Slashdot Mirror


ReplayTV DVR to Remove Features

KarlTheGhoul writes "D&M Holdings Inc. on Tuesday said its new ReplayTV digital television recorder will not include controversial features such as automatically skipping commercials and sharing shows via the Internet." This is a confirmation of our earlier story. Their new ad slogan will be "Costs More, Less Useful".

12 of 418 comments (clear)

  1. Failure ahead for Replay... by pir8garth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This only effect's their new product line, but the article says that it's older models will be produced with those features still in tact. It sounds like they are just trying to please the networks, and not the customers. If you ask me, they are setting themselves up for a big let-down in the number of sales, but by the same token, Tivo doesn't have these features to start with, and is doing extremely well...

    --
    Something clever...
  2. In related news: by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Informative


    MythTV v.0.9 was released yesterday

    Works great on the 500mhz system I found in the trash a couple of months ago.

    Freevo also works quite nicely.

    Ryan Fenton

  3. Hacking potential? by SailFly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hope there is still as much hacking potential as the original ReplayTV. There are some impressive projects going on out there!

    http://rtvpatch.sourceforge.net/

  4. In other news... by illumin8 · · Score: 5, Funny

    In other news... Ebay prices of the older 4000 series Replay units skyrocketd...

    --
    "When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon
  5. Don't get so worked up. by stanmann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doesn't automagically skip comercials doesn't mean you can't do a 15/30 second skip or jump forward. Just means that the box won't have the current feature which autodetects and skips commercials. Obviously, a compromise solution, but not earthshattering or skybreaking.

    --
    Food not Bombs is a nice platitude but it breaks down when you notice that the Bombees are usually well fed
  6. Content providers vs. Media tools providers by ites · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Companies with content simply can't bring themselves to create decent media tools. Look at Sony, handicapping themselves because they own Columbia records, while Apple do the right thing by the consumer, digitizing every media format they can.

    It just goes to show how the "synergy" arguments of the 1990's are actually complete bullshit.

    --
    Sig for sale or rent. One previous user. Inquire within.
  7. Re:Just wait by KrispyKringle · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't know. People have been predicting the downfall of the mainstream media for a while for the same reasons. My feeling is that people never notice what is bad unless their is an alternative. People don't say "wow, our society could be so much better if...", they say "wow, our society isn't nearly as good as..." or, in this case, "wow, my TiVo doesn't do nearly as much as so-and-so's..."

    The reason that peope have largely lashed back at Big Music is because there is a clear alternative which applies not just to consumers' sense of moral wrongitude, but their pocketbooks: Kazaa, Gnutella, or what-have-you. Until people see the alternative that they aren't supposed to know about, just the abstracted idea of not being able to do something that the technology does allow isn't going to catch the public's attention much.

    Look at how people seem to feel about Big Music. Reading that ABC News article about the RIT student who settled with the RIAA by paying them $12,000, I was truly surprised at how openly critical of the RIAA the article seemed to be, at least, for another member of Big Media, so to speak. It's not that there's a whole open political movement, but rather that so many people, including, most likely, the ABC News correspondent, simply share music files and the RIAA has made anyone who shares files their enemy, quite publicly. They made the consumers the enemy, not the other way around.

    So why will there be no immediate lash back at Big Media for restricting things like the TiVo? Because whats the illegal alternative? What free software are people going to download onto their box-top sets out of self-interest which will essentially make them unwitting enemies of Big Media? There is none; short of complicated and risky hardware-hacking, people won't be exposed to what they are missing.

    If one TiVo-type product is available in the store with ad-skipping, and the other without, sure, there'll be a preference. But if people are never presented with the option? Then there will be no complaints. Just don't let them see what they're missing and no one is the wiser.

  8. Re:But the advertisers... by KrispyKringle · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The concern most people have here, though, is not that they have a right not to view the ads; such a right is quite basic, as it goes hand-in-hand with your right not to view TV. This is quite different from a right, however, to view TV without the ads; when you accept an essentially free gift from the networks (however crappy the programming may be) you accept it on their terms; they would be well within their rights to say, "Don't like ads? Don't watch TV." As the ads become more pervasive, this is essentially what they are saying.

    Rather, critics are bothered by the impact that a totally seperate industry can have on what sort of consumer electronics are even available to us with what capabilities. Were the TV networks to dislike this, they could force contractual agreements with consumers banning the use of these devices (purely hypothetically, of course). But instead they choose a less direct means of asserting their power, which translates to a means of, from a really sinister viewpoint, pacifying the natives.

    Rather than openly tell us who's decision it was, the networks use threats and bribes to induce the hardware manufacturers into denying consumers an otherwise profitable and desirable product. This echos far too similarly to the practice of the RIAA of suing the pants off anyone who manufactures software or hardware that appears to threaten them ("Hey, baby, you don't need to sue me to get my pants off...") regardless of significant legitimate use.

    This direction-through-indirection is merely annoying at best, but really a terrifying over-stepping of commercial bounds at worst. The government, who supposedly represents us all, is entrusted with the rights to deny us harmful or dangerous products. We trust that such an action is in our best interest, and that the reasons for such an action are the reasons stated up front--no underhanded manipulation is ever acceptible in a democracy--but we have given no such trust to any corporation. When a corporation who's business is televised entertainment, no less, makes for us a decision on what hardware is good and what is bad, it oversteps its commercial bounds.

  9. VCR? by siskbc · · Score: 5, Funny
    They said that when the VCR came out, that TV would be dead within two years. So in 1986, I stopped watching TV, since the two years had elapsed by then, and figured why wait until the screen faded to black since that would be really sad.

    So for the last 17 years, I didn't watch TV until someone told me this year, hey, TV never died, it was there all along. I was really happy, and I watched some really great shows like Jackass, but now you fuckers are telling me this TiVo shit is going to kill TV again! Fuck!

    Well, I'm not waiting around for the end. I'm giving up TV. I just think it's shitty that people are always talking about some box killing broadcast TV. I'm gonna break all those fucking boxes.

    --

    -Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat

  10. Secret code by Eevee · · Score: 5, Funny

    And I thought it was Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A Start.

  11. Re:But the advertisers... by Onan+The+Librarian · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm still astonished at the number of people who believe that television exists in order to provide programs. Television exists solely for the purpose of providing another advertising medium, for everything from footwear to politicians. The quality of programming is quite secondary to the networks first consideration: advertising dollars. They don't utilize those dollars to create "better TV programs", there's no such thing. The shows exist only to sucker viewers into watching the advertisements, and although you can say, "Oh, I always mute the commercials", the visuals are still effective at capturing attention (often far more so than the programs). It's also worth noting that television advertising works on the same basis as email spam: sure, YOU don't respond to those Nike and Coke ads, but someone sure as hell does, and the take from even a tiny percentage of viewers is significant enough to warrant the continued domination of television by its advertisers. Btw, in his book "Four Arguments For The Elimination Of Television" Jerry Mander notes that the more heavily a product is advertised the less there is an actual need for it. So while you never see an advertisement for whole wheat or organic farming you'll see plenty for soft drinks, antiperspirants, and yes, even automobiles and beer. You might like that stuff but you don't really NEED it. That is known up front in the advertising industry, so they must continue to blare their wares, else in a very short time you will forget about their product and discover that you simply don't need it.
    As an aside, I was told by a former jingles writer for the J. Walter Thompson Agency that he once conferred with representatives for a major brewing company here in the US. The reps told him they were targeting what they termed the "reparative drinker", i.e., the 30% of American drinkers who consume 60% of their product. These are the people who don't have a babe girlfriend, a fast cool car, or any talent for sports. But the advertisers know that their job is to convince those people that if they just drink their beer then at least they'll FEEL like they got the babe, the car, and the talent. In short, drinking their beer "repaired" those deficincies, and it's the advertiser's work to convince those people to keep drinking, as opposed to actually doing something to improve their real lives.
    As a last comment, I've lost track of the number of friends who tell me about their attention-deficit out-of-control kids, and then tell me that "All those kids want to do is watch TV". What those kids will really remember is the ads. Makes me wonder what Hitler might have accomplished with television...

  12. Re:Feature wanted - "Capture Commercials" by Torqued · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's not my fault that the delivery model for television advertising is lagging behind the technology. Why should I waste my time watching commercials that do not apply to me or that I have no interest in seeing? Now.. there are a few commercials that I will watch - even on the Tivo -- Commercials for TV shows that I am interested in, funny commercials, commercials for other sci-fi shows, commercials for motorcycle stuff, some commercials for home remodeling/etc.

    I watch *more* television shows/programs in *less* time than I watched before.

    By skipping commercials, I can watch 2 "1-hour" shows in 1.5 hours. Watching 10 "hours" of TV programming can be done in 7.5 hours with Tivo. I do a lot of things that interest me with an "extra" 2.5 hours of time! To me, my time is more valuable than whatever some advertiser is paying for their 30-second slot. People that waste my time piss me off!

    If I want to go out to dinner, go to a movie, or go out of town, I don't have to worry about taping and/or missing any of the shows I *really* want to watch - this is especially handy on weekend nights.

    Yes.. I skip commercials.. BUT, I would say that I have absolutely no interest in > 90% of the commercials being shown:

    -I'm not looking to buy a new car
    -I'm not looking to buy a new PC - "Dude! I'm NOT getting a Dell!
    -I don't eat fast food
    -I'm a guy and don't need make-up, feminine hygiene products, nor do I want to have an "organic experience" when washing my hair
    -I am not looking to refinance a house
    -I don't watch Oprah, Dr. Phil, or any of those other mindless talk shows.
    -I don't care about commercials for other shows tha I have absolutely no interest in - I don't care what time they come on nor do I want to see whatever stupid teaser you're going to put in the commercial
    -I'm 33 years old - I don't need senior citizen "supplemental insurance" and/or home delivery of drugs, etc. ...

    Have I left anything out?

    What I would like to see is more targeted advertising that gives me information that I really want to see. Have the commercials downloaded to the Tivo and insert them dynamically into the program at the commercial breaks. Set aside an "hour" worth of disk space and fill it with 120 30-second commercials that can be inserted dynamically into my shows. Maybe embed a signal in the broadcast that would indicate the start of the commercial break and how long it is to run.. Let me "rate" the commercials like I can "rate" programs on the Tivo - 1,2, or 3 thumbs-up or thumbs-down and give me 80% of the commercials that I have said I want to receive and 20% of commercials that you think I would want to receive based on the ratings of my tv programs and commericals.

    Just like with the TV shows, give me something that I want to watch and I will watch it.