Archive for July 6, 2009

Lcdt_Toshiba_REGZA_52XV545U

With the Supreme Court's decision, "Remote DVR" may be on the way, but when that will be and how much it will cost remains to be seen.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision not to hear a final appeal by broadcasters and movie studios seeking to block Cablevision’s proposed “remote DVR” technology opens the door for the company, and others, to offer such a service.

Unlike a conventional DVR, which stores programs on a hard drive in the cable box in your living room, Cablevision’s planned remote DVR service lets you store programs on the company’s servers. Because the technology resides within the cable system’s network, subscribers can use their existing cable boxes instead of renting new equipment. This would free consumers from the storage limits of their hard drive (often about 30 hours of HD video). It could also theoretically make the service cheaper, since the cable companies don’t have to deploy and service separate boxes.

So when will we be able to get this new service? Unfortunately, no time soon, since Cablevision says there’s no timetable in place for a rollout of its remote DVR service. Instead, Cablevision’s first application of the technology will be far more prosaic: Subscribers with standard cable boxes will be able to pause live TV when the phone rings—something I (and Cablevision subscribers with DVRs and cable-phone service) can already do with my DirecTV DVR service, which displays Caller-ID information on the TV screen.

As a result, many questions remain as to how the service will really work. For example:

• How much will Cablevision charge for its remote DVR service? Current subscribers pay a $10 per month DVR service fee, but nothing extra for the box itself.

• Will existing cable boxes need a firmware or software update to work with the remote DVR service?

• Will the company continue to offer conventional DVRs to subscribers who prefer them, and allow those who currently have them to keep them?

• Will there be preset limits on the amount of storage each subscriber gets, or price tiers allowing you to pay for greater storage if you wish?

• Will you be able to simultaneously record two shows while viewing a previously recorded selection?

• Will you be able to fast-forward past commercials, the way we do now, or will that feature be blocked?

• And will we be able to make DVD backups of recorded shows to free up our allotted storage space, or to archive shows we want to keep permanently?

In fact, it seems a bit odd to me that Cablevisions has no definite plans to offer the service, especially since its announcement of an impending remote DVR rollout was what got them sued in the first place. Maybe it’s the conspiracy theorist in me, but I’m thinking the delay could be due to backroom negotiations between Cablevision and broadcasters to limit the ability to fast-forward through commercials. A perhaps less intrusive approach would be for cable operators to work with broadcasters to insert newer, more targeted ads in the stream that would have greater relevancy and appeal to viewers so maybe they won’t want to skip them.

Another thought is that given the inefficiency of having to make separate recordings of every program subscribers want to record, the company may be investigating if there’s a way to store a single “master” recording of a program that could be shared by all those who want to view it. The legality of this approach is unclear, given the narrowness of an appeals court's prior ruling. While it did affirm the right of consumers to “time-shift” personal recordings per the original Betamax decision back in 1994, an essential element of its decision was that the recordings would be made and controlled by subscribers, not the company.

So what do you think? Do you like having a DVR that stores programs locally? Would you opt for a remote DVR if it were a cheaper option? What if it cost more but got you more space? And would you be willing to give up fast-forwarding through commercials if the ads you received were more closely targeted to your interests? Let us know what you think.–James K. Willcox

Leave a Comment

Lcdt_Toshiba_REGZA_52XV545U

With the Supreme Court's decision, "Remote DVR" may be on the way, but when that will be and how much it will cost remains to be seen.

The Supreme Court’s recent decision not to hear a final appeal by broadcasters and movie studios seeking to block Cablevision’s proposed “remote DVR” technology opens the door for the company, and others, to offer such a service.

Unlike a conventional DVR, which stores programs on a hard drive in the cable box in your living room, Cablevision’s planned remote DVR service lets you store programs on the company’s servers. Because the technology resides within the cable system’s network, subscribers can use their existing cable boxes instead of renting new equipment. This would free consumers from the storage limits of their hard drive (often about 30 hours of HD video). It could also theoretically make the service cheaper, since the cable companies don’t have to deploy and service separate boxes.

So when will we be able to get this new service? Unfortunately, no time soon, since Cablevision says there’s no timetable in place for a rollout of its remote DVR service. Instead, Cablevision’s first application of the technology will be far more prosaic: Subscribers with standard cable boxes will be able to pause live TV when the phone rings—something I (and Cablevision subscribers with DVRs and cable-phone service) can already do with my DirecTV DVR service, which displays Caller-ID information on the TV screen.

As a result, many questions remain as to how the service will really work. For example:

• How much will Cablevision charge for its remote DVR service? Current subscribers pay a $10 per month DVR service fee, but nothing extra for the box itself.

• Will existing cable boxes need a firmware or software update to work with the remote DVR service?

• Will the company continue to offer conventional DVRs to subscribers who prefer them, and allow those who currently have them to keep them?

• Will there be preset limits on the amount of storage each subscriber gets, or price tiers allowing you to pay for greater storage if you wish?

• Will you be able to simultaneously record two shows while viewing a previously recorded selection?

• Will you be able to fast-forward past commercials, the way we do now, or will that feature be blocked?

• And will we be able to make DVD backups of recorded shows to free up our allotted storage space, or to archive shows we want to keep permanently?

In fact, it seems a bit odd to me that Cablevisions has no definite plans to offer the service, especially since its announcement of an impending remote DVR rollout was what got them sued in the first place. Maybe it’s the conspiracy theorist in me, but I’m thinking the delay could be due to backroom negotiations between Cablevision and broadcasters to limit the ability to fast-forward through commercials. A perhaps less intrusive approach would be for cable operators to work with broadcasters to insert newer, more targeted ads in the stream that would have greater relevancy and appeal to viewers so maybe they won’t want to skip them.

Another thought is that given the inefficiency of having to make separate recordings of every program subscribers want to record, the company may be investigating if there’s a way to store a single “master” recording of a program that could be shared by all those who want to view it. The legality of this approach is unclear, given the narrowness of an appeals court's prior ruling. While it did affirm the right of consumers to “time-shift” personal recordings per the original Betamax decision back in 1994, an essential element of its decision was that the recordings would be made and controlled by subscribers, not the company.

So what do you think? Do you like having a DVR that stores programs locally? Would you opt for a remote DVR if it were a cheaper option? What if it cost more but got you more space? And would you be willing to give up fast-forwarding through commercials if the ads you received were more closely targeted to your interests? Let us know what you think.–James K. Willcox

Leave a Comment

Online privacy: New tool makes it easier to hide your tracks

Here’s your chance to easily opt out of many of those ad-trackers that follow your every move as you surf the Internet. A new, free tool called TACO, or Targeted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out, lets you do just that.

Developed by a student fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society, TACO places cookies in your browser that prevent 84 online ad networks from tracking your browsing habits. Right now, the tool works only with the Firefox browser.

Without TACO, you’d have to visit a large number of Web sites individually and opt out of each network’s program.–Donna Tapellini

Leave a Comment

Adobe Flash to your TV: Let’s get interactive!

Not content to remain tethered to the computer, Adobe’s Flash technology is about to make the jump to televisions and other consumer-electronics devices this fall, promising to deliver high-def video and other web-based content seamlessly to TV viewers. The technology, called Flash for the Digital Home, is an optimized version of Flash Lite—designed for mobile products—that can run on TVs, Blu-ray DVD players, and settop boxes.

As far as we know, Vizio is the only TV brand that’s announced support for the specialized version of Flash, which will be available later this summer in XVT-series TVs that feature Vizio Internet Apps (VIA), the company’s online TV platform. But Flash for the Digital Home has already garnered the support of some major players, including Atlantic Records, Comcast, Disney Interactive, Intel, Netflix, and The New York Times, among others.

This is part of the Open Screen Project, Adobe’s plan to let you access Internet content from almost any kind of device without going through a computer or web browser. Flash for the Digital Home will give users the ability to combine traditional TV viewing with access to new types of Internet-delivered content, including streaming HD video and music, along with interaction with social-networking communities. Flash Lite is currently used to deliver multimedia content to mobile devices, including cell phones.

We’ll be looking for additional product announcements from TV and Blu-ray player manufacturers to see how broadly this new technology will be adopted—and of course testing models when they become available to see if the technology lives up to its promise. —Will Dilella

Leave a Comment

Jul 6, MicroGEM MG2000 DTV Converter Box

Features of the Micro GEM MG2000 DTV Converter Box. NTIA Approved CECB.

Leave a Comment