kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
 ·Packet8
edit:
May 25th, @10:08AM
| reply to odog
Re: don't stifle it...
said by odog  :This is an evolutionary technology they should be promoting it not litigating the only company with the balls to try it. Hardly. The last thing I want is to store my movies on the provider's server. Imagine if a stupid technician, installing for somebody else something, cuts your line - you not only lost your TV bu8t all of your stored stuff, let alone the fact that now they will be in full control.
This idiotic idea should die. |
|
MxxCon
join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY
clubs:  
| indeed.
it's hardly "customer-friendly technological approach"
next time CV will have a fight with another channel/distributor, similar to their Mets/Yankees fight, they will delete/block all YOUR content from them. so you'll be paying those extra $10/month for nothing.
--
[Sig removed by Administrator: Signature can not exceed 20GB] |
|
yabos
join:2003-02-16
Ingersoll, ON | reply to kamm
I really can't see how this is any better than the DVR, except they can now record how many times you view a tv show. |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| reply to kamm
said by kamm :said by odog :This is an evolutionary technology they should be promoting it not litigating the only company with the balls to try it. Hardly. The last thing I want is to store my movies on the provider's server. Imagine if a stupid technician, installing for somebody else something, cuts your line - you not only lost your TV bu8t all of your stored stuff, let alone the fact that now they will be in full control. This idiotic idea should die. How is this ANY different from the "On Demand" services. Subscribing to Charter Cable's movie packages (HBO, etc) automatically gets you the ability to watch ANY of HBOs shows on for that month for a set time period, usually 30-60 days, at any time you want. You can treat the movie just like a DVR, pause FF, rewind, etc. The programming is stored on Charter's servers, not HBOs. So what's the difference?
--
“We want the Republicans out of our bedroom and the Democrats out of our wallet and both out of our First and Second Amendment rights." - Alan Nathan |
|
achuchma
join:2001-04-11
Tampa, FL
| reply to yabos
said by yabos :I really can't see how this is any better than the DVR, except they can now record how many times you view a tv show. They can do that now, and probably do.
--
Bring back chicken and potato chips - Vote Perot! |
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN
edit:
May 25th, @10:44AM
| reply to qdemn7
It's different from onDemand because the user has to specify what shows they want recorded. It's a fine line but in essence the user still having to manually hit the record button means it's still a dvr and it's not ondemand. And supposedly you can store shows as long as you want, until you choose to delete them. And you have a storage limit. Honestly the media companies should love this. It ensures they can enforce copy protections and time limits on recordings. Unlike stand alone dvrs. |
|
Weasel
join:2001-12-18
Lombard, IL
clubs: | reply to kamm
This idiotic idea should die.
And a quick death at that. |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| reply to qdemn7
said by qdemn7 :said by kamm :said by odog :This is an evolutionary technology they should be promoting it not litigating the only company with the balls to try it. Hardly. The last thing I want is to store my movies on the provider's server. Imagine if a stupid technician, installing for somebody else something, cuts your line - you not only lost your TV bu8t all of your stored stuff, let alone the fact that now they will be in full control. This idiotic idea should die. How is this ANY different from the "On Demand" services. Subscribing to Charter Cable's movie packages (HBO, etc) automatically gets you the ability to watch ANY of HBOs shows on for that month for a set time period, usually 30-60 days, at any time you want. You can treat the movie just like a DVR, pause FF, rewind, etc. The programming is stored on Charter's servers, not HBOs. So what's the difference? Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut. |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| said by Cheese :Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut. And even if the line gets cut, they damn well will restore service soon. For all the negatives often posted about Charter here, they have always given me excellent service. I would grade them as an A-.
I really don't get why the providers are so up-in-arms, (actually I do, it's all about power). This type of head-end system would give them am extremely accurate profile of what people are watching. If 125K customers in a 500K market record the same program, that gives a good indication of what's popular.
--
“We want the Republicans out of our bedroom and the Democrats out of our wallet and both out of our First and Second Amendment rights." - Alan Nathan |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
| said by qdemn7 :said by Cheese :Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut. And even if the line gets cut, they damn well will restore service soon. For all the negatives often posted about Charter here, they have always given me excellent service. I would grade them as an A-. I really don't get why the providers are so up-in-arms, (actually I do, it's all about power). This type of head-end system would give them am extremely accurate profile of what people are watching. If 125K customers in a 500K market record the same program, that gives a good indication of what's popular. Yes, I would expect the line to be fixed but that information on their servers would not be affected as someone would like to claim. |
|
qdemn7
Smurf in My Loop
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Fort Worth, TX
| said by Cheese :Yes, I would expect the line to be fixed but that information on their servers would not be affected as someone would like to claim. Sure, sure, and I don't understand his opposition to this, either.
--
“We want the Republicans out of our bedroom and the Democrats out of our wallet and both out of our First and Second Amendment rights." - Alan Nathan |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
edit:
May 25th, @11:47AM
| said by qdemn7 :said by Cheese :Yes, I would expect the line to be fixed but that information on their servers would not be affected as someone would like to claim. Sure, sure, and I don't understand his opposition to this, either. I don't think anyone understands him or anything he ever says. I don't oppose it, but it would be something I think I would need to try first to see if I like it or not as it sounds like a good idea and I would assume it may have much more space as opposed to a box sitting in the living room with a limited HDD.
Edit: Seems he can't understand he is on ignore and I can't see what he says, but it shows he replied to me, I am sure, as usual, he has insulted me, once again, showing how utterly ignorant he is. Anyone want to confirm he has insulted me and shown his usual ignorant intelligence? I sure he has said something about my level of education?
And at 40 years old as he claims he is, he sure as hell don't act like he is 40. He acts more like a a child then anything. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
| said by Cheese :said by qdemn7 :said by Cheese :Yes, I would expect the line to be fixed but that information on their servers would not be affected as someone would like to claim. Sure, sure, and I don't understand his opposition to this, either. I don't think anyone understands him or anything he ever says. Yawn. Your usual utter ignorance is kinda boring, kid.
You're confused again: the fact that you cannot grasp something doesn't mean others couldn't either. 
In other words it's just you, again - please, crawl back to your cave/basement.
I don't oppose it, but it would be something I think I would need to try first to see if I like it or not as it sounds like a good idea and I would assume it may have much more space as opposed to a box sitting in the living room with a limited HDD.
Well, that's what called limited abilities when it comes to abstractions - I don't need to see it to understand a fairly primitive underlying idea... |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
edit:
May 25th, @12:57PM
| reply to Cheese
said by Cheese :Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. LOL 
Ummm kid it's you who - as usually - fails to understand that it is the problem.
And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut.
Ummm perhaps the access to your movies?
Sheer idiotic trolling at its best. |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
| reply to qdemn7
said by qdemn7 :said by Cheese :Yes, I would expect the line to be fixed but that information on their servers would not be affected as someone would like to claim. Sure, sure, and I don't understand his opposition to this, either. At least 3 people explained to you already, it's not our problem anymore... |
|
kamm
join:2001-02-14
Brooklyn, NY
·Packet8
| reply to yabos
said by yabos :I really can't see how this is any better than the DVR, except they can now record how many times you view a tv show. That's the point: it isn't better at all.
It's just giuves them full control over your content. logically the next step will be when you'll be charged if you want to save it to your VCR/DVDR/etc. |
|
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| reply to Cheese
said by Cheese :Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut. If you line is cut (or the connection is down), you have lost ACCESS to the recorded content until the connection is restored. With a DVR, you can still play/view what was recorded and stored on the DVR's Hard Drive. To that extent, he is correct that you've lost [access to] your recordings. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to insomniac84
I have to agree with you. This is actually studio friendly. Further, it IS still a DVR. The *AAs are idiots in thinking they have a chance to pull off this legal battle. I think in the end, we will shelve THIS case up with the Beta, VHS, laser disc, and everything else they have tried to block.
It's nothing more than DVR is today, only, think of it as being in "another room"...
But, if they want to spend their money on attorneys, more power to them. I think they are going to loose.
You know, it's getting to the point where when you get a paycheck, it might as well be direct deposited to the banks by default.. half of your check goes to the oil/energy companies and the other half to the *AAs. SEems they are the ones wanting most, er, feeling like they deserve all th emoney now adays. |
|
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs:
edit:
May 25th, @04:10PM
| reply to RARPSL
said by RARPSL :said by Cheese :Since he is ignored, and I can see what you quoted, he fails, again to understand, that if it's stored on their servers, and the line gets cuts, it's still on their servers. And unless someone wants to correct me, I don't think you are going to lose anything if a line just happens to get cut. If you line is cut (or the connection is down), you have lost ACCESS to the recorded content until the connection is restored. With a DVR, you can still play/view what was recorded and stored on the DVR's Hard Drive. To that extent, he is correct that you've lost [access to] your recordings. Yes, but he is saying your stored stuff will be lost, which is not true. The information is still on their servers, and once your connection is restored your information will be there. And yes, having it local is better, but some people will enjoy this as it should eliminate one extra box in their home setup.
Oh damn, no reply from SKamm? I must have shot down his theory again. Not that it matters as I can't see what the genius has to say anyway. Damn, hate when that happens. |
|
Phattieg
join:2001-04-29
Jacksonville, FL
 ·Verizon Wireless B..
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
| reply to kamm
said by kamm :said by yabos :I really can't see how this is any better than the DVR, except they can now record how many times you view a tv show. That's the point: it isn't better at all.It's just giuves them full control over your content. logically the next step will be when you'll be charged if you want to save it to your VCR/DVDR/etc. Try having your hard drive fry in your REAL DVR, and then swapping it only to find all your content gone. This sucks, especially considering you paid additional to be able to have DVR. I think the possibility of VOD related glitches may make it a little less fast in response to using a hard drive based DVR service, but all content could be viewed in any room of the house that has a box, and the provider could upgrade storage availability simply by adding equipment in the head end and the provisioning the boxes to use it. I think you guys fighting this are all just mad because you had suck experiences with Video on Demand type services, and think they are taking control away from you. The control is still in your hands, you can still record whatever you want. Geez. 
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. |
|
