Slashdot Mirror
Calling Out TiVo
ephraim writes "Forbes has an article by John C. Dvorak which summarizes the TiVo and similar devices as follows: "It's a way to steal programming." He justifies this remark by claiming that the main purpose of a TiVo is to "skip commercials" that pay for TV content. He also seems upset that people can use these devices to record content onto a hard drive without paying royalties to the content companies. Never mind the fact that the article has numerous factual errors (Dvorak claims that TiVo systems cost $500 and implies that the systems are difficult to use; he also makes a ridiculous comparison between MP3 file-sharing and TiVo). This guy seems to never have heard of the Betamax court case which legitimized time-shifting. "
The comparison of a PVR to mp3 file sharing is completely invalid. PVRs do not offer any method for obtaining content illicitly. They also do not offer a method to distribute the saved content to others, with the exception of "save to VCR", which even the MPAA would agree is legal.
He seems to think that the only feature of a PVR is 'commercial skip'. Obviously he doesn't have a PVR, or if he does, he hasn't had it for very long. PVRs offer a convenient way to regularly record favorite programming. Your favorite shows are recorded, whether you're there or not, thus allowing the PVR owner to enjoy the original, unedited content, which they already subscribe to, at their leisure.
Dvorak isn't too good with money, apparently. He insists that TiVo costs $10 a month. Anybody who has half a brain will instead opt for the $200 lifetime subscription, which is to cover the cost of the guide data, and software upgrades for their PVR. He should also consider shopping at a different electronics store, as his 'average' price of $500/unit is about $100-150 higher than the average price I've seen for 30 hour units.
One valid point that Dvorak makes is that adding a TiVo to the system adds complexity. It seems like it "should" be complicated, but in reality it's not. Toss the TiVo between your signal source (cable box, or DTV reciever) and your receiver or TV. Done. Pretty difficult, eh? As for the complexity of the remote control, it actually simplifies things nicely. I actually prefer the TiVo interface to the interface presented to me by my DTV receiver. The only awkwardness is in recording pay-per-view events, which TiVo doesn't have guide data for, and can't do an on-screen purchase for.
Dvorak describes the fact that a PVR requires access to a phone line to be "a hassle in itself". The fact that after setup, the phone is used only when you're not using it (usually late at night), and for short periods of time is ignored. He also rants about a bug in one PVR implementation as a reason to ignore the technology. If a single problem is reason to ignore a technology, then I'll assert that a single column is reason to ignore a pundit.
Perhaps the most amusing show of Dvorak's ignorance is his implication that PVR technology only exists because broadcasters are unaware of it. Either CBS, AOL-Time Warner, Discovery, Showtime, Disney and NBC aren't broadcasters, or he's just dead wrong. They aforementioned companies are all equity investors in TiVo, Inc.
In the second to last paragraph, Dvorak accidentally let's slip his real motivation for his rant. He had trouble getting a ReplayTV unit to work.
Apparently this article is what happens when Dvorak has an electronics malfunction and an article due simultaneously.
--
"Don't trolls get tired?"
John Dvorak typically writes his pieces for people who think that they're "digerati" when, in fact, they're really just the same sort of folks who, a few years ago, would buy a component stereo system from Radio Shack and call themselves "audiophiles".
Nothing against those people, though, but I think that Dvorak does them a disservice by trying to make news instead of commenting on it.
I don't see much of a difference between using a Tivo device to eliminate commercials and using a VCR to do the same thing. Both involve some sort of time shifting. In order to miss the commercials, you give up some degree of timliness in your viewing habits.
Perhaps in the long run that's how we'll justify skipping commercials...if we want to see the show "as it is being broadcast", then the price we pay is commercials. If we choose to wait some period of time, then we get to skip them.
I think, though, that Dvorak's claims of theft fall apart when you realize that a Tivo fits the idea of "personal use" even better than a video tape...you can always give a video tape of a program to somebody else, thus potentially opening a can of copyright worms, but who's going to record a few episodes of Survivor and then turn over their (much less than $500) Tivo? That's what I thought.
-h-
As people have said, what if i watch the commercials but don't run out and buy the products? Am i stealing? After all, i'm leeching off the guy down the block who zips out and buys the Jif peanut butter he saw being advertised. Without people like him, there could be no content, after all!
So, um, if it's the right of content producers to force viewers to do stuff that gets them money, and anyone who doesn't do that is stealing, i have this to say:
Send me $10!
There. I rely on people like you to send me ten bucks -- without which, i would not be able to continue publishing content on Slashdot. If you don't like it, don't read my comments. But if you read my comments without sending me money, you're no more than a common criminal.
And anyone who skips over my comments either manually or through technology is like a Tivo user skipping commercials. In other words, uh, a criminal. It seems.
--
--
Mod up a post Rob doesn't like and you'll never mod again
I love Dvorak's comment that networks haven't gotten mad yet simply because they haven't taken notice of TiVo yet.
Gee, well, let's look at the list of equity investors in TiVo, inc: CBS, AOL-Time Warner, Comcast, Liberty Media, Discovery communications, Showtime Networks, Disney, and NBC. So, gee, guess Dvorak believes either (a) NBC, CBS and friends don't count as "major networks", or (b) they invested in TiVo without having even a vague clue as to what the company would produce.
Good research, Dvorak! And you get paid for this crap?
--JRZ
As the consumer, I don't care or have to care wether CBS gets a cut of that 50$ ...
I think the fact is that Networks have existed in the coincidence that people *were willing to watch commercials* ... that coincidence is coming to an end -- just like the banner add revenue crisis :) ... At best television is a loss-leader revenue model, give away something for free, hope people make it worth your while ... remind you of anything else thats failed latley ? ...
I believe the add-banner and commercial problems are coming from a complete advertising overload ... EVERYWHERE you look theres advertising ... after awhile it just blends into the background ... and who pays attention to the background?
What I'd like to see is a DirecTV + TIVO device that downloads the shows *I* want to see via sattelite onto its hard drive as well as providing a few realtime channels (news, etc...) ... I'd pay 1$ a month to download *new* simpsons episodes without commercials, which is more money then fox has ever gotten from me so far!
Free Techno/Jazz/DNB/MI Music by guys obsessed with monkeys!
Its kind of funny really, when you take it all in perspective. My Grandfather told me when he was working for Magnavox that there was quite the to do about the fact their remote controls were going to have MUTE buttons. Yep there were threats of law suit and all manner of huffing and puffing... it never really hit the press back then though because most people didn't care. And really nothing really came of it and nobody got into any big fight about it, and nobody lost anything from it. Same story, different inovation.
--
Personally, I think this pales in comparison to the practice of "mind-shifting," or memorizing plots, funny bits, and catch phrases from television shows in order to experience them -- or worse yet, share them with others -- without having to watch the commercials or pay the copyright holders.
I'm petitioning congress to outlaw quoting television shows to your friends without also quoting at least one ad from that show. For instance, "EX-cellent, Smithers! The Joy of Cola!"
If you don't want my koalas, baby, don't shake my eucalyptus tree.
Among his reasons why the Mac won't succeed:
From the San Francisco Examiner, Feb. 19th, 1984
The Macintosh has no slots for expansion and is therefore restricted in versatility
Well, Microsoft is currently pushing a legacy free, closed box PC as the new consumer utopia...
The machine uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse'
If Dvorak didn't use a GUI based system (my bet is a PC, seeing how he is so viruntly anti-Mac) to write his article, and to do all his work for the past 7 or 8 years (conservative estimate), I will eat my own shorts.
Who out there in the general martketplace even knows what a 'font' is?
I would bet that about 90% of the public knows at this point; and most knew by the early 90s
What businessman knows about point size or typefaces or the value of variable point size?
See the comment above...
The Macintosh uses icons to represent functions as though there was some intuitive knowledge on the part of the user as to what these icons mean.
Did you know what sounds the letters in the alphabet represented before you memorized them? Sever anti-GUI trend here...
Mr. Dvorak is one of the worst 'major' PC columnists in almost all regards (accuracy, predictions, impartiality). I don't have time to list more of his hilarious mistakes, but if you put anything Apple in front of him, he will immediatly say it will fail and is inferior to anything PC.
Arthropoid, the Right Clam for the Job
Mr. Dvorak is one of the worst 'major' PC columnists in almost all regards (accuracy, predictions, impartiality).
Plus his keyboard SUCKS.
"And like that
Again, the market comes into play on this.
People want to watch TV shows but do not wish to watch ads.
Consequently they skip the adds.
If the ads are made more amusing and more interesting people will want to watch the ads as well.
The clear example of this is the Super Bowl. My fiancee, who thinks football is a barbaric, mindless, tiresome practice that somehow vents our twisted societies need to experiance violence, religiously watches the Super Bowl every year explicitly for the comercials.
The success of sites like AdCritic indicates that people will, if the content is good enough, actualy go out of their way to watch comercials. Hell, the 7up commercials had me laughing so hard I fell out of my chair once. Lo and behold I find myself drinking more 7up.
If advertisers are pissed because people won't watch their shit the clear solution is to make better commercials.
If you build it they will come
This has been another useless post from....
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.