more info on replay

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

hi all

We have a tivo in our house for living room and we use it every day and
like it very much, but we heard that soon in near future we will not be able
to fast forward of skip the commercials. We don't have a Dvr in bedroom and
considering getting one. Because of the future with tivo regarding skip
commercial my husband is little bit upset cause he says it was one of the
main draw that he wouldn't have to watch commercials. To make long story
short can you tell us if replay TV have any outstanding quality that would
make us get replay TV.? also is it possible to record shows off replay TV
and burn them on dvd recorder on computer with out hacking? or with hacking?
another option we also have in near future is that Comcast is suppose to be
coming out with their own DVR. Any one have that yet? just doing some
research for near future.

thanks for all answers and help in advance.

Amee

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

"veris and amee young" <verisyoung@comcast.net> shaped the electrons to say:
>like it very much, but we heard that soon in near future we will not be able
>to fast forward of skip the commercials. We don't have a Dvr in bedroom and

As I said in my reply on alt.video.ptv.tivo, this is false. There are
no plans to remove, or limit, FF, or the 30 second skip backdoor.

If you already have TiVo you'd be better off getting a second one
because you can network them and share content, plus you are already
familiar with the UI and feature set.

-MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762
--
<URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org> Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me.
"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098
<URL:http/www.megazone.org/> <URL:http/www.eyrie-productions.com/> Eris

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

veris and amee young wrote:
> hi all
>
> We have a tivo in our house for living room and we use it every day and
> like it very much, but we heard that soon in near future we will not be able
> to fast forward of skip the commercials. We don't have a Dvr in bedroom and
> considering getting one. Because of the future with tivo regarding skip
> commercial my husband is little bit upset cause he says it was one of the
> main draw that he wouldn't have to watch commercials. To make long story
> short can you tell us if replay TV have any outstanding quality that would
> make us get replay TV.? also is it possible to record shows off replay TV
> and burn them on dvd recorder on computer with out hacking? or with hacking?
> another option we also have in near future is that Comcast is suppose to be
> coming out with their own DVR. Any one have that yet? just doing some
> research for near future.
>
> thanks for all answers and help in advance.
>
> Amee
>
>
1) Better picture quality - Read ANY test report.
2) Much better navigation through menus and within shows. Want to go 5
min further on in a show? Do it instantly. Want to begin watching x
minutes from the beginning or x min from the end? Do it instantly. Want
to see the channel guide x days from now or 12 hrs from now? Go there
instantly. MANY such shortcuts are built in, no hacks needed.
3) skip commercials auto on 50XX series or manually on 55xx series. It
is 85-90% accurate and is a killer app in use.
4) Vastly superior networking with nothing extra to buy. See all Replay
shows on any networked Replay and watch from any Replay, instantly with
no copying of files.
5) DVArchive (freeware) allows you to see all Replays, control all
replays from your pc, copy files from your Replays to burn to DVD. It
acts like another Replay so you can download shows from all your Replays
and then stream them back to any Replay in the house. All w/o fuss. You
can use DVArchive to program any replay in your house from the web.
Replay running out of space? No problem, store a couple hundred gig of
shows on your pc and watch on your pc or any replay at your liesure.
DVArchive also shows future recordings scheduled on all Replays in the
house, showing conflicts occurring on the individual Replays and allows
you to resolve them. Think of this as an elaborate to-do list for all of
the Replays in the house combined.
6) Poopli.com If you get a 50XX series (it will cost you a fortune on
eBay) you can share shows with thousands of other Replayers. There is an
updater program which "publishes" the shows available on your machine
and all the other members (4400). It also allows you to remotely send
shows to other users w/o having to go to the Replay itself to do.
7) Upgrade a Replay easily yourself. You can put 2 of the biggest drives
available in a Replay. Currently you can have a Replay with 800 hours.
Many people do not upgrade and schedule shows to offload from the Replay
to your pc via DVArchive.

Check out DVArchive.org, poopli.com and the FAQ on the Replay forum at
avsforums.com. Replay owners are more techno-geeky than Tivoites, and
the majority of them have more than 1 unit.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 14:54:46 -0500, Tony D <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>veris and amee young wrote:
>> hi all
>>
>> We have a tivo in our house for living room and we use it every day and
>> like it very much, but we heard that soon in near future we will not be able
>> to fast forward of skip the commercials. We don't have a Dvr in bedroom and
>> considering getting one. Because of the future with tivo regarding skip
>> commercial my husband is little bit upset cause he says it was one of the
>> main draw that he wouldn't have to watch commercials. To make long story
>> short can you tell us if replay TV have any outstanding quality that would
>> make us get replay TV.? also is it possible to record shows off replay TV
>> and burn them on dvd recorder on computer with out hacking? or with hacking?
>> another option we also have in near future is that Comcast is suppose to be
>> coming out with their own DVR. Any one have that yet? just doing some
>> research for near future.
>>
>> thanks for all answers and help in advance.
>>
>> Amee
>>
>>
>1) Better picture quality - Read ANY test report.
>2) Much better navigation through menus and within shows. Want to go 5
>min further on in a show? Do it instantly. Want to begin watching x
>minutes from the beginning or x min from the end? Do it instantly. Want
>to see the channel guide x days from now or 12 hrs from now? Go there
>instantly. MANY such shortcuts are built in, no hacks needed.
>3) skip commercials auto on 50XX series or manually on 55xx series. It
>is 85-90% accurate and is a killer app in use.
>4) Vastly superior networking with nothing extra to buy. See all Replay
>shows on any networked Replay and watch from any Replay, instantly with
>no copying of files.
>5) DVArchive (freeware) allows you to see all Replays, control all
>replays from your pc, copy files from your Replays to burn to DVD. It
>acts like another Replay so you can download shows from all your Replays
>and then stream them back to any Replay in the house. All w/o fuss. You
>can use DVArchive to program any replay in your house from the web.
>Replay running out of space? No problem, store a couple hundred gig of
>shows on your pc and watch on your pc or any replay at your liesure.
>DVArchive also shows future recordings scheduled on all Replays in the
>house, showing conflicts occurring on the individual Replays and allows
>you to resolve them. Think of this as an elaborate to-do list for all of
>the Replays in the house combined.
>6) Poopli.com If you get a 50XX series (it will cost you a fortune on
>eBay) you can share shows with thousands of other Replayers. There is an
>updater program which "publishes" the shows available on your machine
>and all the other members (4400). It also allows you to remotely send
>shows to other users w/o having to go to the Replay itself to do.
>7) Upgrade a Replay easily yourself. You can put 2 of the biggest drives
>available in a Replay. Currently you can have a Replay with 800 hours.
>Many people do not upgrade and schedule shows to offload from the Replay
>to your pc via DVArchive.
>
>Check out DVArchive.org, poopli.com and the FAQ on the Replay forum at
>avsforums.com. Replay owners are more techno-geeky than Tivoites, and
>the majority of them have more than 1 unit.

Sorta like the difference in quality between VHS (Tivo) and Beta
(Replay), except this Beta ain't going anywhere.

yeah-lo sno (6 units)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

[snip]

>Sorta like the difference in quality between VHS (Tivo) and Beta
>(Replay), except this Beta ain't going anywhere.
>

sometimes it seems like Beta failed BECAUSE of the better quality.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http/go.to/notstupid
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"It is a curious thing that every creed promises a
paradise which will be absolutely uninhabitable for
anyone of civilized taste." -- Evelyn Waugh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

> Sorta like the difference in quality between VHS (Tivo) and Beta
> (Replay), except this Beta ain't going anywhere.
>
> yeah-lo sno (6 units)
>

Given the shape of DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report detailing the
future plans with Replay I think your reply is a little silly.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

> sometimes it seems like Beta failed BECAUSE of the better quality.
>
In any test since 1980, I never saw Beta (except Beta 1) declared
"better". This is a propagation similar to the Mac people saying Mac is
"better". VHS won simply because it gave the consumer what they wanted
(recording time, special features) and Beta was always playing catch up.

In terms of performance, they were roughly comparable. Funny, in
hundreds of tests the "Beta is better" people could never pick the Betas
out of a sampling.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Tony D wrote:
>
>> Sorta like the difference in quality between VHS (Tivo) and Beta
>> (Replay), except this Beta ain't going anywhere.
>>
>> yeah-lo sno (6 units)
>>
>
> Given the shape of DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report detailing the
> future plans with Replay I think your reply is a little silly.

Please elaborate on DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

mcp6453 wrote:

> Tony D wrote:
>
>>
>>> Sorta like the difference in quality between VHS (Tivo) and Beta
>>> (Replay), except this Beta ain't going anywhere.
>>>
>>> yeah-lo sno (6 units)
>>>
>>
>> Given the shape of DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report detailing the
>> future plans with Replay I think your reply is a little silly.
>
>
> Please elaborate on DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report.

In financial terms, Tivo has one foot in the grave and one on a banana
peel. Don't listen to chat room theorists, call any broker.

In the next to last quarterly report, DNNA announced an elaborate system
of intercompatibility of Denon, Marantz, Escient equipment covering a
large range in pricing. At the top were big home media servers with huge
storage capacities, many tuners, cablecard slot, serving video, mp3,
still images, etc. to displays all over the house. Also in the tier were
media server lites, which would all interconnect. The illustration they
used was of a Replay 5K (giving a capabilities idea).

In the last statement, DNNA announced an agreement with Tribune media to
license DNNA/Tribune software and hardware packages. Tribune supplies
the Tivo and Replay guides. The idea is to market Tribune's service
connections with DNNA's ability (through the Replay servers) to download
Replay software and programming to compatible equipment. Typical, but
not limited to, things like Receivers, Networked DVD recorders, etc. So
you could have a Pioneer DVD recorder as a source, as well as a Denon
media player, all accesible from Replay based equipment.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Mark Lloyd wrote:

>
> sometimes it seems like Beta failed BECAUSE of the better quality.

No, Beta failed because it was a SONY product.

Not far from where I live (in fact I'll be in the same city later today)
there is a little company you might just have heard of FOX VIDEO (20th
century fox) At the time I found out where they were located they were
talking about how they had FINALLY after many months (actually years) of
trying gotten a license to produce product in the BETA format. They
finally had ONE, count it ONE, Beta machine.

They had dozens of VHS and had been running the VHS duplicators all day
every day for years. Nearly every movie 20th Century Fox put out was on
VHS at the time.. But their BETA license was limited.

This was SONY's decision, to restrict BETA so that you had to buy a very
expensive license from SONY and then they only gave out a few with
serious limits.

So, if you wished to do your own recording be it live or "off the air"
well, Beta was, and still is, far superior to VHS, I can not list all
the ways Beta is better.

But if you Wanted to go to the equivlent of Blockbuster or Video Land
and buy or rent a show already recorded at a factory... Beta was.. Well
Beta was not. Thus folks bought VHS cause that is what the market
place supported.. VHS.

Now.. I've had folks argue with me, they bring up learned articles
written by folks who did not live then, they point out that TODAY those
same movies are to be found in Beta (or they were at one time) however
as is common with Sony it was too little too late

Panasonic and JVC on the other hand,,, Well being slightly ahead of
their time (Panasonic slogan) Handed out licenses to produce tapes in
the VHS format like they were business cards.. They were slightly more
restrictive with tape manafacturers (making sure the tapes were of good
quality) before they would license the logo for them, but if you wished
to produce movies in VHS they did everything short of loaning you start
up cash (And I'm not sure they did not do some of that)

That is why Beta now lives mostly in commericial instalations and VHS
dominates in the home market

It's also why PC's and Windows dominate instead of say Texas Insturments
(TI did it the SONY way and it killed them)

It is why I keep seeing posts "Mini-Disc is dead" (Another Sony
invention) even though it appears to be strong (The only pre-recorded
mini-discs I can buy are Sony due to the same kind of licensing issues)

But it was Sony who shot themselves in the foot with Beta

And they have a history of doing the same

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 11:07:21 GMT, John in Detroit
<Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>Mark Lloyd wrote:
>
>>
>> sometimes it seems like Beta failed BECAUSE of the better quality.
>
>No, Beta failed because it was a SONY product.
>

No, I said it SEEMS like it. I was not aware of the other stuff at the
time.

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http/go.to/notstupid
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"It is a curious thing that every creed promises a
paradise which will be absolutely uninhabitable for
anyone of civilized taste." -- Evelyn Waugh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

From what I can remember, BetaMax had smaller tapes with less record
time. VHS had larger tapes with longer record times. Wasn't it hard
to get a complete movie on the BetaMax? 1//2 hours on BetaMax versus
2/4/6 on the VHS.

>: No, Beta failed because it was a SONY product.
<snip>
>My uncle bought a Betamax because of the picture quality (so he claims).
>After having it for two years, he couldn't get tapes for it anymore,
>and had to buy a VHS machine.
>I have always owned VHS.
<snip>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:33:59 -0500, nospamcoming@me.com wrote:

>From what I can remember, BetaMax had smaller tapes with less record
>time.

And higher audio/video quality.

At the time my father cared particularly about audio quality, and had
read an article about Beta HiFi. That's how I got started with that
format.

> VHS had larger tapes with longer record times. Wasn't it hard
>to get a complete movie on the BetaMax? 1//2 hours on BetaMax versus
>2/4/6 on the VHS.
>

An error of omission. For Beta it was 1.5/3/4.5 hours (later machines
couldn't record at the middle speed, so it became 1.5/4.5). We usually
got 2 or 3 movies on a standard Beta tape (5 hour tapes were
available).

>>: No, Beta failed because it was a SONY product.
><snip>
>>My uncle bought a Betamax because of the picture quality (so he claims).
>>After having it for two years, he couldn't get tapes for it anymore,
>>and had to buy a VHS machine.
>>I have always owned VHS.
><snip>

--
Mark Lloyd
has a Replay 5xxx
http/go.to/notstupid
http/notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"It is a curious thing that every creed promises a
paradise which will be absolutely uninhabitable for
anyone of civilized taste." -- Evelyn Waugh

 

[Greg]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

>> Given the shape of DNNA vs Tivo and the quarterly report detailing the
>> future plans with Replay I think your reply is a little silly.
>

Actually the analogy is sound. Beta was the Sony product, clearly a better
product but it was sunk because Sony tried to hold the licensing too closely.
VHS was licensed to anyone who wanted to make one and quickly flooded the
marketplace.
That is very similar to the closed architecture and "frozen" feature set of the
RTV.
The real competition is not TiVo, it is the unit that gets bundled into a
content provider's product. When the cable companies finally open their eyes to
the business opportunities of a DVR with broadband the standalone market will
go the way of "super TV".

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

> So, if you wished to do your own recording be it live or "off the air"
> well, Beta was, and still is, far superior to VHS, I can not list all
> the ways Beta is better.

Beta 1 was clearly superior, but was only 60 min and faded fast for
consumer use. Both formats had the same resolution and if Beta had a
less convoluted tape path, VHS had faster FF and Rewind. On and on and
on, a dead heat.

> Now.. I've had folks argue with me, they bring up learned articles
> written by folks who did not live then, they point out that TODAY those
> same movies are to be found in Beta (or they were at one time) however
> as is common with Sony it was too little too late

My friend opened the 2nd video store in NJ in 1980. I wrote all of the
store programs for rental on a multi user Altos running CCPM and helped
to manage the place for 18 yrs. EVERY film we purchased (and we bought
EVERYTHING available for years) was available in VHS and Beta. From the
beginning VHS was more popular, but there were enough Betas to justify
buying the films. A decade or more later films were STILL in both
formats but we could no longer break even on a copy of say
"Koyaanisqatsi" in Beta, so we bought ALL available titles in VHS and
major releases in Beta. It was a few years AFTER THAT when the studios
began cutting back on Beta, releasing only major films. I also ordered
the films, BTW. Ultimately reaching 14,000 titles. (the avg Blockbuster
has 3000). Then we just dropped Beta and converted our Beta memberships
to VHS (everyone with a Beta seemed to also have a VHS). For more than a
decade, the software was there. Sony was stingy licensing hardware, not
software.

>
> It is why I keep seeing posts "Mini-Disc is dead" (Another Sony
> invention) even though it appears to be strong (The only pre-recorded
> mini-discs I can buy are Sony due to the same kind of licensing issues)
>

Mini-Disc died because there was no compelling reason for everyone to
drop CDs and buy mini-disks. CDs are already better than you can hear
and damaged resisitant. The guy at Sony who though mini-disk was going
to do what CDs did to vinyl should have seen a psychiatrist.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

General Kireiko wrote:
> John in Detroit <Blanked@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> :> sometimes it seems like Beta failed BECAUSE of the better quality.
>
> : No, Beta failed because it was a SONY product.
>
> Yup. SONY would introduce a product, and make sure they controlled all
> channels related to said product. They pulled an Apple, and it hurt
> them, and their format.
>
> My uncle bought a Betamax because of the picture quality (so he claims).
> After having it for two years, he couldn't get tapes for it anymore,
> and had to buy a VHS machine.
>
> I have always owned VHS.
>
> Sony did a similar thing with their early DVD PLayers. They wouldn't
> play buurned media. I have a freind who works at Sony in NYC, and
> Sony had to go out, buy, and install PIONEER DVD players because they
> Sony players wouldn't play CD-R or CD-RW. Once the Sony players
> were able to play the media (two years later), he was able to get
> me my Pioneers for a nice price. Even he said SONY shot themselves in
> the foot. When the bosses came by to see the setup, they were
> flabbergasted that they had to use Pioneer products. They were
> embarrassed.
>
> -Doug

You know... Usually when I post that, folks argue, (Guess some folks do
not like the truth) Thanks for the support

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.video.ptv.replaytv (More info?)

Tony D wrote:
>> So, if you wished to do your own recording be it live or "off the air"
>> well, Beta was, and still is, far superior to VHS, I can not list all
>> the ways Beta is better.
>
>
> Beta 1 was clearly superior, but was only 60 min and faded fast for
> consumer use. Both formats had the same resolution and if Beta had a
> less convoluted tape path, VHS had faster FF and Rewind. On and on and
> on, a dead heat.
>
>> Now.. I've had folks argue with me, they bring up learned articles
>> written by folks who did not live then, they point out that TODAY
>> those same movies are to be found in Beta (or they were at one time)
>> however as is common with Sony it was too little too late
>
>
> My friend opened the 2nd video store in NJ in 1980. I wrote all of the
> store programs for rental on a multi user Altos running CCPM and helped
> to manage the place for 18 yrs. EVERY film we purchased (and we bought
> EVERYTHING available for years) was available in VHS and Beta. From the
> beginning VHS was more popular, but there were enough Betas to justify
> buying the films. A decade or more later films were STILL in both
> formats but we could no longer break even on a copy of say
> "Koyaanisqatsi" in Beta, so we bought ALL available titles in VHS and
> major releases in Beta. It was a few years AFTER THAT when the studios
> began cutting back on Beta, releasing only major films. I also ordered
> the films, BTW. Ultimately reaching 14,000 titles. (the avg Blockbuster
> has 3000). Then we just dropped Beta and converted our Beta memberships
> to VHS (everyone with a Beta seemed to also have a VHS). For more than a
> decade, the software was there. Sony was stingy licensing hardware, not
> software.
>
>>
>> It is why I keep seeing posts "Mini-Disc is dead" (Another Sony
>> invention) even though it appears to be strong (The only pre-recorded
>> mini-discs I can buy are Sony due to the same kind of licensing issues)
>>
>
> Mini-Disc died because there was no compelling reason for everyone to
> drop CDs and buy mini-disks. CDs are already better than you can hear
> and damaged resisitant. The guy at Sony who though mini-disk was going
> to do what CDs did to vinyl should have seen a psychiatrist.
>
>

Ah, but Mini Disc is not dead, and your friend in the video business
must have had a very limited inventory if he only stocked movies
published by SONY