| nobody bothered posting nobody wants network dvr.. at least as a $$ PAID $$ service.. |
|
 mmay149qPremium
join:2009-03-05
Dallas, TX
kudos:48 | said by tmc8080:at least as a $$ PAID $$ service..
Unfortunately whether it's network or not it's still a PAID service 
Matt
--
Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing is not to stop questioning. -Albert Einstein |
|
| Suggestions So Verizon just patented Tivo Suggestions. Sounds very innovative considering Tivo did in back in the 90's.
But the PTO probably approved it because Verizon said it was being done on the network as if that makes any bloody difference. Afterall slidelock switches have existed for more than 200 years but apple puts on in software and suddenly it's a patentable invention. |
|
| said by rahvin112:So Verizon just patented Tivo Suggestions. Sounds very innovative considering Tivo did in back in the 90's. This reads nothing like that. This is more like database caching using logic to determine what should be stored on faster media (i.e. inhouse DVR) and on slower (network or "cloud").
Of course a patent application doesn't mean any intention of actually implementing a product.
Oh, and Tivo stole most of what they do from ReplayTV. |
|
| I mean really? Analyzing viewer count data of shows to determine which are watched the most and move it elsewhere to save room on CPE? How the fuck is that a revolutionary idea? It's a great idea, but not deserving of a patent.
Not yelling at you. |
|
| Network DVR puts more load on the VOD system Network DVR puts more load on the VOD system and bandwidth that is needed for NON live channels.
and FIOS is running out of QAM room.
Now WITH a full IPTV system you don't have to deal with QAM room but you can't multicast network DRV feeds like you can with live TV feeds. |
|
|
|
JPLPremium
join:2007-04-04
Downingtown, PA
kudos:2 | said by Joe12345678:Network DVR puts more load on the VOD system and bandwidth that is needed for NON live channels.
and FIOS is running out of QAM room.
Now WITH a full IPTV system you don't have to deal with QAM room but you can't multicast network DRV feeds like you can with live TV feeds.
I'm not sure I get this. I mean I understand what you're saying, but how does having a network DVR affect your bandwidth overall with respect to IPTV? I think it's a non-sequiter. Let's say version goes full IPTV. Now you want to watch something on your TV. Whether that feed is live... or recorded, it comes in the same way - via IP. You don't lose MORE just because your DVR is on the network. Unless you plan on watching two feeds on the same tv simultaneously (which you can't do anyway) you lose nothing of our IP connection to go this route.
In fact, I can argue that having a network DVR makes IPTV implementation easier... not harder. Look at it this way. With QAM, if I want to record two shows at the same time on my DVR, I need two frequency slots. If I do that with a network DVR, I use 0 frequency slots coming to my house. I only use one when I want to watch something. |
|
