Slashdot Mirror
Slate Predicts The End Of TiVo
wiredog writes "Slate has an article about why TiVo (the company, not the idea) is destined to fail. It suffers from the same first mover disadvantage that did in the Newton and the Amiga."
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
It's an article from Slate (a Microsoft publication) saying TiVo's dead. (Microsoft had DVR plans for XBox, last I heard.)
:^)
Whatever... I'll still buy a TiVo once I can afford it. And sit it down next to that Amiga500 I've always wanted to get.
It doesn't matter for me, though, I have my VCR programmed to record Mother Angelica every day.
A. Rightmann
I suspect that those same families still have their clocks flashing 12:00AM and do little more than read email on their P4 2GHz computers.
You're always going to have people who simply aren't going to make use of technology due to phobia.
However, the opposite side to their figures is that 70% of the people given TiVos ARE using it.
And I honestly can say that once you teach someone initially how to navigate through the menus, having the TiVo automatically catch your favorite shows whenever they're on, despite most schedule changes, is far easier than the hassles of putting in new tapes all the time and manually programming a change in a particular week's showtime.
The Amiga failed in the marketplace not because they were the first mover, as the article suggests, but because the management at Commodore was hopelessly inept and corrupt. Instead of spending money marketing the Amiga and creating markets for them, they instead blew hundreds of millions of dollars on executive perks like private jets and company yaghts, not to mention obscene bonuses and stock option deals. It's failing had far more to do with Enron-style executive hubris than it ever did with market forces.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
that a company that sinks millions into R&D can't profit as quickly as a company that just has to look at what you did, what parts are prohibitively expensive, and copy the product without them.
This is exactly why the USPTO should be gotten rid of altogether. If we didn't have them, these new devices could be even closer to the original, and cheaper. After all, screw the original inventor, the consumer is who needs to benefit.
Read the fucking article and when your little troll eyes get to:
The other 20 percent? Gaming consoles like Xbox 2 and the next generation of Sony PlayStations will likely include DVR technology
You'll understand why this isn't a plug for MS, but an unbiased article on a site that just happens to be owned by MS. Believe me, I'm sure that if MS was censoring articles on Slate, you would never see mention of PS, who right now is MS's biggest competitor in the gaming console wars.
Live web cams
How was the Amiga "not a success?" Sure, it's not around and popular today, like PCs, but then again, neither are Apple IIs, Commodore 64s, Atari 8-bits, Atari STs, etc. It's called progress.
With TiVo, we're talking about a VERY simple concept. To the end user, all it does is record and play back (and all that other good stuff). It's not something you have to go out and buy software for, and hope that the latest and greatest Laser printer will work for it.
Comparing TiVo to (un)successful computer platforms is like apples to oranges.
Also, I didn't really understand this part:
Joe Six-Pack, however, was stumped. VCRs and video-game machines had just recently made a splash in the mass market.
Umm... "Recently" as in "8 years before?" (The Amiga 1000 came out in 1985. The Atari VCS (aka 2600) came out in 1977.)
This, too:
he Amiga, which featured such revolutionary perks as a full-color screen (a big plus in the age of green-and-black Apple IIc monitors) and stereo sound.
Let's see - we what else had full-color screens? Atari 400/800 (1979), Commodore 64 (1982), and hey! Apple II! (You just needed the right monitor, I believe.)
Apple II's came out in 1977 and was still in production through 1993.
I can nitpick further, but I actually have something productive to do... somewhere... (checking pockets) No, not there...
At least for Amiga...
Amiga was a great machine - it was one of a kind back then: true multi tasking, had the most colors compared to others (ok, not against SGI or higher end machines), best sound, and as many magazines wrote "A dream machine" but Commodore mistake was the price. The price was $1200 for 256K Amiga 1000 (not including monitor). As soon as Atari start shipping the Atari ST, the price went down seriously (to something like $700) and it sold quite a lot, and in europe it sold neck to neck compared to Atari ST (which costed about $500)..
The biggest problem of Amiga wasn't the hardware - it was the management which was full of crap, never listened to their customers and never worked with the Amiga community, decisions were wrong all the way - until the company went bankrupcy and died.
I hardly think that TiVo management is the same as it was on Commodore, so I cannot think Slate can compare the 2...
I predict the end of Slate before the end of Tivo.
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
Strangely enough, the founder and many of the key players and designers of (Tivo competitor) Replay TV came from Amiga companies.
I think Replay is doing a much better job than Tivo of giving the customers what they want. Replay is not so beholden to the content providers, thus can provide cutting (some would say bleeding) edge technologies in it's units. These "unique to Replay TV" features started with 30 second commercial skip buttons on the early units and have progressed to the current features of IP addressable show sharing and automatic commercial removal. It's really fantastic stuff that I fear Tivo's partners will never allow into their boxes.
But I suppose by the Salon authors argument Replay dooms themselves all the more by producing even greater cutting edge technologies.
Honestly, I think their number one reason for failure will be the price of their product, and their insistence on pushing loads of services with it.
I know a lot of people who have been interested in it, but can't justify the price. I myself would really enjoy one because my work schedule makes it very difficult for me to catch shows. However, I don't like being forced to buy into a bunch of other stuff just to buy the product, and for what it does, I can't justify the price in my mind.
It's really just an example of consumer preference dictating the market... clearly the product is not placed in a position where the public needs it.
Last year TiVo spent almost nothing on advertising, and it's interesting why:
It turns out that MS was pumping millions into Ultimate TV advertising, and enthused customers were flocking to Circuit City and Good Guys, only to be told that they'd have to also get a satellite dish and service, regardless of what they already had.
Seeing their frustration, salespeople show them the TiVo, which works with whatever service they already have. Every dollar spent by Microsoft generated more TiVo revenue than UTV revenue...
Kevin Fox
Slate, a Microsoft magazine, says Tivo (a personal video recorder) will fail. Then they say that the X-box (a Microsoft toy) will rule the pvr world. Then, at the bottom of their site, have a kickback link for a Tivo at BestBuy. Now that's what I call journalism.
The middle mind speaks!
The point isn't that PVR will fail -- just that the long term prognistics for this company aren't good.
I bought a PVR card for a pc. It sucks, the software is no good. But the card was $50. There's no reason why the software couldn't be good -- it just isn't. There are 3rd party apps that tie into tv listings just like TiVo does.
TiVo is nice, and they make it work, but you pay an awful lot for the storage space. TiVo is vulnerable to pressure from the big media companies, too, in a way that other solutions won't be. And I have to say that it's very nice to be able to record to Divx files that can be saved or shared.
I think that the now-defunct Oldsmobile was the first make in the United States, and that Karl Benz (as in Mercedes-Benz) invented the automobile. So the first mover is still around, and the US first mover isn't.
OK, maybe I'm a little biased. I was a happy TiVo owner for almost a year -- until the modem broked. TiVo only offered a 60 or 90 day warranty, so I would have had to send them the box, wait a few weeks, and pay them at least $99 to repair it.
So I bought an Ultimate TV. Since MSFT was shutting down the division, you could get them for $99 including the dish and installation.
Plus, with the UltimateTV, I can record 2 shows at once, in original quality(including Dolby Digital).
The reason I say it should die is their service policy. The failing modem is an extremely common problem with the units (just read any TiVo board), and they fail to recognize it.
TiVo has a far superior and faster interface. Their service releases give great new and timesaving features, and they listen to user feedback and do usability. If it weren't for their lousy service, I would be their biggest advocate.
Sorry to piss on your parade, but the masses are asses, and possess a similar intellect. Yes, in Japan people are expected to grok high tech. Here in the USA people are expected to be patriots and believe in Jesus H. Christ. It's hard to be intelligent enough to grok tech when you're smoking Jesus.
...that Sony or DirecTv would buy TiVo before it goes under. Sony could easily prop it up and any patents and intellectual property would be valuable to an electronics maker like Sony.
Side (but relevant) note, I just got a notice from DirecTv saying they are now "responsible" for my TiVo service, not TiVo. I have a lifetime with TiVo for my "Direct Tivo" reciever and I was wondering if this was the beginnings of a shift in TiVo to outsource managment of services to the vendors who resell their stuff to reduce the cost of doing biz for them (TiVo). Could be...
-s
Or am I mis-interpreting things? Let me know - I'd like to know if I should buy one or not. Thanks!
I'm not sure what the secret to success is, but the secret to failure lies in trying to please everyone -Bill Cosby
I just installed a DirecTiVo system, replacing my cable TV system. I'm move the current TiVo box to my vacation home.
TiVo is so elegant: easy to use - in fact trivial. With the satellite system it's a no-brainer natural.
I wnt it for radio also.
Microsoft? Someone? They're going to build it. Here's my picture of it.
The most elemental function is that of a DVR. It wraps a user interface around the whole home television experience. And once you control the user interface... (points over to The Book of Microsoft)
Now, people have a computer that, for the first time, is running 24x7 and they don't shut it off. They don't turn their DVRs off when they are done watching television. It is always on. All television commands (record this, channel up, etc) are received by the DVR, and then forwarded to other devices (DSS receiver) as needed.
Now, this DVR has a broadband input. How can we sell software and services? Answer: Game Console.
A game console you know has to have enough computing power (or at least graphics processing) to be pretty advanced. Add a decent hard drive. Know what the next step is?
Games-on-demand. Think Yahoo! Games on Demand. I actually tried this service, and I liked it. For $15 (I cancelled immediately after subscribing so I'd just have 30 days server), I am able to play 15 games up to a month.
How does it work? It downloads a good bulk of the game onto my local hard drive. Then, my hard drive works like a cacheing filesystem in front of an NFS filesystem. That is, the game runs off of the local hard drive cache, and anything not in the local cache is downloaded from the central server and placed in my local cache. For all my game knows, it is running off of the CD or a real filesystem on a real hard drive.
This means more revenue because now you don't have to trouble with the distribution of software over the shelves. Microsoft (or X company) is going to take off where the music industry has failed... online software distribution or rental, and for a nice profit.
You might add in some tangents. Video on demand is somewhat interesting. There could be a good market there... if done correctly. Various lifestyle 'services' (local weather maps available at the touch of a few buttons).
Of course, remember that this is all in a very friendly menu system of a video computing device... not a personal computer. It is wrapped up with a bow on top for the masses who want to play a game or watch tv, but not have to manage or figure out a personal computer.
So, I'll argue that TiVo could be at a disadvantage being a first mover. It has pioneered the DVR space. The DVR space is the very KEY to getting people to put an operating system on their television set. The problem is that TiVo doesn't have the muscle to fully leverage that position. (And why Microsoft competes in that territory.)
The author of the article is saying, as far as I can tell, that TiVo as a company will fail because their hardware is in the market too soon. The author has failed to understand some basics of the TiVo business model.
First, licensing is not something that may save TiVo, it is one of the main focuses of their business. With partnerships with Sony, AT&T and DirecTV, and the technology in use in America, Asia and Europe, TiVo is well positioned to benefit from the continued rollout of this technology, not suffer from competition.
TiVo doesn't really make and sell the hardware, so they are not like the hardware based companies (Apple, Commodore) they are compared to in the article. Yes, they do subsidize the stand alone units, but standalone units (and competing standalone units like XBOX) are destined for the garbage heap. Integrating the technology into set top boxes (satellite/cable) and letting the service providers subsidize/support the equipment is the model that will succeed. This completely invalidates the authors arguments of complicated setup and being hard to sell in a retail establishment.
TiVo plays nicely with content providers. TiVo has gone out of their way to try to stay on the good side of the studio's IP lawyers. The clearest example is that it takes some intelligence to turn on 30-second skip; it is not enabled by default from the factory.
TiVo actively pursues other revenue sources. TiVo is using its service to deliver targeted advertising (Best Buy, Lexus).
Now, I am not saying that TiVo as a company will succeed in its current form (my crystal ball is at the cleaners), but if it fails it is not going to be because of some mythical disadvantage from being in the market first.
From the article: how does a Best Buy salesman explain the difference in 25 words or less, especially with inexpensive DVD recorders about to the hit the market?
1) You'll the capacity for ninetyeight *hours* of programming at medium quality once you drop in an extra seventy dollar hardrive.
2) You'll never have to remeber to swap another tape in your VCR. Ever.
3) Seasons Pass.
I'm sure you kind folks can think up your own.
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - BF
I can see things moving in the service, hosted direction. Rather than buy a box that wll be obsolete in 6-12 months, I'd much rather subscribe to a service. I pay $20/mo to the cable company or whoever and they store all the shows I want on their side and send them over to me on demand. This wouldn't even need that much storage since they only need to store each show one.
The real issues are bandwidth and legal. While legally a single person can record most OTA stuff for private, personal use, I doubt a company could do that and serve up shows for anyone. And just looking at replay tv sharing it takes like 4 hours for a 30 minute show to download, but as bandwidth to the home become faster and more ubiquitous... watch out!
It really would be your own personal tv channel. Simply pay the networks for what you do watch, maybe they'll even get rid of the commercials.
Same goes for software. I'd much rather subscribe to get the the latest and greatest versions of any software I want automatically available on my desktop. I'm still a little wary of getting rid of my PC's, but that'll probably happen to some extent too as the home pc becomes "a service"
They market to people who watch a lot of TV - when I think the perfect TiVo customer is the person who has very little time to watch TV - so that when you can sit down you can watch something you want, and not "uhh... it's 9:15, I guess I'll sit though half of 'Everyone Loves Raymond'..."
/. So much for my credibility...
Make the most of your valuable time. That's what it's all about.
Of course I am blabbing about how little time I have while I am here typing my drivel on
I think the author made a few mistakes on his article.
1. It is not true that being first on a new market usually leads to failure (the author seems to imply that). Exactly the opposite, history has shown once and again that being first is most of the time to your advantage, and most of the time leads to success. Is this the case with TiVo? Judge by yourself
2. The author of the article gave a bad example with the Amiga. What killed the Amiga was not the industry or the users or the competition, it was Commodore itself. It had the most awful marketing department in the world (and this is an understatement).
3. The newton's failure was not being first, but being over-engineered to an excessive cost (the author does imply something to this respect). The market was not prepared for such an expensive and large unit at that time.
If TiVo actually does go under, I really feel that it will be a reflection of the relative lack of TV programming worth recording in the first place....
Let's face it, VCR's are dirt cheap nowdays, and the tapes have the advantage of being removeable and easy to trade with others.
Most of us only have one or two TV programs we care enough about to bother recording them, if that. For a task that small, a regular old VCR does the trick.
TiVo is very cool, but primarily, it just encourages the user to watch more TV they wouldn't have bothered watching otherwise. That's not something I'd pay hundreds of dollars for, and many others won't either.
Personally, I make a conscious effort to limit my TV watching time. It's all too easy to sit back and get passively entertained by television nonsense, and suddenly realize you've wasted hour after hour, accomplishing nothing.
But my wife certainly does. She is about to get her own dedicated Tivo, just so she can start recording all of her "Trading Spaces," "Ground Force," "Changing Rooms" home redecorationg shows. It'll be a hard-drive full of estrogen in no time.
She's "just a chick," but she can't go back to watching TV the old way.
For those that would die defending it, Freedom
has a sweet taste that the protected will never know.
Microsoft's PVR failed totally agaist TiVo for features and never turned a profit either.
Each and every Xbox is sold at a loss and still can't outsell the PS2. The foreseable future holds nothing but more losses from Xbox. How come nobody in the media remembers the Microsoft PVRs, WinCE 1, WinCE 2, or dare I say it? MSX? They poured money down that drain and the media ate it up. Problem is, consumers didn't.
PS3 and even Xbox2 are already in serious development. Xbox will never live long enough to turn a profit.
This guy is nothing but a M$ propaganda tool. It's typical for them to compare their future fantasy products to other's past and existing products.
How's this one? Don't buy XP, M$ is going out of business when I release by ZZ OS, which is 100% Windows binary compatible, but 10x as fast. Wait now, a year, maybe 3, but wait. Don't buy anybody else's products. Sound familiar?
Basically, it lets you control your Tivo without needing the remote control. Useful for me since I've got the Tivo outputting to two TVs in separate rooms - I can use my laptop as a remote this way. Also handy for scheduling a recording from work if you forget to set it up before...