AOL's Mystro TV vs Tivo?

admiral2001 writes "Here is is a NYTimes story about AOL-Time-Warner's plans for a TiVo-killing 'Mystro TV' (nytimes annoying free registration required). They plan to begin rolling this out sometime in the next two years. Their major features are the simple pause, rewind, and fast forward that all PVRs have. However, they've taken the obvious stance to "let[s] networks set the parameters, dictating which shows users can reschedule, and it also creates ways for networks to insert commercials." The article even mentions how they could get an advantage in pushing their product because "viewers could try out Mystro TV by pushing a button on their remote"."

Comments

WHy would anyone buy this?

[Unknown Poltroon]

Whats the point if i cant skip commercials? If the network decides what i can watch? I mean, hasnt the network already shown it at the wrong time, thats why im recording it!

Re:WHy would anyone buy this?

[jedidiah]

They are hampering their own ability to provide meaningful exposure for their sponsors. ANNOYING the customer is never beneficial. At best, viewers will merely ignore commercials. At worst, viewers will hold a grudge. Neither of these options is good for the TV networks.

The TV networks need to get their heads out of their *sses and stop running around like they are living in some fantasy land where the Neilson ratings actually mean something. They need to be more mindful and directed with their advertising. They need better feedback and confirmed (rather than merely assumed) viewership.

They simply need to be willing to be told when commercials suck or are annoying. They also need to know what commercials end up viewed for their own sake even by viewers that have the option not bothering.

TV networks need to get over the idea that commercial viewing is an entitlement. They need to EARN our eyeballs. The sooner they realize this, the better off they will be.

BTW, there IS NO CONTRACT between me and a broadcaster. I owe them NOTHING. They OWE US, since we are their revenue source.

Don't pretend that any altruism is remotely involved in this situation.

Yeah good luck...

[i_want_you_to_throw_]

Getting the legions of Tivo owners to give up the system they have become so rabidly fond of. It's not just a product, it's a culture.

Getting an industry behind you won't help that much either. You could probably get bunches of AOL people who are on the fence about a Tivo purchase but anyone who owns a Tivo probably wouldn't jump at the chance to start receiving commercials.

Missing the boat...

[peterdaly]

The whole appeal of Tivo is that the watcher can take back control of watching TV. That is what makes Tivo a "killer app."

This reigns back in that control. That being the case, it is not the "killer app" TWC hopes it will be.

-Pete

cable on demand

[buktotruth]

I've seen the cable on demand functionality of "Cablevisions - Digital IO" service and it blew me away. You could watch whatever whenever. I think that this AOL-TW product will be dwarfed by on demand broadcasting. I'm waiting for the day when television will shift from broadcasting on a set schedule, to allowing the viewers freedom to choose what to watch, and when.

Imagine sitting down at 4AM and throwing on the news. It of course would not be live, but who cares. If you can watch it then, then great.

I do own a Tivo, and my TV watching has changed drastically. Unfortunately though, if its 7:30PM on a Sunday and I want to watch the new Simpsons episode at 8:00, I still have to wait. Imagine a system like this:

The channel decides which shows will "air" in a given week, and the viewer has access to ALL of them, at any time. If it's Monday and I want to watch something that typically airs on Friday, no problem. The only caveat with this, is live television. And you know what, if the live broadcast is that good, people will tune in at that time too.

Re:TiVo killer?

[Sabalon]

Never understimate the power of a lower price over quality.

Q.E.D - Wal-mart

It's a step in the inevitable direction

[ites]

The future of movies and television seems to be changing towards one that is advert-free but sponsored by product placement. Given that content is becoming plastic - copied and manipulated as wanted - this seems the only way to pay for films that people want to watch.
A recent film made in Africa - where copying is rife and people are poor anyhow - demonstrates this wonderfully. Critical Assignment, paid for by Guiness, is a kind of African James Bond action film with sexy women and a cheesy plot. The hero is Michael Power, already famous as the kung-fu kicking hero of Guiness adverts across Nigeria and other countries. I've driven past a huge poster of him in Lagos many times.
While businesses like AOL and Sony are worrying about how to (a) keep their customers and (b) make money from movies and (c) prevent piracy, other more pragmatic businesses are thinking: "piracy is inevitable, so let's use that to our advantage".
To be honest, films like Critical Assignment (which I've not seen, just read about) are probably really bad, but then many commercial efforts are as well. And as competition for viewers heats up (when Guiness's competitors, like South African Breweries and Heineken make their own action movies), quality will go up (or down, if you like).
I think the US/Japanese/Western content industry is too old and inflexible to understand how to use the new digital economy usefully. Expect the next Hollywoods to be in South Africa, Bombay, and Hong Kong, catering for audiences that number in the billion range.

Max Headroom said this would happen...

[SolemnDragon]

Anybody remember Max Headroom? Quote from the site: "It predicted the use of Internet-like e-mail to cast election votes, such as is commonly done for taking polls nowadays by CNN and many other Web sites, and as is done by Web page-hit counters. And some states are now talking of instituting political elections via Internet.

It predicted the rise of "BlipVerts" as advertising, in the use of short ads that flash constantly-moving and -changing images to the viewer because the viewers' attention spans had become so increasingly short.

It predicted the common occurrences of computer viruses, tapeworms, timebombs, and Trojan horses as ways of defeating other programs. In fact, one episode showed Max invading an enemy's computer network with an image of a wooden Trojan horse! Of course, today, these are well-known hackers' (crackers') products. It predicted what is known today as "page-jacking," or the surrepticious taking over of another's Web page, calling it "zipping" (of an online broadcast station's signal) in one episode. In the same "zipping" episode it introduced the idea of on-line shopping. It predicted, in a sense, the clandestine use of Web anonymizers or ways of being online without being tracked, calling the people who can do this "blanks."
It also included features such as televisions functioning as webcams, by remote control with two way feed, televisions which are manufactured without shutoff buttons, in a world where the television show/ network with the most ratings wins an election. And of course, my alltime favourite quote from The Max himself, "Why do you think they call it 'programming?'"

You are all missing the point

[Snowspinner]

TiVo is not wildly popular, and never will be. It will remain the province of a relative handful of dedicated geeks like us.

This, in and of itself, does not bother the networks. The networks are largely aware that there is a limited subclass of the population that is going to find ways out of their pay schemes.

Their primary interest is not actually to eliminate this subclass. It's to make sure that they remain a subclass, and that their newfangled PVRs and the like don't spill out into the mainstream. It's only when they fail miserably at this (c.f. mp3s) that they will begin cracking down wildly.

No one really pretends that they can get rid of technological innovation like this. Geeks will always be ahead of the curve. The interest of the networks and corporations in general is in making sure that the mass population doesn't catch up with these foul innovations.

That's what MystroTV is about. Getting the mainstream to avoid fancy stuff like TiVos. The handful of us who already have TiVos? We're only of interest to them in that we'll show them the next innovation they have to keep limited to the elite.