- Related Stories
-
DVR technology comes to video iPods
December 19, 2005 -
Cablevision revs up its broadband
November 7, 2005 -
Cablevision: We're not afraid of Verizon's fiber
May 5, 2005 -
TiVo, Comcast reach DVR deal
March 15, 2005 -
Cablevision rings in 270,000 phone customers
February 23, 2005
Proposed service will let cable TV subscribers record programs on network servers, doing away with DVR boxes like TiVo's.
The story "Comcast, Time Warner back Cablevision DVR plan" published March 30, 2006 at 4:04 AM is no longer available on CNET News.
Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.
So what group of executives are the stupidest:
a) Movie studios, for resisting digital media, and insisting on encouraging the use of easily pirated DVDs?
b) TV networks, who are unable to grasp the concept of most new technology (e.g., NBC, in response to Apple selling ABC TV shows on itunes, offers to sell their shows on-line to subscribers who own PVRs)
c) cable companies, who refuse to deliver video over IP, which would enable everything on demand;
d) U.S. telephone companies, who had to be forced into offering broadband service by the CLECs, whom they subsequently killed off, and are patheticly inferior to most foreign telcos that offer much faster broadband speeds.
Answer: it's a tie, in a race to the bottom.
So what group of executives are the stupidest:
a) Movie studios, for resisting digital media, and insisting on encouraging the use of easily pirated DVDs?
b) TV networks, who are unable to grasp the concept of most new technology (e.g., NBC, in response to Apple selling ABC TV shows on itunes, offers to sell their shows on-line to subscribers who own PVRs)
c) cable companies, who refuse to deliver video over IP, which would enable everything on demand;
d) U.S. telephone companies, who had to be forced into offering broadband service by the CLECs, whom they subsequently killed off, and are patheticly inferior to most foreign telcos that offer much faster broadband speeds.
Answer: it's a tie, in a race to the bottom.
The cable industry keeps crowing about how this kind of stuff is going to kill off the satellite TV industry, but the fact of the matter is that fully half of the U.S. population will never be served by cable due to last-mile (more like last 100 mile, in many cases) infrastructure costs. However, a large fraction of satellite subscribers are in the largest urban areas, where infrastructure costs for cable are the absolute lowest. The reason for this is that cable companies' customer service model continues to be rated right down there with used car salesmen, Mafia lawyers, and other bottom-feeders, and it will only get worse over time as the last-mile infrastructure built over the last few decades continues to rot (it's all copper, and replacing that with fiber, including very expensive optical interconnect at the set-top boxes, is out of the ballpark for cable operating costs). Cable revenue is going to eventually level off and decline, and top-tier services like RS-DVR will take the first hit as the Baby Boomers' budgets continue to become squeezed by job outsourcing, retirement, soaring energy and medical costs, and deaths of primary-income family members (men die an average six years before women in the demographic groups where cable prevails).
Then, there's the issue of content-producer control over the ability of subscribers to record, playback, and keep around recordings that services like RS-DVR will certainly contain. This shoe has yet to drop, mostly because of arguments over the broadcast flag, but sooner or later, it's going to happen (I'll leave it up to your imagination when it's more likely). The minute the content producers start restricting subscribers' abilities to manage their recordings, the subscribers are going to run, not walk, to get DVRs like TiVos, ReplayTVs, and even Home Theater PCs, so that they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, with that for which they've already paid to receive.
Meanwhile, the cable companies are going to continue to unwittingly aid and abet the cannibalization of their video business by Internet Protocol based content (e.g., IPTV), especially as subscribers become better educated about it. Continued pricing pressure due to competition from DSL, satellite, and especially terrestrial wireless technologies is going to maintain the race to the bottom for profits, precisely because broadband is a commodity, and people will quickly figure out how to get what they want via IP-based technologies without the intervention of the cable companies' content-delivery gatekeepers (witness the growing popularity of the Slingbox, which allows you to pull any video across broadband connections, and the direct delivery of content via iTunes, Google Video, whatever Yahoo is doing, etc.).
The continued quarter-to-quarter focus of media delivery corporations on their numbers is going to be their downfall if they keep tossing things like RS-DVR up on the wall to see if they will stick, because it doesn't look like there's any long-term strategy in anything they're doing. It's just more of the "keep doing what made us money in the past" mentality.
All the Best,
Joe Blow
The cable industry keeps crowing about how this kind of stuff is going to kill off the satellite TV industry, but the fact of the matter is that fully half of the U.S. population will never be served by cable due to last-mile (more like last 100 mile, in many cases) infrastructure costs. However, a large fraction of satellite subscribers are in the largest urban areas, where infrastructure costs for cable are the absolute lowest. The reason for this is that cable companies' customer service model continues to be rated right down there with used car salesmen, Mafia lawyers, and other bottom-feeders, and it will only get worse over time as the last-mile infrastructure built over the last few decades continues to rot (it's all copper, and replacing that with fiber, including very expensive optical interconnect at the set-top boxes, is out of the ballpark for cable operating costs). Cable revenue is going to eventually level off and decline, and top-tier services like RS-DVR will take the first hit as the Baby Boomers' budgets continue to become squeezed by job outsourcing, retirement, soaring energy and medical costs, and deaths of primary-income family members (men die an average six years before women in the demographic groups where cable prevails).
Then, there's the issue of content-producer control over the ability of subscribers to record, playback, and keep around recordings that services like RS-DVR will certainly contain. This shoe has yet to drop, mostly because of arguments over the broadcast flag, but sooner or later, it's going to happen (I'll leave it up to your imagination when it's more likely). The minute the content producers start restricting subscribers' abilities to manage their recordings, the subscribers are going to run, not walk, to get DVRs like TiVos, ReplayTVs, and even Home Theater PCs, so that they can do whatever they want, whenever they want, with that for which they've already paid to receive.
Meanwhile, the cable companies are going to continue to unwittingly aid and abet the cannibalization of their video business by Internet Protocol based content (e.g., IPTV), especially as subscribers become better educated about it. Continued pricing pressure due to competition from DSL, satellite, and especially terrestrial wireless technologies is going to maintain the race to the bottom for profits, precisely because broadband is a commodity, and people will quickly figure out how to get what they want via IP-based technologies without the intervention of the cable companies' content-delivery gatekeepers (witness the growing popularity of the Slingbox, which allows you to pull any video across broadband connections, and the direct delivery of content via iTunes, Google Video, whatever Yahoo is doing, etc.).
The continued quarter-to-quarter focus of media delivery corporations on their numbers is going to be their downfall if they keep tossing things like RS-DVR up on the wall to see if they will stick, because it doesn't look like there's any long-term strategy in anything they're doing. It's just more of the "keep doing what made us money in the past" mentality.
All the Best,
Joe Blow
upgrade it, I can't buy more. With such a service, if I fill up my
120G, but can't bring myself to delete this season's Sopranos, then
I can order 20G more for some price. It gives me options.
I would gladly try out this service. My Time Warner HD DVR service
is wonderful. It's overpriced, but now that they fixed a signal
problem in my neighborhood, I'm quite happy with it.
upgrade it, I can't buy more. With such a service, if I fill up my
120G, but can't bring myself to delete this season's Sopranos, then
I can order 20G more for some price. It gives me options.
I would gladly try out this service. My Time Warner HD DVR service
is wonderful. It's overpriced, but now that they fixed a signal
problem in my neighborhood, I'm quite happy with it.
What would also be cool, is if the cable companies allowed users to share there programs with others. For example if i record 24, and my buddy forgot to record it he can still watch 24 from his house if I allow access to my recording(s).
What would also be cool, is if the cable companies allowed users to share there programs with others. For example if i record 24, and my buddy forgot to record it he can still watch 24 from his house if I allow access to my recording(s).
- Bad Idea
- by fosterjt2 April 3, 2006 11:54 AM PDT
- My cable provider just rolled out their VoIP solution and ruined our neighborhood's broadband for a week. I already have issues with video on demand giving me error messages about not being able to contact the server when I use it. Now they are going to remotely record programs which I record in High Definition, requiring lots of storage space and will be bandwidth intensive. Anyone else see a problem with this idea??
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(24 Comments)