"Digital videorecorders -- the cult gadgets that let you automatically record an entire season of "The Sopranos" or pause live TV -- are now coming packaged inside other popular home electronics.
In a step in that direction, TiVo Inc. -- one of the best-known makers of digital videorecorders -- Wednesday announced that Toshiba Corp.'s U.S. unit will likely incorporate the technology in a DVD player or other devices. The new "combination box" is set for release next year. Other similar combo gadgets are also beginning to hit the market."
As I said below, the future of Tivo is as an add on to other boxes--cable, satellite, DVD. Someone from the tech sector--Scientific Atlanta, DirectTV, Toshiba, maybe even Microsoft--will buy Tivo before it goes under. Tech companies don't care about advertising models, so manybe Toshiba or Phillips is a better fit than a company with media interests or media clients like Scientific Atlanta.
The opinions I expressed in my E-Media Tidbits items, and in this ensuing discussion thread, are entirely my own and do not reflect the thinking of Poynter or its staff.
I think the concept of free content with complete consumer control will most likely become extinct. Consumers are going to have to learn to adapt with their wallets, or get use to watching feature-length commercials. It is not apparent to me how one can have it both ways, because for many consumers “complete control” means advertising is bypassed. “Consumers" are just going to have to stop thinking that the world owes them 24/7 access to free quality content and realize that they are hastening the death of the goose that laid the free-ride.
Of course, Tivo and SonicBlue could try to build sustainable partnerships with the content producers that they are economically endangering. This is typical how destructive technology with no regard or respect for established economic systems is automatically viewed as innovative. How long will it be until digital content becomes ubiquitous like air? Oh, yeah, that will be a GREAT industry to be in. Spend a few million dollars on quality content and immediately surrender it to the collective consciousness of digital “consumers” with miniscule compensation (e.g. charity donations). Producers are already being pirated before their official releases reach the market.
It will be interesting to watch when Poynter starts to apply this “adapt or die” strategy to their own operations. When will they realize that a group of smart high-school students could effectively maintain their blogs at no cost? Teenagers are more in tune with digital technology and its applications. They might even bring fresh perspectives and have a more accurate view of the future. Poynter needs to stop thinking like dinosaurs, and realize that with the Internet, no one has an information-based advantage. So why not give a younger, cheaper, hungrier workforce a chance??? But what about the valuable real-world experience of the existing contributors? It’s all documented and freely available on the Internet for all to benefit. The interesting issue would be how long would it take until the teenagers were replaced with intelligent software programs (the fourth generation of Google News-type applications).
> It's coming. Adapt or die.
This warning can be applied to any knowledge-based profession. We all work in an information-based economy, where information is increasingly becoming a disrespected commodity, with the assistance of ever cheap and powerful technology.
Tivo is a disk medium, VCRs are a tape medium. Without an industry migration (as occured when music went from being sold on tape cassettes to being sold on CDs ) there won't be a migration. But cable systems are losing 2 million customers a year to satillite dishes, which gives them a lot of incentive to find ways to improve services. So it may be left to Time Warner and Cablevision (who very shortly will be the only two cable companies left) and the satellite companies to make the transition by building personal digital recorders into our cable and satellite boxes as part of their one up-manship.
Blockbuster and network television companies will have to migrate to other revenue models over the decades, but they're perfectly capable of doing that.
(And furthermore: TiVo is vastly superior--even with the additional costs--to VCRs, for all the reasons cited here. It's better the same way CDs are better than cassette tapes)
On the cost: I agree with Larry. Were $600/year pocket change, we'd have TiVO at home, though we already use the VCR as a virtual TiVO, ffwarding through commercials and time-shifting. For now I'd rather spend the $$$ on a vacation, say, to visit far-flung family.
My 5-year-old isn't yet comfortable with the TiVo remote, so when she's watching one of her programs and a commercial comes on, she yells "COMMERCIAL" so someone will come fast-forward for her. 8^)
Will this kill commercial TV if our family becomes the common model? On stuff like this, I always believe that old industries have to adapt; there's no putting this genie back in the bottle. When TiVo or ReplayTV code is in most every set-top box and TV, then commercial TV will have to change. It's coming. Adapt or die.
1. I'm not paying $600 for a VCR. 2. I'm not paying $10 a month to run a VCR. 3. I'm not running a special phone line to my TV for a VCR.
The real problem I see with this is that it may force TV stations to move away from 30-second commercials to putting even more of those obnoxious graphics on top of the programs. Am I the only one who HATES seeing commercials scrolling along the bottom of the screen during the show?
1. Avoid commercials2. Time shift
A VCR accomplishes #2, for a fraction of the price of a DVR. And studies show that -- and I'm surprised that you've forgotten this one, Steve -- consuners perceive commercials to be content, too.
Funniest thing I've seen this week wasn't "Everybody Loves Raymond" or "Monk". It was the Visa commercial shown on "The West Wing", with Charlie Sheen and his "older self". And who watches the Super Bowl for the (usually lousy) game?
Commercials give viewers a sense of the commercial culture of America in the same way that the programs they're carried in give viewers a sense of the nation's popular culture. It's information, misinformation, and malinformation, all jumbled into one, but you can't argue that it's powerful.
A DVR is a costly luxury, and a case of paying more for content that the consumer perceives the content to be worth. Adoption will be sloooooow.
And let's assume that Steve is right: That everyone with the disposable cash to do so runs out today and buys a DVR and service, and that the networks react by making their content subscription-only to cope with the loss of advertising revenue. The poorest among us have just lost their first, last and best source of affordable entertainment. The digital divide widens. The implication of technology adoption before costs hit their lowest possible point is that the people who could most benefit from it are least able to use it.
Sliced bread is only useful if you can afford the toaster.
Dave BullardFulton & Oswego Daily News.com
In Michael Lewis’ book “Next”, he states that early research showed that ~80% of ads are skipped with these types of devices. The remaining 20% tended to be viewed by lazy viewers.
It's possible many people won't sign on board for this technology until TIVO or a similar service is integrated into their current cable or satellite systems. It's been observed before in this forum that TIVO may be only an interim step toward a higher level of on-demand services. Consumers may see TIVO as the Betamax or Laser Disc of services to come. That's not really Luddite behavior, but rather cautious consumerism.
The real advantages of digital PVR are the directory services. With the introduction of digital cable, "57 channels and nothing on" has mushroomed to "257 channels and nothing on." Locating interesting content within the vast sea of channels is a daunting task, and one which PVR software generally does an admirable job of simplifying.
