the space shuttle no Mars program ever got off the ground.



Mikeguy said:


> Off-topic, but:
> 
> You did a great job in designing the sets for the moon landings. And unlike in the movie "Gravity," you got the hair right in simulating astronauts in zero-gravity.
> 
> On a separate note, a sincere thank-you for your laudable efforts, advancing our understandings and technologies, and stimulating our beliefs and imaginations. Especially in these days of unrest, it is achievements such as those that make one proud and make it worthwhile. :up:


----------



## poppagene

bradleys said:


> Tivo may choose to release a minor updated Roamio model that can support UHD from streaming providers some time in the future - but 4k from cable is still a very, very long time away.
> 
> I actually expect them to wait and see what happens with the mpeg4 conversions (providers may skip this codec) to ensure the future state is covered.
> 
> All that said - no, a new series tivo is still a long way out.


Wouldn't the tivo need to support HDCP 2.2 and HDMI 2.0 in order to stream UHD content to a UHD tv set?


----------



## zerdian1

TiVo just had its best year ever with earnings, with profit, with MSOs at a new high, with less churn.

TiVo has already done the R&D for MEGA (2Q15) and for ULTRA (4Q15/1Q16) and ULTRA MEGA (3Q16?). Why do you think there was so much storage in MEGA in the first place. They had to marry RAID and ROAMIO and get out of the single disk limitations. WD has dropped eSATA External DVR Expansion Disk Development. 

I believe the RAID will be shaken out with MEGA as a reliable much larger alternative to the single disk. NEVER LOSING A TiVo RECORDED PROGRAM DUE TO A FAULTY DISK WILL BE A GREAT SELLING POINT. Being able to record more programs than you can possibly watch in your lifetime may be another selling point for those of us who just like large mass storage solutions.

We have used RAID Disk Technology in NASA for decades. NASA has pushed the development of huge storage capacities. In the days when we were using the 1MB floppy disk at home, NASA was using 1TB single reel Optical Tape in my Mission to Planet Earth, Earth Observing System Data Information System (EOSDIS) where I was the Chief (computer) Architect more than 20 years ago. 
We stored PetaBytes of online data and ExaBytes of offline storage data

from 1/2015 TiVo financial statement:
We believe we're on the right track and the additional new features and products that we plan to launch will continue to demonstrate innovation and progress in our retail business. This along with simplified pricing and selling models that make it easier for consumers to purchase the TiVo products and services across multiple channels including Amazon, will lead to a business that has the potential to contribute to TiVo's overall growth. Further, to the extent these efforts to drive growth are successful, we will evaluate increasing our marketing activities going forward.

"To that point, we are making enhancements to build on our diverse suite of advanced television products for the operator and retail markets. This includes our efforts to bring TiVo to more devices, add more cloud-based functionality, expand personalization and content options, as well as serve the needs of operators and consumers that go without a Pay TV package through our TiVo OTA products.


----------



## zerdian1

TiVo just had its best year ever with earnings, with profit, with MSOs at a new high, with less churn.

TiVo has already done the R&D for MEGA (2Q15) and for ULTRA (4Q15/1Q16) and ULTRA MEGA (3Q16?). Why do you think there was so much storage in MEGA in the first place. They had to marry RAID and ROAMIO and get out of the single disk limitations. WD has dropped eSATA External DVR Expansion Disk Development. 

I believe the RAID will be shaken out with MEGA as a reliable much larger alternative to the single disk. NEVER LOSING A TiVo RECORDED PROGRAM DUE TO A FAULTY DISK WILL BE A GREAT SELLING POINT. Being able to record more programs than you can possibly watch in your lifetime may be another selling point for those of us who just like large mass storage solutions.

We have used RAID Disk Technology in NASA for decades. NASA has pushed the development of huge storage capacities. In the days when we were using the 1MB floppy disk at home, NASA was using 1TB single reel Optical Tape in my Mission to Planet Earth, Earth Observing System Data Information System (EOSDIS) where I was the Chief (Computer) Architect more than 20 years ago. 
We had PetaBytes (Quadrillion) of Online storage with instant access.
We had hundreds of Exabytes (Quintillion) of Offline Storage with quick automated access.

from 1/2015 TiVo financial statement:
...
We believe we're on the right track and the additional new features and products that we plan to launch will continue to demonstrate innovation and progress in our retail business. This along with simplified pricing and selling models that make it easier for consumers to purchase the TiVo products and services across multiple channels including Amazon, will lead to a business that has the potential to contribute to TiVo's overall growth. Further, to the extent these efforts to drive growth are successful, we will evaluate increasing our marketing activities going forward.

"To that point, we are making enhancements to build on our diverse suite of advanced television products for the operator and retail markets. This includes our efforts to bring TiVo to more devices, add more cloud-based functionality, expand personalization and content options, as well as serve the needs of operators and consumers that go without a Pay TV package through our TiVo OTA products.
...

I see ULTRA, 3D and HDTV movies being offered via other means like Apple, Amazon, and other sources that can be downloaded to TiVo.

Now I am looking for tools to allow me to watch the movies on my Mac with my 5K Ultra High Resolution.


----------



## bradleys

poppagene said:


> Wouldn't the tivo need to support HDCP 2.2 and HDMI 2.0 in order to stream UHD content to a UHD tv set?


I am not sure... A normal HDMI cable cannot push UHD content to a UHD TV?

TiVo has done a few in-series updates on the past. Series 3 to TiVo HD, Premiere to Premiere XL4....

I do believe that TiVo will come out with a UHD box designed to simply to pass Netflix / Amazon UHD content to the TV. I believe this will come out by the end of 2015, early 2016. And I suspect it will be a Series 5 Roamio UHD...

New development?

Yes, they are working on several initiatives that we continue to hear rumors about. Roku streaming client, new streaming service partners, OTA and maturing the Onepass integration.



zerdian1 said:


> TiVo has already done the R&D for MEGA (2Q15) and for ULTRA (4Q15/1Q16) and ULTRA MEGA (3Q16?). Why do you think there was so much storage in MEGA in the first place. They had to marry RAID and ROAMIO and get out of the single disk limitations. WD has dropped eSATA External DVR Expansion Disk Development.
> ...
> 
> I see ULTRA, 3D and HDTV movies being offered via other means like Apple, Amazon, and other sources that can be downloaded to TiVo.


The Mega was mostly a marketing stunt. Priced at $5,000 with only 6 tuners - it has a pretty small market, but sounded cool on CNET and The Verge. Apple and Amazon allowing downloads to TiVo? Amazon just eliminated all downloading solutions, why would they add it back for TiVo? No, we are moving to a future of streaming only content - Linear cable is in decline and I suspect you will never see UHD from that source.

More and more content providers will move to cloud based, streaming solutions - Netflix, Sling TV, integrated cloud based DVR's that is the future. Somebody is going to gain enough market share to consolidate content - and that will spell the beginning of the end for Linear cable.

TiVo Series 6? I think it will come, but it may be the last one delivered.


----------



## bradleys

Dan203 said:


> But most Smart TVs and BD players with apps are also transitioning to HTML5, so this is becoming the norm. The biggest cause of delays when deploying apps for TiVo is the fact that they like to integrate them into search and OnePass. Switching to Android wouldn't change that. TiVo is one of only a few devices with a unified search across apps, and from my experience it is the best at it. That level of of integration requires extra work regardless of which language an app is written in.


I agree with you and I disagree with you....

First, I agree that the integration component is what separates TiVo from the rest of the options. I am a big fan and wouldn't want to loose that integration.

Now, about simple HTML5 apps on Smart TVs and BD players... They are garbage. Oh, big streaming services like Netflix and Amazon have proprietary apps and are good on every platform - but the rest are filler.

Smart TVs, BD and TiVo have an app store as an afterthought, it comes with the platform to support Netflix, et al and most go un-used.

Would an Android app store fair better than the Opera app store for TiVo? I don't know, but if TiVo wants to compete with the top tier streaming boxes - they will have to do better than Opera.

Lots of Players in this space - I was reading the about the Firefox OS this morning and I suspect they will become the major service in the Smart TV area very soon. Opera is just never going to be a robust solution and I think TiVo as a premium product should partner for a premium app solution. Is Android the answer? Probably not, but Opera certainly isn't going to get them any press...

http://liliputing.com/2015/05/this-is-what-firefox-os-looks-like-on-tvs.html


----------



## Mikeguy

zerdian1 said:


> So when China or India go to the Moon in the near future, will they also use Hollywood sets or Hong Kong or Bollywood sets?
> 
> Hopefully, The USA NASA will be on our way to Mars in a decade. Needs Public support to get Administrative and Congressional support. Probably needs a space race with someone to get everyone to support it.


Here's a way for NASA to fund a U.S. Mars "expedition": lease NASA's moon sets to the Chinese and to India.


----------



## Dan203

bradleys said:


> Lots of Players in this space


Not really. AFAIK TiVo is the only combo DVR and streaming device in existence.

Now where there could be some competition is the Mini. Cable companies are being forced to add an open streaming standard to their boxes by September this year. Most of them are going to use DLNA CVP-2. TiVo, being an MSO supplier, is also going to have to add this functionality. Once this happen then the Mini will be in direct competition with all the various streaming boxes/sticks out there. That could make the apps more important since users will have more options for streaming recorded programs from their TiVos. But on the main DVR they pretty much have a monopoly.

Also the only "native" app on TiVo is Netflix. YouTube, Vudu, Amazon, Pandora, etc... are all HTML5. So there is a lot of potential for developing quality apps in HTML5. Don't judge the quality of the platform by what's available in the Opera store. The apps in there are junk because the developers writing for the Opera store aren't putting the effort into the UI that they could.


----------



## davezatz

Dan203 said:


> Not really. AFAIK TiVo is the only combo DVR and streaming device in existence.


FiOS, Comcast, and DISH all have Pandora. DISH Hopper has Netflix app.

http://www.dish.com/technology/netflix/

I bet we'll see things like Epix and HBO GO apps, and more Netflix partners, on many cable/sat set-tops eventually.


----------



## bradleys

@Dan

I don't disagree with your point and I am not really advocating for one service (Android) over another. My point is that Opera was a poor choice as an app ecosystem. I think we all agree that TiVo really had little intention to add an "App Store", they selected Opera simply as a platform to launch generic HTML5 apps.

I think that is the problem... 

I suggest that a partnership with a well known, well funded provider would have been more of a strategic option. TiVo is a very closed ecosystem and people get excited about services like Fire TV, and Chromecast.


----------



## Dan203

I'm not sure that's really TiVo's goal. I think they partnered with Opera to get their browser so that they could add/upgrade a few top tier apps that they really wanted. (i.e. Amazon, YouTube, Vudu, etc..) The Opera Store was just a byproduct of that partnership. I don't think they ever intended to make your TiVo a broad apps platform like a Roku or FireTV, they just needed something other then Flash/Air so they could add apps for the top tier services they wanted. And since most/all of those services offer an HTML5 version of their apps this made sense. 

Even if TiVo did wanted to switch to Android I'm not sure that's possible. The FireTV's entire OS is Android. TiVo runs on Linux, so they would have to use some sort of visualization to run Android apps and I don't think the hardware is capable of that.


----------



## Jeff_DML

Dan203 said:


> ...
> 
> Even if TiVo did wanted to switch to Android I'm not sure that's possible. The FireTV's entire OS is Android. TiVo runs on Linux, so they would have to use some sort of visualization to run Android apps and I don't think the hardware is capable of that.


fyi, BRCM chips support it

http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=s732076


----------



## bradleys

Dan203 said:


> I'm not sure that's really TiVo's goal. I think they partnered with Opera to get their browser so that they could add/upgrade a few top tier apps that they really wanted. (i.e. Amazon, YouTube, Vudu, etc..) The Opera Store was just a byproduct of that partnership. I don't think they ever intended to make your TiVo a broad apps platform like a Roku or FireTV, they just needed something other then Flash/Air so they could add apps for the top tier services they wanted. And since most/all of those services offer an HTML5 version of their apps this made sense.
> 
> Even if TiVo did wanted to switch to Android I'm not sure that's possible. The FireTV's entire OS is Android. TiVo runs on Linux, so they would have to use some sort of visualization to run Android apps and I don't think the hardware is capable of that.


I agree, TiVo isn't trying to segment their ecosystem with an app store and app ecosystem. Opera was to allow HTML5 apps and the app store was simply an artifact of the browser.

I understand their strategy, but at this point I don't necessarily agree with it. I think TiVo could get a lot out of hosting a well supported app environment. And that doesn't necessarily have to be Android...

Roku, the new Firefox OS - it doesn't matter. TiVo is always going to be measured against these low price streaming services... I am just saying that consolidating the best DVR on the market with a robust app ecosystem would be a compelling strategy.


----------



## joewom

astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.
> 
> Zero. Chance.


You do realize most of their revenue now is from cable companies and not you and I? they have maybe 600,000 retail tivos out there compared to millions with Cable Co.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

joewom said:


> You do realize most of their revenue now is from cable companies and not you and I? they have maybe 600,000 retail tivos out there compared to millions with Cable Co.


944,000 vs. 4.5 million. Retail subs currently still provided almost twice as much revenue ($88m vs $45m) because the MSO licenses are much cheaper.

Tivo DOES have cloud-based services for MSOs though. That's a real thing that already exists and is deployed in Sweden by Com Hem.

But it won't be for retail. They'd have to make like Sony, Verizon, Apple and others and start their own IPTV service. They could do it, but would they?


----------



## atmuscarella

Well I may have to rethink my 4K time line: http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/06/comcast-4k-set-top-box/

If Comcast is really moving this fast TiVo may have to also.


----------



## bradleys

atmuscarella said:


> Well I may have to rethink my 4K time line: http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/06/comcast-4k-set-top-box/
> 
> If Comcast is really moving this fast TiVo may have to also.


Comcast has a product called - Xfinity in UHD. It is a 4K On Demand app (Basically an IP based streaming service - like Netflix)

Comcast does not send UHD over normal cable channels...

I think it is reasonable to believe that TiVo will come out with a 4K model relatively soon that will support 4k streaming apps in the same way. Roamio UHD?


----------



## joewom

BigJimOutlaw said:


> 944,000 vs. 4.5 million. Retail subs currently still provided almost twice as much revenue ($88m vs $45m) because the MSO licenses are much cheaper.
> 
> Tivo DOES have cloud-based services for MSOs though. That's a real thing that already exists and is deployed in Sweden by Com Hem.
> 
> But it won't be for retail. They'd have to make like Sony, Verizon, Apple and others and start their own IPTV service. They could do it, but would they?


That 944,000 had to include Minis. Since there are only some 800,000 (845,000 Ibelieve is the total) cable cards issued to people. And I am certain TIVO doesn't have every single stand alone cable card activated in the US. I am sure its 80-90% though.


----------



## zerdian1

Telemark,
THANKS,
I knew TiVo were developing and testing ULTRA. But they were doing it in a Roamio with 6 Tuners. I did not realize it was only for Streaming.
The only Ultra shows I have come in contact with since last October were from Dish Hopper ULTRA HD MOVIES that were streamed. There were no ULTRA channels.
The ULTRA Streaming capability may well be just added to Roamio, as Roamio Ultra. This Ultra Streamer may not let you save it, but may let you buffer it.
I believe that when TiVo introduces a box that will support ULTRA channels that it will be a Series 6 in possibly in 2016.
TiVo will have to greatly increase the storage to support ULTRA Programming.
I think that is where the MEGA experiment comes in.
TiVo ULTRA SERIES 6 Will have RAID technology with expandable storage from 6TB to 24TB would be my guess with hot swappable disks that will guarantee you will never lose a program due to a faulty disk.



telemark said:


> What's the controversy- There's a press release.
> http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=s870350


----------



## atmuscarella

joewom said:


> That 944,000 had to include Minis. Since there are only some 800,000 (845,000 Ibelieve is the total) cable cards issued to people. And I am certain TIVO doesn't have every single stand alone cable card activated in the US. I am sure its 80-90% though.


 The 944,000 includes anything with a active subscription - so yes it includes Minis - it also includes Series 1 & 2 TiVos and OTA Series 3-5 users so how many cable cards exist doesn't tell you much when it comes to total TiVo subs.


----------



## joewom

atmuscarella said:


> The 944,000 includes anything with a active subscription - so yes it includes Minis - it also includes Series 1 & 2 TiVos and OTA Series 3-5 users so how many cable cards exist doesn't tell you much when it comes to total TiVo subs.


I get that. But with most minis now a one time fee there is no steady revenue coming in from that so it will dwindle rapidly. Which leads me to the point that the MSO market will drive TIVO's future. Not retail.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

joewom said:


> That 944,000 had to include Minis. Since there are only some 800,000 (845,000 Ibelieve is the total) cable cards issued to people. And I am certain TIVO doesn't have every single stand alone cable card activated in the US. I am sure its 80-90% though.


There are ~600K cablecards issued, and 1/3 of Tivo customers are OTA. So that's how it gets most of the way to 944K. But yeah I agree the Minis are included, and not all cablecards are for Tivos.

I don't think the Series 1 and 2 holdouts are big numbers at this point.


----------



## bradleys

zerdian1 said:


> Telemark,
> THANKS,
> I knew TiVo were developing and testing ULTRA. But they were doing it in a Roamio with 6 Tuners. I did not realize it was only for Streaming.
> The only Ultra shows I have come in contact with since last October were from Dish Hopper ULTRA HD MOVIES that were streamed. There were no ULTRA channels.
> The ULTRA Streaming capability may well be just added to Roamio, as Roamio Ultra. This Ultra Streamer may not let you save it, but may let you buffer it.
> I believe that when TiVo introduces a box that will support ULTRA channels that it will be a Series 6 in possibly in 2016.
> TiVo will have to greatly increase the storage to support ULTRA Programming.
> I think that is where the MEGA experiment comes in.
> TiVo ULTRA SERIES 6 Will have RAID technology with expandable storage from 6TB to 24TB would be my guess with hot swappable disks that will guarantee you will never lose a program due to a faulty disk.


And I will still highly disagree with you...

But I have highlighted where you really go off the rails!


----------



## gamo62

Xbox One possibly adding DVR feature.


----------



## zerdian1

It is an opinion.

They have been developing the technologies (MEGA RAID MASS STORAGE & ULTRA HD) under several different projects.
I think to think they will not tie these technologies together in what I am calling TiVo Series 6 ULTRA MEGA would be bad business on their part.
They need massive amount of storage to deal with ULTRA HD.
The first ULTRA machine with deal mostly with ULTRA STREAMING VIDEPS.
TiVo announced that in Sept 2014.
But more and more Cable companies will offer 4K ULTRA HD in the USA and around the world.
How much storage they offer and when they offer it will be decided by TiVo and more than likely we will buy it.



bradleys said:


> And I will still highly disagree with you...
> 
> But I have highlighted where you really go off the rails!


----------



## bradleys

zerdian1 said:


> It is an opinion.
> 
> They have been developing the technologies (MEGA RAID MASS STORAGE & ULTRA HD) under several different projects.
> I think to think they will not tie these technologies together in what I am calling TiVo Series 6 ULTRA MEGA would be bad business on their part.
> They need massive amount of storage to deal with ULTRA HD.
> The first ULTRA machine with deal mostly with ULTRA STREAMING VIDEPS.
> TiVo announced that in Sept 2014.
> But more and more Cable companies will offer 4K ULTRA HD in the USA and around the world.
> How much storage they offer and when they offer it will be decided by TiVo and more than likely we will buy it.


No ultra HD will be available for download in the lifetime of this new series box you are predicting - only available via streaming.

It is unlikely that linear TV will ever broadcast 4k at a significant rate, all of this content will be delivered via streaming services.

I paid $800 for the original S3 OLED TiVo just to move from SD to HD and was happy to do it. The price of the device you are predicting would make that S3 feel like a bargain! 

But in all seriousness, Comcast is delivering 4k content via a proprietary on demand streaming app and I suspect that will be the aproach the rest of the cable providers choose as well. I do agree that TiVo will deliver a 4K streaming capabilities within the next 18 months - whether that is an enhanced S5 or a new S6 really doesn't matter. Keeping the price low enough and feature set high enough will be the goal.


----------



## aaronwt

bradleys said:


> No ultra HD will be available for download in the lifetime of this new series box you are predicting - only available via streaming.
> 
> It is unlikely that linear TV will ever broadcast 4k at a significant rate, all of this content will be delivered via streaming services.
> 
> I paid $800 for the original S3 OLED TiVo just to move from SD to HD and was happy to do it. The price of the device you are predicting would make that S3 feel like a bargain!
> 
> But in all seriousness, Comcast is delivering 4k content via a proprietary on demand streaming app and I suspect that will be the aproach the rest of the cable providers choose as well. I do agree that TiVo will deliver a 4K streaming capabilities within the next 18 months - whether that is an enhanced S5 or a new S6 really doesn't matter. Keeping the price low enough and feature set high enough will be the goal.


UHD content has been available to download since 2013. For instance the Sony UHD media player. It came out in 2013(FMP-X1) and a new version(Sony FMP-X10) came out this year. The UHD movies/TV shows are downloaded to it for playback. And then it also has UHD streaming apps like Netflix.


----------



## atmuscarella

aaronwt said:


> UHD content has been available to download since 2013. For instance the Sony UHD media player. It came out in 2013(FMP-X1) and a new version(Sony FMP-X10) came out this year. The UHD movies/TV shows are downloaded to it for playback. And then it also has UHD streaming apps like Netflix.


I still think this is where a 4K TiVo could shine if Amazon & Vudu wanted to go that route. As far as I can tell downloaded content to a TiVo is just as secure as streaming it and a whole lot more people could get a good 4K experience if they didn't have to worry about their Internet functioning well enough to support a 20+ Mbps stream.


----------



## slowbiscuit

zerdian1 said:


> But more and more Cable companies will offer 4K ULTRA HD in the USA and around the world.


Via streaming and VOD? Sure. But not for live linear channel delivery anytime in the next few years, which is the point you seem to be missing.

Agreed that Tivo needs to support 4k at some point for those applications, but not because an MSO is going to start delivering 4k *channels* in any significant way. (Hint - See: 3D).


----------



## HarperVision

gamo62 said:


> Xbox One possibly adding DVR feature.


Can you elaborate on this and maybe open a new thread somewhere with some links? Just reply with the new thread link so we don't take this one off the rails.


----------



## Dan203

HarperVision said:


> Can you elaborate on this and maybe open a new thread somewhere with some links? Just reply with the new thread link so we don't take this one off the rails.


http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/07/xbox-one-dvr-rumor/


----------



## zerdian1

we have been getting 4K Ultra HD movies from DISH for about 6 months now. 
I expect Direct TV will do it if it hasn't already.

Comcast (last march 2014) 
Comcast is taking the lead with an Xfinity 4K app for Samsung UHD TVs and 4K-capable X1 set-top boxes later this year. Comcast sees UHD as part of an effort to implement high-efficiency video coding (HEVC) -- a next-generation video compression technology that is critical for delivering 4K UHD -- and expand IP bandwidth capacity. Comcast's interest is not only to add UHD to its service mix but also to push the boundaries of HDTV itself.
http://www.lightreading.com/cable-v...is-4k-ultra-hd-in-cables-future/a/d-id/708112



atmuscarella said:


> And every new 4K TV will have those service built in so why would someone buy a TiVo just to duplicate them. Next up is likely going to be 4K blu-ray and 4K from the satellite companies but right now TiVo can not play in the satellite market. Son unless TiVo is going to release a 4K DVR with built in 4K blu-ray what's the point, at least until we get closer to 4K cable or OTA?
> 
> Now if Netflix/Amazon/Vudu allowed 4K downloads to a TiVo that might be worth something to people buying a 4K TV with to slow or less reliable Internet access (I think I read somewhere you will need about a 20Mbps stream for high quality 4K).


----------



## zerdian1

Ultra High Definition (HD) Sampler App FAQs
The Ultra High Definition HD Sampler app Ultra HD Sampler app provides an XFINITY On Demand-only service for download from the Smart Hub on Samsung Smart TVs. The Ultra HD Sampler app provides XFINITY TV customers the ability to search and watch limited XFINITY On Demand Ultra High Definition 
Ultra High Definition (HD) Sampler App on Samsung Smart TVs Overview
The Ultra High Definition HD Sampler app provides an XFINITY On Demand-only service for download from the Smart Hub on Samsung Smart TVs. This allows you to watch 4K or Ultra HIgh Definition UHD content on your Samsung Smart TV without the need for a set-top box, and is included in your 
How to Use The Ultra High Definition (HD) Sampler App
This article provides instructions on how to use the Ultra High Definition HD Sampler app Ultra HD Sampler app for Samsung Smart TVs. Using the Ultra HD Sampler App Download the app from the Samsung Smart Hub. Upon opening the app, you will see a loading screen. Log in with your Comcast


----------



## Series3Sub

Dan203 said:


> Not really. AFAIK TiVo is the only combo DVR and streaming device in existence.
> 
> Now where there could be some competition is the Mini. Cable companies are being forced to add an open streaming standard to their boxes by September this year. Most of them are going to use DLNA CVP-2. TiVo, being an MSO supplier, is also going to have to add this functionality. Once this happen then the Mini will be in direct competition with all the various streaming boxes/sticks out there. That could make the apps more important since users will have more options for streaming recorded programs from their TiVos. But on the main DVR they pretty much have a monopoly.
> 
> Also the only "native" app on TiVo is Netflix. YouTube, Vudu, Amazon, Pandora, etc... are all HTML5. So there is a lot of potential for developing quality apps in HTML5. Don't judge the quality of the platform by what's available in the Opera store. The apps in there are junk because the developers writing for the Opera store aren't putting the effort into the UI that they could.


All the most recent DVR's stream content today. If your point was OTT, then Dish has Netflix streaming available on it Hoppers with Sling and highly promotes it to those subscribers with banners and access via apps page or apps banner display or on channel 370 amongst the premium cable services (HBO, Starz, etc.), and small cable cos are close to offering OTT on their cable set top boxes. Finally, we are seeing MVPD's thinking it may be to their advantage to offer the OTT services on their DVR's.

And FWIW, I really do think we will see SlingTV on TiVo OTA in by the end of or early next year. It makes perfect sense, but I'm sure the sticking point will be Sling and TiVo feeling the other should shoulder the greater financial burden to make it happen.


----------



## Jepato

The Tivo Roamio is the only consumer dvr that gives you a wide range of the most popular streaming services- netflix, amazon video, hulu, vudu etc. Other devices may give you an app here and there. And Tivo is the only one that integrates these streaming services with tv recordings.

The only thing that compares is if you build an htpc computer with cable card tuner, and utilize windows 8 metro style apps. But those apps are not remote friendly.

Otherwise, people have to switch inputs to use their rokus, fire tvs, etc, or utilize smart tv streaming apps.


----------



## dougdingle

Dan203 said:


> There will be no broadcast UHD anytime in the near future. Even with HEVC it's still going to require 25-30Mbps for UHD, which is more then ATSC even supports and would require an entire QAM on cable. I suspect it will be at least 2 more years before we start to see even prototype channels and at least 5 before there are enough to warrant a UHD DVR.


In fact, the claim at SMPTE meetings recently has been that the H.265 codec will be able to make lovely UHD pictures at 10-12Mbps. But confronted with someone (like me) saying "OK, great, show me that on a 50" or bigger screen" there are blank stares and shuffling feet.

At the same meeting, there was a 50" Panasonic UHD set streaming House Of Cards from Netfilx in UHD, and at normal 'living room' viewing distances, it looked no different from 1080. Keeping in mind, of course, that current UHD streams are limited color space REC709, 8 bit, MPEG2 garbage. In other words, just slightly sharper versions of the trash the TV stations and cablecos and satellite kids are dishing up now. The amount of resolution lost in the compression makes today's UHD a 1080 equivalent.

I saw Furious 7 last week at a SMPTE sponsored event at the Chinese in Hollywood in IMAX, with twin 4K laser IMAX projectors offset over-and-down half a pixel (for what was described as an 8K projector experience), shot on a real 4K camera, and projected onto a 90x60 IMAX screen. Without question the best looking cinematic images I've seen in 60 years - real solid black blacks, little to no highlight bleeding, a ton of screen intensity without blooming, excellent dynamic range, wide color space, 10 bit images.

Now if I could get images like that at home, I'd go for it. The current state of home UHD is not worth spending money on. It's really crap, and on two 50" monitors at 10-12 feet away, one streaming House Of Cards at UHD, the other at 1080, my guess is 80-95% of the people would not be able to see the difference.

Seems to me outfits like Roku will be able to make a 4K UHD streaming device for FAR less money than TiVo could possibly charge, and cablecos are YEARS away from sending recordable UHD content over the wire, making the likelihood of a UHD TiVo being available any time soon approach a possibility very close to zero.


----------



## telemark

I didn't realize the Chinese theater went IMAX.

According to IMAX, 35mm is about 6K.
So all the prior major films can be 4K once telecine (again).

The laser stuff is cool, but I'm not sure the relevance of comparing it to home tech, unless you can get it for home. The comparison should be 4K vs 1080p.

For all those who hate 4K, what's the alternative? Skip it and go straight to 8K? That's more expensive and all the same problems but more so.

Just ignore it, and eventually 4K will be as cheap as 1080p.


----------



## bradleys

telemark said:


> I didn't realize the Chinese theater went IMAX.
> 
> According to IMAX, 35mm is about 6K.
> So all the prior major films can be 4K once telecine (again).
> 
> The laser stuff is cool, but I'm not sure the relevance of comparing it to home tech, unless you can get it for home. The comparison should be 4K vs 1080p.
> 
> For all those who hate 4K, what's the alternative? Skip it and go straight to 8K? That's more expensive and all the same problems but more so.
> 
> Just ignore it, and eventually 4K will be as cheap as 1080p.


I don't think it has anything to do with loving or hating on 4K. I think it is simply trying to decide what the value of 4k is for my 50" TV at 12 feet away? 8K isn't going to change that conversation - resolution has diminishing returns...

I think the other point is content... Even if I really wanted 4k content, it will only be delivered by streaming services and potentially a new BD standard in the foreseeable future.

I don't use much physical media any more, but I do use streaming services. It makes sense simply for revenue that Vudu, Netflix, Comcast streaming and all the rest create a 4k tier (Premium content at a Premium cost). And since TiVo is a Premium DVR, they need to implement a 4k box to support these new 4K streaming services.

My "Personal" opinion? Cable Television, with the exception of maybe a few sports channels, will skip 4k altogether as they focus on developing and implementing streaming media services.

The point most of us are making is that it will be a long time before 4K is as ubiquitous as HD - and it is likely that it won't be delivered by linear cable when it is.

(Note: It is time to replace my media room projector, and I will replace it with a 4k unit - And when TiVo puts out a 4K Mini, I will purchase it as well.)


----------



## Dan203

telemark said:


> According to IMAX, 35mm is about 6K.
> So all the prior major films can be 4K once telecine (again).


Telecine is a way to convert 24fps film to 29.97 interlaced for TV or DVDs. 4K movies will be in their native 24fps or 48fps format, no telecine required.


----------



## dougdingle

Dan203 said:


> Telecine is a way to convert 24fps film to 29.97 interlaced for TV or DVDs. 4K movies will be in their native 24fps or 48fps format, no telecine required.


I think he was talking about having to re-transfer film projects originally transferred to 1080 for UHD/4K viewing.

Which is also going to prove to be interesting, since actual telecines capable of 4K are increasingly rare, that business having generally disappeared not long after shooting on film became a novelty. Most likely they will be using ARRI or Blackmagic film scanners and not full telecine chains.

Except for a few very famous films, it's more likely they're going to simply uprezz them (badly) for UHD. Re-transferring the original negative is expensive and time consuming, and goes wholly against the current concept of "Hey, it's good enough."


----------



## telemark

Yes, that's what I meant.

I'm not in the biz, but I'd still want to call the "Film to 24p video conversion", telecine, especially post post production. I admit this is basically equivalent to "scanning", but don't feel that term captures the meaning.

Here's a couple references that use a term, Soft Telecine for 24p.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine#Soft_and_hard_telecine
https://trac.handbrake.fr/wiki/Telecine#soft

Idk, I can also see Dan203's view, but it's practically semantics and POV depends on where you are in the pipe-line.


----------



## atmuscarella

dougdingle said:


> I think he was talking about having to re-transfer film projects originally transferred to 1080 for UHD/4K viewing.
> 
> Which is also going to prove to be interesting, since actual telecines capable of 4K are increasingly rare, that business having generally disappeared not long after shooting on film became a novelty. Most likely they will be using ARRI or Blackmagic film scanners and not full telecine chains.
> 
> Except for a few very famous films, it's more likely they're going to simply uprezz them (badly) for UHD. Re-transferring the original negative is expensive and time consuming, and goes wholly against the current concept of "Hey, it's good enough."


If that is all they are going to do they might just as well let the 4K TV upscale the 1080p content and save the band width.


----------



## Dan203

4k is the same resolution they use for digital projection at the theater, so most films made in the last 8-10 years will already exist as 4k digital. It's the older movies where they have to decide if it's worth the effort to rescan the film.


----------



## dougdingle

Dan203 said:


> 4k is the same resolution they use for digital projection at the theater, so most films made in the last 8-10 years will already exist as 4k digital. It's the older movies where they have to decide if it's worth the effort to rescan the film.


The majority of theaters in the U.S. that have digital projectors are still 2K. The big famous showcase ones, like the Chinese and Arclight in Hollywood, have 4K in the main room, but the other 12 at the Arclight are currently 2K. That is changing slowly, as 4K projectors drop in price, but still in the minority.

While most features are shot in 4K, as often as not the post pipeline downrezzes to 2K and stays there through projection. The asset management to keep a 4K workflow throughout is painful and expensive. The vast majority of visual effects (with the exception of *huge *tentpole projects with huge budgets) are also done at 2K and uprezzed to 4K as necessary.

Up until about five years ago, most big features were still shot on 35mm or even Vistavision film. It's only when the labs started closing in alarming numbers, Kodak filed for bankruptcy, and ARRI released the Alexa camera that digital production came into its own.


----------



## lessd

Dan203 said:


> 4k is the same resolution they use for digital projection at the theater, so most films made in the last 8-10 years will already exist as 4k digital. It's the older movies where they have to decide if it's worth the effort to rescan the film.


OH! I though that big theaters use 8K for digital projection.

When the parts for 4K become so inexpensive, within a few years, all (over 40" or so ) HDTV will be 4k, but the less expensive 4K HDTV will not have any great 4K picture, now almost all HDTV have 1080P (For xmiss I got two 50" HDTV at less than $300 each, and they have 1080P, (not that you can notice any 1080P differences). We all could get a much better 1080I/720P TV picture if the xmissions would cut down on the amount of compression. You can Xmit a crap 1080i TV picture and also a crap 4K TV picture. TiVo can't do anything about that.
I still think 4K HDTV is a marketing ploy to sell more stuff at higher prices. A few people with a big media rooms and a 80" or bigger HDTV may see some difference at 4K using a BD player at 4K when it comes out.


----------



## Jepato

bradleys said:


> (Note: It is time to replace my media room projector, and I will replace it with a 4k unit - And when TiVo puts out a 4K Mini, I will purchase it as well.)


I envy you.....it will be quite some time before most people can afford a true 4K projector. But like when they came out 1080p or 3d, eventually they will drop in price like the tvs.


----------



## bradleys

Jepato said:


> I envy you.....it will be quite some time before most people can afford a true 4K projector. But like when they came out 1080p or 3d, eventually they will drop in price like the tvs.


They wI'll come down significantly in the next 12 to 24 months.


----------



## CCourtney

First, as many have said, I don't foresee the broadcast (cable or OTA) of 4K programming for a long time to come. 

Before we get there we'll get 4K BD players, which while in progress are still a few years off from hitting shelves (spec's are still a good way from being nailed down as far as I can tell.)

Yeah, 4K streaming is starting to penetrate, but is it really better than 1080p broadcast content? Or for that matter can you tell the difference at seating distances? I can tell a 1080p stream content vs watching the same content recorded on HBO. The streaming content from Netflix and Amazon Prime have a lot more compression artifacts. That said, it still looks decent on my 64" 1080P Samsung Plasma sitting at 10.5' away. At that size and seating distance going to higher resolution content is not going to yield a better looking image over a good quality 1080p feed on that screen.

I recently replaced a TV in the living room w/ a 50" (size limited due to niche) and seating distance is around 12' away. I could have went to a 4K for $1000, or spend the $700 on the 1080p. I went the 1080p route as there's no way at seating distances I'm going to see the difference (not to mention there's little to no content.)

Eventually the cost delta will be on par and I'll get a 4K TV when replacing a unit. But that said, it's not a priority like so many seem to think it is.

Ok, back to TiVo and 4K, and why we're not going to see 4K on Cable or OTA for a long time. OTA is very simple, it takes a decade for the committees to come up w/ a standard and set on it, and eventually force broadcasters to use it. For Cable companies it's about bandwidth. Going from Analog to digital back in SD gave us a ton of channels, but we only get a fraction of those channels when providing HD content. Cable companies where starting to loose market to Sat companies, who just added more LNBs to increase the bandwidth and get more HD channels (but pushing the limits as well.) Cable companies had to resort to killing off the Analog channels to get back around 80's bands (able to support about 240 or so HD channels - this varies based on compression and whether it's 720 or 1080 feeds.) They've used up the vast majority of this. To go to 4K feeds they'd need to reduce the content even further or possibly got to H.265 (higher compression w/ less artifacting than H.264) and a wholesale equipment changeout. 

They're not going to do it until there's wholesale demand for that, and then as we know it will take them a couple years between announcing they intend to do it and them actually getting any decent inroads into implementation.

No doubt it will happen, but I don't see it happening until at least 2020 and more realistically 2025 timeframe. By that timeframe the TV set manufactures will be pushing 8K sets.


----------



## Dan203

dougdingle said:


> The majority of theaters in the U.S. that have digital projectors are still 2K. The big famous showcase ones, like the Chinese and Arclight in Hollywood, have 4K in the main room, but the other 12 at the Arclight are currently 2K. That is changing slowly, as 4K projectors drop in price, but still in the minority.


I thought the transition to 4k was further along then that. And I assumed that the distribution/production systems were all upgraded to 4k by now and were simply downresing for 2k projectors.

You sound more knowledgeable then me on the subject so I'll concede to you, but it seems very short sighted if they are really developing the special effects at 2k and upresing to 4k.


----------



## Dan203

CCourtney said:


> Before we get there we'll get 4K BD players, which while in progress are still a few years off from hitting shelves (spec's are still a good way from being nailed down as far as I can tell.)


Players and a hand full of titles will be released this holiday season. They're basically just using triple layer BDs. The big difference between them and existing BD players will be they will have H.265 decoders and they will support HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2.


----------



## CCourtney

Dan203 said:


> Players and a hand full of titles will be released this holiday season. They're basically just using triple layer BDs. The big difference between them and existing BD players will be they will have H.265 decoders and they will support HDMI 2.0 and HDCP 2.2.


Nice to know, I thought this was a stopgap player. Is it a full defined standard?


----------



## joblo

CCourtney said:


> Nice to know, I thought this was a stopgap player. Is it a full defined standard?


From http://www.avsforum.com/forum/34-hd...test-tv-news-information-10.html#post34161466:



> *Technology Notes*
> *Ultra HD Blu-ray Spec Completed, Consumer Products Expected Later This Year*
> By Carolyn Giardina, *The Hollywood Reporter* - May 12, 2015
> 
> The Blu-ray Disc Association has completed an Ultra HD Blu-ray technical specification that will lead to the release of players and discs that support the new format.
> . . .
> http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/behind-screen/ultra-hd-blu-ray-spec-794961


----------



## CCourtney

Now that's timing


----------



## joblo

bradleys said:


> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.





astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.
> 
> Zero. Chance.





astrohip said:


> Many of you replied to my reply with something along the lines of "it's the future" and similar thoughts.
> 
> I don't disagree that streaming will become more important as time goes on. But my reply was to a very specific statement: "the *next *Series TiVo".
> 
> The next TiVo (S6?) will not be cloud based. Zero. Chance. (Is there an echo in here?). Someday, maybe. But not the next one.


*TiVo unveils cloud-based network digital video recorder, emphasizes social discovery and sharing

TiVo prototype DVR recordings stay in the cloud, watch them anywhere on any screen

TiVo to Acquire Digitalsmiths, a Leading Cloud-Based Content Discovery Service

TiVo Buys Aereo Trademark and Customer List

TiVo Demos Network DVR Prototype for Operators at CES*

From the last link:



> ...
> The TiVo NDVR is a natural extension of the TiVo solution and will use TiVo's Emmy Award winning cloud service. TiVo's NDVR will extend the TiVo Service and consistent user experience on every device, while enabling consumers to easily find, consume and socially share cloud delivered content through the TiVo user interface. This is an important next step for operators as they consider a transition to IP delivered content and utilization of low-cost IP clients and consumer provided devices (tablets, smartphones, etc.) while enhancing the user experience anywhere they may be.
> ...
> In addition to *moving the Roamio experience to the cloud*, TiVo would be enabling operators and programmers to manage complex content rights, create multiple tiers of network PVR features, and enable multiscreen policies that accelerate the critical transition to an all IP video world. For instance, operators deploying TiVo's NDVR could offer a premium service with expanded catch-up and save options. The service could also empower programmers to more intelligently target advertising in *cloud hosted time-shifted content*.
> 
> CES *2014* runs from *January* 7 - 10 in Las Vegas. TiVo's booth is located at LVCC, Central Hall - 7920.


Notice the date. This is actually old news. TiVo has been working on it for one to two years already.

Not only do I think S6 will be at least cloud-enabled if not entirely cloud-based, it would not surprise me to see a RoamioCloud diskless DVR within a year or two.


----------



## lessd

joblo said:


> *TiVo unveils cloud-based network digital video recorder, emphasizes social discovery and sharing
> 
> TiVo prototype DVR recordings stay in the cloud, watch them anywhere on any screen
> 
> TiVo to Acquire Digitalsmiths, a Leading Cloud-Based Content Discovery Service
> 
> TiVo Buys Aereo Trademark and Customer List
> 
> TiVo Demos Network DVR Prototype for Operators at CES*
> 
> From the last link:
> 
> Notice the date. This is actually old news. TiVo has been working on it for one to two years already.
> 
> Not only do I think S6 will be at least cloud-enabled if not entirely cloud-based, it would not surprise me to see a RoamioCloud diskless DVR within a year or two.


A cloud based diskless TiVo, I don't understand what TiVo, then, would bring to us, that VOD/smart HDTV already has, if we can't fast forward the system would be worthless to most people, I have Netflix streaming and fast rewind/forward is a pain compared to TiVo, and I am not trying to skip commercials on Netflix. If personal recording goes away so does retail TiVos as we now know them. I record lots of stuff that I want to skip part of the program itself, for example if a late show has somebody I want to see I will skip until that guest goes on, for Saturday night live, I only watch the first skit than skip to the weekend update, and skip parts of that also. That what I love about TiVo,* TV my way*, take that away, and I not left with much.


----------



## CCourtney

joblo said:


> *TiVo unveils cloud-based network digital video recorder, emphasizes social discovery and sharing
> 
> TiVo prototype DVR recordings stay in the cloud, watch them anywhere on any screen
> 
> TiVo to Acquire Digitalsmiths, a Leading Cloud-Based Content Discovery Service
> 
> TiVo Buys Aereo Trademark and Customer List
> 
> TiVo Demos Network DVR Prototype for Operators at CES*
> 
> From the last link:
> 
> Notice the date. This is actually old news. TiVo has been working on it for one to two years already.
> 
> Not only do I think S6 will be at least cloud-enabled if not entirely cloud-based, it would not surprise me to see a RoamioCloud diskless DVR within a year or two.


I could be wrong, but I believe what they were actually describing (functionality wise) for NDVR (Network DVR) is the remote streaming outside of local networking which Roamio's support.

I believe the writers made the assumption that it's cloud based, but were wrong.

Before this point, you could download a copy of content (depending up DCC setting {copy once, never, all}) to Laptops and iOS devices for playback. But not the network streaming to the outside world. Basically, your Roamio has become your personal Cloud if you want to think of it that way, but I don't believe they are making a cloud service for everyone to store their content on.


----------



## joblo

CCourtney said:


> Now that's timing


Hey, that's what we do here. 

From *AVSForum Hot Off The Press*:



> *TV/Business Notes*
> *TiVo Wants to Totally Change TV  Again*
> By Victor Luckerson, *TIME.com* - May 14, 2015
> 
> TiVoremember them?has plans to imitate Aereo, the live-TV streaming service whose business model was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court. TiVo CEO Tom Rogers told Multichannel News that his company, mostly known for its DVRs, is planning to launch a service that is kind of the Aero model, done legally and better.
> 
> Aereo allowed customers to live-stream content from broadcast television networks over the Internet for a monthly fee and save programming to watch later using a *cloud-based DVR service*. The company used tiny, remotely-located antennae to pick up the broadcast signals of networks like CBS, then streamed the content to users on their phones and tablets. However, Aereo didnt pay the broadcasters for their content, leading to a fatal Supreme Court decision that resulted in Aereos end last summer.
> 
> Its not clear which parts of Aereos model TiVo wants to mimic, or how the company would do so without running afoul of the law. According to Multichannel News, the play could be to bundle over-the-air networks delivered via the Internet with subscription services like Netflix or Hulu. However, if TiVo is forced to pay the networks retransmission fees to carry their content, it could be tough to make such an offering cheaper than the basic TV packages that cable operators already offer.
> 
> A TiVo spokesperson told Multichannel that the company has a product announcement planned for July. Meanwhile, TiVo acquired Aereos customer list and other assets for $1 million back in March. So its fair to expect something unusual this summer from the the company that already changed the way we watch TV once.
> 
> http://time.com/3858842/tivo-aereo/


----------



## aaronwt

lessd said:


> A cloud based diskless TiVo, I don't understand what TiVo, then, would bring to us, that VOD/smart HDTV already has, if we can't fast forward the system would be worthless to most people, I have Netflix streaming and fast rewind/forward is a pain compared to TiVo, and I am not trying to skip commercials on Netflix. If personal recording goes away so does retail TiVos as we now know them. I record lots of stuff that I want to skip part of the program itself, for example if a late show has somebody I want to see I will skip until that guest goes on, for Saturday night live, I only watch the first skit than skip to the weekend update, and skip parts of that also. That what I love about TiVo,* TV my way*, take that away, and I not left with much.


Comcast has cloud based storage for it's X1 DVR. From a user perspective you do not notice a difference whether the show is stored locally or stored in the cloud.


----------



## damondlt

joewom said:


> I get that. But with most minis now a one time fee there is no steady revenue coming in from that so it will dwindle rapidly. Which leads me to the point that the MSO market will drive TIVO's future. Not retail.


And most cable companies still charge for minis as addtional rooms of service.
With that in mind, I see the cloud based dvr in in the works.
So much for Tivo not going that way .

Retail sales are dismal at best in the history of Tivo.


----------



## WorldBandRadio

astrohip said:


> Zero chance. Totally goes against the concept of a home DVR. And their customer base is not stupid, they know what they're buying. Sales would vanish.
> 
> Zero. Chance.


Their customer base may not be stupid, but TiVo has been showing evidence of that trait recently.

The DVR is a low-priority for TiVo nowadays (as evidenced by the removal of important features). There's every reason that TiVo would put the DVR functionality in the unreliable TiVo cloud processing.

The TiVo box in your home entertainment cabinet will be little more than a streaming device, with one source of the streams being TiVo's unreliable cloud services.


----------



## bradleys

I have no idea what TiVo is planning to deliver and it very well may simply be a repackaged OTA Roamio. It may actually just be the $300 OTA Lifetime Roamio deal that some low level TiVo employee accidentally "Released too early" (My personal conspiracy theory)

I consider that the most likely announcement to tell you the truth - But....

If TiVo came up with a simple black box device that would push recordings to cloud storage and a Roku /IOS / Android client that could access and play that content from "anywhere" like any other streaming service. That would be cool.

The difference between Aero and TiVo in this case would be that the customer is hosting the antenna.


----------



## lessd

aaronwt said:


> Comcast has cloud based storage for it's X1 DVR. From a user perspective you do not notice a difference whether the show is stored locally or stored in the cloud.


Comcast also controls the internet to my home, that why I use the Comcast land line phone system, I have never used the X1 Comcast system and know nobody that has it, but if they do as good a job with their cloud service as they do with the phone you could be correct, TiVo and Netflix do not have that internet advantage, thus cloud on 3rd pty devices will never be as good (for now) as a Comcast provided cloud service.


----------



## Diana Collins

Take a Roamio OTA, add a Stream and you have a legal version of Aereo. The alleged selling point of Aereo was the ability to get OTA on any device. Their legal shortcoming was that they got between the broadcaster and the viewer, making money from the intervention, without sharing the wealth with the stations.

If the viewer is recording the programs on a local, privately controlled antenna/DVR combination (which has plenty of precedents declaring that legal) and that DVR has the ability stream those recording over the Internet (which many solutions do, none of which have been challenged), then you are delivering most of what Aereo did without violation of any copyrights.

So, perhaps what is coming is a version of the Roamio OTA with built-in streaming. Couple that with the existing Android and iOS apps (and maybe add an HTML5 client) and you have a pretty good candidate for the Roamio Aereo.


----------



## atmuscarella

bradleys said:


> I have no idea what TiVo is planning ...


Ya I am guessing none of us here do. But it is fun to speculate.

I find it hard to believe TiVo is going to do anything with OTA other than sell a OTA DVR and perhaps build in a "Stream". Without TiVo actually buying the retransmission rights, streaming OTA channels via IP, and recording directly to Cloud storage, Cloud storage for OTA makes no sense to me as I see very little advantage to a person having to record locally to a DVR and then uploading to Cloud storage.

TiVo Cloud Storage makes sense to me if TiVo is selling it to a cable company otherwise I see to many bit falls - now if we all get Gb Internet then I might have a different opinion.


----------



## atmuscarella

Diana Collins said:


> Take a Roamio OTA, add a Stream and you have a legal version of Aereo. The alleged selling point of Aereo was the ability to get OTA on any device. Their legal shortcoming was that they got between the broadcaster and the viewer, making money from the intervention, without sharing the wealth with the stations.
> 
> If the viewer is recording the programs on a local, privately controlled antenna/DVR combination (which has plenty of precedents declaring that legal) and that DVR has the ability stream those recording over the Internet (which many solutions do, none of which have been challenged), then you are delivering most of what Aereo did without violation of any copyrights.
> 
> So, perhaps what is coming is a version of the Roamio OTA with built-in streaming. Couple that with the existing Android and iOS apps (and maybe add an HTML5 client) and you have a pretty good candidate for the Roamio Aereo.


:up:


----------



## Dan203

That's the most likely scenario. But it's possible they are working with the broadcasters and will offer a service like SlingTV or PlayStation Vue with locals. As long as they pay the rebroadcasting fee then the old Aereo model is still legal. They just said they couldn't make money doing that and charging what they were charging. Maybe TiVo can get away with charging more if they include their UI as a cloud type service.


----------



## atmuscarella

Just another thought - wasn't TiVo and Frontier going to hook up with some type of OTA solution that Frontier was going to be offering their FIOS customers? Partnering with a high speed non-cable ISP would open up allot more alternatives.


----------



## HarperVision

Dan203 said:


> That's the most likely scenario. But it's possible they are working with the broadcasters and will offer a service like SlingTV or PlayStation Vue with locals. As long as they pay the rebroadcasting fee then the old Aereo model is still legal. They just said they couldn't make money doing that and charging what they were charging. Maybe TiVo can get away with charging more if they include their UI as a cloud type service.


Maybe they'll just team up with Sony and offer the Vue service right on the Roamio?!


----------



## Diana Collins

atmuscarella said:


> Just another thought - wasn't TiVo and Frontier going to hook up with some type of OTA solution that Frontier was going to be offering their FIOS customers? Partnering with a high speed non-cable ISP would open up allot more alternatives.


Except that Frontier IS a cable company (at least as much as Verizon is). They may use fiber optic cable instead of coaxial, but that is the only difference.


----------



## ajwees41

joewom said:


> You do realize most of their revenue now is from cable companies and not you and I? they have maybe 600,000 retail tivos out there compared to millions with Cable Co.


what cable companies in the USA use Tivo hardware that the MSO supplies?


----------



## HarperVision

ajwees41 said:


> what cable companies in the USA use Tivo hardware that the MSO supplies?


I know RCN is one of them.


----------



## atmuscarella

Diana Collins said:


> Except that Frontier IS a cable company (at least as much as Verizon is). They may use fiber optic cable instead of coaxial, but that is the only difference.


I have wondered about that is the service really Frontiers or is Frontier just fronting for Verizon in areas where they bought out Verizon's lines? What I mean by that is does Frontier actually have contracts the cable channels or are they just contracting with Verizon to resell Verizon's service.


----------



## aaronwt

ajwees41 said:


> what cable companies in the USA use Tivo hardware that the MSO supplies?


This TiVo page shows some of them.

http://www.tivo.com/cable-operators

It shows Suddenlink, RCN, GRANDE Communication, GCI, Armstrong and Midcontinent.

http://www.suddenlink.com/tivo/
http://www.gci.com/TV/tivo
http://www.rcn.com/tivo/
http://mygrande.com/cable-tv/tivo
https://www.midcocomm.com/support/cable-tv/tivo


----------



## Dan203

HarperVision said:


> Maybe they'll just team up with Sony and offer the Vue service right on the Roamio?!


I assume if they go this route the DVR part will be cloud based and accessible via devices like Roku or FireTV, rather then depending on a local DVR.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw

ajwees41 said:


> what cable companies in the USA use Tivo hardware that the MSO supplies?


RCN, Grande Communications, Armstrong Cable, Midcontinent, and Suddenlink use Tivo hardware.

GCI and Mediacom uses Pace hardware with Tivo software.

(But the quoted statement was wrong anyway and 2/3 of Tivo's revenue still comes from retail. $88M vs. $45M)


----------



## damondlt

BigJimOutlaw said:


> RCN, Grande Communications, Armstrong Cable, Midcontinent, and Suddenlink use Tivo hardware.
> 
> GCI and Mediacom uses Pace hardware with Tivo software.
> 
> (But the quoted statement was wrong anyway and 2/3 of Tivo's revenue still comes from retail. $88M vs. $45M)


Blueridge Communications used Tivo hardware as well.


----------



## astrohip

WorldBandRadio said:


> Their customer base may not be stupid, but TiVo has been showing evidence of that trait recently.
> 
> The DVR is a low-priority for TiVo nowadays (as evidenced by the removal of important features). There's every reason that TiVo would put the DVR functionality in the unreliable TiVo cloud processing.
> 
> The TiVo box in your home entertainment cabinet will be little more than a streaming device, with one source of the streams being TiVo's unreliable cloud services.


They have not removed any important features. They may have made some changes you don't like. One man's important is another man's "I didn't even know that was there".

We have no reason to think TiVo plans on moving all recording to the cloud. They may offer cloud as an option, or it may be part of a certain feature (Hopper-like). They may even offer cloud-based units for specific marketing niches. But the basic "use a TiVo to record a TV show" will not change.

Everyone here continues to speculate on how these recent streaming-related changes portend the death of the DVR and the advent of cloud-ONLY recording. I say the opposite. TiVo continues to bolster their DVR with additional features, many of which are streaming and cloud related. *Absolutely none of which say recording to a local HD is dead.*


----------



## ajwees41

astrohip said:


> They have not removed any important features. They may have made some changes you don't like. One man's important is another man's "I didn't even know that was there".
> 
> We have no reason to think TiVo plans on moving all recording to the cloud. They may offer cloud as an option, or it may be part of a certain feature (Hopper-like). They may even offer cloud-based units for specific marketing niches. But the basic "use a TiVo to record a TV show" will not change.
> 
> Everyone here continues to speculate on how these recent streaming-related changes portend the death of the DVR and the advent of cloud-ONLY recording. I say the opposite. TiVo continues to bolster their DVR with additional features, many of which are streaming and cloud related. *Absolutely none of which say recording to a local HD is dead.*


the dvr still has a use especially for programs aired on channels that don't stream or seldom rerun like the diginets


----------



## atmuscarella

astrohip said:


> ... *Absolutely none of which say recording to a local HD is dead.*


I would prefer to "record" 100% of the video content I consume to my TiVo's hard drive or at least my HTPC's hard drive but lots of companies have told me I can not:
TiVo told me I can no longer record podcasts but at least I can still record them with my HTPC
Vudu told me I can not record their content on my TiVo but will let me record owned content on my HTPC
Amazon told me I can no longer record their rented or owned content on any hard drive
Netflix Told me I can not record their content on any hard drive
Sling TV told me I can not record their content on any hard drive
Hulu told me I can not record their content on any hard drive
The fact is the only thing I can record with my TiVo is OTA content. So recording to a local hard is not dead but lots of companies are trying to kill or prevent it.

The bottom line is simple anything that moves us towards more streaming is moving us to not being able to record it to a local hard drive. I honestly don't think the masses will care and if the Internet becomes reliable and fast enough might even prefer not having local storage.


----------



## Jed1

Here is an excellent 1 hour program talking about UHD. It appears that the standard will be P3 (Digital Cinema Initiative) and not Rec 2020. 
Also the resolution is not really important as it is starting to get beyond the threshold of the human eye. To really notice the increased resolution you will need to have a TV that is 80 inches or larger or sit with in 4 feet of a smaller TV.
HDR (High Dynamic Range) is the biggest benefit but this also could have been incorporated into 1080p TVs. Basically outside of HDR, UHD is a waste of time.

Take the time to watch the whole program as you can avoid making costly mistakes in purchasing UHD branded devices.
http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/255


----------



## Dixon Butz

Jed1 said:


> Here is an excellent 1 hour program talking about UHD. It appears that the standard will be P3 (Digital Cinema Initiative) and not Rec 2020.
> Also the resolution is not really important as it is starting to get beyond the threshold of the human eye. To really notice the increased resolution you will need to have a TV that is 80 inches or larger or sit with in 4 feet of a smaller TV.
> HDR (High Dynamic Range) is the biggest benefit but this also could have been incorporated into 1080p TVs. Basically outside of HDR, UHD is a waste of time.
> 
> Take the time to watch the whole program as you can avoid making costly mistakes in purchasing UHD branded devices.
> http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks/255


Dwayne is an idiot. He is pro? Ha!
You do not need to sit 4 feet away from a 65" UHDTV to see the benefits of 4K.


----------



## damondlt

No more than 10 feet.


----------



## atmuscarella

Dixon Butz said:


> Dwayne is an idiot. He is pro? Ha!
> You do not need to sit 4 feet away from a 65" UHDTV to see the benefits of 4K.


Depends on how you define "benefits". If you are talking resolution depending on ones eyes the increased resolution of 4K over 1080 on a 65 inch screen is not fully visible much past 4-5 feet according to the charts I have seen. Given that most of the 4K TVs made so far can not do High Dynamic Range and even if they could the content with it is not very available yet which leaves me trying to figure out what exactly the benefits are. The bottom line is that at the 65inch size if you are watching TV (720p or 1080i) or 1080p blu-ray and sitting a normal 10+ foot away that last top Plasmas still provide the best picture.


----------



## Dixon Butz

atmuscarella said:


> Depends on how you define "benefits". If you are talking resolution depending on ones eyes the increased resolution of 4K over 1080 on a 65 inch screen is not visible much past 4-5 feet according to the charts I have seen. Given that most of the 4K TVs made so far can not do High Dynamic Range and even if they could the content with it is not very available yet which leaves me trying to figure out what exactly the benefits are. The bottom line is that at the 65inch size if you are watching TV (720p or 1080i) or 1080p blu-ray and sitting a normal 10+ foot away that last top Plasmas still provide the best picture.


Charts are useless. 
Samsungs 2015 models can do HDR


----------



## WorldBandRadio

atmuscarella said:


> Depends on how you define "benefits". If you are talking resolution depending on ones eyes the increased resolution of 4K over 1080 on a 65 inch screen is not fully visible much past 4-5 feet according to the charts I have seen. Given that most of the 4K TVs made so far can not do High Dynamic Range and even if they could the content with it is not very available yet which leaves me trying to figure out what exactly the benefits are. The bottom line is that at the 65inch size if you are watching TV (720p or 1080i) or 1080p blu-ray and sitting a normal 10+ foot away that last top Plasmas still provide the best picture.


The 4K HD standard has a larger color space than the regular HD standard.

"Given the appropriate program material", the improvement in color can be noticeable, regardless of one's distance to the screen.


----------



## atmuscarella

WorldBandRadio said:


> The 4K HD standard has a larger color space than the regular HD standard.
> 
> "Given the appropriate program material", the improvement in color can be noticeable, regardless of one's distance to the screen.


From what I have been able to gather the 3 major improvements of 4K/HUD in order of what is most likely to cause a noticeable improvement in the picture are: 

Implementation of High Dynamic Range - as noted above finally available in this year's top Samsung 4K TVs
The color improvement you mention (and noted in post 133 as being the P3 standard) which is the same as what we see in movie theaters.
Increase screen resolution
I don't disagree that eventually 4k TVs will be worth buying and that eventually there will be plenty of 4K content. But people who have purchased sets so far are not going to get all or even most of the potential benefits and some of them aren't even going to be able to use the 4K blu-ray players because their sets don't have the needed HDMI port.

My bottom line is up to now 4K sets didn't get you much more that higher resolution which doesn't get you much unless the set is very large or you sit very close to it. In my opinion these sets were not really ready for prime time. Of course that is water over the damn and if one is willing to pay close attention to what you buy going forward you should be able to get a set providing all the noted benefits and I am sure there will be much more content once the 4K blu-ray players are released this fall.


----------



## Jed1

Dixon Butz said:


> Dwayne is an idiot. He is pro? Ha!
> You do not need to sit 4 feet away from a 65" UHDTV to see the benefits of 4K.


Dewayne Davis is a consultant to the TV manufacturers. Samsung is one of them which you quoted as having HDR.
He also helps Panasonic, Sharp, Vizio, and especially Pioneer when they made their world famous plasmas.
He also participates in the Value Electronics HDTV shootout and has done so for about 8 years now. This is along with Joe Kane, David Mackenzie, Dr. Larry Weber, and Kevin Miller.

Here is David Mackenzie talking about resolution at the 2013 shootout:




There is a good piece towards the end about how accurate Blu ray is and it is the best format that home viewers will ever have.

Here is Dewayne Davis talking about color at the 2013 shootout:





Here is the introduction to the 2014 HDTV Shootout:





The two things people keep mentioning about UHD, resolution and a wider color space is actually not a benefit to UHD. High Dynamic Range is the only benefit to UHD but that could be achieved with 1080p.
The main problem with the wider color space on TVs is it comes at a loss of luminance. Luminance is the one thing that the human eye can detect a loss of.
The resolution gains is not substantial and most humans will not notice the gain at all. The biggest reason is most people own HDTVs that are smaller than 50 inches, which 1080 is not even necessary.


----------



## Dixon Butz

BS. Anyone can see the resolution gains of 2160 over 1080. Night and day difference.


----------



## dougdingle

atmuscarella said:


> From what I have been able to gather the 3 major improvements of 4K/HUD in order of what is most likely to cause a noticeable improvement in the picture are:
> 
> Implementation of High Dynamic Range - as noted above finally available in this year's top Samsung 4K TVs
> The color improvement you mention (and noted in post 133 as being the P3 standard) which is the same as what we see in movie theaters.
> Increase screen resolution
> 
> My bottom line is up to now 4K sets didn't get you much more that higher resolution which doesn't get you much unless the set is very large or you sit very close to it. In my opinion these sets were not really ready for prime time. Of course that is water over the damn and if one is willing to pay close attention to what you buy going forward you should be able to get a set providing all the noted benefits and I am sure there will be much more content once the 4K blu-ray players are released this fall.


Sets may be able to display HDR, but there is no commonly available HDR material available to show on them. I've seen HDR demo'd at Dolby Labs, and it's very good indeed, but it will be quite a while before anyone sends you images that are HDR. Not a lot of cameras used to shoot the material are capable of true HDR, either. Those have to come first - you can't go back and make something HDR that wasn't shot that way. At least not in any meaningful way.

I'd also like to point out that HDR needs some *very serious* screen intensity to get the full benefits of the tech.

Same issue with wide color space, whether REC2020 or P3. Cameras and post workflow are available now to shoot and release things in a wider color space, but as I've pointed out before, Netfilx is currently sending HOC in 4K at 8 bits, REC709, 4:2:0, MPG2; this is the same spec (except for resolution) as over-the-air HD is now. I know you have to start somewhere, I'm just not sure four times the number of pixels with the same crappy specs and a ton of compression is the right place.

All these things might happen eventually. You just have to keep in mind that aside from BluRay, *no one* sending you video has shown the slightest interest in increasing the quality of the images you get at home or on portable devices (especially portable devices), regardless of source. Quite the opposite - off air used to be ~19 mbit, now it's ~10-12 mbit (at least in L.A.) because they've filled up their side channels with stuff that takes up bandwidth. And so off-air breaks up and pixelates with explosions, or concert lights, or any material that's high density, like trees with blowing leaves, or large crowd shots. And Time Warner, seeing that off-air is at 10-12 mbit, now compresses all their channels, even their premium channel feeds like HBO, to that pathetic spec or worse. No reason to believe everyone else (except perhaps FiOS, which has minuscule penetration) isn't doing the same. We are going backward.

The *main *interest everywhere seems to be in compressing the living hell out of the image to fit it into a smaller container for streaming. MPG is old and tired. Changing to something else is going to require new hardware. I can't imagine the sat people or cablecos rushing to replace 15 million boxes each at their expense. So streaming is the great hope, but again, reducing bandwidth seems to be the big drive there, not increasing image quality. I keep hearing about how wonderful h.265 is going to be, but have only seen prototypes of the implementation.


----------



## dougdingle

Dixon Butz said:


> Charts are useless.


If you don't know what you're looking at, yes that's true. If you do know what you're looking at, they can be quite useful. I own a $1,500 chart I use professionally that is extremely useful for measuring all sorts of things on professional cameras and monitors.



> Samsungs 2015 models can do HDR


So they claim. Don't know how to test that, since there is little to no HDR material available outside labs and high end facilities.

Personally, I think it's more marketing nonsense than reality.

Do they also claim to have seriously increased screen intensity? Because without that, HDR is meaningless.


----------



## atmuscarella

Dixon Butz said:


> BS. Anyone can see the resolution gains of 2160 over 1080. Night and day difference.


Maybe you have really good eys, but when I was purchasing a 43 inch TV for my mother a few years back I couldn't tell the difference between the 720p & 1080p sets at a fairly close viewing distance (so I bought the 720 set). So it stands to reason the same is true for 4K vs 1080p unless I get a very big set or move a whole lot closer than the 12 foot distance I am at now.


----------



## atmuscarella

dougdingle said:


> ... All these things might happen eventually. You just have to keep in mind that aside from BluRay, *no one* sending you video has shown the slightest interest in increasing the quality of the images you get at home or on portable devices (especially portable devices), regardless of source. Quite the opposite - off air used to be ~19 mbit, now it's ~10-12 mbit (at least in L.A.)


Thanks for you whole post - reinforces my hopes that I don't need another TV for at least 5 years. On the video quality thing I have an OTA station that now broadcasts ABC & CW on one channel along with another SD station the ABC & CW stations are both 720p and a one hour prime time shows on either only uses about 3Gb of space - quality is noticeably lower than all my other HD OTA channels which still use over 6Gb for one hour shows.

My take on over all quality is that most people sit pretty fair back from their TV and have smaller, poorly setup, lower quality TVs without surround sound and really don't notice the difference (or just don't care). I mean after all isn't how bright the picture is the most important thing .


----------



## dougdingle

atmuscarella said:


> My take on over all quality is that most people sit pretty fair back from their TV and have smaller, poorly setup, lower quality TVs without surround sound and really don't notice the difference (or just don't care). I mean after all isn't how bright the picture is the most important thing .


In fact, a very scary (to me) national U.S. survey done not too long ago found that slightly less than half the people with HD sets display HD material - it's mostly SD material that the set scales for them.

But every single one of those people believed they were watching HD material because they had a flat screen TV.

A sentence I've used often over a 45 year career as a video engineer: If you can't see the difference, then for you there isn't any.


----------



## dougdingle

Dixon Butz said:


> You don't have clue.


I'm sure you're right.


----------



## Dixon Butz

dougdingle said:


> I'm sure you're right.


No one will ever take you seriously with statements like:

"So it stands to reason the same is true for 4K vs 1080p"

Cry to the mods again if that insults you.


----------



## dougdingle

dougdingle said:


> Sets may be able to display HDR, but there is no commonly available HDR material available to show on them. I've seen HDR demo'd at Dolby Labs, and it's very good indeed, but it will be quite a while before anyone sends you images that are HDR. Not a lot of cameras used to shoot the material are capable of true HDR, either. Those have to come first - you can't go back and make something HDR that wasn't shot that way. At least not in any meaningful way.
> 
> I'd also like to point out that HDR needs some *very serious* screen intensity to get the full benefits of the tech.


Just to be clear: HDR as it is used by people shooting projects for money refers to roughly 16 stops or more of *available *dynamic range between the darkest thing and the brightest thing in the image. Many relatively inexpensive pro cameras can get to around 12-14 stops of DR on a good day if shooting log or RAW, but 16 stops and above is currently referred to as HDR in the industry, although there is currently no 'official' designation for the term.

And when it's put through the REC709-8-bit-4:2:0-MPG cuisinart, what comes out of your set and hits your eyeballs is roughly 6-7 stops of DR, and that has very little to do with the set and lots more with what's done to the signal long before you get to see it.


----------



## dougdingle

Dixon Butz said:


> No one will ever take you seriously with statements like:
> 
> "So it stands to reason the same is true for 4K vs 1080p"
> 
> Cry to the mods again if that insults you.


I didn't make that statement.

And I've never "cried to the mods" about anything.

This will be the last time I respond to you. I don't deal with uninformed yet opinionated trolls.


----------



## aaronwt

dougdingle said:


> If you don't know what you're looking at, yes that's true. If you do know what you're looking at, they can be quite useful. I own a $1,500 chart I use professionally that is extremely useful for measuring all sorts of things on professional cameras and monitors.
> 
> So they claim. Don't know how to test that, since there is little to no HDR material available outside labs and high end facilities.
> 
> Personally, I think it's more marketing nonsense than reality.
> 
> Do they also claim to have seriously increased screen intensity? Because without that, HDR is meaningless.


DOn't most of the new cell phones take HDR video? I know my Galaxy S6 uses 2160P and HDR for the video if you set it. But for HDR I think it tops out at the 1080P setting. When using 2160P I think the HDR setting gets turned off.


----------



## HarperVision

Dixon Butz said:


> No one will ever take you seriously with statements like: "So it stands to reason the same is true for 4K vs 1080p" Cry to the mods again if that insults you.


Your for one should start taking him serious because from the things he's said, he's correct and he certainly appears to know much more than you or I.


----------



## dougdingle

aaronwt said:


> DOn't most of the new cell phones take HDR video? I know my Galaxy S6 uses 2160P and HDR for the video if you set it. But for HDR I think it tops out at the 1080P setting. When using 2160P I think the HDR setting gets turned off.


I don't know about phone displays, sorry.

I do know that it's currently the unregulated wild wild west for HDR, because there are no defined industry standards and therefore no proper definitions.

Remember when HD sets used to claim an insane "1,000,000:1 contrast ratio!!"?

Or audio amplifiers that claimed "1,000 BLISTERING watts of peak impulse power output per channel!!!" when drawing 120 watts of total power from the wall socket? They neglected to mention that for the spec to be valid, the amp had to be hit by lightning at the instant of measurement. 

That's where the definition of HDR is now. Anything at all can claim to be HDR capable.


----------



## aaronwt

dougdingle said:


> I don't know about phone displays, sorry.
> 
> I do know that it's currently the unregulated wild wild west for HDR, because there are no defined industry standards and therefore no proper definitions.
> 
> Remember when HD sets used to claim an insane "1,000,000:1 contrast ratio!!"?
> 
> Or audio amplifiers that claimed "1,000 BLISTERING watts of peak impulse power output per channel!!!" when drawing 120 watts of total power from the wall socket? They neglected to mention that for the spec to be valid, the amp had to be hit by lightning at the instant of measurement.
> 
> That's where the definition of HDR is now. Anything at all can claim to be HDR capable.


I only know that when I tried out HDR vs non HDR, it made a big difference in the darker areas. It's really not a feature I care about. I have it set for auto.


----------



## Dixon Butz

HarperVision said:


> Your for one should start taking him serious because from the things he's said, he's correct and he certainly appears to know much more than you or I.


So I am supposed to believe in someone's speculation when I have owned one for over a year? I would know better than anyone that has never owned one.


----------



## atmuscarella

Dixon Butz said:


> So I am supposed to believe in someone's speculation when I have owned one for over a year? I would know better than anyone that has never owned one.


The reality is that most likely none of us who are just normal consumers can actually make a valid comparison. Back when I compared similar 43"ish sized 720/1080 sets I had to walk back and forth in the store, stand at an estimated viewing distance and make a decision based on what I saw in a poor viewing environment while comparing TVs that may have had other difference beyond the 720/1080 resolution and that likely where not setup properly.

If you recently bought a top 4K set it likely has an exceptional picture which may be because it is 4K or it may simple be because it is a top TV and you set it up properly. To actually do a valid comparison you would need the at least 2 same size TVs (one 4K & one 1080p) of similar quality setup the same in the same viewing environment. Then you could compare the same 480i/720p/1080i/1080p content on each to see what difference if any you could see at viewing distance and then you would need the same content in a native 4K version to see if you thought native 4K content looked any different again at your viewing distance.

When actual reviewers have done the above type review most have said the same thing and question the value of 4K resolution on sets under 60" at "normal" viewing distances.


----------



## lessd

atmuscarella said:


> The reality is that most likely none of us who are just normal consumers can actually make a valid comparison. Back when I compared similar 43"ish sized 720/1080 sets I had to walk back and forth in the store, stand at an estimated viewing distance and make a decision based on what I saw in a poor viewing environment while comparing TVs that may have had other difference beyond the 720/1080 resolution and that likely where not setup properly.
> 
> If you recently bought a top 4K set it likely has an exceptional picture which may be because it is 4K or it may simple be because it is a top TV and you set it up properly. To actually do a valid comparison you would need the at least 2 same size TVs (one 4K & one 1080p) of similar quality setup the same in the same viewing environment. Then you could compare the same 480i/720p/1080i/1080p content on each to see what difference if any you could see at viewing distance and then you would need the same content in a native 4K version to see if you thought native 4K content looked any different again at your viewing distance.
> 
> When actual reviewers have done the above type review most have said the same thing and question the value of 4K resolution on sets under 60" at "normal" viewing distances.


The proper setup of any high end HDTV is more important than the resolution, and now that much of what you see is compressed so your not even seeing the best your high end 1080p TV is capable of I do question the value of paying more for a 4K HDTV then using the money to purchase a top end 1080p HDTV. However I think the days of 1080p top end HDTV are limited because 4K will take over for all bigger TV (50" or bigger) as 1080p have taking over for most HDTV 36" or bigger.
I watch Netflix on my 1080p HDTV at 1080p24, great picture but if I come into the room I could not tell quickly if I was watching a 1080i (HBO) or a 1080p24 (Netflix) movie. I don't think I could even tell a 720P movie from the others as my TV is converting all to the panels 1080 lines.


----------



## Wattsline

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/05...ase/?intcmp=ob_homepage_tech&intcmp=obnetwork


----------



## HarperVision

Dixon Butz said:


> So I am supposed to believe in someone's speculation when I have owned one for over a year? I would know better than anyone that has never owned one.


Yes. I own a solar system on my house. That doesn't make me an expert.


----------



## Dan203

With a 4k TV playing good 4k content you can tell the difference. It's not just resolution, the picture just looks better. But watching HD content on a 4K TV most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. And if they can it may not be a positive difference. It can be similar to the "soap opera effect" a lot of people notice when watching a 240Mhz TV with the motion enhancement feature enabled. It looks more lifelike, but that's not always a good thing.


----------



## Dixon Butz

Wattsline said:


> http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/05...ase/?intcmp=ob_homepage_tech&intcmp=obnetwork


Article sponsored by Sony.


----------



## HarperVision

Dan203 said:


> With a 4k TV playing good 4k content you can tell the difference. It's not just resolution, the picture just looks better. But watching HD content on a 4K TV most people wouldn't be able to tell the difference. And if they can it may not be a positive difference. It can be similar to the "soap opera effect" a lot of people notice when watching a *240Mhz TV with the motion enhancement feature enabled*. It looks more lifelike, but that's not always a good thing.


240MHz......Damn that's a fast refresh rate!!!


----------



## Dixon Butz

With Samsung UHD TVs, there is no soap opera effect if adjusted properly.


----------



## Dixon Butz

One of the best uses for a 4K TV is using it as a computer monitor. GTX 980 with HDMI 2.0. Most of my 4K TV use is with a PC.
And no you don't need to sit within 4 feet. I am 9 feet with windows scaling at 168%
If you have a 4K TV and you don't use it as a monitor, you are missing out.


----------



## Dan203

HarperVision said:


> 240MHz......Damn that's a fast refresh rate!!!


Doh!


----------



## Wattsline

Dixon Butz said:


> Article sponsored by Sony.


Lol, where did you get that from and even if it were true it wouldn't change the fact about HDR coming.


----------



## Dixon Butz

Wattsline said:


> Lol, where did you get that from and even if it were true it wouldn't change the fact about HDR coming.


Well they only recommend the Sony 950b or the Vizio. And the and they say don't buy a curved TV Samsung or LG. 
The 950b has an IPS panel. Which means poor black levels. There are many reports of bad blacks on AVS with many returns.
IDK anything about the Vizio except their bad warranty policy.


----------



## atmuscarella

Wattsline said:


> Lol, where did you get that from and even if it were true it wouldn't change the fact about HDR coming.


Well give how the article is pimping the Sony 4K TV pretty hard (pretty much ever paragraph says to buy it) it isn't a big leap to believe that Sony "sponsored" the article.


----------



## Wattsline

Dixon Butz said:


> Well they only recommend the Sony 950b or the Vizio. And the and they say don't buy a curved TV Samsung or LG.
> The 950b has an IPS panel. Which means poor black levels. There are many reports of bad blacks on AVS with many returns.
> IDK anything about the Vizio except their bad warranty policy.


They wern't recommending a t.v. and it wasn't about buying a t.v. The article was about HDR and talked about companies implementing HDR only one of which is Sony. Sony has a long history of being in the forefront of Audio/Video, Bluray for one and their XBR line has had some of the best TVs on the market. I'm a fan of their TVs but the article was about HDR not Sony TVs.


----------



## Wattsline

atmuscarella said:


> Well give how the article is pimping the Sony 4K TV pretty hard (pretty much ever paragraph says to buy it) it isn't a big leap to believe that Sony "sponsored" the article.


They wern't recommending a t.v. and it wasn't about buying a t.v. The article was about HDR and talked about companies implementing HDR only one of which is Sony. Sony has a long history of being in the forefront of Audio/Video, Bluray for one and their XBR line has had some of the best TVs on the market. I'm a fan of their TVs but the article was about HDR not Sony TVs.


----------



## Dixon Butz

Wattsline said:


> They wern't recommending a t.v. and it wasn't about buying a t.v. The article was about HDR and talked about companies implementing HDR only one of which is Sony. Sony has a long history of being in the forefront of Audio/Video, Bluray for one and their XBR line has had some of the best TVs on the market. I'm a fan of their TVs but the article was about HDR not Sony TVs.


But they do recommend the Sony if your TV is broken or on it's last leg. 
Funny how an article about HDR can recommend a TV with low contrast ratio.


----------



## Wattsline

Dixon Butz said:


> But they do recommend the Sony if your TV is broken or on it's last leg.
> Funny how an article about HDR can recommend a TV with low contrast ratio.


They said if you must buy NOW and can't wait he recommended the Sony on the high end and a Visio on the modest price side. The reviews of the Sony say it's got great contrast! It would have helped if you kept your opinion out and supplied facts. I don't care if you liked the article or Sony but, HDR is coming, it's big in the camera world and it's coming to TVs. Advances will always happen and things will always get better it's just at what point do you want to jump in. Since there isn't much 4K content I'm waiting. I can afford to do that and HDR adds to the "maybe it's better to wait another year" feeling.

One review
http://reviews.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/sony-lcd-tv/sony-xbr-65x950b.html


----------



## Dixon Butz

Wattsline said:


> They said if you must buy NOW and can't wait he recommended the Sony on the high end and a Visio on the modest price side. The reviews of the Sony say it's got great contrast! It would have helped if you kept your opinion out and supplied facts. I don't care if you liked the article or Sony but, HDR is coming, it's big in the camera world and it's coming to TVs. Advances will always happen and things will always get better it's just at what point do you want to jump in. Since there isn't much 4K content I'm waiting. I can afford to do that and HDR adds to the "maybe it's better to wait another year" feeling.
> 
> One review
> http://reviews.lcdtvbuyingguide.com/sony-lcd-tv/sony-xbr-65x950b.html


Yet another Sony ad. You work for Sony?

This Amazon review sums up the 950b perfectly.

"The Ugly:
The Flashlight effect when viewing darker content is a dark room. This is huge and has caused me to send the unit back with in a few days of owning it. The flash light effect is so prominent that it distracts from what is being viewed on the screen.
Black and Grey Uniformity is nonexistent on this unit to the point where it makes the TV unwatchable.

I would have given it one star but the picture quality and the upscale processor are amazing. Unfortunately the Back Lighting pours over the screen with dark content and in a dark room and that distracts from the finer points of this unit."


----------



## Wattsline

Dixon Butz said:


> Yet another Sony ad. You work for Sony?
> 
> This Amazon review sums up the 950b perfectly.
> 
> "The Ugly:
> The Flashlight effect when viewing darker content is a dark room. This is huge and has caused me to send the unit back with in a few days of owning it. The flash light effect is so prominent that it distracts from what is being viewed on the screen.
> Black and Grey Uniformity is nonexistent on this unit to the point where it makes the TV unwatchable.
> 
> I would have given it one star but the picture quality and the upscale processor are amazing. Unfortunately the Back Lighting pours over the screen with dark content and in a dark room and that distracts from the finer points of this unit."


Anybody can find any kind of review on Amazon 1 or 5 stars on everything! That was so lame to pass that off as a fact! You lost all credibility! 
I do not work for Sony. I'm a senior electronic engineering technologist at boeing. Good day!


----------



## Dixon Butz

Wattsline said:


> Anybody can find any kind of review on Amazon 1 or 5 stars on everything! That was so lame to pass that off as a fact! You lost all credibility!
> I do not work for Sony. I'm a senior electronic engineering technologist at boeing. Good day!


Look on AVS forums. Same issues. 
It's an IPS panel. Great colors and viewing angles. But terrible blacks. Bad choice for a large format TV.


----------



## Wattsline

Dixon Butz said:


> Look on AVS forums. Same issues.
> It's an IPS panel. Great colors and viewing angles. But terrible blacks. Bad choice for a large format TV.


Again users, not professional reviews. I've been a member of AVS forever. Just looked and you can find good and bad reviews by users all the time. Some users have never had their sets calibrated and all sorts of things. There are many positive reviews, very positive! I'm done with this conversation. If you don't like Sony or XBRs I really don't care. This wasn't about sony it was about HDR.

P.S. I read the sony is a full-array LED backlight not that I care, again it was about HDR!


----------



## Dixon Butz

Here is a more in depth review.
http://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/xbr65x950b-201407223857.htm


----------



## anthonymoody

Re: the seating charts I've seen that delineate the distances required to see the difference between 1080p and 4K, I've found them to consistently understate the distance. And I don't have 20/20 vision any more.

For reference, I sit just beyond the typically stated distance from my 75" set, yet I can see pixels in quite a bit of content.

Said another way, in my experience more people will notice the jump to 4K than the charts would indicate. I also believe that more people will jump a screen size (or several) as 4K sets become ubiquitous and pricing continues its inevitable march downward.


----------



## lessd

anthonymoody said:


> Re: the seating charts I've seen that delineate the distances required to see the difference between 1080p and 4K, I've found them to consistently understate the distance. And I don't have 20/20 vision any more.
> 
> For reference, I sit just beyond the typically stated distance from my 75" set, yet I can see pixels in quite a bit of content.
> 
> Said another way, in my experience more people will notice the jump to 4K than the charts would indicate. I also believe that more people will jump a screen size (or several) as 4K sets become ubiquitous and pricing continues its inevitable march downward.


I have a high end Sharp 80" 1080p HDTV (from 2013) and at 10 feet with glasses set for 10 feet I can't see any pixels, a 720P channel looks as good as 1080I channel, last night on the Letterman CBS show there were some clips from the old days, and one could see a big difference on the old 480 clips as the resolution was crap. I don't see much difference on Netflix streaming at 1080p/24 from a 1080i HBO movie. But as with anything subject to different people eyes and sensitivities YMMV. When I purchase my next big HDTV (5 to 10 years from now) it will be a 4K set because by then all top end sets will be 4K, like it or not. (Try purchasing a new 80" 720p HDTV today, if you could find one you would not save much money)


----------



## anthonymoody

lessd said:


> I have a high end Sharp 80" 1080p HDTV (from 2013) and *at 10 feet with glasses set for 10 feet* I can't see any pixels, a 720P channel looks as good as 1080I channel, last night on the Letterman CBS show there were some clips from the old days, and one could see a big difference on the old 480 clips as the resolution was crap. I don't see much difference on Netflix streaming at 1080p/24 from a 1080i HBO movie. But as with anything subject to different people eyes and sensitivities YMMV. When I purchase my next big HDTV (5 to 10 years from now) it will be a 4K set because by then all top end sets will be 4K, like it or not. (Try purchasing a new 80" 720p HDTV today, if you could find one you would not save much money)


Not sure what you mean by the part I bolded, but yes obviously YMMV. I can see pixels no problem at 10.5' from my 75" Samsung.


----------



## Dan203

anthonymoody said:


> For reference, I sit just beyond the typically stated distance from my 75" set, yet I can see pixels in quite a bit of content.


Are you sure you're not confusing pixels with macroblocks? Marcoblocks are caused by crappy compression, not the resolution of the TV. The "pixels" on an LCD/LED TV are actually little individual red, green and blue dots. If you can actually make those out then you're sitting too close.


----------



## ej42137

anthonymoody said:


> Not sure what you mean by the part I bolded, but yes obviously YMMV. I can see pixels no problem at 10.5' from my 75" Samsung.


You must be young. As we get older, our eyes lose flexibility and we need glasses to see sharply, and those glasses will be "set" for a given distance, like one would focus a microscope or a telescope, but without an adjustment. I myself am an old guy and I have different glasses for very close work, for a computer monitor and for driving (luckily I don't need glasses for reading. Yet.)

Your time will come, if you're lucky enough to get old.


----------



## aaronwt

LASIK can push that back a few years. I wore glasses/contacts from 1976 to 2005. Then I got LASIK and had 20/20 vision again. Although it's not quite 20/20 any more. Ten years later.


----------



## ej42137

aaronwt said:


> LASIK can push that back a few years. I wore glasses/contacts from 1976 to 2005. Then I got LASIK and had 20/20 vision again. Although it's not quite 20/20 any more. Ten years later.


I'm waiting for those bionic lenses that have been written about recently. Supposedly they will make your vision three times better than 20/20. Which will make UHD a necessity, not an empty luxury.


----------



## atmuscarella

How things are changing. There is now a great reason for TiVo to get into the 4K business. *Legal downloadable 4K content.*

https://www.vidity.com/

From Engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/21/vidity-4k-downloads/

If TiVo builds a 4K DVR that can both stream and download 4K content they will have a winner - if they build a high end version that includes 4K Blu-ray it could become the one box for 4K.


----------



## bradleys

atmuscarella said:


> How things are changing. There is now a great reason for TiVo to get into the 4K business. *Legal downloadable 4K content.*
> 
> https://www.vidity.com/
> 
> From Engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2015/05/21/vidity-4k-downloads/
> 
> If TiVo builds a 4K DVR that can both stream and download 4K content they will have a winner - if they build a high end version that includes 4K Blu-ray it could become the one box for 4K.


Hmm...

How big would a feature length 4k movie be. at least 100GB? So the max would be 10 movies per terabyte? You certainly wouldn't want to put it on a mobile device... 1080P is 10 to 15GB and 480P is about 4GB in the MPEG2 format.

Assume some compression can bring that down a little, but a library of 4k movies is going to take up some serious space and take a long time to "copy or move the files and...play them elsewhere"

Oh, and the DRM? This isn't likely to be as interesting as it sounds.


----------



## Dixon Butz

bradleys said:


> Hmm...
> 
> How big would a feature length 4k movie be. at least 100GB? So the max would be 10 movies per terabyte? You certainly wouldn't want to put it on a mobile device... 1080P is 10 to 15GB and 480P is about 4GB in the MPEG2 format.
> 
> Assume some compression can bring that down a little, but a library of 4k movies is going to take up some serious space and take a long time to "copy or move the files and...play them elsewhere"
> 
> Oh, and the DRM? This isn't likely to be as interesting as it sounds.


The 4K movies on the Samsung pack are 32-42GB with HEVC.
They are encrypted and can only be played off the movie pack hard drive. 
MGO has at least one 4K movie that is 60GB.


----------



## dougdingle

bradleys said:


> Hmm...
> 
> How big would a feature length 4k movie be. at least 100GB? So the max would be 10 movies per terabyte? You certainly wouldn't want to put it on a mobile device... 1080P is 10 to 15GB and 480P is about 4GB in the MPEG2 format.
> 
> Assume some compression can bring that down a little, but a library of 4k movies is going to take up some serious space and take a long time to "copy or move the files and...play them elsewhere"
> 
> Oh, and the DRM? This isn't likely to be as interesting as it sounds.


At four times the pixel count, and assuming the same sort of compression ratios and 8 bit 4:2:0 images as we now have with mpg, UHD should take up 40-60 GB for a two hour movie.

The 'promise' of h.265, once deployed, is that it will be able to deliver UHD images at the same file size and quality as we are now seeing 1080 images. We'll see.

But if UHD moves up to 10 bit images at 4:2:2 (or even 4:4:4) sampling with a broader REC2020 color space, and somewhat milder compression, file sizes are going to get a lot bigger. Then throw in HDR, and they will get a LOT bigger.

Streaming is slightly different, as reducing file size is job one for streaming image suppliers. Reduced filesize=higher compression=lower image quality.


----------



## atmuscarella

bradleys said:


> Hmm...
> 
> How big would a feature length 4k movie be. at least 100GB? So the max would be 10 movies per terabyte? You certainly wouldn't want to put it on a mobile device... 1080P is 10 to 15GB and 480P is about 4GB in the MPEG2 format.
> 
> Assume some compression can bring that down a little, but a library of 4k movies is going to take up some serious space and take a long time to "copy or move the files and...play them elsewhere"
> 
> Oh, and the DRM? This isn't likely to be as interesting as it sounds.


If the service requires you to maintain your movies yourself forever I agree. But the way Vudu works now on my computer is I can download 1080p movies as often as I like so they get deleted after viewing and of course I always have the option of just streaming them. If 4K goes that route and TiVo gets the services providing that ability on their boxes it puts them squarely in the solution for 4K content access. We really only have a few choices streaming/downloading/solid media/cable/sat/OTA channels. At some point most people may have the band width needed to reliable stream 4K content and perhaps there will be 4K "TV" channels, but that is not true now, so downloading and solid media are going to be part of the solution to 4K content. If TiVo wants to play they need to offer a full solution.


----------



## lessd

atmuscarella said:


> If the service requires you to maintain your movies yourself forever I agree. But the way Vudu works now on my computer is I can download 1080p movies as often as I like so they get deleted after viewing and of course I always have the option of just streaming them. If 4K goes that route and TiVo gets the services providing that ability on their boxes it puts them squarely in the solution for 4K content access. We really only have a few choices streaming/downloading/solid media/cable/sat/OTA channels. At some point most people may have the band width needed to reliable stream 4K content and perhaps there will be 4K "TV" channels, but that is not true now, so downloading and solid media are going to be part of the solution to 4K content. If TiVo wants to play they need to offer a full solution.


The main use of TiVo is time shifting and Ad skipping, most movies now at 4K don't need this type of service, so I don't see TiVo in the 4K business for the next 5 or more years. 4K BD player is and should be a stand alone product, as most 1080P BD players are now, you don't fine many (if any) BD players built into TVs.


----------



## atmuscarella

lessd said:


> The main use of TiVo is time shifting and Ad skipping, most movies now at 4K don't need this type of service, so I don't see TiVo in the 4K business for the next 5 or more years. 4K BD player is and should be a stand alone product, as most 1080P BD players are now, you don't fine many (if any) BD players built into TVs.


What TiVo wants to be when it grows up is an interesting question. It was fairly clear when they released the Premiere and promoted it as "the one box" solution they (TiVo) wanted to be more than a DVR. My take is they still want to be "the one box" solution that is what OnePass is all about.

In the old SD days the TiVos with DVD players seemed to command a pretty good premium which extended into the used market. My guess is TiVo could have added a blu-ray player to Roamio Pro for $20 which would have helped to justify the premium price, but they clearly where more focused on the MSO's desires at the time. Plus by the time the Roamio line was released I am guessing most people who wanted a blu-ray player had one. We are at a new beginning with 4K blu-ray if TiVo offered the right product it might help the high enders to decide to upgrade via a TiVo 4K one box solution.

If all TiVo is going to do is add 4K streaming then I think their is near zero reason for TiVo to get into the 4K market anytime soon and buy your 5 year time frame. However if they want to really offer a premium product and be "the one box" solution then they are going to have to get into the 4K market and offer something more than what already comes with every 4K TV (4K streaming).

Regarding 4K blu-ray players none of them will be stand alone devices. They will all offer streaming and some may offer on board storage for downloadable content depending on how that plays out, along with 4K blu-ray play back. If someone builds a 4k player that also provides superior streaming and/or downloadable 4K, I see no way for TiVo to be relevant in the Premium product/4K world without offering something more than 4K steaming which downloadable 4K and/or 4K blu-ray would be.

Unfortunately my belief is in the end TiVo will not deliver a Premium 4K product. My guess is if they do anything with 4K it will be a Roamio with 4K streaming which as I have said several times I find little or no reason for. And I am also guessing that high end 4K users will have less use for that type of a 4K TiVo than the general population has for a TiVo now.


----------



## lessd

atmuscarella said:


> Unfortunately my belief is in the end TiVo will not deliver a Premium 4K product. My guess is if they do anything with 4K it will be a Roamio with 4K streaming which as I have said several times I find little or no reason for. And I am also guessing that high end *4K users will have less use for that type of a 4K TiVo than the general population has for a TiVo now*.


That exactly the point I was trying to make, as of* now *there no space for a 4K TiVo.


----------



## Diana Collins

While I do expect that we will see a UHD TiVo DVR eventually, a UHD Mini is cheaper and somewhat easier to bring to market. The DVR could tune and record UHD, even if it can't play it. This is what DirecTV is doing now, with RVU enabled UHD TVs instead of a Mini. Dish is doing the same thing with their announced UHD Joey. A UHD Mini would provide a streaming platform by itself, and as soon as there is some UHD linear content a current model DVR could record it and feed it to a UHD capable Mini.


----------



## shwru980r

SD content can look bad on large 1080P screens. Are the even larger 4K screens going to make the lower definition content look worse? I was shocked when I first purchased an HD TV in 2008 and found that some of the channels looked worse.

I think the determining factor should be how non HD content looks on a 4K TV compared to 1080P. I would definitely want to compare the lowest common denominator before buying a 4K TV, especially if my 1080P TV was still working.

Also, I'm not going to save any floor space replacing a 1080P TV like I did when I replaced a CRT TV, so for me the improvement would have to be compelling


----------



## atmuscarella

shwru980r said:


> SD content can look bad on large 1080P screens. Are the even larger 4K screens going to make the lower definition content look worse? I was shocked when I first purchased an HD TV in 2008 and found that some of the channels looked worse.
> 
> I think the determining factor should be how non HD content looks on a 4K TV compared to 1080P. I would definitely want to compare the lowest common denominator before buying a 4K TV, especially if my 1080P TV was still working.
> 
> Also, I'm not going to save any floor space replacing a 1080P TV like I did when I replaced a CRT TV, so for me the improvement would have to be compelling


Back in the mid 2000s how well an HD TV up-scaled SD content was part of lots of reviews and there were some TVs that did a good job and some that did a bad job of it. As more HD content became normal reviews stopped worrying about SD content.

But as I pointed out in post 139 there is more to 4K TVs and the ultra HD spec than resolution. Just watch a review of Tomorrowland which is one of the first movies shot with High Dynamic Range (only 4 theaters in the country have it) and the review was blown away by the picture - which was the same resolution as most movies.

So as with HD, content is coming for UHD and that is what will make 4K TVs shine.


----------



## lessd

atmuscarella said:


> Back in the mid 2000s how well an HD TV up-scaled SD content was part of lots of reviews and there were some TVs that did a good job and some that did a bad job of it. As more HD content became normal reviews stopped worrying about SD content.
> 
> But as I pointed out in post 139 there is more to 4K TVs and the ultra HD spec than resolution. Just watch a review of Tomorrowland which is one of the first movies shot with High Dynamic Range (only 4 theaters in the country have it) and the review was blown away by the picture - which was the same resolution as most movies.
> 
> So as with HD, content is coming for UHD and that is what will make 4K TVs shine.


My question is will 4K HDR ever come from a cable tuner, BD yes, streaming most likely yes, but for TiVo, time shifting and commercial skip has no place in that space. When and if normal RJ6 cable signal VIA your cable co has 4K HDR channels, then TiVo so called Series 6 would make some sense. It not clear to me that 4K HDR will ever become common, just like SVHS taping never became common, for most people SVHS did not make enough improvement over VHS tape for the average person.
I don't know that most 42" to 65" TVs will look that much better in 4K HDR, than 1080P but I guess time will tell.


----------



## atmuscarella

lessd said:


> My question is will 4K HDR ever come from a cable tuner BD yes, streaming most likely yes, but for TiVo, time shifting and commercial skip has no place in that space. When and if normal RJ6 cable signal VIA your cable co has 4K HDR channels, then TiVo so called Series 6 would make some sense. It not clear to me that 4K HDR will ever become common, just like SVHS taping never became common, for most people SVHS did not make enough improvement over VHS tape for the average person.
> I don't know that most 42" to 65" TVs will look that much better in 4K HDR, than 1080P but I guess time will tell.


My guess is 4K/UHD is not going to come out of a cable tuner anytime soon. What TiVo does really depends on what TiVo sees as their future; are they mostly a DVR, a media consumption device, or something else.

The good news about HDR is apparently 35mm film was a real gem in hiding. Not only can you do a rescan to get higher resolution you can also get HDR. So there is the potential of lots of content. What I did not get a clear reading on was if there was anything they could do if the content was "filmed" digitally - didn't sound like they could.

My take on the 42-65 inch TV range is fairly simple. Manufactures are artificially choosing to move all their top TVs to 4K only so if you want a top picture you will have to buy a 4K TV. At the 42-65 inch size the extra resolution isn't going to get you much so if the TV doesn't provide HDR and the increase color improvement that appear to be going to be a big part of the over all UHD spec you are going to get a great picture but not the major jaw dropping improvement some people expect this to be when it gets all worked out and native content becomes available. Depending on who you want to believe the end result (which we are not close to yet) is that UHD could be as big an improvement over HD as HD was over SD. Guess we will have to wait and see.


----------



## astrohip

shwru980r said:


> I think the determining factor should be how non HD content looks on a 4K TV compared to 1080P. I would definitely want to compare the lowest common denominator before buying a 4K TV, especially if my 1080P TV was still working.


I'd be far more concerned with how my usual fare looks, not the lowest fare. Combined with the fact I watch little to no SD, that's of zero concern to me. YMMV.

However, if you watch so much SD that you _are _concerned about it, why would you even get a 4K?


----------



## JBDragon

bradleys said:


> I read that back in September... It doesn't change the fact that the only source for 4k content in the foreseeable future will be streaming providers.
> 
> I do see TiVo providing a minor series update with 4k capabilities, but once again the driver will be streaming services such as Netflix - not Linear cable or even broadcast TV.
> 
> I also suspsect this would be considered a minor update and still considered a Series 5 Roamio TiVo.
> 
> As for the other predictions, larger har drives are easy, but I don't suspect raid in anything but the Mega.
> 
> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.


Even 4K streaming, I mean come on. it's not really 4K, just like 1080P streaming is not really 1080P. It's been heavily compressed. You really think it's the same 30+ Gig Blu-Ray which is already compressed, and then they stream it to you and it's only around 5 Gig's in size. A fraction of what it was. Now you want to 4K it which means much larger then even 30 Gig's in size and why it won't fit on a normal Blu-Ray Disc and yet somehow, people think a 4K stream is really 4K quality? HAHAHAHAHA You're not even getting 1080P quality. You need a Blu-Ray for that.

Like all these suckers buying a crappy Digital version of Star Wars!! I have it on Blu-Ray. I can and did Rip it into a Digital version to watch that's a far better copy then what people are paying for. Of course I handbreak it and squeeze it down to a much smaller size to take up less space and still look pretty good. That's what you're paying for!!! Because 4K takes up much more space, there's no Disc standard for it yet. There's that Sony Box which is really the only true 4K source out there right now for home, but it's not cheap.

4K TIVO is pointless. It's as pointless as a 4K ROKU or AppleTV which is why it hasn't happened. 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.

Unless you plan to sit 1 foot in front of your 50" TV, 4K is overkill. You get a 100"+ screen at around 6 feet away or so and OK, 4K may matter. What do you think you see going to the movie theater? Digital 4K. Many times it says it right up there on the screen. Is your screen at home that size??? If it is, 4K would matter. If it's a fraction of that size, 4K is pointless. Go get a larger 1080P HDTV and not a more expensive smaller 4K set that is just a marketing gimmick.

You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


----------



## Johncv

bradleys said:


> I read that back in September... It doesn't change the fact that the only source for 4k content in the foreseeable future will be streaming providers.
> 
> I do see TiVo providing a minor series update with 4k capabilities, but once again the driver will be streaming services such as Netflix - not Linear cable or even broadcast TV.
> 
> I also suspsect this would be considered a minor update and still considered a Series 5 Roamio TiVo.
> 
> As for the other predictions, larger har drives are easy, but I don't suspect raid in anything but the Mega.
> 
> It actually wouldn't suprise me if the next Series TiVo was cloud based as opposed to self contained.


Can the Roamio display 4K streaming?


----------



## Johncv

JBDragon said:


> Even 4K streaming, I mean come on. it's not really 4K, just like 1080P streaming is not really 1080P. It's been heavily compressed. You really think it's the same 30+ Gig Blu-Ray which is already compressed, and then they stream it to you and it's only around 5 Gig's in size. A fraction of what it was. Now you want to 4K it which means much larger then even 30 Gig's in size and why it won't fit on a normal Blu-Ray Disc and yet somehow, people think a 4K stream is really 4K quality? HAHAHAHAHA You're not even getting 1080P quality. You need a Blu-Ray for that.
> 
> Like all these suckers buying a crappy Digital version of Star Wars!! I have it on Blu-Ray. I can and did Rip it into a Digital version to watch that's a far better copy then what people are paying for. Of course I handbreak it and squeeze it down to a much smaller size to take up less space and still look pretty good. That's what you're paying for!!! Because 4K takes up much more space, there's no Disc standard for it yet. There's that Sony Box which is really the only true 4K source out there right now for home, but it's not cheap.
> 
> 4K TIVO is pointless. It's as pointless as a 4K ROKU or AppleTV which is why it hasn't happened. 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.
> 
> Unless you plan to sit 1 foot in front of your 50" TV, 4K is overkill. You get a 100"+ screen at around 6 feet away or so and OK, 4K may matter. What do you think you see going to the movie theater? Digital 4K. Many times it says it right up there on the screen. Is your screen at home that size??? If it is, 4K would matter. If it's a fraction of that size, 4K is pointless. Go get a larger 1080P HDTV and not a more expensive smaller 4K set that is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


There is a new disc standard it call Ultra HD Blu-Ray:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/ultra-hd-blu-ray-specs-dates-and-titles/

http://www.cnet.com/news/ultra-hd-4k-blu-ray-what-we-know/


----------



## Dixon Butz

JBDragon said:


> Even 4K streaming, I mean come on. it's not really 4K, just like 1080P streaming is not really 1080P. It's been heavily compressed. You really think it's the same 30+ Gig Blu-Ray which is already compressed, and then they stream it to you and it's only around 5 Gig's in size. A fraction of what it was. Now you want to 4K it which means much larger then even 30 Gig's in size and why it won't fit on a normal Blu-Ray Disc and yet somehow, people think a 4K stream is really 4K quality? HAHAHAHAHA You're not even getting 1080P quality. You need a Blu-Ray for that.
> 
> Like all these suckers buying a crappy Digital version of Star Wars!! I have it on Blu-Ray. I can and did Rip it into a Digital version to watch that's a far better copy then what people are paying for. Of course I handbreak it and squeeze it down to a much smaller size to take up less space and still look pretty good. That's what you're paying for!!! Because 4K takes up much more space, there's no Disc standard for it yet. There's that Sony Box which is really the only true 4K source out there right now for home, but it's not cheap.
> 
> 4K TIVO is pointless. It's as pointless as a 4K ROKU or AppleTV which is why it hasn't happened. 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.
> 
> Unless you plan to sit 1 foot in front of your 50" TV, 4K is overkill. You get a 100"+ screen at around 6 feet away or so and OK, 4K may matter. What do you think you see going to the movie theater? Digital 4K. Many times it says it right up there on the screen. Is your screen at home that size??? If it is, 4K would matter. If it's a fraction of that size, 4K is pointless. Go get a larger 1080P HDTV and not a more expensive smaller 4K set that is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


4K streaming is spectacular. You have obviously never seen it so why are you trolling?


----------



## dougdingle

JBDragon said:


> 4K TIVO is pointless. It's as pointless as a 4K ROKU or AppleTV which is why it hasn't happened. 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.
> 
> You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


Yep. Whether in the consumer area or the professional area, those pushing for 4K always *always *have something they want to sell you. In this case, it happens to be 800 million new TVs worldwide. And when that market gets saturated (and it will), there will be 8K snake oil right around the corner.

Think of it as the "3D straight into your living room!!!!" debacle all over again, just without the glasses.


----------



## Dixon Butz

Technology evolves, get over it already. 
No is forcing you to buy anything. 
Some people buy new cars every year. Some buy a new iPhone every 6 months. BFD
I can't wait until a 65" 8K is available for PC! 4K is amazing! I laugh at all the haters


----------



## lessd

JBDragon said:


> Even 4K streaming, I mean come on. it's not really 4K, just like 1080P streaming is not really 1080P. It's been heavily compressed. You really think it's the same 30+ Gig Blu-Ray which is already compressed, and then they stream it to you and it's only around 5 Gig's in size. A fraction of what it was. Now you want to 4K it which means much larger then even 30 Gig's in size and why it won't fit on a normal Blu-Ray Disc and yet somehow, people think a 4K stream is really 4K quality? HAHAHAHAHA You're not even getting 1080P quality. You need a Blu-Ray for that.
> 
> Like all these suckers buying a crappy Digital version of Star Wars!! I have it on Blu-Ray. I can and did Rip it into a Digital version to watch that's a far better copy then what people are paying for. Of course I handbreak it and squeeze it down to a much smaller size to take up less space and still look pretty good. That's what you're paying for!!! Because 4K takes up much more space, there's no Disc standard for it yet. There's that Sony Box which is really the only true 4K source out there right now for home, but it's not cheap.
> 
> 4K TIVO is pointless. It's as pointless as a 4K ROKU or AppleTV which is why it hasn't happened. 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.
> 
> Unless you plan to sit 1 foot in front of your 50" TV, 4K is overkill. You get a 100"+ screen at around 6 feet away or so and OK, 4K may matter. What do you think you see going to the movie theater? Digital 4K. Many times it says it right up there on the screen. Is your screen at home that size??? If it is, 4K would matter. If it's a fraction of that size, 4K is pointless. Go get a larger 1080P HDTV and not a more expensive smaller 4K set that is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


:up::up::up:



Johncv said:


> Can the Roamio display 4K streaming?


Not at present, 4K streaming is done directly from your 4K HDTV, or from some satellite source.


----------



## lessd

Dixon Butz said:


> 4K streaming is spectacular. You have obviously never seen it so why are you trolling?


Have you seen it (4K streaming) next to a uncompressed 1080P signal on the same HDTV ?


----------



## Dixon Butz

lessd said:


> Have you seen it (4K streaming) next to a uncompressed 1080P signal on the same HDTV ?


Well there is really no such thing as a uncompressed 1080P video for consumers. But 1080P does look great on my UHD TV upscaled to 4K. I have TB's of ripped Blurays.
I have seen plenty of 4K streaming. Netflix, Ultraflix, MGO, Youtube. All looks amazing even though it can be heavily compressed. You get image quality and resolution that you can not get with Bluray. 
One thing is great is how my TV's image quality has been greatly increased by firmware updates. It really is noticeable. Tomorrow I will be installing the Samsung SEK-3500U/ZA 2015 Evolution Kit that upgrades all the TV's hardware. Which will improve the IQ even more and add features.


----------



## tarheelblue32

Dixon Butz said:


> Well there is really no such thing as a uncompressed 1080P video for consumers.


Yeah I was about to say that I don't think I've ever even seen a truly uncompressed 1080p video stream. Unless you work for a media company, I doubt most people ever will.


----------



## aaronwt

lessd said:


> Have you seen it (4K streaming) next to a uncompressed 1080P signal on the same HDTV ?


Where are you getting an uncompressed 1080P signal? It certainly isn't from a Blu-ray Disc.


----------



## lessd

aaronwt said:


> Where are you getting an uncompressed 1080P signal? It certainly isn't from a Blu-ray Disc.


I should have said the least uncompressed 1080P.


----------



## Dan203

I'm not a 4K hater. However the reality is that a 4K TiVo is completely unnecessary at this point. Even with H.265 the bandwidth and processing requirements for 4K are too high for current linear broadcast technology. That's why at this point 4K is all streaming via VOD services. Cable could deal with the bandwidth, but the real time encoding hardware still isn't there yet. OTA can't even deal with the bandwidth. So what's the point of having a 4K DVR if there is nothing for it to record?


----------



## dougdingle

tarheelblue32 said:


> Yeah I was about to say that I don't think I've ever even seen a truly uncompressed 1080p video stream. Unless you work for a media company, I doubt most people ever will.


I watch 1080p uncompressed all day on Sony OLED monitors, and depending on the camera and lens, it can be quite spectacular when set up correctly.

Some compression is better than others. Apple's ProRes 4:4:4:4 is excellent, as is Avid's DNxHD 220x. Prores 4:2:2 and AVC-Intra are pretty good. MPG2 is garbage for the most part. H.264 is interesting - it is visually quite good for a very small file size, but you can't do anything with in terms of post production manipulation. It falls apart instantly as soon as you attempt to color correct it or otherwise manipulate the image.

As I've said before, I currently see no advantage to 4K for the home at normal viewing distances the way it is being distributed. I do see great advantage for it theatrically, especially if the entire workflow stays at 4K and doesn't get rezzed around to save space while it's being posted.


----------



## Dan203

A lot of the syndicators we deal with still use Intra only MPEG-2 @ 4:2:2 for distribution. (occasionally we see 4:4:4) H.264 is just starting to catch on, but is still a small percentage. We do see some ProRes and DNxHD but mostly on the ingest side. They're typically looking to convert those formats to MPEG-2 or H.264.


----------



## zerdian1

Streaming is OK only if you have a good workable fast internet everywhere you go.
when you are on a train, you can not see a whole streamed movie.
you can watch a whole prerecorded movie.
I love the ability to record and playback anywhere.
So far I have 5.5TB ON TIVO and 16TB on DISH.

What I need is a good TiVo Playback manager for my OSX iMac Desktop and my OSX Mac Book Pro Laptop. I have not been able to find TiVo Desktop for Mac.



L David Matheny said:


> I absolutely agree. DVRs are to record content (on local hard drives) for later viewing, with commercial skipping, etc. If that goes away, then TiVo goes away. I hope they understand that.


----------



## zerdian1

I do not think TiVo will limit to Streaming. TiVo is a storage Company.
their model is record now and playback later.
Maybe they will have a way to store streaming ULTRA 4K and play it later.



Diana Collins said:


> Well, I doubt TiVo will release a new hardware series until a successor to Cablecard is selected and starts to be deployed. You may see an "Ultra Roamio" that can play streaming UHD content, and you may see larger storage, but it will still be a series 5 box. I wouldn't expect to see a series 6 until late 2016, at the earliest.


----------



## zerdian1

I do not think TiVo will limit to Streaming. TiVo is a storage Company.
their model is record now and playback later.
Maybe they will have a way to store streaming ULTRA 4K and play it later.
TiVo announced both the MEGA and the ULTRA September 2014.
both have been prototyped.
the MEGA with 24TB of RAID hot swappable disks is working but is behind schedule to be available.
The ULTRA will record 4K video. Is doe snot make any sense for it only to be for 4K Streaming video, unless it can record streaming 4K video.
The MEGA can still be a Roamio with 6 tuners.
But I still think that the ULTRA recording capability may make more sense as a new series, Series 6.



Diana Collins said:


> Well, I doubt TiVo will release a new hardware series until a successor to Cablecard is selected and starts to be deployed. You may see an "Ultra Roamio" that can play streaming UHD content, and you may see larger storage, but it will still be a series 5 box. I wouldn't expect to see a series 6 until late 2016, at the earliest.


----------



## davidg716

JBDragon said:


> Even 4K streaming, I mean come on. it's not really 4K, just like 1080P streaming is not really 1080P.
> ...
> 4K TV's are the next step from the failed 3D TV's. It's a way to try and get people to buy a new TV instead of holding onto the perfectly good 1080P HDTV they have now.
> 
> Unless you plan to sit 1 foot in front of your 50" TV, 4K is overkill. You get a 100"+ screen at around 6 feet away or so and OK, 4K may matter. What do you think you see going to the movie theater? Digital 4K. Many times it says it right up there on the screen. Is your screen at home that size??? If it is, 4K would matter. If it's a fraction of that size, 4K is pointless. Go get a larger 1080P HDTV and not a more expensive smaller 4K set that is just a marketing gimmick.
> 
> You already have people wanting 8K now. That's so far beyond silly.


Wow, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about do you...


----------



## zerdian1

I have DONE 4K STREAMING ON MY DISH HOPPER,
but never on a TiVo, so far.
I have a 5K iMac 27" screen that I can watch 4K videos on.
I have watched 4K videos on my iMac and there is a much sharper picture over HDTV.
but I have not found a Good TiVo Desktop for Mac that will run on my new iMac with OSX 10.10.3. or my Mac Book Pro OSX 10.10.3.



Johncv said:


> Can the Roamio display 4K streaming?


----------



## Carlos_E

lessd said:


> My question is will 4K HDR ever come from a cable tuner, BD yes, streaming most likely yes, but for TiVo, time shifting and commercial skip has no place in that space. When and if normal RJ6 cable signal VIA your cable co has 4K HDR channels, then TiVo so called Series 6 would make some sense. It not clear to me that 4K HDR will ever become common, just like SVHS taping never became common, for most people SVHS did not make enough improvement over VHS tape for the average person.
> I don't know that most 42" to 65" TVs will look that much better in 4K HDR, than 1080P but I guess time will tell.





atmuscarella said:


> My guess is 4K/UHD is not going to come out of a cable tuner anytime soon. What TiVo does really depends on what TiVo sees as their future; are they mostly a DVR, a media consumption device, or something else.


UHD and HDR is coming to cable sooner than you think.



> *COMCAST TO LAUNCH 4K ULTRA HIGH-DEFINITION SET-TOP BOX*
> 
> Comcast today announced that it will launch a 4K ultra high-definition (UHD) set-top box later this year as it brings the Xfinity in UHD catalog to the X1 platform. The new X1 set-top box, the Xi4, will deliver Xfinity TV customers 4K UHD content-four times the resolution of high-definition-directly to the television, enabling X1 customers to enjoy unlimited virtual 4K linear channels by creating personalized playlists from the Xfinity in UHD library. Customers will also enjoy high dynamic range (HDR) programming-increased color, contrast and brightness-with the launch of a new HDR set-top box, the Xi5, next year.


----------



## dougdingle

Carlos_E said:


> UHD and HDR is coming to cable sooner than you think.


The Comcast announcement is, at least at the moment, about streaming only, with your 'personalized playlists' residing on their servers. This is no different from what Netflix is doing and Amazon Prime may soon be doing, it seems to me - it's just IPTV over cable instead of being converted to CAT-6 by the cable modem. No mention anywhere of a 4K capable DVR.

As for HDR, the 'increased color, contrast and brightness' is only able to give you the full benefit of all its majesty if *both *ends of the wire support it. Which is to say, you'll need a new TV/monitor capable of displaying HDR and the broader dynamic range and color space for that immersive experience.

All this stuff is likely to come sooner or later. But there are issues to solve, not the least of which is how much total bandwidth will be consumed when lots of people start streaming high quality HDR capable 4K, and how the people supplying your Internet will charge for it.


----------



## aaronwt

Carlos_E said:


> UHD and HDR is coming to cable sooner than you think.


Not from a cable tuner though.


----------



## lessd

aaronwt said:


> Not from a cable tuner though.


My original point !! Again I say TiVo UHD (Series 6 as it was called) has no space in this 4K IPTV world.


----------



## Carlos_E

dougdingle said:


> The Comcast announcement is, at least at the moment, about streaming only, with your 'personalized playlists' residing on their servers. This is no different from what Netflix is doing and Amazon Prime may soon be doing, it seems to me - it's just IPTV over cable instead of being converted to CAT-6 by the cable modem. No mention anywhere of a 4K capable DVR.
> 
> As for HDR, the 'increased color, contrast and brightness' is only able to give you the full benefit of all its majesty if *both *ends of the wire support it. Which is to say, you'll need a new TV/monitor capable of displaying HDR and the broader dynamic range and color space for that immersive experience.
> 
> All this stuff is likely to come sooner or later. But there are issues to solve, not the least of which is how much total bandwidth will be consumed when lots of people start streaming high quality HDR capable 4K, and how the people supplying your Internet will charge for it.


Ive been watching 4K content since 2013. I have the Sony XBR-55X850A and XBR-65X900B and two Sony X-10 4K Media players to purchase and download 4K content.

Im waiting on delivery for two more 4KTVs. The XBR-65X930C and the XBR-75X940C should delivery the next 2 weeks. Both the X930C and X940C support HDR streaming and Ultra HD HDR Bluray. UHD Bluray players hit the market fall of this year along with Netflix HDR, HDR Amazon Instant Video and VUDU HDR. All of the available streaming services will support UHD HDR so there will be plenty of content.


----------



## Dan203

Again those are all streaming services. Now I guess since TiVo is sort of a hybrid device they could release a new unit with an H.265 decoder and HDMI 2.0 and support these UHD streaming services, but it wouldn't really be a 4K DVR. Since there is no 4K content to record you'd be paying hundreds of dollars for a new TiVo to access a handful of 4K streaming services, when you could just as easily buy a <$100 "stick" device that does the same thing and use your existing TiVo to record HDTV. 

So while there may be a tiny market for such a device I don't think it's very big and probably doesn't warrant the R&D from TiVo's perspective.


----------



## atmuscarella

Dan203 said:


> Again those are all streaming services. Now I guess since TiVo is sort of a hybrid device they could release a new unit with an H.265 decoder and HDMI 2.0 and support these UHD streaming services, but it wouldn't really be a 4K DVR. Since there is no 4K content to record you'd be paying hundreds of dollars for a new TiVo to access a handful of 4K streaming services, when you could just as easily buy a <$100 "stick" device that does the same thing and use your existing TiVo to record HDTV.
> 
> So while there may be a tiny market for such a device I don't think it's very big and probably doesn't warrant the R&D from TiVo's perspective.


and most 4K/UHD TVs will have the streaming services built in. The only way it makes any sense for TiVo to jump in to 4K/UHD sooner than latter is if they are going to offer a 4K/UHD solution that is more than streaming like the download service I posted about back in post 185 or a 4k/UHD blu-ray player.


----------



## lessd

atmuscarella said:


> and most 4K/UHD TVs will have the streaming services built in. The only way it makes any sense for TiVo to jump in to 4K/UHD sooner than latter is if they are going to offer a 4K/UHD solution that is more than streaming like the download service I posted about back in post 185 or a 4k/UHD blu-ray player.


If I wanted a 4K Blu-Ray player I sure would not want that player built into a TiVo, unless that TiVo could also legally rip the 4K/UHD movies to the TiVo hard drive Ha Ha.


----------



## Dan203

Why not? I would love to have a TiVo/BD player combo. I use to have a S2 TiVo with built in DVD player and it was great.


----------



## lessd

Dan203 said:


> Why not? I would love to have a TiVo/BD player combo. I use to have a S2 TiVo with built in DVD player and it was great.


The great thing about that Humax Series 2 was its ability to take any video input and store that input onto the hard drive, I converted family VCR tapes to DVD with ease. I don't think the product made it big time.


----------



## slowbiscuit

zerdian1 said:


> I do not think TiVo will limit to Streaming. TiVo is a storage Company.
> their model is record now and playback later.
> Maybe they will have a way to store streaming ULTRA 4K and play it later.


Again, you're totally missing the point that there is no 4k content that is recordable, and won't be for quite a while. Tivo will NOT record any streaming content for later playback because no provider will authorize this. Downloads are a different beast but I don't think these will exist going forward.


----------



## Dixon Butz

slowbiscuit said:


> Again, you're totally missing the point that there is no 4k content that is recordable, and won't be for quite a while. Tivo will NOT record any streaming content for later playback because no provider will authorize this. Downloads are a different beast but I don't think these will exist going forward.


You can download and store 4K movies from MGO with a Samsung UHDTV and the Samsung Hard Drive movie pack. 
But yeah, there is no need whatsoever for a 4K TiVo at this point.


----------



## atmuscarella

slowbiscuit said:


> Again, you're totally missing the point that there is no 4k content that is recordable, and won't be for quite a while. Tivo will NOT record any streaming content for later playback because no provider will authorize this. Downloads are a different beast but I don't think these will exist going forward.





Dixon Butz said:


> You can download and store 4K movies from MGO with a Samsung UHDTV and the Samsung Hard Drive movie pack.
> But yeah, there is no need whatsoever for a 4K TiVo at this point.


How video is consumed is changing. It seems fairly clear to me that TiVo understands that and has been moving from a DVR to a video consumption device for years (that is what "One Box" marketing was and what One Pass is now about). It also seems fairly clear to me that we are moving towards a 4K/UHD video world and that consumers video consumption habits are and will continue to change from watching linear TV channels via cable/sat/OTA to more on demand video consumption be it by streaming, downloading, or solid media. Both of these trends may take years to become dominate or there maybe something that causes a rapid change. In my opinion if TiVo waits until there is a need for a 4K/UHD DVR to record cable/OTA before they move into 4K/UHD video consumption market they maybe waiting forever or to a point where they can no longer become relevant in the 4K/UHD video consumption market.

In any event TiVo has 2 choices when it comes to 4K/UHD video consumption. They can either stay out of it for now or they can make a play to be the One Box 4K/UHD video consumption solution/device. The need for a 4K/UHD DVR is not really relevant it that decision. What is relevant is what TiVo believes the market for 4K/UHD video consumption is going to be and if TiVo believe they can build a DVR (or mini) with 4K/UHD video consumption abilities that can compete (and be profitable) in the 4K/UHD video consumption market.

Personally I think a 4K/UHD mini with a built in UHD Blue-ray player could be a killer 4K/UHD devices. Especially if 4K/UHD download services could be added via an optional add on external hard drive.


----------



## atmuscarella

If anyone is interested in the tech behind what is going on with 4K/UHD I can highly recommend the last 3 episodes (255-257) from the Home Theater Geeks.

http://twit.tv/show/home-theater-geeks​
My take is we are at the beginning of 4K/UHD both as it pertains to hardware and content. Both are still evolving and we are not really there yet. The one thing that seems fairly clear is that if you are just focusing on resolution you are really missing the point.


----------



## krkaufman

> to facilitate a TV experience that is much more personal (link)


So long as by "personal" the user doesn't infer the capability of multiple users within a household having "personal" settings, preferences, recordings and streaming app setups.

Nit picked.


----------



## Series3Sub

The irony is that the real perceived, appreciable enhancement of 4K is not the 4K resolution (unless on a 70"+ or 100+ at common viewing distance), but the wider color gamut/spectral and HDR. That, and not the resolution, is what has the potential to grab the consumer's eyeballs and finding UHD/4K compelling.

However, I agree that the CE TV makers are pushing 4K hard because the need something to get TV sales back up anD hopefully make money instead of Sony's massive loss on TV products and Samsung's virtual no profit in its TV products. They are desperate for this 4K hype and it may determine if Sony will continue to make TV's.


----------



## atmuscarella

Series3Sub said:


> The irony is that the real perceived, appreciable enhancement of 4K is not the 4K resolution (unless on a 70"+ or 100+ at common viewing distance), but the wider color gamut/spectral and HDR. That, and not the resolution, is what has the potential to grab the consumer's eyeballs and finding UHD/4K compelling.
> 
> However, I agree that the CE TV makers are pushing 4K hard because the need something to get TV sales back up anD hopefully make money instead of Sony's massive loss on TV products and Samsung's virtual no profit in its TV products. They are desperate for this 4K hype and it may determine if Sony will continue to make TV's.


I don't have much sympathy for the CE TV makers. They have been shipping 4K/UHD TVs for the last few years that were half baked and they new it. Some didn't even have the newer HDMI ports or 4K streaming built in and most will not be able to deal completely with the wider color gamut or HDR.

With movies like Tomorrowland having been shot in HDR once the specs are settled and UHD Blu-ray is available the CE TV manufactures that are actually selling TVs that can deliver the whole UHD package should have the ability to show off what UHD is in show rooms. Then we can all decide if it is worth an upgrade or not. Personally I expect to be waiting another 3-5 years as I am happy enough with my current TV.


----------



## dougdingle

atmuscarella said:


> With movies like Tomorrowland having been shot in HDR once the specs are settled and UHD Blu-ray is available the CE TV manufactures that are actually selling TVs that can deliver the whole UHD package should have the ability to show off what UHD is in show rooms. Then we can all decide if it is worth an upgrade or not. Personally I expect to be waiting another 3-5 years as I am happy enough with my current TV.


Early days are early days. The issue remains that all that HDR and wide color gamut goodness will be eaten alive by the amount of compression currently required to stream UHD in any practical way. Netflix currently can't get beyond 8 bit 4:2:0 REC-709 MPG, which is the same HD garbage cable and satellite send out, just with more pixels, many of which disappear in the compression.

So that leaves hardware like UHD BluRay to bring the joy, and I have to say that experience with non-UHD BluRay clearly demonstrates how short of any real quality goal the the IP owners and manufacturers will fall to save a dollar. BluRay could have been much higher quality if they had gone to dual layer disks on everything, and left off the endless marketing crap and nine different versions that just forces higher compression on the main movie to make it all fit on single layer 25 GB media. Very few movies were released on dual layer because it cost more to author and print those.

As for Tomorrowland, there is no doubt in my mind that the people at Disney are *not *thinking "Wow, with triple layer UHD disks we could really release some high quality images, replicate the theatrical experience!" but instead are looking at just how many previews and tie-ins and 'long form' ads for the parks, movies, toys, and other endless marketing crap they can put on a disk of that capacity.

Greed will drive UHD down to the lowest possible 'acceptable' quality, just as it did HD - every single cable channel I get, including the premiums, is being compressed at least 50% more than it was five years ago, and boy does it show. We're the frog in the pot with the slowly heating water - we don't notice the changes until it's too late.

I would love to be pleasantly surprised and be wrong about this, but based on past experience, the cynic in me doubts that triple layer UHD BluRay will deliver on its quality promise, and UHD streaming even less so.


----------



## atmuscarella

dougdingle said:


> Early days are early days. The issue remains that all that HDR and wide color gamut goodness will be eaten alive by the amount of compression currently required to stream UHD in any practical way. Netflix currently can't get beyond 8 bit 4:2:0 REC-709 MPG, which is the same HD garbage cable and satellite send out, just with more pixels, many of which disappear in the compression.
> 
> So that leaves hardware like UHD BluRay to bring the joy, and I have to say that experience with non-UHD BluRay clearly demonstrates how short of any real quality goal the the IP owners and manufacturers will fall to save a dollar. BluRay could have been much higher quality if they had gone to dual layer disks on everything, and left off the endless marketing crap and nine different versions that just forces higher compression on the main movie to make it all fit on single layer 25 GB media. Very few movies were released on dual layer because it cost more to author and print those.
> 
> As for Tomorrowland, there is no doubt in my mind that the people at Disney are *not *thinking "Wow, with triple layer UHD disks we could really release some high quality images, replicate the theatrical experience!" but instead are looking at just how many previews and tie-ins and 'long form' ads for the parks, movies, toys, and other endless marketing crap they can put on a disk of that capacity.
> 
> Greed will drive UHD down to the lowest possible 'acceptable' quality, just as it did HD - every single cable channel I get, including the premiums, is being compressed at least 50% more than it was five years ago, and boy does it show. We're the frog in the pot with the slowly heating water - we don't notice the changes until it's too late.
> 
> I would love to be pleasantly surprised and be wrong about this, but based on past experience, the cynic in me doubts that triple layer UHD BluRay will deliver on its quality promise, and UHD streaming even less so.


I pretty much agree with all of what you said.

I am OTA and as they add more sub channels the quality goes down. Right now I have ABC & CW in 720p on the same channel - those files are half the size of my 720p fox channel's files and you can sure see the difference. Plus OTA has had the ability to broadcast 1080p content via H2.64 in the OTA spec since about 2007. Is there even one channel in the U.S. broadcasting that way? I don't think so.

Regarding UHD Blu-ray I expect the CE TV manufactures will get the studios to produce a few top quality disks to start with so they can be used for demos in showrooms. But after that who knows.

However consumers are part of the problem, just look at all the people still buying/renting DVDs or not upgrading cable/sat to HD once they have purchased HD TVs. The sad reality is that the masses don't care enough about picture quality to push studios into caring more about it. So we get what we get.


----------



## dougdingle

atmuscarella said:


> OTA has had the ability to broadcast 1080p content via H2.64 in the OTA spec since about 2007. Is there even one channel in the U.S. broadcasting that way? I don't think so.


Well, to be fair, it's a chicken and egg thing. TV tuners have to be able to decode H.264, or there's no point in sending it. Broadcasters cater to existing systems, they can't send two different codec signals.



> However consumers are part of the problem, just look at all the people still buying/renting DVDs or not upgrading cable/sat to HD once they have purchased HD TVs. The sad reality is that the masses don't care enough about picture quality to push studios into caring more about it. So we get what we get.


Too true. Recent survey showed that somewhere around 40-45% of American households with HD capable sets have no source of HD images feeding them, yet the vast majority believe they're watching HD because they have a 16:9 flat screen.

And the viewing choices are changing. Not only are people watching on smaller and smaller screens where HDR and UHD approach being meaningless, but their ADHD prevents them from watching anything longer than 5 or 6 minutes. Whether comedy or drama, it's impossible to write a decent script and build toward that great joke or dramatic moment in 5 minute chunks. You'll know we've jumped the shark when the Academy presents an award for Best YouTube Short. It's coming.

In the end, it's about selling hardware and content, and to reach the vast majority of consumers requires sinking to the lowest common denominator. The people on these forums and the A/V forums are needed because we're early adopters and convince family and friends to commit, but it quickly becomes a high volume low quality business once the 'new' format is accepted and stuff starts shipping in huge quantities.


----------



## aaronwt

dougdingle said:


> Early days are early days. The issue remains that all that HDR and wide color gamut goodness will be eaten alive by the amount of compression currently required to stream UHD in any practical way. Netflix currently can't get beyond 8 bit 4:2:0 REC-709 MPG, which is the same HD garbage cable and satellite send out, just with more pixels, many of which disappear in the compression.
> 
> So that leaves hardware like UHD BluRay to bring the joy, and I have to say that experience with non-UHD BluRay clearly demonstrates how short of any real quality goal the the IP owners and manufacturers will fall to save a dollar. BluRay could have been much higher quality if they had gone to dual layer disks on everything, and left off the endless marketing crap and nine different versions that just forces higher compression on the main movie to make it all fit on single layer 25 GB media. Very few movies were released on dual layer because it cost more to author and print those.
> 
> As for Tomorrowland, there is no doubt in my mind that the people at Disney are not thinking "Wow, with triple layer UHD disks we could really release some high quality images, replicate the theatrical experience!" but instead are looking at just how many previews and tie-ins and 'long form' ads for the parks, movies, toys, and other endless marketing crap they can put on a disk of that capacity.
> 
> Greed will drive UHD down to the lowest possible 'acceptable' quality, just as it did HD - every single cable channel I get, including the premiums, is being compressed at least 50% more than it was five years ago, and boy does it show. We're the frog in the pot with the slowly heating water - we don't notice the changes until it's too late.
> 
> I would love to be pleasantly surprised and be wrong about this, but based on past experience, the cynic in me doubts that triple layer UHD BluRay will deliver on its quality promise, and UHD streaming even less so.


The majority of bd titles are dual layer discs. Although most don't come close to using 50GB.


----------



## lessd

From what I have read above all this new 4k and wide color gamut uncompressed will take too much bandwidth to be delivered in all its glory, except maybe the new BD, and that also may be compressed, the question is when will you be able to walk into a room, look at the HDTV in that room and say *WOW* that a picture that a 4K HDTV can give in all its glory? When the cable co start to compress I not sure the difference will be that great for the extra money, except for any high end HDTV over 50" you will have to purchase 4K as no other option will exist in a few years.


----------



## wmcbrine

dougdingle said:


> You'll know we've jumped the shark when the Academy presents an award for Best YouTube Short. It's coming.


They already give awards for short films. But YouTube is just a distribution medium; there's no reason for them to single it out.


----------



## joewom

davidg716 said:


> Wow, you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about do you...


No it seems he doesn't. Yes 1080 is good enough for 32 inch tvs. but 50 and higher and very much so with 70 and higher you will definitely notice the resolution difference. This is not 3d related or anything to do with 3d. 3d just didn't catch on like some thought.


----------



## Dan203

lessd said:


> From what I have read above all this new 4k and wide color gamut uncompressed will take too much bandwidth to be delivered in all its glory, except maybe the new BD, and that also may be compressed, the question is when will you be able to walk into a room, look at the HDTV in that room and say *WOW* that a picture that a 4K HDTV can give in all its glory? When the cable co start to compress I not sure the difference will be that great for the extra money, except for any high end HDTV over 50" you will have to purchase 4K as no other option will exist in a few years.


H.265 is suppose to allow about 50% more compression with the same visual quality as H.264. H.264 was suppose to do the same compared to MPEG-2, but in reality you only get 30-40% when doing a realtime encode. So let's assume that a typical MPEG-2 stream looks pretty good at 15Mbps. Cut that by 50% for H.264 and you're down to 9Mbps. Cut that by another 40% for H.265 and you're down to 5.4Mbps. Now 4k has 8x as many pixels as 1080i HD so now we're up to 43.2Mbps. No current broadcast system can handle that. QAM only provides about 38Mbps and ATSC only allows 19.2Mbps. Even ATSC 3.0 would only provide about 28Mbps. So the only way we're going to get top quality 4K is via stream services and really fast broadband, or a major overhaul to how cable broadcasts linear TV.


----------



## tarheelblue32

Dan203 said:


> H.265 is suppose to allow about 50% more compression with the same visual quality as H.264. H.264 was suppose to do the same compared to MPEG-2, but in reality you only get 30-40% when doing a realtime encode. So let's assume that a typical MPEG-2 stream looks pretty good at 15Mbps. Cut that by 50% for H.264 and you're down to 9Mbps. Cut that by another 40% for H.265 and you're down to 5.4Mbps. Now 4k has 8x as many pixels as 1080i HD so now we're up to 43.2Mbps. No current broadcast system can handle that. QAM only provides about 38Mbps and ATSC only allows 19.2Mbps. Even ATSC 3.0 would only provide about 28Mbps. So the only way we're going to get top quality 4K is via stream services and really fast broadband, or a major overhaul to how cable broadcasts linear TV.


Cable companies will probably never do it, but if they did use an entire 38Mbps QAM with H.265 compression to send through a 4k stream, I'm guessing it would still look pretty good. But yeah for a really great 4k stream you're probably looking at 45-50Mbps bitrate.


----------



## lessd

tarheelblue32 said:


> Cable companies will probably never do it, but if they did use an entire 38Mbps QAM with H.265 compression to send through a 4k stream, I'm guessing it would still look pretty good. But yeah for a really great 4k stream you're probably looking at 45-50Mbps bitrate.


How many years will that happen, if ever, as I don't think it will sell much more 4K HDTVs, as 3D was not a great winner, and past the flat screen I don't think many people are that fussy except some folks on this and the AVI board(s).


----------



## Dan203

The CE manufacturers are pushing 4K hard. Eventually it will be impossible to buy a new TV that is not 4K. So I don't think 4K is going to end up like 3D. Although it's going to be a long time before we see linear 4K content requiring a TiVo to record. Most 4K will likely be delivered via IP streaming for the foreseeable future.


----------



## atmuscarella

lessd said:


> How many years will that happen, if ever, as I don't think it will sell much more 4K HDTVs, as 3D was not a great winner, and past the flat screen I don't think many people are that fussy except some folks on this and the AVI board(s).





Dan203 said:


> The CE manufacturers are pushing 4K hard. Eventually it will be impossible to buy a new TV that is not 4K. So I don't think 4K is going to end up like 3D. Although it's going to be a long time before we see linear 4K content requiring a TiVo to record. Most 4K will likely be delivered via IP streaming for the foreseeable future.


I also believe that within a year or 2 all top TVs will be 4K and that traditional broadcasts via a OTA/cable/Sat channel will not be 4K anytime soon. That leaves streaming, downloading, & Disks as the most likely way 4K will be delivered. As I have said in previous posts if TiVo wants to be player in the high end 4K video consumption market those are the delivery options that they will have to be focusing on. It will be interesting to see what the demand for 4K content ends up being and what premium people will be willing to pay to get it.


----------



## Dan203

I'm not sure many will pay a premium to get 4K. If it's included for free as part of an existing subscription they will likely use it, but I doubt many would actually pay extra for it. While 4K looks cool it's not the same jump as going from SD to HD and I don't think the difference between 4K and HD is really enough to justify an extra expense to most people.


----------



## Jeff_DML

Dan203 said:


> I'm not sure many will pay a premium to get 4K. If it's included for free as part of an existing subscription they will likely use it, but I doubt many would actually pay extra for it. While 4K looks cool it's not the same jump as going from SD to HD and I don't think the difference between 4K and HD is really enough to justify an extra expense to most people.


guess netflix should know since they charge extra for it


----------



## atmuscarella

Dan203 said:


> I'm not sure many will pay a premium to get 4K. If it's included for free as part of an existing subscription they will likely use it, but I doubt many would actually pay extra for it. While 4K looks cool it's not the same jump as going from SD to HD and I don't think the difference between 4K and HD is really enough to justify an extra expense to most people.





Jeff_DML said:


> guess netflix should know since they charge extra for it


My guess is UHD Blu-ray disks are also going to cost more, plus I am guessing we will not be able to buy a good UHD player for $100-150 (about what a good blu-ray player costs) anytime soon. Will be interesting to see if red box or Netflix ends up renting them.


----------



## Dan203

atmuscarella said:


> My guess is UHD Blu-ray disks are also going to cost more, plus I am guessing we will not be able to buy a good UHD player for $100-150 (about what a good blu-ray player costs) anytime soon. Will be interesting to see if red box or Netflix ends up renting them.


BDs already cost more then DVDs, even though the cost essentially the same to produce. I'm not sure how much higher the market will bear.

I'm not sure about the cost of the players though. The disks themselves will essentially be triple layer BDs, which could technically play in any of today's BD players. The only difference is they will need an H.265 decoder chip. I'm not sure how much that will really add to the cost of manufacturing.


----------



## Dan203

Jeff_DML said:


> guess netflix should know since they charge extra for it


Kind of. They require you to have the family plan which is more expensive, but also allows you to stream to 4 devices, instead of just 2, simultaneously.


----------



## aaronwt

atmuscarella said:


> My guess is UHD Blu-ray disks are also going to cost more, plus I am guessing we will not be able to buy a good UHD player for $100-150 (about what a good blu-ray player costs) anytime soon. Will be interesting to see if red box or Netflix ends up renting them.


I doubt they will anytime soon but 3d-bluray rental might be a better prospect.

In June 2006 when the Blu-ray format launched in the US, the players cost $1K. I got one the first day they were available and returned it within a couple of weeks because it was a piece of crap. They cost twice as much as the HD DVD players cost and had no better quality. So I sat out of the BD market for a few months until the PS3 came out later that year. Then for only $500 you could get a good quick BD player that wasn't matched for several years by the stand alone players.

I wonder if the UHD players will follow a similar path? Although I think it will be mostly DoA and stay as an ultra niche. I expect Streaming UHD content to always be more popular than the UHD disc content. BD sales are already waning. 2014 was the first year there was a decline. Streaming is rapidly increasing now while DVD and BD revenue are on the decline.


----------



## zerdian1

Jeff_DML said:


> guess netflix should know since they charge extra for it


Dish (Network) also charges a heavier Premium (fees) for streamed 4K 
then they did for 3D.
The fees are approximately double the fees for HD. 
HD is only about 20% more than SD.

For those of us who are earlier adapters of technology, the initial products are often lacking and need refinement.
The same when buying a car, a practical person would wait a year of two before getting a new model.
I have always ordered new models even before they made it to the showroom, as I did a year ago with the 2015.5 Cadillac Escalade 4WD ESV Platinum. It took 8 months to get my new car. I love it.


----------

