TIVO vs E*
- Thread starter Juan
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 2K
- Views 178K
- Status
I agree that there are many features the HR2X has that are better than TiVo. I was only pointing out that there are also some TiVo features that are also better.
That is why people are excited about a new HD TiVo with Directv. Hopefully it will have the best of both.
That is why people are excited about a new HD TiVo with Directv. Hopefully it will have the best of both.
Wonder why E* continues to use the coined phrase "Better than TiVo?"
Because they want another lawsuit. It is what the do.
Because VIPs are better than TiVOWonder why E* continues to use the coined phrase "Better than TiVo?"
The implication is E* has every intention to compete with TiVo on the DVR front, not only in court, but in the market. Their recent moves also proved that. By selling a low cost, no monthly fee OTA DVR, and making available a cable version of its 922 DVR, E* is hitting TiVo where it hurts: The TiVo’s standalone DVR markets, whether OTA or cable.
I am somewhat excited as well, even though I will probably not get it. I like the fact that subs will now have a choice and because there are 2 competing DVRs for the same provider, that competition may force each to improve.
I don't mean to always try to curb people's enthusiasm, but let's not forget D*, since the 09/03/08 press release, has yet uttered a single word of this new D* TiVO DVR.
It has been pretty much TiVo who is desperately trying to beat that drum, and also the TiVo supporters, who continue to believe what TiVo is saying.
Not saying it will not happen, just putting things in perspective.
Not old, how can it be old if its a re-occuring problem? But thats not important now is it...
Anyway...you can't compare the HR to the original HDTivo, but you can take HDTivo on its own merits based on what was available at that time.
IT was awesome.
...its just a shame D* let that fabulous piece of technology to go waste...
At the time it was cutting edge and at the top of its class. But it never evolved; although they did add a few features. We will have to wait to see what the new generation of TiVO brings for a more accurate comparison of apples to apples.Not old, how can it be old if its a re-occuring problem? But thats not important now is it...
Anyway...you can't compare the HR to the original HDTivo, but you can take HDTivo on its own merits based on what was available at that time.
IT was awesome.
...its just a shame D* let that fabulous piece of technology to go waste...
Probably can...much of it is open source and available to the public.
However superior DVRs these days implement most of their functionality in hardware now, not software. So whatever 'code' was involved becomes irrelevant.
I know fanboy rapture and blind hate-mongering can cloud the perception of some, not like I would ever accuse you of such a thing so don't take that personal. But most of these court cases are focused more on the 'processes' and 'algorithms' being implemented on a technical level to perform the allegedly patented functionality.
You see, thats where the wheels fall of the cart in this whole litigation process. Many of the details of the trial (I know this is going to spark a multi-paragraph post from jacmyoung sounding more intelligent than thou, or Greg Brimson chiming in, so just brace yourself guys...it could become a psuedo-mensa meeting any minute.
)Anyway many of the details of this trial, strictly on a technical level, not so much a legal one, focus on whether or not many of the processes and algorithms implemented in the ViP series in hardware are essentially the same processes and algorithms implemented by Tivo in software. Specifically when it comes to the video stream buffering and whatever they choose to call a 'parser' from one day to the next.
So that is why Tivo essentially built their castle on the sand, and that is why it was a critical mistake for Tivo NOT to innovate their product and just claim they invented it. You see, technology changes fast. Change is inevitable. Technology patents are inherently weak in the long run. E* has proven that Tivo's patent is contestable, and win or lose, somebody somewhere at sometime will contest it.
And since E* is innovating their DVR product and Tivo isn't...well...that somewhere, sometime could be sooner than you think...
It couldn't evolve...never had the breathing space. As soon as it was release D* announced their mpeg4 plans and that was it for the HDTivo...price dropped from 999.00 to 699.00 to 299.00...and next thing you know they couldn't give them away.
It was a shame...
Probably can...much of it is open source and available to the public.
However superior DVRs these days implement most of their functionality in hardware now, not software. So whatever 'code' was involved becomes irrelevant.
I know fanboy rapture and blind hate-mongering can cloud the perception of some, not like I would ever accuse you of such a thing so don't take that personal. But most of these court cases are focused more on the 'processes' and 'algorithms' being implemented on a technical level to perform the allegedly patented functionality.
You see, thats where the wheels fall of the cart in this whole litigation process. Many of the details of the trial (I know this is going to spark a multi-paragraph post from jacmyoung sounding more intelligent than thou, or Greg Brimson chiming in, so just brace yourself guys...it could become a psuedo-mensa meeting any minute.
Anyway many of the details of this trial, strictly on a technical level, not so much a legal one, focus on whether or not many of the processes and algorithms implemented in the ViP series in hardware are essentially the same processes and algorithms implemented by Tivo in software. Specifically when it comes to the video stream buffering and whatever they choose to call a 'parser' from one day to the next.
So that is why Tivo essentially built their castle on the sand, and that is why it was a critical mistake for Tivo NOT to innovate their product and just claim they invented it. You see, technology changes fast. Change is inevitable. Technology patents are inherently weak in the long run. E* has proven that Tivo's patent is contestable, and win or lose, somebody somewhere at sometime will contest it.
And since E* is innovating their DVR product and Tivo isn't...well...that somewhere, sometime could be sooner than you think...
Believe it or not, I think what you said in this last post finally is making a lot of sense, not because you have been saying the same before, rather now you have limited your opinion at a theoretical level.
There are however still factual errors and/or speculation without basis:
1) No VIP DVRs were involved in this case.
2) There is no basis that someone somewhere else will contest TiVo. For it to happen, TiVo must first sue that someone or threaten to sue, that has yet to happen, and will unlikely to happen if E* is found not in contempt.
3) Of course it is all technical, that was how TiVo won that $100M, you can say all you want about such technical details are built on the sand, the $100M will buy you a whole resort island, and all the sand in it.
4) TiVo did not stop innovating, their own new generations of HD DVRs are some of the best HD DVRs out there.
5) The fact the D*TiVO DVRs are not that good is not indicative of how good TiVo DVRs are. D* does not care to let its D*TiVo to be as good as TiVo can make them be, for obvious reasons.
People have been debating based on this incorrect premise, that D*TiVo DVRs are what TiVo is all about. They are not. D* never cared to make their D*TiVo DVRs the best they could be, due to contractual reasons and business reasons. D* licensed TiVo's patent and sold D*TiVo DVRs mainly to avoid a lawsuit from TiVo, this much was said by D* themselves in their news releases, because D* did not want to spend their resources and take the risk to CONTEST TiVo.
That is also why I have been telling people do not hold your breadth waiting for that new D*TiVo to show up. If E* is found not in contempt, such threat from TiVo will be gone, no one will ever have the need to contest TiVo.
Last edited:
sigh...
...saw this coming...1) I know...thats kind of my point.
2) I mean contest Tivo in the market, not the courtroom. Contest by putting out a superior DVR product LIKE the ViP. A superior product using technology that Tivo failed to innovate, and has now evolved beyond the scope of a weak patent (You know I don't give a rats behind about that courtroom.
)3) Once again, too hung up on that courtroom. Who cares about 100MM?? Companies stay in business via the revenue stream, not the payday. And if Tivo is looking to stay in business based on a revenue stream hinged on licensing DVR technology, that revenue stream may be in jeoprody regardless of that 100M.
4) How have they innovated? What have they done to build on their base technology? Catch up to the ViP? Maybe E* should sue Tivo!
5) I'm not talking about D*Tivo, I'm talking about Tivo. The problem is the D*Tivo is the best (and only real) practical application of Tivo, and thus the most prevalent in discussion.
sigh...
You should not have to see this coming
What point?
Well then make it clear, because this thread is about the court case, i.e. what happened in that courtroom, not marketplace. If you decide to go a little off the topic, please make sure to point that out.
Which part of the new generations of TiVo standalone HD DVRs do you think failed behind the E* VIP DVRs? Please be specific, for example the VIPs have a 500GB drive, the new TiVo has only a 80GB drive...
(You know I don't give a rats behind about that courtroom.
Then why are you here? I thought this thread is about the courtroom case, have you read the first post? How about starting your own new thread, for example call it "who makes better DVRs, TiVo or E*?"
Once again you are then in the wrong thread. This thread is all about the courtroom case.
Apparently Charlie cared a lot, else he would have paid it in 2006.
That I agree. But if TiVo wins this round, all other providers will be more likely to not only license TiVo's patent (most of them already do), but seriously sell TiVo enabled DVRs, and that is where the revenue streams will come for TiVo. Because they pay TiVo monthly fees based on the number of TiVo enabled DVRs they install.
4) How have they innovated? What have they done to build on their base technology? Catch up to the ViP? Maybe E* should sue Tivo!
Again I ask you what are the evidence that the new generations of TiVo's HD DVRs such as the S3 and XL DVRs, what part of them failed compared to the VIPs? Be specific.
If you are trying to tell us D*TiVo is the best practical application of TiVo, then I hope you do realize you are agreeing with me. To force D* to enable the most advanced TiVo functions in its D*TiVo, D* must be willing to do so, which squarely competes with D*'s own DVRs.
How to force D* to do so? Yes, to win this case, because if TiVo can prove E* cannot design around TiVo's patent, then D* will be forced to reckon with TiVo, and quickly release that new D*TiVo, enabling all the new TiVo features the TiVo S3 or XL HD DVRs currently have, and pay TiVo the "significantly higher monthly fees" while they are at it. Else TiVo may go after D* in court too.
Remember, part of the reasons D* agreed to license TiVo's patent and sell those D*TiVo DVRs was to avoid being sued by TiVo, this much has been stated by D* themselves time after time.
I hope you can see why this lawsuit is so important, without its success, TiVo can have the very best DVR in the world, no one will agree to sell TiVo versions of the DVRs, and therefore no one will be paying TiVo that "significantly higher monthly fee.".
You should not have to see this coming
I did. and predicted it in my post...lol. you waste too many words.
1) if you missed my point, than why are you even bothering to respond? whoops, there it goes...
Please read what I write and don't make things up like you usually do...(I still haven't seen that much HD on Disney yet...don't know what you were all recording back then...)2) Where does it say this thread is only about the courtroom? You would like it to be I'm sure...but its not. Sorry. the title "Tivo vs. E*" alone covers a wide variety of topics...there you go, making up something else. Your not the mod so you can just deal with it. I'm on topic because thats what the topic is...
As for the hard drive, I can replace an hard-drive in a DVR myself...I would hardly call that innovative. lol. (if I do it, its called hacking...
)3) This thread is not 'only' about the courtroom, YOU are only about the courtroom. STop trying to stifle conversation and peoples opinions with your wastes of words.
4) You avoided my point yet again. Obviously you have nothing to counter it but a wisecrack. lol....typical. BTW: A revenue stream is more important than a payday...remember? Charlie has that revenue stream, Tivo does not (at least not a good one). You missed that point too...
5) The lawsuit is not as important as you think it is. And for the record, you aren't as important as you think you are either...lol...
Thanks for the lovely testimonial to yourself. But as I said, you wasted words. You made no point, nor even addressed mine.
...this must be one of your little 'out do' games...
I dont' know why you keep playing them when its so terribly obvious and just makes you look...well....not very smart...
You should stick to fibs about free DVRs and hawking coupon books like a snakeoil merchant. Just kidding....
Quite simply put (not wasting words)...
You did not address a single thing I said! lol....
Last edited:
After suggesting Vampz26 to read the very first post, I thought you know what, why not read some of them myself too?
It is interesting to read those very early ones posted in 11/08, the above is one of my posts. What I said back then was correct except I missed one thing, the DE judge can transfer the "new action" to Judge Folsom.
Vampz26, you are right, if you believe this thread is about other things such as who makes better DVRs, you can most certainly post those topics here. I just thought it was clear from day one, it was about this case, because the OP asked this question.
He did not ask whose DVRs do you think were better. But if you want to let him know who makes better DVRs, you have every right to do so.
once again, you missed my point....and made something up instead....
I said the case is part of the topic of this thread, but not all...
And
I said that the case has nothing to do with who makes the better DVRs, nor the eventual fate of Tivo.
The market will decide that, the courtroom won't. And that is who will succeed in the long run...
...and you obviously missed all of that. You'd rather waste a lot of words posting a testimonial to yourself.
folks, lets keep the conversation about the Tivo vs E* law suit and not about who is trolling whom. There is enough trolling on both sides here without trolling for trolls
See ya
Tony
BTW, here is a quote from one of our mods that seemed to confirm my view, and I am sure I can find more than one of such posts from the mods in this thread
Also earier in this thread Greg and a few others on the TiVo side had insisted the modified DVRs were not changed still the same status as the adjudicated DVRs, they have been silent for a while, probably because the DE judge, in dismissing TiVo's motion to dismiss this new DE case, confirmed the opinion I had with a few others on the E* side, that is, the modified DVRs, if more than colorably different, will have to be adjudicated in this new trial case, the only question is whether this case will end up in the DE court or in the TX court.
And BTW, if this new trial is to take place, it will be a jury trial, because this is what E* is seeking, unless they change their mind later.
Last edited:
BTW, here is a quote from one of our mods that seemed to confirm my view, and I am sure I can find more than one of such posts from the mods in this thread
Also earier in this thread Greg and a few others on the TiVo side had insisted the modified DVRs were not changed still the same status as the adjudicated DVRs, they have been silent for a while, probably because the DE judge, in dismissing TiVo's motion to dismiss this new DE case, confirmed the opinion I had with a few others on the E* side, that is, the modified DVRs, if more than colorably different, will have to be adjudicated in this new trial case, the only question is whether this case will end up in the DE court or in the TX court.
And BTW, if this new trial is to take place, it will be a jury trial, because this is what E* is seeking, unless they change their mind later.
once again....'yawn'...
Did I or Did I not address the trial? Yes I did...
Did I or Did I not address the trial in the context of the bigger picture, that being the market that decides the fate of any business, trial or not. Did I or Did I NOT state that in the context of the discussion, the trial and this thread? YES I DID.
And did I or did I NOT state that my point was justified and relevant to the thread because the thread in name alone is clearly not only about the trial, and thus to project the bigger picture beyond the trial but still relevant to the trial was not out of scope? Yes I DID.
Did you agree with me? YES YOU DID!
Did you ignore my statement and try to keep the conversation in your 'comfort zone' and pretend it was something it isn't? YES YOU DID and still are!
Sorry man...you're way off here...stop pretending to be a mod and still trying to 'out do' or something....no point, just 'out do'...
for example...who said anything about a jury trial just now? lol...just you...lol
- Status
