4 ms·

Am I alone in wondering why neither Amazon, Roku, nor Apple have tackled the OTA DVR space? I know there are some options out there like Tablo and SimpleTV, bu

Am I alone in wondering why neither Amazon, Roku, nor Apple have tackled the OTA DVR space? I know there are some options out there like Tablo and SimpleTV, but their implementations are not very good. This would seem like a big differentiator for these set top boxes, b/c they are all kind of the same right now.

twoodfin 12y ago
I always assumed that was Apple's ultimate goal: Record (essentially) everything in their big data centers and offer live-TV-on-demand as a service. But the licensing issues for something like that are daunting, unless you want to take a chance on the courts giving you a pass because you're "just like a remote VCR".
- zimpenfish 12y ago
  That sounds a lot like Aereo[1]'s ultimately failed defence. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo
johne20 12y ago
No. I had similar thoughts when Fire tv was introduced. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7516646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7516646
bryanlarsen 12y ago
That would require substantial storage, which none of the sticks or boxes have. AFAICT, an OTA DVR is very much a secondary market; it's not big enough for the big guys to justify building a box with that as its primary purpose. However, it definitely would be a good differentiating point between the available boxes. But requiring secondary storage is probably a no-go. It's complicated and failure prone. Which is why the best hope lies in video game consoles, which do include substantial storage. And in fact, the XBox One is gaining DVR-type capabilities in Europe. If it is successful there I hope we will eventually see it in North America too.
- synthos 12y ago
  If home internet speeds weren't so asymmetrical, you could save/stream the broadcast to the cloud to be streamed back later.
- madoublet 12y ago
  I used a Tablo for a few days and they just required an attached drive. It worked pretty well. The UI on the Roku was the big problem.
- btgeekboy 12y ago
  Tivo is no longer one of the "big guys" in the DVR space? http://www.tivo.com/discover/antenna http://www.tivo.com/discover/antenna
eloisant 12y ago
I think DVR is going to die out (or become a very small niche) as TV is moving to on-demand, and away from channels that broadcast programs at a specific time.
- bryanlarsen 12y ago
  Certainly that's the future, but I think over-the-air can be an important part of a successful transition away from cable.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> Am I alone in wondering why neither Amazon, Roku, nor Apple have tackled the OTA DVR space? Because they're investing in replacing OTA TV rather than owning it, and most of the people interested in spending money on non-web TV already have cable/satellite with provider-issued DVRs.
- madoublet 12y ago
  Yes, but it is an imperfect replacement. There is a lot of content offered locally (e.g. local sports, news, weather, local PBS) that is just not on these devices.
  - untog 12y ago
    And the audience for all those things is smaller than the potential audience they are chasing.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Yes, but it is an imperfect replacement. And at the very beginning, horseless carriages were an imperfect replacement for horse carriages, but that doesn't mean that people investing in building horseless carriages should also have invested in building accessories for horse carriages (e.g., buggy whips.) It makes more sense to invest in making the new technology a more adequate replacement.
vidarh 12y ago
In the UK at least, all the major channels have apps that provides reasonable access to shows you've missed. E.g. I have BBC iPlayer installed on my Fire TV. So while it's certainly not exactly the same, here the available apps covers the 80% use cases, which presumably makes it much less attractive to take the cost of adding lots of local storage to support the remainder.

twoodfin 12y ago

I always assumed that was Apple's ultimate goal: Record (essentially) everything in their big data centers and offer live-TV-on-demand as a service. But the licensing issues for something like that are daunting, unless you want to take a chance on the courts giving you a pass because you're "just like a remote VCR".

zimpenfish 12y ago
That sounds a lot like Aereo[1]'s ultimately failed defence. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo

johne20 12y ago

No. I had similar thoughts when Fire tv was introduced. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7516646 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7516646

bryanlarsen 12y ago

That would require substantial storage, which none of the sticks or boxes have. AFAICT, an OTA DVR is very much a secondary market; it's not big enough for the big guys to justify building a box with that as its primary purpose. However, it definitely would be a good differentiating point between the available boxes. But requiring secondary storage is probably a no-go. It's complicated and failure prone. Which is why the best hope lies in video game consoles, which do include substantial storage. And in fact, the XBox One is gaining DVR-type capabilities in Europe. If it is successful there I hope we will eventually see it in North America too.

synthos 12y ago
If home internet speeds weren't so asymmetrical, you could save/stream the broadcast to the cloud to be streamed back later.
madoublet 12y ago
I used a Tablo for a few days and they just required an attached drive. It worked pretty well. The UI on the Roku was the big problem.
btgeekboy 12y ago
Tivo is no longer one of the "big guys" in the DVR space? http://www.tivo.com/discover/antenna http://www.tivo.com/discover/antenna

eloisant 12y ago

I think DVR is going to die out (or become a very small niche) as TV is moving to on-demand, and away from channels that broadcast programs at a specific time.

bryanlarsen 12y ago
Certainly that's the future, but I think over-the-air can be an important part of a successful transition away from cable.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> Am I alone in wondering why neither Amazon, Roku, nor Apple have tackled the OTA DVR space? Because they're investing in replacing OTA TV rather than owning it, and most of the people interested in spending money on non-web TV already have cable/satellite with provider-issued DVRs.

madoublet 12y ago
Yes, but it is an imperfect replacement. There is a lot of content offered locally (e.g. local sports, news, weather, local PBS) that is just not on these devices.
- untog 12y ago
  And the audience for all those things is smaller than the potential audience they are chasing.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Yes, but it is an imperfect replacement. And at the very beginning, horseless carriages were an imperfect replacement for horse carriages, but that doesn't mean that people investing in building horseless carriages should also have invested in building accessories for horse carriages (e.g., buggy whips.) It makes more sense to invest in making the new technology a more adequate replacement.

vidarh 12y ago

In the UK at least, all the major channels have apps that provides reasonable access to shows you've missed. E.g. I have BBC iPlayer installed on my Fire TV. So while it's certainly not exactly the same, here the available apps covers the 80% use cases, which presumably makes it much less attractive to take the cost of adding lots of local storage to support the remainder.