[oOLiquidNightOo]

decent column ..


http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/23/te...gy/23VIDE.html

 

[Reden]

Ney: give non-comparable prices for Replay and Tivo. Everyone does this.. I bet that's the #1 reason Replay is moving to subscriptions: so the press and everyone will print apples-apples prices.


Yea: Numerous examples of how the "Entertainment" industry is using lawsuits instead of trying to work with technology. This is the sort of publicicty PVR makers need. Advertisers have a clue and are trying to learn how to make money with it.


I thought it was one of the fairest pieces on the PVR issues I've read. Maybe leaning a little towards consumer issues, but pretty close to center.


Robert

 

[jptsetme]

The article explains that ReplayTV *records* all the commercials, and that they have simply provided an easy way for consumers to skip the commercials *if they want to*. He says that it's up to the networks and advertisers to come up with creative ways to get people to want to watch their commercials:


"What are they going to attack next, the mute button?" Mr. Potashner said. "We've provided an efficiency improvement for a consumer who is compelled to skip a commercial. What they should do is work with us."


Nice!


--Joe

 

[oOLiquidNightOo]

i thought it was "ok" too. it's nice to see DVR being brought into the limelight. i know there's been exposure on 60 minutes etc but this was a good sized piece that will grab 'the common guys' attention.


i must admit, i was disappointed though. when i saw the size and title of the column i would have thought that the 'current issue' of 'consumer privacy' and the pending suit against sonic blue would have been the main focal point of the column. of course it does go into the court issues but fails to spell out the courts sweeping demands. in my opinion that was a huge omission.


70% of the column was dedicated to the 'networks concerns'. i realize that's relevant but isn't this old news? how about mentioning the court issue demanding SB to spy on its user base? just seemed like that would have been the whole reason for a column of this size.


again - it was a decent write up but i've seen enough columns about customer satisfaction and evolving technology. the angle of networks considering other alternative advertising was good.


i was just hoping that the current DVR issues where going to be brought to light as opposed to just reissuing ones that haven't changed in the last 2 years.

 

[hroeder]

'common guy attention' and New York Times don't track together in my mind. I get the electronic Times every day, but still it doesn't seem "common guy" to me. That would be the Daily News.


The issue is simply an absurd waste of time. The argument is like saying you have to read ads in a magazine. . .Yeah, let's see a judge make that ruling.


Money grubbers are just paranoid. They get "money for nothing" and they're afraid we'll get our "kicks for free". If they want to sell my "attention", then they have to earn it. . .

 

[RandyL712]

I WANT MY MTV

 

[oOLiquidNightOo]

Quote:

Originally posted by hroeder 'common guy attention' and New York Times don't track together in my mind. I get the electronic Times every day, but still it doesn't seem "common guy" to me. The issue is simply an absurd waste of time. The argument is like saying you have to read ads in a magazine. . .Yeah, let's see a judge make that ruling. Money grubbers are just paranoid. They get "money for nothing" and they're afraid we'll get our "kicks for free". If they want to sell my "attention", then they have to earn it. . .

points *very* well made and taken hroeder. it was just too bad that the column didn't focus on those very issues.


as WIRED MAGAZINE would say ..


TIRED -


* program time shifting

* network concern of infringement.

* evolving digital 'VCR'

* tivo VS replaytv


WIRED -


* commercial omission.

* citizen concern over court ordered privacy issues.

* networked DVRs.

* open source DVR programs enabling program migration to computers.