First let me apologize if this has been gone over before. I haven't followed closely threads on the 4000 series because it isn't realistic for me to think about getting one.
After the initial head rush of hearing about the 4000 series machines, I have a lot of questions about why one wants to get one.
The way I see it, they AREN'T anything more than extensions of the 3000 series machines -- for reasons I'll expound on below. If you consider that, then the prices make even less sense than they did before.
First, what do they do that is different than the 3000 series?
What good are these differences to me?
1)Ethernet (but no dialup) connection. I have a broadband (cable modem) connection, but it is in a different room. Apparently I would have to purchase other hardware (a router?) to set up a home network, and then run wire along the perimeter of the house (vaulted ceilings/no attic access) to the living room. While I would prefer broadband, I think modem works better for me -- no extra wiring -- I use one of those electronic thingydos to run the modem over the electric lines to a room with a phone jack. Plus, no additional hardware purchases. Have to add that to the cost of the 4000 series machine.
2)File sharing over the internet. Not sure how realistic this is. I know the broadband providers have rules against setting up servers, and against services which have heavy duty upload usage (like Napster), they may outlaw this in the end -- easy to monitor and enforce; think how heavy upstream traffic will be when you try to upload a 3 hour movie at "high" resolution.
3)Commercial Skip. This is the big one -- I would love to have no-button commercial advance.
4)Size. It is nice they start at 40 and go up, and they must be able to support large drives better than the 3000 series (means more RAM, I guess)... Well, I have an upgraded 3020 (upgraded from 20 to 80 hours), and I bought my sister a PV-HS2000 (30 hour) Panasonic; I got the bunch for something like $750 + $240 for the 80 gig drive. I would have to pay SIGNIFICANTLY more for the same space, let alone two tuners.
5)Other outputs. VGA, progressive video (?), digital audio. Well, I don't have anything with these inputs except for my computer monitor (VGA, and my dolby digital receiver. Dolby digital 2.0 output doesn't excite me -- I don't see the advantage of a short (few feet) cable run for digital audio versus compoosite audio. I've gone into discussions of this on digital cable threads -- for short runs your ears can't tell the difference. Now, if it STORED it, well, that would be a different story and a large improvement.
OK, as far as I can tell those are the differences.
As far as what is the same:
No direct feeds. This is NOT a digital tuner. You can't send in and store the raw digital audio/video from a sat/cable receiver. You can't store raw HDTV signals. This does the same thing as the 3000 series machines: it takes an analog A/V signal, digitizes it, stores it, pulls it back out, converts the video back to analog, and the audio to analog and dolby digital. As far as I know, it does not convert the analog audio directly to dolby digital; it stores it in some MPEG audio format and converts that. Likewise, none of the video formats it outputs is "conversionless". Anyone know more about this?
So this isn't really a quantum leap in technology. If it acted as a universal receiver and stored the raw feed from digital cable and satellite transmissions, I would sit up and take notice.
The way I see it there are going to be two large steps coming.
1) Direct integration of PVR technology into digital cable receivers. This has already occured for satellite TV; the three digital cable box manufacturers are all working on the problem with various partnerships; Motorola has announced its model although it has not seemed to follow up on it.
2) Moving to digital TV. Someday we will be switching to HDTV. At this point you will need set-top converters to convert HDTV signals from digital to analog to view on today's sets. This down the line, 5 years? 10? Is it far enough away to justify such a LARGE investment in a product with a limited lifetime? Especially for a product which isn't a quantum leap forward?
As far as I can tell, for me, the only advantage for 4000 series over 3000 series is the commercial advance -- and there are several disadvantages.
An aside:
Since ReplayTV announced the 4000 series, and removed links to 3000 series products from their websites, coupled by the disappearance of Panasonic Showstoppers from several major stores, has there been a decrease in the number of new users (as seen on traffic on this site)? My point is, is ReplayTV rapidly losing market share to TiVo as we wait for the 4000 series to appear? At these prices, can they get it back? It seems to me that the 4000 series is aimed at a totally different market than Showstoppers, ReplayTV 3000 series, TiVo, and the various satellite PVR's are marketed to. These seem to be marketed to the general (if slightly high end) consumer. I consider myself to be well off -- high tech upper middle class -- but not Lexus rich. This seems to be aimed at the Lexus crowd. Are we going to be left out of ReplayTV's future plans?
Ciao
Joe
After the initial head rush of hearing about the 4000 series machines, I have a lot of questions about why one wants to get one.
The way I see it, they AREN'T anything more than extensions of the 3000 series machines -- for reasons I'll expound on below. If you consider that, then the prices make even less sense than they did before.
First, what do they do that is different than the 3000 series?
What good are these differences to me?
1)Ethernet (but no dialup) connection. I have a broadband (cable modem) connection, but it is in a different room. Apparently I would have to purchase other hardware (a router?) to set up a home network, and then run wire along the perimeter of the house (vaulted ceilings/no attic access) to the living room. While I would prefer broadband, I think modem works better for me -- no extra wiring -- I use one of those electronic thingydos to run the modem over the electric lines to a room with a phone jack. Plus, no additional hardware purchases. Have to add that to the cost of the 4000 series machine.
2)File sharing over the internet. Not sure how realistic this is. I know the broadband providers have rules against setting up servers, and against services which have heavy duty upload usage (like Napster), they may outlaw this in the end -- easy to monitor and enforce; think how heavy upstream traffic will be when you try to upload a 3 hour movie at "high" resolution.
3)Commercial Skip. This is the big one -- I would love to have no-button commercial advance.
4)Size. It is nice they start at 40 and go up, and they must be able to support large drives better than the 3000 series (means more RAM, I guess)... Well, I have an upgraded 3020 (upgraded from 20 to 80 hours), and I bought my sister a PV-HS2000 (30 hour) Panasonic; I got the bunch for something like $750 + $240 for the 80 gig drive. I would have to pay SIGNIFICANTLY more for the same space, let alone two tuners.
5)Other outputs. VGA, progressive video (?), digital audio. Well, I don't have anything with these inputs except for my computer monitor (VGA, and my dolby digital receiver. Dolby digital 2.0 output doesn't excite me -- I don't see the advantage of a short (few feet) cable run for digital audio versus compoosite audio. I've gone into discussions of this on digital cable threads -- for short runs your ears can't tell the difference. Now, if it STORED it, well, that would be a different story and a large improvement.
OK, as far as I can tell those are the differences.
As far as what is the same:
No direct feeds. This is NOT a digital tuner. You can't send in and store the raw digital audio/video from a sat/cable receiver. You can't store raw HDTV signals. This does the same thing as the 3000 series machines: it takes an analog A/V signal, digitizes it, stores it, pulls it back out, converts the video back to analog, and the audio to analog and dolby digital. As far as I know, it does not convert the analog audio directly to dolby digital; it stores it in some MPEG audio format and converts that. Likewise, none of the video formats it outputs is "conversionless". Anyone know more about this?
So this isn't really a quantum leap in technology. If it acted as a universal receiver and stored the raw feed from digital cable and satellite transmissions, I would sit up and take notice.
The way I see it there are going to be two large steps coming.
1) Direct integration of PVR technology into digital cable receivers. This has already occured for satellite TV; the three digital cable box manufacturers are all working on the problem with various partnerships; Motorola has announced its model although it has not seemed to follow up on it.
2) Moving to digital TV. Someday we will be switching to HDTV. At this point you will need set-top converters to convert HDTV signals from digital to analog to view on today's sets. This down the line, 5 years? 10? Is it far enough away to justify such a LARGE investment in a product with a limited lifetime? Especially for a product which isn't a quantum leap forward?
As far as I can tell, for me, the only advantage for 4000 series over 3000 series is the commercial advance -- and there are several disadvantages.
An aside:
Since ReplayTV announced the 4000 series, and removed links to 3000 series products from their websites, coupled by the disappearance of Panasonic Showstoppers from several major stores, has there been a decrease in the number of new users (as seen on traffic on this site)? My point is, is ReplayTV rapidly losing market share to TiVo as we wait for the 4000 series to appear? At these prices, can they get it back? It seems to me that the 4000 series is aimed at a totally different market than Showstoppers, ReplayTV 3000 series, TiVo, and the various satellite PVR's are marketed to. These seem to be marketed to the general (if slightly high end) consumer. I consider myself to be well off -- high tech upper middle class -- but not Lexus rich. This seems to be aimed at the Lexus crowd. Are we going to be left out of ReplayTV's future plans?
Ciao
Joe