Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
What I mean is, nobody has used one yet.
The features may be "well documented" but all anyone on here (apart from a few VM bods maybe) has done is read about them.
|
All we have to judge the price on, is what has been documented. I'm certainly not going to pay for something now that it "might do" in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
Remember when Sky+ first came out, "you can record a whole series at a press of a button", "record live TV", sounded all very good, but when you actually used it for the first time, wow, TV was never going to be the same again. I couldn't imagine living with Sky + box.
|
I remember when TiVo first came out (before Sky+) - it was better then than Sky+ is now - and that's the core of the problem - the core TiVo product hasn't changed enough in all those 10 years to justify the whopping price tag.
TiVo series 1 could "record live TV", and whole series at the press of a button long before Sky+ even hit the market. Plus it did it in a more sophisticated way (scanning +1 and repeat channels to avoid clashes and ensure your programme was recorded).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
Now compared to a Sky+ box, a tivo is just quite simply in a different arena.
|
As it was then, and 10 years have passed. The one thing Sky+ had over TiVo was dual-tuners (TiVo only had one), and the Murdoch-money-machine behind it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre
It's like any new technology, it will be expensive for the first few "must have first" tech heads, but the price will come down eventually. But if you want it now, for bragging rights, you'll have pay top dollar.
|
It's barely new technology - the core is 10 years old. The hardware will be as minimal as it needs to be, so what really is the £200 paying for? VM's licensing costs of the middleware appears to be obvious answer.
I like to think of it as the return of an old friend, who has made some nice improvements, but is still the friend it once was.