# DIRECTV Buys ReplayTV



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

*Japan's D&M sells ReplayTV business to DirecTV*
http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071213/tbs-d-m-directv-7318940.html



> Japan's D&M Holdings Inc said on Thursday it had sold its ReplayTV business, which develops software for digital video recorders, to DirecTV of the United States for an undisclosed sum.


----------



## say-what (Dec 14, 2006)

I didn't know they were still in business, even as a software only company.


----------



## Pink Fairy (Dec 28, 2006)

I get to vote for who is replaytv??


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

This is excellent news. They always had the best DVR around since they came out, and they came out before tivo. They had MRV before anyone... They have been kept alive by licensing there software, and have new PC dvr software hitting the market, which I hope can finally turn into a DirecTV PC card with DVR functionality...

Way to go DirecTV!!!


----------



## ccr1958 (Aug 29, 2007)

for now i will vote "cool" as long as it does
not cause me to need a new receiver version
someday too soon


----------



## jlancaster (Feb 10, 2006)

There must have been a good reason for this.


----------



## VeniceDre (Aug 16, 2006)

Could incorporating ReplayTV tech in future updates to current r15 & HR20/21 get them around contiunug their relationship with TiVo?

I've always felt they've kept paying TiVo to stop from being sued like Dish is by TiVo.


----------



## techrep (Sep 15, 2007)

I see another stand-a-lone product in DirecTV's future.


----------



## Ken_F (Jan 13, 2003)

jlancaster said:


> There must have been a good reason for this.


There are two major DVR patent holders -- TiVo and ReplayTV.

Years ago, TiVo and ReplayTV both sued one another for patent infringement. TiVo had the stronger patent portfolio, but ultimately, the suits were dropped when both parties reached an out-of-court settlement. The details of that settlement were never publicly disclosed.

If TiVo's victory over Echostar (Dish Network) is upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals, that would greatly strengthen TiVo's bargaining position with DirecTV when their current patent licensing agreement expires in two years (February, 2010). DirecTV may feel that owning the ReplayTV patents will strengthen its own position in the next round of patent licensing talks with TiVo.

_Another possibility..._

Liberty Media-- the new owner of DirecTV-- already has a large equity investment in TiVo. With DirecTV's acquisition of ReplayTV, Liberty Media will have direct or indirect ownership stakes in most major DVR patents. DirecTV has the resources and a vested interest in pursuing patent litigation against Echostar and/or cable companies who may be violating ReplayTV patents. If the decision against Echostar is upheld, then TiVo will be better equipped to pursue patent litigation against cable companies like Charter, TWC, and Verizon. With ReplayTV's patents in the hands of DirecTV, cable companies (and Dish Network) could find themselves fighting on two fronts.

If the cable companies don't license the patents, DirecTV will have superior DVRs, increasing their market share and Liberty's profits; if the cable companies do license the patents, then Liberty Media will make more money through its stakes in both companies.


----------



## gulfwarvet (Mar 7, 2007)

okietekkie said:


> I get to vote for who is replaytv??


same here, I've heard of it from the forums but never seen one. so what feature's or benefits does it have?


----------



## looney2ns (Sep 20, 2007)

Kheldar said:


> *Japan's D&M sells ReplayTV business to DirecTV*
> http://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20071213/tbs-d-m-directv-7318940.html


Outstanding. Glad to see ReplayTV lives on!
I still have two of them in operation!
Hopefully, DTV will use this in their DVR's


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

gulfwarvet said:


> same here, I've heard of it from the forums but never seen one. so what feature's or benefits does it have?


Replay was the first to ever market a DVR. They were the first to market many things, like MRV and networking with their DVR's. Unfortunately they weren't supported by the money that tivo was and they exited the hardware world several years ago in favor of licensing software. They still build far superior software for the DVR world than Tivo does, in my opinion. From a generational aspect they have always been ahead of tivo and they, quite frankly are the reason many of the features we have today on DVR's exist. They were never afraid to push the envelope either. They had a feature on a unit once that when activated, would automatically skip commercials, without the user pressing anything. ( that feature was removed, unfortunately)

I see this as almost like echostar picking up sling media. I expect that we will see many things either come from or be approved upon because of this merger, like....

MRV
advanced controlling your DVR from the internet
creating your own folders for recording programs
better search engines
better categorization of programming
remote viewing over the internet of your programs...

And as someone else pointed out, The only two real holders of dvr patents are Replay and Tivo, and I assure you this will allow them to do more things they like without having to worry about tivo and patent infringements.


----------



## IDRick (Feb 16, 2007)

Ken_F said:


> There are two major DVR patent holders -- TiVo and ReplayTV.
> 
> Years ago, TiVo and ReplayTV both sued one another for patent infringement. TiVo had the stronger patent portfolio, but ultimately, the suits were dropped when both parties reached an out-of-course settlement. The details of that settlement were never publicly disclosed.
> 
> ...


Yikes, the second to the last paragraph is rather scary.... :eek2: Don't like the thought of a monoply... Competition is great for lower consumer pricing!


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

This is pretty definitive evidence that DirecTV has absolutely no plans of ever bringing Tivo back as a DVR option.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> This is pretty definitive evidence that DirecTV has absolutely no plans of ever bringing Tivo back as a DVR option.


Good point... And why bring back tivo when you can have something superior anyway...


----------



## Aridon (Mar 13, 2007)

Very good news if they use what they gain properly. I am a huge fan of Replay and had several units. The tech was superior on average to TIVO and i was a big TIVO fan as well.


----------



## Spike (Jul 4, 2007)

I like this move a lot!! ReplayTV was also my choice over Tivo. Come on D*. Let the implementation of ReplayTV begin! And don't be stingy!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

This would look to be a complimentary purchase, as they would most likely use ReplayTV's resources (staff and expereience) to help develop their next generation DVR firmware.

With all the advancement made in the past year with the HR20 series DVR, as well as the new HR21 series, I suspect the ownership of patents will play as much a role as seeing any profound changes. We may see some enhancements to the GUI, etc., but overall, my guess is that this is a business decision more so than a technical one.


----------



## Kheldar (Sep 5, 2004)

Don't forget also, that a couple years ago D* promised (with some kind of alliance with Microsoft and Intel) to create a PC add-in card that will allow people to view their D* service on their PCs.

Buying ReplayTV gets them ReplayTV PC Edition, so they will have the software component of this ready-made.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

okietekkie said:


> I get to vote for who is replaytv??





gulfwarvet said:


> same here, I've heard of it from the forums but never seen one. so what feature's or benefits does it have?


Who is ReplayTV?

What is ReplayTV?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replaytv


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

"ReplayTV currently sells a PC edition of their product."

Hmmm ...


----------



## gquiring (Jan 8, 2006)

I still have two Replay 3060's in my home. When I switched to Tivo I had a hard time understanding why they were considered better since I was a Replay user. I think some of the current HR20 ideas like the double press record button came from Replay. Replay was also the first DVR to be able to be programmed from the web.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Hmmm.......maybe this is part of their OTA solution?


----------



## vonzoog (Jul 23, 2005)

I think this is a win-win situation. I see no negative aspect of this.

I too love my TiVo and am pleased with my current HR20. I have no experience with RePlay, but I do remember when it and TiVo first came out their were many, many people who swore it was better than TiVo.

It was kind of like the VHS/Beta war with the lesser winning out.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

I'm not sure what to make of this, except for owning patents.

While there are still a several items on our HR20/21 Wish List, the HR20 as it stands today is already pretty much as full-featured as I remember the last REPLAY box being, last time I played with one. /steve


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

I'm hoping this leads to MRV and/or some form of "DIRECTV-To-Go", since ReplayTV is already a PC product.


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> I'm hoping this leads to MRV and/or some form of "DIRECTV-To-Go", since ReplayTV is already a PC product.


That's exactly what I was thinking.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

I personally welcome the involvement of ReplayTV!

I posted months ago that the hardware specs of the HR20 had been released to a third party for evaluation. I said that we would see movement by the end of the year.

Earl et. al. did everything but call me a liar. I guess he knows the truth by now.

I'll repeat... the HR20 project has been a nightmare for DirecTV and there will be major changes. How long will it take to happen? I don't know, but the first steps were taken months ago.


----------



## lifelong (Sep 16, 2007)

What if DirecTV wants to enforce ReplayTV's patents against Echostar/Cable Co's?


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

looney2ns said:


> Outstanding. Glad to see ReplayTV lives on!
> I still have two of them in operation!
> Hopefully, DTV will use this in their DVR's


The ReplayTV DVR hardware is history and nothing in development, but they are a talented bunch of proven software developers.

DirecTV already has the hardware... they just haven't been able to get the software up to par.

As for the patents... most of the ReplayTV patents are already well aged and many in effect abandoned. They've not done much to protect their rights so I don't think this is much of an issue.

Hopefully this will lead to good things.


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

ReplayTV is referring to the PC edition as legacy - looks like they are currently marketing 'Personal HD' as the current product.


----------



## NYSmoker (Aug 20, 2006)

I have heard of ReplayTV but never seen it in action. Those who know, is it as annoying as TiVo with all the comfirmation screens (i.e. Are you sure you want to delete this item?) Of course I am sure I hit delete the first time didn't I?


----------



## ToddD (Jun 14, 2006)

one more thing to note ...NDS -the creators of the + dvr's is part of Newscorp.....not DirecTV, Owning ReplayTV brings a DVR group into DirecTv for the first time..... It might signal a change in direction and it might not!


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

csgo said:


> I personally welcome the involvement of ReplayTV!
> 
> I posted months ago that the hardware specs of the HR20 had been released to a third party for evaluation. I said that we would see movement by the end of the year.
> 
> ...


Ummm ... where to begin?

Nightmare? Not even close. The HR20 today is very successful. There have already been major changes - and they started with the CE program and the close relationship DIRECTV has with the CE testers.

You predicted months ago that ReplayTV would be sold to DIRECTV? Or you posted something that was general in nature so that any future "movement", no matter what, you could be given credit for it?

The truth right now is that online reports say DIRECTV is buying ReplayTV. There is nothing beyond that to even come close to saying this is vindication ...


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

ToddD said:


> one more thing to note ...NDS -the creators of the + dvr's is part of Newscorp.....not DirecTV, Owning ReplayTV brings a DVR group into DirecTv for the first time..... It might signal a change in direction and it might not!


Yes, NDS created the DVR Plus for the R15 series, but they had nothing to do with DVR Plus for the HR20 series. DIRECTV has their own dedicated talented group of DVR programmers working on the HR20, so the Replay DVR developers would be in addition to, not the first ...


----------



## EricRobins (Feb 9, 2005)

csgo said:


> As for the patents... most of the ReplayTV patents are already well aged and many in effect abandoned. They've not done much to protect their rights so I don't think this is much of an issue.


Don't you love when ignorance rears its ugly head???? Do you even understand the meaning of an ABANDONED patent right? Some of the strongest and most valuable patents are ones that issued 10 years or more ago as these patents broadly claim the entire technology. Ever hear of Mr. Jerome Lemelson? He filed applications back in the 50's which are generating hundreds of millions of dollars in licensing fees TODAY.

As far as ReplayTV "having not done much to protect their rights," have you looked at the newer patent filings? Of course not. They currently have 18 patent applications which have not issued as patents yet, and that only counts the ones that have published (applications are supposed to publish 18 months after earliest priority -usually the filing date).

So, before you go out spouting off legal terms like the patents have been abandoned (even "in effect"), I would recommend you do a little research and educate yourself on the meanings of those terms!


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

VeniceDre said:


> Could incorporating ReplayTV tech in future updates to current r15 & HR20/21 get them around contiunug their relationship with TiVo?
> 
> I've always felt they've kept paying TiVo to stop from being sued like Dish is by TiVo.


I doubt that they would use ReplayTV software on the R15 & HR20/21. If anything, they would use it on a box that is just beginning its development stage.

What would be interesting is if DirecTV decides to go with ReplayTV software on future boxes, does that mean that the coding will be done by one entity instead of multiple entities trying to make everything the same as it is now? It would definitely make keeping the user interface and features consistent among all boxes. One version of the software would have to be developed and certain features would be turned on/off depending on what box it was loaded onto.

- Merg


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

As a former Replay owner I sure hope that D* can incorporate some of the features that Replay has had for years. Of course MRV is #1 on my list with #2 being the ability to have a recording conflict be resolved by moving the conflict to another networked DVR.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> I'm hoping this leads to MRV and/or some form of "DIRECTV-To-Go", since ReplayTV is already a PC product.


Sorry. Still doesn't compute for me, since neither MRV nor sling-capability require "DVR on a PC" technology, and D* already knows how to stream MPEG-4 over a network.

I'm thinking that $36 million was for patents, but just my .02. I'm also hopeful REPLAY's search and recording scheduler might have been of interest to DirecTV as well. /steve


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

RAD said:


> #2 being the ability to have a recording conflict be resolved by moving the conflict to another networked DVR.


Now THAT sounds very cool!! instead of me having to do them separate!


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

RAD said:


> As a former Replay owner I sure hope that D* can incorporate some of the features that Replay has had for years. Of course MRV is #1 on my list with #2 being the ability to have a recording conflict be resolved by moving the conflict to another networked DVR.


+1. That's an item I have on my MRV wish list as well. A "master scheduler" that takes advantage of all tuners available on all networked DVR's in the house. /steve


----------



## captain_video (Nov 22, 2005)

I posted a while back that I'd like to see DirecTV acquire ReplayTV (although I honestly can't remember which forum I posed it in:sure: ) because I thought it would bolster the development of their own DVRs following the divorce from Tivo-based units. I used to own several ReplayTV and Panasonic Showstopper DVRs (i.e., Panasonic-branded ReplayTV's) and thought the setup and interface was far superior to that of a Tivo. I think a DirecTV DVR with the ReplayTV software would become a fan favorite and would probably make all of the Tivo lovers instant converts. It would really be a win-win situation for everyone.

The original HDR-112 Tivos were a pain to set up. They literally took hours for the initial setup whereas I could have a ReplayTV installed from scratch and setup and running in under 20 minutes. I used to carry one with me when I travelled extensively throughout the country around the turn of the millennium as I'd be stationed in one location for about four weeks at a time.

ReplayTV was way ahead of its time with regard to features such as MRV. You could also extract videos from them using the same method as the older Dish DVRs. This involved physically removing the hard drive and installing it in a PC to extract the recordings. There are utilities available for upgrading the hard drive and also adding a 2nd drive if you were inventive enough to figure out how to mount it in the case. For those that are interested, here's a link to the RTVPatch utility:

http://rtvpatch.sourceforge.net/

There's an entire forum dedicated to ReplayTV and Pansonic Showstopper models at the AVS Forums in case anyone is looking for more info.


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Although I do think DirecTV may be looking to implement some of ReplayTV's cool features, I honestly believe this was done because of patents.

As I recall, TiVo and ReplayTV settled out of court by cross-licensing each others patents. DirecTV's current deal includes a non-litigation clause with TiVo, so TiVo cannot sue for any DirecTV receivers that use TiVo's patented technology. With this deal for ReplayTV, DirecTV has acquired a patent portfolio that is allowed to use the TiVo patents, provided that there is a cross-licensing deal with TiVo.


----------



## b0st0n (Feb 10, 2007)

To the best of my knowledge, ReplayTV owns the patent on the "automatic commercial skip" which would be a cool addition to the D* DVR's.


----------



## Araxen (Dec 18, 2005)

I hope they go out and buy Tivo too and then they'll have all the patents under one roof and make a really killer DVR!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

b0st0n said:


> To the best of my knowledge, ReplayTV owns the patent on the "automatic commercial skip" which would be a cool addition to the D* DVR's.


No way will they implement that, unless DirecTV also buys ABC, CBS, NBC, and turns around and Buys the Fox network from Rupert. Then they need to move on to advertisers and production companies.


----------



## breevesdc (Aug 14, 2007)

This is awesome news. I still own 2 ReplayTV units (which was my first DVR) and I duplicate all of my recordings on them because I want MRV. Though the ReplayTV interface is not perfect, it has more stengths over the Tivo interface than weaknesses.

The only reason I gave up on using ReplayTV as my primary DVR is because they do not have an integrated solution for HD with cable and/or satellite. It appears now that this will change. But don't hold your breath ladies and gentlemen. I suspect that it will take quite some time for D* to convert this acquisition into a real product. Months? Years? Who knows.

Brian


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Is this really that big a deal?

Liberty has owned stakes in Replay and Tivo since the late 90s.

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-515457.html


----------



## breevesdc (Aug 14, 2007)

Lee L said:


> No way will they implement that, unless DirecTV also buys ABC, CBS, NBC, and turns around and Buys the Fox network from Rupert. Then they need to move on to advertisers and production companies.


I agree. "Commerical Advance" and "Internet Video Sharing" are the two features that got ReplayTV into hot water (i.e.- sued) back in the late 90's. They probably will not touch either one of those features.

However, Commerical Advance really only worked 80% of the time. It sometimes would jump too far or not far enough. I turned it off on my Replays and just use the 30-second skip button.

I will admit that IVS was (and still is) an outstanding feature. If you forget to record a show, you can request it from another ReplayTV user. If they have it, they can "send" the show to your Replay unit over the internet. However, it takes roughly 12 hours to send a 1 hour program (standard def). I still use it heavily on my Replays.

SonicBlue (the previous owners of ReplayTV before DNNA) did not remove the feature from existing units, but agreed to remove this feature from future units. So there is no way that D* will revive this feature. It would probably be infeasible anyway given that a 1 hour HD program would be many times larger than a standard def program.

Brian


----------



## BkwSoft (Oct 18, 2007)

I would hope that DIRECTV could leverage some of the Replay developers for future developments. In my mind the HR20/1 units are still striving to become what ReplayTV had out of the box years ago.

I have two ReplayTVs sitting in the closet right now because a lack of HD support. These have lifetime subscriptions and have the grandfathered commercial advance in them. I have yet to see any other unit beat the Replay in simplicity to use advanced features like MVR and recording conflict resolution. 

I just hope that this isn't simply a patent grab and have DIRECTV scrap what is left of ReplayTV.


----------



## say-what (Dec 14, 2006)

Ken S said:


> Is this really that big a deal?
> 
> Liberty has owned stakes in Replay and Tivo since the late 90s.
> 
> http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-515457.html


Owning a stake in a company and "owning a company" are 2 completely different animals. Owning a stake doesn't prevent you from being sued for patent violations or necessarially give you unfettered use of their patents and resources - it just makes it easier to form, but does not guarantee, business relationships that may or may not last.

Owning ReplayTV is interesting b/c it gives DirecTV the ability to create their own media server platform for your home PC. Also, while you'd never see open internet file sharing, you could see the development of a DirecTV DVR with remote viewing capabilities and advanced multi-room viewing/programming capabilities. Oh, ReplayTV recently introduced an HD-USB tuner.......


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm thinking that the intellectual property will serve DIRECTV well, but I would be surprised if we saw new features or hardware based on the ReplayTV patents.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Kheldar said:


> Don't forget also, that a couple years ago D* promised (with some kind of alliance with Microsoft and Intel) to create a PC add-in card that will allow people to view their D* service on their PCs.
> 
> Buying ReplayTV gets them ReplayTV PC Edition, so they will have the software component of this ready-made.


The software component has existed for years. It's called Windows Media Center, which is the reason they partnered with Microsoft. The DirecTV tuner was supposed to integrate directly with WMC.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> I'm hoping this leads to MRV and/or some form of "DIRECTV-To-Go", since ReplayTV is already a PC product.


I certainly hope not. Integrating anything from Replay into the HR20 will take quite a bit of time and I'm hoping that MRV is already much further along than that.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

b0st0n said:


> To the best of my knowledge, ReplayTV owns the patent on the "automatic commercial skip" which would be a cool addition to the D* DVR's.


Yep, and Replay got sued for it too.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

BkwSoft said:


> I would hope that DIRECTV could leverage some of the Replay developers for future developments.


This company has bounced around and been picked apart for years. I would imagine that the _really_ talented programmers that were involved with the company have long since been gone.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

I think this will be a good thing.

Time will tell.

Just give me my DLB and I'll be happy.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Araxen said:


> I hope they go out and buy Tivo too and then they'll have all the patents under one roof and make a really killer DVR!


Actually, according to this 2002 article, it may no longer be necessary to acquire TiVo. /steve

"Sonicblue and TiVo announced late on Friday that the two companies will dismiss their patent infringement claims against one another.

The two companies filed lawsuits against each other in the US District Court for the Northern District of California late last year and earlier this year. Both cases were pending.

Both suits were for infringements on patents dealing with capabilities associated with digital video recorders (DVRs).

"We believe our energies are better spent expanding the market for digital video recorders (DVRs) rather than fighting each other. Both sides believe in the merits of their respective positions, but the overall success of the DVR category is what is most important to the companies at this time," the two companies said in a joint statement.

Sonicblue and Tivo representatives were not available to comment on the settlement.

The competing companies each maintain a digital video recording service. Sonicblue also sells recorders under its ReplayTV brand.

The patent dispute developed after Sonicblue first filed suit in December of last year, a day after receiving a patent covering 50 claims for developing devices that can pause and play back television shows. TiVo in turn filed suit in January for a "multimedia time warping system" patent.

Both companies said they were looking to protect their intellectual property. [...]"


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

say-what said:


> Owning a stake in a company and "owning a company" are 2 completely different animals. Owning a stake doesn't prevent you from being sued for patent violations or necessarially give you unfettered use of their patents and resources - it just makes it easier to form, but does not guarantee, business relationships that may or may not last.
> 
> Owning ReplayTV is interesting b/c it gives DirecTV the ability to create their own media server platform for your home PC. Also, while you'd never see open internet file sharing, you could see the development of a DirecTV DVR with remote viewing capabilities and advanced multi-room viewing/programming capabilities. Oh, ReplayTV recently introduced an HD-USB tuner.......


You're missing my point. We could have seen all the things you listed anyway. DirecTV through Liberty has relationships with both companies. More importanly, DirecTV had/has a relationship with Microsoft to work with Media Center.

My guess is they got Replay for practically nothing. I don't know how many developers or employees they still have anymore...and how many will stay. The HD USB tuner may have been what they wanted.

The patent portfolio may prove to have some value, but just because they own a patent or a technology doesn't mean they have the people that developed it.

I'd call this more of a garage sale pickup by DirecTV that they may get some value out of.


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

I see this as something that is definitely interesting. I truly think DirecTV is looking at this as a move to strengthen their DVR position in several ways. 

First and foremost the patents. ReplayTV has been a little lax with some patent enforcement, but the reality is that they still have a lot of clout on the table. The acquisition would eliminate the need for any negotiations to use these patents, and potentially allow DirecTV to develop new features more secretively as there is no news to leak about negotiation. There is also the potential for DirecTV to realize revenue by licensing these technologies to their competitors. There is nothing better than sending a bill to your competitor 

The other side of this is the people element. I think most of us are in agreement that the ReplayTV guys were very sharp and had a solid grasp of DVR development and the issues. Bringing them into the DirecTV family brings that experience the the existing groups of developers and will hopefully expedite future development.

One last thought here is the whole thought about Windows Media Center and what the ReplayTV acquisition means here. The fact is it means nothing. Windows Media Center already has all of the DVR software in place, and that software was built upon Microsoft's prior experience with UltimateTV (frankly still my favorite DVR). ReplayTV means nothing in this regards as the only holdups are developing a secure system that will allow a PC to tune (DirecTV tuner card??), write to disk (probably using BitLocker or some other drive encryption to protect content), and replay DirecTV content (codecs and access card). None of these really relate to the actualy DVR component. Media Center already has HD MRV, and has secure transport protocols to protect the content so even that element is unneeded at this point in time.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Ken_F said:


> Liberty Media-- the new owner of DirecTV-- already has a large equity investment in TiVo. With DirecTV's acquisition of ReplayTV, Liberty Media will have direct or indirect ownership stakes in most major DVR patents. DirecTV has the resources and a vested interest in pursing patent litigation against Echostar and/or cable companies who may be violating ReplayTV patents. If the decision against Echostar is upheld, then TiVo will be better equipped to pursue patent litigation against cable companies like Charter, TWC, and Verizon. With ReplayTV's patents in the hands of DirecTV, cable companies (and Dish Network) could find themselves fighting on two fronts.





IDRick said:


> Yikes, the second to the last paragraph is rather scary.... :eek2: Don't like the thought of a monoply... Competition is great for lower consumer pricing!


I don't disagree with your statement, but I believe even DIRECTV would see that the FTC would not be happy with a monopolistic situation .. The technology would be licensed and all would be well in the world.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Steve said:


> I'm thinking that $36 million was for patents, but just my .02. I'm also hopeful REPLAY's search and recording scheduler might have been of interest to DirecTV as well. /steve


I with you on this Steve .. takes the legal part out of a lot of things that DIRECTV has going on now. The DIRECTV software dev team already has a handle on how to make a DVR. With the Patents in hand, certain things can be implemented without fear or retribution.

In all honesty, I hope that the Replay Dev Team get job offers with DIRECTV as there is no guarantee that that will happen (regardless of the quality of their work).


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

csgo said:


> I personally welcome the involvement of ReplayTV!
> 
> I posted months ago that the hardware specs of the HR20 had been released to a third party for evaluation. I said that we would see movement by the end of the year.
> 
> ...


I stand by what I said then... and the purchase of ReplayTV... doesn't change that fact either.

The HR20 project has been nothing remotely close to a "nightmare" for DirecTV. And I don't expect major changes to happen either.

And yes... I do think you where throwing wet slop against a wall to see what sticks... and frankly... none of it has.

But hey... keep throwing up vague references... you might hit something.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Lee L said:


> No way will they implement that, unless DirecTV also buys ABC, CBS, NBC, and turns around and Buys the Fox network from Rupert. Then they need to move on to advertisers and production companies.


Agreed .. while it would be nice, pragmatically .. ain't gonna happen.


----------



## bjamin82 (Sep 4, 2007)

ccr1958 said:


> for now i will vote "cool" as long as it does
> not cause me to need a new receiver version
> someday too soon


I agree... it is cool, but hopefully whatever changes DirecTv is going to make to its DVR now that they own this software will not require equipment changes.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I stand by what I said then... and the purchase of ReplayTV... doesn't change that fact either.
> 
> The HR20 project has been nothing remotely close to a "nightmare" for DirecTV. And I don't expect major changes to happen either.
> 
> ...


Earl, csgo may indeed have a buddy that works with Replay TV and knew of these negotiations long ago. Where I suspect a mistake was made was that buddy assuming that ReplayTV would re-write the DIRECTV DVR line in a different form.

I agree with you completely that the HR20 development is not a nightmare. I do think there were long hard nights last year with the HR20, but we are so far removed from that era that there is no way that the current design path will be changed.

The thing we can all hope for are cool new features .. will these be born out of the ReplayTV acquisition? Maybe, but this purchase is to compliment the direction DIRECTV is going, not change it.


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I stand by what I said then... and the purchase of ReplayTV... doesn't change that fact either.
> 
> The HR20 project has been nothing remotely close to a "nightmare" for DirecTV. And I don't expect major changes to happen either.
> 
> ...


Isn't this the way elections work??? Keep taking guesses until you stir something up 

Seriously though I agree with you Earl. The HR20 was not really a nightmare for DirecTV. Not by any measure. It might have resulted in increased CSR calls, some minor loss of customers, and some extra hours for developers (who are probably salaried  so it didn't cost them anything), but that is by no means a nightmare.

Nightmares are class action suits, people's TVs blowing up because of the unit, the box catching on fire, something major. Not people's recordings not working.


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

As someone who's been involved with ReplayTV from the beginning (I was a longtime beta tester and still run planetreplay.com and replayfaqs.com), I welcome our new DirecTV overlords. I think most of the important points have been hit here with regard to ReplayTV's value to DirecTV:

1. Patents - you can never have too many patents.
2. Multi-room viewing - Replay's first implementation of this in like 2000-2001 has remained one of the best and most reliable in a DVR.
3. Software DVR - Possibly to accompany a PC-card based DirecTV receiver.
4. Internet-based scheduling - The MyReplayTV.com service allowed users to program their DVR from a centralized server.
5. Remote Scheduling - ReplayTVs would recognize other ReplayTVs on the local network and allow situations like "no tuners available" to be handled by offering to record a show on another DVR. "Sorry, this unit is busy during that time. Record on Bedroom DVR instead?"
6. Remote Scheduling II - The first remote scheduling feature allowed 3rd party developers to use the same networking functions and allow localized remote scheduling from PC software.
7. Internet Video Send - OK, so ReplayTV (then under Sonicblue) got sued for this one. It was a feature that let you send a show to ReplayTV box belonging to another owner. It was supposed to be for "friends and family", but in the internet age that's a little nebulous (hi to all my friends on poopli.com). So it meant that I didn't necessarily have to subscribe to HBO to watch THe Sopranos, I just had to know someone who did and could send it to me. I know this is a little far-fetched, but think about it: DirecTV has a serious advantage here. They know what programming I'm subscribed to. Just like with the downloadable content they're now offering that is limited by my subscription - they could actually control what programs I send to who. They could actually be in the position of offering a peer-to-peer sharing service that is Hollywood-friendly.
8. ReplayTV had no 50-series limit - ok, cheap shot. It never had a "to-do" list either.


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

mrshermanoaks said:


> As someone who's been involved with ReplayTV from the beginning (I was a longtime beta tester and still run planetreplay.com and replayfaqs.com), I welcome our new DirecTV overlords. I think most of the important points have been hit here with regard to ReplayTV's value to DirecTV:
> 
> 1. Patents - you can never have too many patents.
> 2. Multi-room viewing - Replay's first implementation of this in like 2000-2001 has remained one of the best and most reliable in a DVR.
> ...


Awesome post. I even appreciated the little cheap shot 

How do you see the software piece relating to Media Center?? Has there been much comparison to date?? Just curious...


----------



## Canis Lupus (Oct 16, 2006)

Remember Apple's Newton? What an abysmal product. However, Apple secured a ton of patents from that development and turned many of them into... the iPhone. 

So I agree patents may be the key here, and it could be another way for D* to close the door/widen the gap on TiVo. 

It would be great though if any left over engineers/developers could help D* finish off MRV.


----------



## jash (Sep 2, 2007)

i like my hr20 and i don't miss my tivo at all. that took a few weeks but it seems to be the case for most folks i know. as for the patent disputes, i worked for a software company that had a similar situation. they sued each other and eventually agreed to stop but to pay each other a nominal fee if they ever got bought out. 1 million. so i bet tivo just got some extra cash from directv.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Hate to say it but I highly doubt you will see a PC card for Directv ever.. (I kinda hope I'm wrong) I don't think anyone is willing to take the risk of allowing programing unencripted in anything but a poprietary box..


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

VeniceDre said:


> I've always felt they've kept paying TiVo to stop from being sued like Dish is by TiVo.


Do not forget the "do-not-sue deal" DIRECTV has with TiVo in exchange for extending the support on the TiVo units until 2010.

http://www.businessweek.com/technol...nology+index+page_more+of+today's+top+stories



Kheldar said:


> Don't forget also, that a couple years ago D* promised (with some kind of alliance with Microsoft and Intel) to create a PC add-in card that will allow people to view their D* service on their PCs.


They made that announcement at the 2006 CES. Microsoft also said that they were working on a "blade" for the Xbox 360 that would turn it into a extension of the DIRECTV HD DVR.

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/10013/DIRECTV-and-Microsoft-Team-Up/

http://www.engadget.com/2006/02/17/directv-blade-to-bring-hd-tv-and-flicks-to-xbox-360-dashboard/


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

theratpatrol said:


> Hmmm.......maybe this is part of their OTA solution?


Interesting... Maybe you're on to something.


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

Radio Enginerd said:


> Interesting... Maybe you're on to something.


I thought that too - the current product of ReplayTV happens to be a USB tuner with some software for $ 99.00


----------



## tiger2005 (Sep 23, 2006)

Did ReplayTV have DLB? That is really the only thing I care about at this point. Although, the MR master scheduler sounds pretty cool, but that would more than likely require me to get a bunch of new receivers.


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

bhelton71 said:


> I thought that too - the current product of ReplayTV happens to be a USB tuner with some software for $ 99.00


It's certainly not the single thing that drove the purchase but definitely an added value. Makes sense they'd utilize it as a possible solution. I guess time will tell whether we're on to something... or not.


----------



## itguy05 (Oct 24, 2007)

Canis Lupus said:


> Remember Apple's Newton? What an abysmal product. However, Apple secured a ton of patents from that development and turned many of them into... the iPhone.


I wouldn't call it abysmal. It was way ahead of its time and led way to the most successful (and best, IMHO) PDA, the Palm Pilot....


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

lguvenoz said:


> Awesome post. I even appreciated the little cheap shot
> 
> How do you see the software piece relating to Media Center?? Has there been much comparison to date?? Just curious...


ReplayTV PC Edition isn't much of a competitor to the broadness of Media Center, but it seemed really tuned (forgive the pun) to the needs of someone who just wanted to record television.

Here are some of the writeups I did on the ReplayTV PC Edition when it first came out with lots of screenshots:

ReplayTV PC Edition - The Setup
ReplayTV PC Edition - Operation


----------



## Canis Lupus (Oct 16, 2006)

You're right. Maybe abysmal was too strong a word. And yes - it led to great developments, including today's iPhone. So even though it was a financial failure at the time, it contributed to future products, and the patents created at that time paid off later, which was really my point. 



itguy05 said:


> I wouldn't call it abysmal. It was way ahead of its time and led way to the most successful (and best, IMHO) PDA, the Palm Pilot....


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

houskamp said:


> Hate to say it but I highly doubt you will see a PC card for Directv ever.. (I kinda hope I'm wrong) I don't think anyone is willing to take the risk of allowing programing unencripted in anything but a poprietary box..


You touched on the key of "unencrypted". I deal with the inner workings of a lot of the media center elements, and the stuff within Vista and Vista SP1 is all about never decrypting anything until it is sent to the display, and even that is going the HDCP route to protect that path and for MRV they already have protocols to establish trusted connections to close that potential loop.

With the latest updates (via SP1) Vista actually supports a closed system now with BitLocker drive encryption, and even support for encryption of data as it flows through the peripherals inside the box and on the USB or Firewire bus (I don't buy that it really works, but it sounds good).

My guess is that DirecTV will be okay with it so long as the tuner is simply storing an encrypted data stream on an encrypted drive (BitLocker ties the drive to the physical machine so it's pretty difficult to crack). Then the system would have to "authorize" the decryption of the source stream during playback. That's where it would get interesting.


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

tiger2005 said:


> Did ReplayTV have DLB? That is really the only thing I care about at this point. Although, the MR master scheduler sounds pretty cool, but that would more than likely require me to get a bunch of new receivers.


Nope, ReplayTV was always a single-tuner system. Because the receivers all networked together, it worked OK.

But we never got ourselves hooked on that dual live buffers thing


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

lguvenoz said:


> You touched on the key of "unencrypted". I deal with the inner workings of a lot of the media center elements, and the stuff within Vista and Vista SP1 is all about never decrypting anything until it is sent to the display, and even that is going the HDCP route to protect that path and for MRV they already have protocols to establish trusted connections to close that potential loop.
> 
> With the latest updates (via SP1) Vista actually supports a closed system now with BitLocker drive encryption, and even support for encryption of data as it flows through the peripherals inside the box and on the USB or Firewire bus (I don't buy that it really works, but it sounds good).


That used to be the story, that once Vista was out the Home Theater PC market was going to explode because you could use CableCard and DirecTV receivers without the outboard hardware. Unfortunately, not so much. I think only now we're seeing the first few CableCard implementations. Not sure if it was because Vista didn't work right or if vendors are waiting for things to shake out.


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

lguvenoz said:


> You touched on the key of "unencrypted". I deal with the inner workings of a lot of the media center elements, and the stuff within Vista and Vista SP1 is all about never decrypting anything until it is sent to the display, and even that is going the HDCP route to protect that path and for MRV they already have protocols to establish trusted connections to close that potential loop.
> 
> With the latest updates (via SP1) Vista actually supports a closed system now with BitLocker drive encryption, and even support for encryption of data as it flows through the peripherals inside the box and on the USB or Firewire bus (I don't buy that it really works, but it sounds good).
> 
> My guess is that DirecTV will be okay with it so long as the tuner is simply storing an encrypted data stream on an encrypted drive (BitLocker ties the drive to the physical machine so it's pretty difficult to crack). Then the system would have to "authorize" the decryption of the source stream during playback. That's where it would get interesting.


I get the storage part scenario - but what would the 'card' be ? I am thinking it would have to be:

1 card with input(s) and tuner(s) and a second card with a card reader

or

A small box with the inputs and card reader with some sort of USB interface back to the PC - something along the size of the D12's (possibly smaller)

or kind of far-fetched

1 card with input(s) and tuner(s) and using an internet connection to connect to Directv for authorization


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

itguy05 said:


> I wouldn't call it abysmal. It was way ahead of its time and led way to the most successful (and best, IMHO) PDA, the Palm Pilot....


Take a side road from the thread for a second...

The last Newton (2100) was a very, very good product that had a huge flaw...it was made under John Scully's watch and Steve Jobs was going to have nothing to do with it. That is until about ten years later and some of the technology started showing up in a little device called the iPod and then later the iPhone.

You're right, Palm got it's start when the first Newton's handwriting technology faltered and they came up with Grafitti...which worked very well. You couldn't really compare the Palm and the Newton. The Palm was all about simplicity and the Newton was a very powerful handheld device. Palm understood one thing very well that Apple didn't figure out...PDAs won't sell at $999


----------



## rminsk (Dec 5, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> but that would require them to have the ability of rational thought.


A totally uncalled for statement. My TiVo boxes are still much more reliable than my 4 HR20 boxes.


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

mrshermanoaks said:


> That used to be the story, that once Vista was out the Home Theater PC market was going to explode because you could use CableCard and DirecTV receivers without the outboard hardware. Unfortunately, not so much. I think only now we're seeing the first few CableCard implementations. Not sure if it was because Vista didn't work right or if vendors are waiting for things to shake out.


Here's the reality in the CableCard front. The CableCard Consortium made a critical error. To have a CableCard slot a PC has to be "certified" by them. This process is expensive and shutout the large number of small shops that specialized in media centers. It left really only the big companies (Sony, HP, etc.) to champion this cause, and they are so focused on buildiung everyday computers that a lot of their implementations provide minimal value.

I would hope that DirecTV does not go this route. They need to include the little guy to gain adoption.


----------



## rydertaylor (Oct 31, 2007)

This is great move for Directv DVR


----------



## BreezeCJ (Jan 8, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> This is excellent news. They always had the best DVR around since they came out, and they came out before tivo. They had MRV before anyone... They have been kept alive by licensing there software, and have new PC dvr software hitting the market, which I hope can finally turn into a DirecTV PC card with DVR functionality...
> 
> Way to go DirecTV!!!


i THINK IT'S GOOD NEWS. bUT i BEG TO DIFFER ABOUT ONE THING:

The best DVR EVER was Microsoft's UltimateTV. It had many features that today's DVR's still haven't implemented.


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

BreezeCJ said:


> i THINK IT'S GOOD NEWS. bUT i BEG TO DIFFER ABOUT ONE THING:
> 
> The best DVR EVER was Microsoft's UltimateTV. It had many features that today's DVR's still haven't implemented.


I could not agree more (can we say PIP)....


----------



## 4DThinker (Dec 17, 2006)

Of course DirectTV may have bought Replay just to bury them.

4D


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

4DThinker said:


> Of course DirectTV may have bought Replay just to bury them.
> 
> 4D


Yeah, that's it .. I'm sure they were hurting the bottom line at DIRECTV.  . I'd say they want the Patents and nothing more ..


----------



## Kevin Dupuy (Nov 29, 2006)

I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but we're all thinking it: What does this mean for DoD and CEs? I guess they would make those features on the new ReplayD*.

Anyone wish to make a bet on when the new boxes will come out? Next summer, my guess.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

Ken_F said:


> ...If TiVo's victory over Echostar (Dish Network) is upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals, that would greatly strengthen TiVo's bargaining position with DirecTV when their current patent licensing agreement *expires in two years*...


 TiVo Contract/Patent Licenses Extended Through 2010 
• _TiVo (TIVO) announced yesterday that they have extended their agreement with DirecTV Group (DTV) for three years. In addition to this, both parties have agreed to not assert patent rights against each other. The previous agreement was due to expire in 2007. _

There were two ways to get to town and DIRECTV just bought one of them. This answers the question, "Will DIRECTV get back together with TiVo?" If DIRECTV buys the other road (TiVo) it will just be to set up a monopoly.

Today people are asking "Who was Replay?"

In ten years, I think the question will be, "Who was TiVo?"

- Craig


----------



## Araxen (Dec 18, 2005)

Well if Directv bought Tivo they could cause all sorts of havoc with the cable co's due to patents and what not from both companies.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

mrshermanoaks said:


> As someone who's been involved with ReplayTV from the beginning (I was a longtime beta tester and still run planetreplay.com and replayfaqs.com), I welcome our new DirecTV overlords. I think most of the important points have been hit here with regard to ReplayTV's value to DirecTV:
> 
> 1. Patents - you can never have too many patents.
> 2. Multi-room viewing - Replay's first implementation of this in like 2000-2001 has remained one of the best and most reliable in a DVR.
> ...


Excellent synopsis. DIRECTV may already be working on some of these features (MRV, Internet Scheduling), but to have access to successful implementations of them, as well as the patent rights, is one of the reason I love this deal.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

Here is a link to the agreement between ReplayTV and TiVo:

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/emergingtech/0,1000000183,2125720,00.htm

Even Swanni got the connection:

http://www.tvpredictions.com/dreplay121307.htm

- Craig


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> Excellent synopsis. DIRECTV may already be working on some of these features (MRV, Internet Scheduling), but to have access to successful implementations of them, as well as the patent rights, is one of the reason I love this deal.


I agree. I think that Directv probably has some features almost ready to go in their first incarnation, and buying Replay gets them the rights to implement them without facing lawsuits. I also believe that in the long run, Replay will definetly help refine the HR20. I don't think you will necessarily see new products introduced because of this, I believe you will see better and more refinement of the software that we have. Ultimate tv was great, I will say, but they were not superior to replay, in fact the were definetly behind replay. The options of dual tuners and PIP were only on a ultimate and not a replay because replay was never installed into a Directv receiver, and there for never had the need to implement those features. Both Replay and Ultimate are far superior to tivo though.....

And I still think that Replays web based control of their replays is by far the best in the business...

In the end, I think that Directv bought Replay for all the reasons we have thought of, from owning a massive amount of patents, (that frankly are the foundation to DVR's that Tivo had to settle out of court to be able to use) to giving them access to software and developers, to that little usb OTA solution.....

And by the way, If I'm not mistaken, I believe that some cable companies are paying replaytv licensing fees right now in order to use some of their DVR functionality... I'll try and research to see if I can find which ones.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Should we have a poll about how worried tivo is right now.... Suddenly I think its tivo worried about what is going to happen in 2011 when their agreement runs out, hoping they don't have to start paying DirecTv....


----------



## GP245 (Aug 17, 2006)

VeniceDre said:


> Could incorporating ReplayTV tech in future updates to current r15 & HR20/21 get them around contiunug their relationship with TiVo?
> 
> I've always felt they've kept paying TiVo to stop from being sued like Dish is by TiVo.


As they used to say on radio, "Give that man a Mars Bar!"

Bingo!


----------



## lguvenoz (Aug 23, 2006)

GP245 said:


> As they used to say on radio, "Give that man a Mars Bar!"
> 
> Bingo!


Definitely!!!


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Kevin Dupuy said:


> I don't know if anyone's mentioned this yet, but we're all thinking it: What does this mean for DoD and CEs?


Nobody's thinking it. It means nothing for VOD and CEs, because nothing is changing. DirecTV is not going to be releasing Replay-branded DVRs, the HR20/1 are still it.


----------



## ub1934 (Dec 30, 2005)

Jeremy W said:


> Nobody's thinking it. It means nothing for VOD and CEs, because nothing is changing. DirecTV is not going to be releasing Replay-branded DVRs, the HR20/1 are still it.


You forgot the sh


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

ub1934 said:


> You forgot the sh


Hmmm, nope I didn't mention Tivo in there anywhere, so no "sh" was necessary.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> Nobody's thinking it. It means nothing for VOD and CEs, because nothing is changing. DirecTV is not going to be releasing Replay-branded DVRs, the HR20/1 are still it.


Agree. IMO, this deal is all about the 50 DVR patents REPLAY owns that are referenced in post #58 here. This should allow DirecTV to continue including patented features in their DVR's in perpetuity... long after their cross-licensing deal with TiVo expires in 2010. Since the HR20/21 technology roadmap was in place long before this deal, any REPLAY technology that might find it's way onto the HR platform in the future will just be a bonus, not the reason for the acquisition.

Just my .02. /steve


----------



## simonkodousek (Feb 20, 2007)

Hmm... I'm happy to see that DirecTV is taking over a wider market of DVR's, but I'm sad to see TiVo go. I really love their software, and like it more than D*'s current DVR's...


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

I hope that if the DVR software development is moved to ReplayTV that the CE program will not become a thing of the past.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> I hope that if the DVR software development is moved to ReplayTV that the CE program will not become a thing of the past.


They're not going to move the software development to ReplayTV.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> They're not going to move the software development to ReplayTV.


How would you know that? It would be good news, but do you have a source for this.


----------



## ned23 (Sep 18, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> They're not going to move the software development to ReplayTV.


I think DirecTv has got do something with their software development. There are systems coming online that totally blow DirecTv's software away. As one example the new Microsoft Mediaroom software. The old UTV people will love it. Not only DLB but PIP with different angles of view, MRV ITV Personal video music and photos, an elegant design.

I hope this alliance with Replay makes our software as worldclass as the satelitte delivery system is.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> How would you know that? It would be good news, but do you have a source for this.


There has been no indication that ReplayTV will take over DVR development ..


----------



## tinyiota (Feb 9, 2007)

Steve said:


> Agree. IMO, this deal is all about the 50 DVR patents REPLAY owns that are referenced in post #58 This should allow DirecTV to continue including patented features in their DVR's in perpetuity... long after their cross-licensing deal with TiVo expires in 2010. Since the HR20/21 technology roadmap was in place long before this deal, any REPLAY technology that might find it's way onto the HR platform in the future will just be a bonus, not the reason for the acquisition.
> 
> Just my .02. /steve


It's all about the patents.. Look at the tech sector and how companies like SUN, IBM and Netapp handle patents and you get the idea.

Buying Replay gives DirecTV more patents that they can use to defend themselves against other patent suits, negotiate more favorable cross-licensing deals and add features on DirecTV products that are covered by Replay's patents.

Whether they add the features, or just keep the patents in the attic until they need to use them defensively, who's to say? We can only hope they don't use them offensively. I have no visibility into DirecTV's development process, but it seems like they have a pretty active development process going already. I can see them possibly adding replay's features to their existing code, but I can't see them taking replay's code and running it on existing hardware.

My $0.02..


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> There has been no indication that ReplayTV will take over DVR development ..


No indication that they will not. In any case, I just hope that whatever happens, that the CE program will continue. With Directv having some control of the ReplayTV patents, we could see some real great new features.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> No indication that they will not.


There's also no indication that DirecTV will not hand over control of the DVR software to Dish Network tomorrow. That doesn't mean it's happening.


----------



## rmartinj (Jan 29, 2007)

Why


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

I remember back in the day when I got my first TiVo. This was before TiVo or ReplayTV was released. I remember browsing their pre-sale websites announcing their upcoming launches. My first love was Replay, but at some point I got sold on TiVo. My brother actually ended up getting a ReplayTV.

The funny thing is the DVR has not changed all that much since I had that first 14 hour TiVo. I do love my HR20s now though.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

marksman said:


> The funny thing is the DVR has not changed all that much since I had that first 14 hour TiVo.


The DVR concept can't change too much. All that really changes with the core DVR functions is just the way they work. And if you think back to your first Tivo, and then look at Tivo's DVRs today, what have they changed? Folders. Their subscribers have been asking for other things, but Tivo doesn't listen. A free space indicator? Hah! Longer buffers? Not a chance. How about simply being able to look at the guide while you're watching a recording? Nope, why would you ever want to do that?


----------



## smiddy (Apr 5, 2006)

WOW, I go away for a day and DirecTV does some good poop! Way to go DirecTV...we're headed in the right direction and I can only imagine what will happen with the CEs in the coming months.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> How about simply being able to look at the guide while you're watching a recording? Nope, why would you ever want to do that?


Although I agree with you on this one, I've always wondered how people can be reading the guide data while trying to watch that small screen in the upper left corner at the same time. Its like trying to watch a movie with subtitles.


----------



## raven56706 (Jan 17, 2007)

will replaytv fix the 771 problem?


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Greg Bimson said:


> Although I do think DirecTV may be looking to implement some of ReplayTV's cool features, I honestly believe this was done because of patents.





Sirshagg said:


> This company has bounced around and been picked apart for years. I would imagine that the _really_ talented programmers that were involved with the company have long since been gone.


I agree this was done for the patents.

There seems to be an idea that Replay was still a company and operated as such. I do not believe this to be the case, but instead the intellectual property, inlcuding the name, was owned by a large Japanese CE manufacturer: D(enon) & M(arantz).

The notion that D* all of a sudden has access to a room full of DVR engineers is just wrong.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

Herdfan said:


> The notion that D* all of a sudden has access to a room full of DVR engineers is just wrong.


 That's true, the engineers "left the building" a long time ago. D&M stopped manufacturing hardware shortly after purchasing ReplayTV and then just let the brand fade away.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

l8er said:


> That's true, the engineers "left the building" a long time ago. D&M stopped manufacturing hardware shortly after purchasing ReplayTV and then just let the brand fade away.


Absolutely. And D&M will continue to support the existing REPLAY subscriber base, not DirecTV, which is another indication that DirecTV is not interested in perpetuating the current REPLAY application. From the D&M press release:

_"D&M Holdings will remain the operator of the existing service contracts for current subscribers for the foreseeable future while DIRECTV will assume most of the other assets of the brand company."_

D&M reportedly paid $36 million to acquire both RIO and REPLAY when SonicBlue went bankrupt, so since the REPLAY brand withered even more during the time that D&M owned it, it's probably safe to assume that DirecTV paid substantially less than that for the intellectual property.

The question someone else asked that I find interesting is why didn't TiVo buy REPLAY to consolidate the patents, rather than let them slip away to a potential competitor? If I were a TiVo shareholder, I'd be a little ticked-off right now.  /steve


----------



## thxultra (Feb 1, 2005)

This is great. I loved my replay tv. Too bad they can't bring back the commercial advance they once had  I think they got sued over it but it was the best dvr feature I have ever seen.


----------



## morphy (Jun 5, 2007)

They could do something as simple as putting support for Directv's DRM format inside an existing ReplayTV, and I would be a happy camper.


----------



## mitchelljd (Aug 16, 2006)

It is interesting to see the commitment that Directv has to doing DVR on their own. In the face of strong pro-Tivo movement among customers, they continually have pushed in a different direction.

Yes, the HR20 and HR21 are finally more stable, though not completely. My guess is that directv wants all of the technology inhouse at all costs. Someone over there has a strong agenda on this, i don't know why but they do.

Perhaps the acquisition of Replay will help protect from lawsuits. 
Perhaps Replay will help them internally keep the DVR fees they will charge many customers. 

I just hope whenever the technology is integrated, it is done in a way that is similar to replace/tivo and superior to the system they are using now.

my hope is that they use replays tech for multiple machines be able to share their saved programs in the same household.


----------



## pwoz1957 (Jul 6, 2007)

vonzoog said:


> *I think this is a win-win situation. I see no negative aspect of this.*
> 
> I too love my TiVo and am pleased with my current HR20. I have no experience with RePlay, but I do remember when it and TiVo first came out their were many, many people who swore it was better than TiVo.
> 
> It was kind of like the VHS/Beta war with the lesser winning out.


I'm certainly hoping so.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Steve said:


> Absolutely. And D&M will continue to support the existing REPLAY subscriber base, not DirecTV, which is another indication that DirecTV is not interested in perpetuating the current REPLAY application. From the D&M press release:
> 
> _"D&M Holdings will remain the operator of the existing service contracts for current subscribers for the foreseeable future while DIRECTV will assume most of the other assets of the brand company."_


Thanks Steve .. I didn't even know that. That's fairly clear evidence that this was a strategic move and not tactical at all. It would almost indicate that DIRECTV said .. "here's some money .. give me the Patents."


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Doug Brott said:


> Thanks Steve .. I didn't even know that. That's fairly clear evidence that this was a strategic move and not tactical at all. It would almost indicate that DIRECTV said .. "here's some money .. give me the Patents."


...and maybe a quick solution to DLB that is legal now.... :lol:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

mitchelljd said:


> It is interesting to see the commitment that Directv has to doing DVR on their own. In the face of strong pro-Tivo movement among customers, they continually have pushed in a different direction.


Does anyone know the numbers? I wonder if the R15/HR20/HR21 subscriber counts are actually bigger than TiVo's entire portfolio of receivers at this point.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and maybe a quick solution to DLB that is legal now.... :lol:


well, I don't know if ReplayTV has a DLB Patent or not .. I have not examined them myself. But if they do .. well, maybe you're right. I don't know myself, though.


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> well, I don't know if ReplayTV has a DLB Patent or not .. I have not examined them myself. But if they do .. well, maybe you're right. I don't know myself, though.


Well I was curious what the patents were that everyone is referring to. So I did this search:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/re...ange=all&stemming=on&sort=chron&search=Search

Not seeing anything jumping out at me ? The only thing I can figure - DirecTV themselves have been submitting patents around Mobile Video

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/re...ange=all&stemming=on&sort=chron&search=Search

There are a couple of the Replay patents that seem related - maybe they are collecting those.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

mitchelljd said:


> It is interesting to see the commitment that Directv has to doing DVR on their own. In the face of strong pro-Tivo movement among customers, they continually have pushed in a different direction.


I think you are DRASTICALLY over estimating the volume of "pro-TiVo" movement amongust their customers.



mitchelljd said:


> Yes, the HR20 and HR21 are finally more stable, though not completely. My guess is that directv wants all of the technology inhouse at all costs. Someone over there has a strong agenda on this, i don't know why but they do.


There are dozens of reasons on why bringing it "in-house" are advantageous... just like there are advantages for leaving it out-house.


----------



## badmonkey (Nov 18, 2005)

mitchelljd said:


> It is interesting to see the commitment that Directv has to doing DVR on their own. In the face of strong pro-Tivo movement among customers, they continually have pushed in a different direction.
> ...


What are you basing the 'strong pro-Tivo movement' comment on? It doesn't seem to me that the movement even exists, save for a few diehards (no disrespect intended) at tivocommunity.com.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> The DVR concept can't change too much. All that really changes with the core DVR functions is just the way they work. And if you think back to your first Tivo, and then look at Tivo's DVRs today, what have they changed? Folders. Their subscribers have been asking for other things, but Tivo doesn't listen. A free space indicator? Hah! Longer buffers? Not a chance. How about simply being able to look at the guide while you're watching a recording? Nope, why would you ever want to do that?


This thread isn't about Tivo, but your post is inaccurate. Tivo has added a bunch of other features...some of which we still wait for on the HR2x series.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Does anyone know the numbers? I wonder if the R15/HR20/HR21 subscriber counts are actually bigger than TiVo's entire portfolio of receivers at this point.


Doug,

I would have to think that DirecTV would easily be the leading seller of DVRs nowadays. The Cable Cos all seem to use different units. Dish might be second.


----------



## m4p (Apr 12, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> MRV
> advanced controlling your DVR from the internet
> creating your own folders for recording programs
> better search engines
> ...


Personally, I would rather have dual live buffers than any other these features. Hopefully we can have it all :hurah:


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

bhelton71 said:


> Well I was curious what the patents were that everyone is referring to. So I did this search:
> 
> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/re...ange=all&stemming=on&sort=chron&search=Search
> 
> ...


Not sure what they are, but maybe you need to search under "SonicBlue". There are apparently 50 patents on DVR technology held by REPLAY's parent company, according to this 12/31/01 article:
*
[EDIT: A search here for "REPLAYTV" resulted in 55 patents found. A few more can be found searching for "SonicBlue".]*

_"*Sonicblue patents TV-to-computer tech*

Legal victory big for company, contains 50 claims

By MARC GRASER

HOLLYWOOD -- Sonicblue, the maker of the controversial ReplayTV 4000 digital video recorder, has won a patent for its technology that enables consumers to record television programming onto computer hard drives.

The Santa Clara, Calif.-based company said that the broad patent, issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, contains 50 claims covering the concept of using a program guide or other user-specified criteria to select TV shows for recording on a digital video recorder.

The patent also covers methodology that creates, names, prioritizes and manages recorded programs on a computer hard drive for the devices.

Mother of invention?

Sonicblue claimed itself a major victory in the digital video recorder war Monday with the new patent in hand, even saying that the patent "establishes that ReplayTV invented this core technology."

"This patent and other forthcoming ReplayTV patents will establish Sonicblue as the leading provider of digital video recording technology," said Ken Potashner, chairman and CEO, Sonicblue.

But Sonicblue isn't first.

The company's patent comes nearly seven months after rival TiVo won a patent for its own digital video recorder technology (Daily Variety, May 24).

Key advancements

That patent covers many of the key inventions associated with personal video recording, including the recording of one program while another is replayed; a method that allows viewers to pause, rewind or forward 'live" television programming; and formats to convert digital and analog signals.

Both companies are hoping to license their patents to electronics manufacturers for use in other devices. [...]"_

* Once these patents were filed, REPLAY sued TiVo over them, and TiVo countersued REPLAY over its patents. The upshot was this announcement in 2002:*
_
"Sonicblue and TiVo announced late on Friday that the two companies will dismiss their patent infringement claims against one another.

The two companies filed lawsuits against each other in the US District Court for the Northern District of California late last year and earlier this year. Both cases were pending.

Both suits were for infringements on patents dealing with capabilities associated with digital video recorders (DVRs).

"We believe our energies are better spent expanding the market for digital video recorders (DVRs) rather than fighting each other. Both sides believe in the merits of their respective positions, but the overall success of the DVR category is what is most important to the companies at this time," the two companies said in a joint statement.

Sonicblue and Tivo representatives were not available to comment on the settlement.

The competing companies each maintain a digital video recording service. Sonicblue also sells recorders under its ReplayTV brand.

The patent dispute developed after Sonicblue first filed suit in December of last year, a day after receiving a patent covering 50 claims for developing devices that can pause and play back television shows. TiVo in turn filed suit in January for a "multimedia time warping system" patent.

Both companies said they were looking to protect their intellectual property. [...]"_

/steve


----------



## BkwSoft (Oct 18, 2007)

The only reason ReplayTV and Tivo stopped the lawsuits against each other is they both ran out of money. Both companies were bleeding cash so bad that they couldn't continue to pay the lawyers.

The real interesting thing is DIRECTV's pockets are much deeper.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> Does anyone know the numbers? I wonder if the R15/HR20/HR21 subscriber counts are actually bigger than TiVo's entire portfolio of receivers at this point.


I would imagine that the DirecTV DVRs outnumber the Tivos by now. We know exactly how many DirecTivos are still in service, but we don't know the count for DirecTV. As of October 31, 2007, Tivo had 2,355,000 DirecTV DVRs in service. It's certainly not too much of a stretch to say that DirecTV has more than that. 40% of DirecTV's subscriber base has "advanced services" meaning DVR, HD, or both. Tivo DVRs only make up approximately 5% of all DirecTV receivers in service.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Steve said:


> "Both companies said they were looking to protect their intellectual property. [...]"


And it is probably going to turn out that their patents cancel each other out. All this fighting over analog technologies seems a waste at this point.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

harsh said:


> And it is probably going to turn out that their patents cancel each other out. All this fighting over analog technologies seems a waste at this point.


Actually, the patents seem "digital"enough to me. 

That being said, I don't understand much about on what basis patents are granted and I find it curious that the US Patent office granted Replay similar patents to TiVo re: the same basic technology, just months after the TiVo patents were granted.

I guess it could be because REPLAY developed them first and demontstrated "prior art". But then why were the TiVo patents recently upheld vs. Echostar? Or maybe just some were?

And if REPLAY was in play, why didn't TiVo buy them to consolidate the patents? Seems like a no-brainer from their standpoint. It's all very confusing to me. :lol: /steve


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

harsh said:


> And it is probably going to turn out that their patents cancel each other out. All this fighting over analog technologies seems a waste at this point.


"...fighting over _analog_ technologies..."

If it were only analog, tell me how TiVo was able to win their patent suit against Echostar?


----------



## Greg Bimson (May 5, 2003)

Steve said:


> I don't undertand much about how patents are granted and I find it curious that the US Patent office granted Replay similar patents to TiVo re: the same basic technology, just months after the TiVo patens were granted.


Because although they practically accomplish the same feature, the _process_ for creating a timeslip or a time warp is a bit different.

Besides, as was pointed out earlier, DirecTV, with the ReplayTV patent, could decide to go after TiVo once the current agreement is complete in 2010. Or, if there is a "cross-licensing" deal between ReplayTV and TiVo, then DirecTV has access to the TiVo patents without the need to license them from TiVo, as ReplayTV has already received a license of TiVo's patents.

Easy, huh? 

I think DirecTV will start going after other DVR manufacturers.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Greg Bimson said:


> Because although they practically accomplish the same feature, the _process_ for creating a timeslip or a time warp is a bit different. [...]
> Easy, huh?


It's a plausible explanation that fits the facts! Thx.  /steve


----------



## bafuerst (Feb 18, 2007)

I'm not sure if this has been said so if it has forgive my post. 

I don't get why DirecTV would buy Replay. 


First they go with Tivo and in my option (yes one I know is not shared by many people here) it was the best DVR ever made. Then they go with an in-house design which I admit I hated but have since come to live with but only because of HD content. Now they buy Replay, it makes no sense. What are they going to do come out with a new Replay DVR thinking that the Tivo lovers like me will drop another $300 per receiver to lease a new Replay box? I used Replay when it came out and to be honest I've gone through so many DVR's in the past 10 years I really don't remember if I liked it or not but I doubt it's any better than the HR20. 

Also if it was just to get patents I would think Liberty would buy Replay directly and leave DirecTV out of it.


----------



## Matt20V (Oct 5, 2006)

BkwSoft said:


> The only reason ReplayTV and Tivo stopped the lawsuits against each other is they both ran out of money. Both companies were bleeding cash so bad that they couldn't continue to pay the lawyers.
> 
> The real interesting thing is DIRECTV's pockets are much deeper.





> think DirecTV will start going after other DVR manufacturers.


Substitute Service Providers for DVR Manufacturers and I think this hits the proverbial nail on the head! But first, I have 2 perspectives on the sale, one good and one bad.

First as a current ReplayTV user- I was a very early adopter, had as many as 4 online but now down to 1 recording SD in the bedroom- I think this is good news. ReplayTV users have been living on borrowed time wondering when the shoe will drop and the guide service dies. From the press release it would seem the core business of collecting monthly fees is profitable, and D&M kept it. As Reden on AVSForum speculated, only a drop in users below critical mass would cause D&M to drop it. That will happen but now seems to be further in the future than I had thought. What DirecTV bought is rights to patents and a few CD-ROM's of source code and designs, nothing to do with the day-to-day business (exception is the ReplayPC sales and I can't imagine that is very high volume- my guess is it will go away).

But as a Dish Network HD-DVR customer, I think this is bad. I use Dish because I think their DVR is better than DirecTV's. Now that DTV will own the ReplayTV patent portfolio and has extended the license agreement with Tivo, I'm afraid they now have a critical mass of DVR patents and will start going after other DVR manufacturers for licensing. That means Dish as well as Comcast and other cable DVR providers will be beholden to DirecTV for license fees or at minumum need to keep funneling money to lawyers to defend lawsuits. Not good for anyone but DirecTV shareholders.

I really don't think there is any chance that DirecTV will crack open those CD-ROM's and adopt Replay's software and user interface. First, that would require additional investment by DirecTV which I'm sure would produce near zero incremental returns. I mean come on, how many new customers would that really bring them. They dumped Tivo and went with their own inferior design, and then invested in improving it. I can't imagine them taking 3 steps back after those 2 steps forward. There is a chance they might pick up a few features- with home networking and room-to-room sharing and recording conflict balancing I might just switch from Dish, so there is potentially some benefit to DTV users.

And in the bigger picture, history has proven that consumer electronics is driven by profits, not by what is a better user experience- and profits are driven by technology ownership. Just look at the Blu-Ray/ HD-DVD fiasco- whoever wins that war wins the annuity jackpot of on-going license fees from device manufacturers worth billions. And the winner of technology wars is usually the party with the deepest pockets- certainly in the satellite TV world that is DirecTV not Dish. Widening the view to include cable, those guys may have deeper pockets given their much larger subscriber base, but they'll need to dig deep as they are starting with a seriously disadvantaged patent position.

We used to think that the DVR war was between Replay and Tivo- and because Tivo won the war was over. But then WWII broke out between DirecTV and Tivo, and Tivo lost that one. In both cases a superior product lost to deeper pockets. Now I think WWIII is going to be between DirecTV and the cable operators. That one will leave Dish in the dust I'm afraid.

-Matt


----------



## JBernardK (Aug 16, 2006)

Do you guys honestly thing that D* bought Replay just so they could make money by suing other companies? Can you think of any precendent for something like that?


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

JBernardK said:


> Do you guys honestly thing that D* bought Replay just so they could make money by suing other companies? Can you think of any precendent for something like that?


No - probably not. And I also don't think we are going to see a DirectReplayTV DVR either. I think they get something that is not obvious to us at this time.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

JBernardK said:


> Do you guys honestly thing that D* bought Replay just so they could make money by suing other companies? Can you think of any precendent for something like that?


Back in the 80's, a company called Scitex acquired some RIT patents for digital color space management between scanners, monitors, printers and presses and made a pretty penny licensing them to companies like Adobe and Kodak.

Like TiVo, Scitex pioneered paradigm-shifting digital technology. In the 80's and 90's, to "Scitex" a photo was akin to "TiVo'ing" a show. Today, photos get "Photoshop'd", but AFAIK, Scitex's successors still derive revenue from every copy Adobe sells. /steve


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

JBernardK said:


> Do you guys honestly thing that D* bought Replay just so they could make money by suing other companies? Can you think of any precendent for something like that?


Anything is possible, but personally, I think it was more to protect their own investment rather than attack others. If I were DIRECTV, I would start working on licensing agreements with other vendors, but since it's not the core business, it would all be gravy anyway. I'd look at comparable services and use that as a gauge to come up with a "fair" price that gets me more than zero but not so much that people really want to fight it.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

A bit more on the story, FWIW. From Multichannel News. /steve

"_DirecTV director of public relations Robert Mercer said the acquisition of Replay TV's assets "will enable us to explore new services as well as the potential of Replay's [Internet Protocol] technology."

DirecTV considers ReplayTV's portfolio of patents and pending applications "to be a significant portfolio in the area of DVRs and advanced DVR features," according to Mercer. He added that DirecTV has not made any decisions concerning the integration of ReplayTV technology with its existing platform._"


----------



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

Being a former Replay DVR owner.. I feel its DVR software best on the market!.. but after four years.. two days before my Best Buy extened warrenty expired.. the modem {plugging in phone line left line 'open} and harddrive {system would not boot up} died.. Best Buy gave me the full purchase price refund.. not taking into account the rebate on the orignal pruchase.. used funds to help purchase my HD-TV....


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I doubt we'll ever see a relpayTV branded DirecTV reciever, but I'm sure we'll see ReplayTV functionality in our HR's at some point...

Has anyone been able to find out if anyone is already paying RelayTV licensing fees?

I'm thinking we will see fruits of this within 9 months... Any takers. And I am pretty sure there is no one that can stop DirecTV from implementing any feature into their own DVR's now, at least from a patent infringement argument. And that is a HUGE deal....

Anyone think DirecTV may have developed a MRV solution, then found out that it infringed on a ReplayTV patent, so they had to do something with that before they could implement MRV to keep from being sued?


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Anyone think DirecTV may have developed a MRV solution, then found out that it infringed on a ReplayTV patent, so they had to do something with that before they could implement MRV to keep from being sued?


I suppose that's possible, though REPLAY didn't sue Verizon for FiosTV's MRV solution.

My sense from Mr. Mercer's statement above is that the deal was more about the patents. He speaks effusively of them, but is vague about the "potential" of REPLAY's IP technology. He was also careful to point out that no decisions have been made about incorporating other REPLAY technology into existing DirecTV products. I see that as him trying to lower the public's expectations of the deal.

Just my read of it. YMMV. /steve


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

theratpatrol said:


> Although I agree with you on this one, I've always wondered how people can be reading the guide data while trying to watch that small screen in the upper left corner at the same time. Its like trying to watch a movie with subtitles.


Pretty easy when watching the right content. Talking head stuff is easy to do , as the visual is of minimal to no importance.

So it is prime stuff to watch while working on the guide or doing housekeeping. It was so refreshing to get away from my TiVos and not have to spend a good chunk of time in front of my tv not actually watching/listening to television.


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

> mitchelljd said:
> 
> 
> > It is interesting to see the commitment that Directv has to doing DVR on their own. In the face of strong pro-Tivo movement among customers, they continually have pushed in a different direction.
> ...


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Steve said:


> A bit more on the story, FWIW. From Multichannel News. /steve
> 
> "_DirecTV director of public relations Robert Mercer said the acquisition of Replay TV's assets "will enable us to explore new services as well as the potential of Replay's [Internet Protocol] technology."
> 
> DirecTV considers ReplayTV's portfolio of patents and pending applications "to be a significant portfolio in the area of DVRs and advanced DVR features," according to Mercer. He added that DirecTV has not made any decisions concerning the integration of ReplayTV technology with its existing platform._"


Sounds like this was an asset sale for the patent portfolio and other intellectual property. I wonder if they even took on any employees. Something also tells me this purchase came very cheap (comparatively speaking).


----------



## awdpaul (Nov 28, 2007)

marksman said:


> > I don't get this at all. I was an early (ie initial) adopter of TiVo. and I have had multiple DirecTivos since they have existed. I am not clamoring for underperforming DVRs for my satellite service.
> >
> > The only thing I even miss from my TiVo experience is the guide. Everything else is better for me with their own DVRs. Where do you get the impression that most of their customers are clamoring for TiVos?
> >
> ...


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> IAs of October 31, 2007, Tivo had 2,355,000 DirecTV DVRs in service.


Is that units or accounts with units? If it is accounts, then there will be some DirecTV/R15/HR2x overlap.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Herdfan said:


> Is that units or accounts with units? If it is accounts, then there will be some DirecTV/R15/HR2x overlap.


That's units. IIRC, DirecTV still accounts for about 50% of the 4+ million TiVo's that have been sold worldwide to date. When those are gone, TiVo's user base will be drastically smaller, unless they make it up on the COX/COMCAST side. /steve


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

IDRick said:


> Yikes, the second to the last paragraph is rather scary.... :eek2: Don't like the thought of a monoply... Competition is great for lower consumer pricing!


Patents are a monopoly


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Steve said:


> IIRC, DirecTV still accounts for about 50% of the 4+ million TiVo's that have been sold worldwide to date.


It's actually around 58%, but Tivo's ARPU on DirecTV DVRs is only 91 cents. So while that is still $2 million/month, it doesn't even come close to the almost $15.5 million/month they make off of their own subs.


----------



## hombresoto (Sep 10, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> Ummm ... where to begin?
> 
> Nightmare? Not even close. The HR20 today is very successful. There have already been major changes - and they started with the CE program and the close relationship DIRECTV has with the CE testers.
> 
> ...


From a technicians standpoint, I would have to say that the HR20 has been the most unreliable IRD directv has ever released, with the r15 running close behind. They were a nightmare at the start, but have gotten better. They still die on an all too regular basis. A customer today was on his 5th in 8 months. And no, there was nothing wrong with his system, perfectly aligned, cabled, and grounded. I see this too often to support the quote. I, on the other hand, have not had a problem with my hr20's, other than an occassional reboot, my r15 on the other hand, is a real pos. I have never seen a failure rate like that of the hr20, going back to the original rca receivers.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

hombresoto said:


> I have never seen a failure rate like that of the hr20, going back to the original rca receivers.


My HR20 and HR21 are actually the only DirecTV receivers I have ever had that haven't died on me. Every other receiver, including RCAs and Tivos, has had to be replaced.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

FWIW, I've got five HR's and one H, and I've had to replace one HR so far that was about 8 months old. I Had four HR10's and had to replace two in 3 years. Looks to me that they are both about equally reliable, so far.

Let's face it, if something on the motherboard's gonna go, it's probably going to happen in the first 30-60 days. After that, it will most likely be a drive, and D* has little control over the quality of those, except to select reputable manufacturers. /steve


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

kb7oeb said:


> Patents are a monopoly


I'd say patents are money makers more than monopoly makers.. They generally led to licensing deals, not monopolies. Patents are usually to do with a way to do something, and usually companies let others in on it because they realize that if they are the only ones making a product, its a lot harder to be successful if your the only one selling a kind of technology. But if everyone is making that product, you'll make lots on yours and a little on every unit sold, so you make more because more people use it, and it can become a cash cow for you if it becomes a true standard... i.e. cds and dvds. Why do you think HDDVD and BluRay are still fighting it out. It has nothing to do with what might offer the better solution for the consumer, its about who's going to make all the money in the long run...


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

Maybe they can use replayTV's USB Tuner to allow OTA on the HR21.
http://www.replaytv.com/


----------



## JonVig (Sep 23, 2007)

Who Cares!!! What does it mean to us?


----------



## jjcaudle (Sep 29, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> This is pretty definitive evidence that DirecTV has absolutely no plans of ever bringing Tivo back as a DVR option. I'd say that maybe this will get the Tivo zealots to stop with their wishful thinking, but that would require them to have the ability of rational thought.


Just like the DTV zealots that still try to justify the HR20. Cox Fairfax is far easier to deal with than DTV csrs ever were. And Directv can't give phone and high speed internet bundled. Tech support, and service calls are prompt instead of a week away like with Directv. And as a proud zealot, I still get TIVO HD. Snowstorms/Rain don't interrupt service

Proud Tivo Zealot.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

jjcaudle said:


> Just like the DTV zealots that still try to justify the HR20.


Nothing you mentioned had anything to do with the HR20. And I don't even understand why you're here, except to troll. You clearly don't like DirecTV, aren't a DirecTV customer, and don't want to be.


----------



## Goodwin (Jun 19, 2007)

thxultra said:


> This is great. I loved my replay tv. Too bad they can't bring back the commercial advance they once had  I think they got sued over it but it was the best dvr feature I have ever seen.


My Replay 5040 still works, and still has commercial advance. I know nothing about Tivo, except when I was researching what DVR to purchase several years ago, there were many reviews that indicated ReplayTV was superior.

I put in a much larger hard drive and have about 90 hours of movies, etc on it. Since I have two HR20s, I no longer record on it.

I agree with the many former Replay owners that it has many superior features compared to DTV, including remote booking, MRV, commercial skip, and superior CSR (at least in the past).

One of its best features is a program search that DTV doen't even come close to equaling. It has a large number of "zones" that can be selected for selective searching. Included are zones to find all 4 star, 3 1/2 star, 3 star, etc. rated movies that are scheduled to show. Using the 4 star zone, I have found and recorded many excellent old movies, even including a few silent movies made in the 1920's.

Let's hope DTV will incorporate some of Replay's superior features!


----------



## GP245 (Aug 17, 2006)

Wouldn't be surprised in TiVo goes into play - being gobbled up by Dish or a large cable MSO.

It sure would solve some of the law suits.

Direct has some new found credibility.

Can't wait for Malone and Company to take over and make some magic happen.

I can dream. Can't I?


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Goodwin said:


> Let's hope DTV will incorporate some of Replay's superior features!


I doubt it will happen. DirecTV doesn't need to compete with anyone in the DVR market...they get to dictate what plays on their system. They really have little financial incentive to make a great machine...cheap is more the goal.

Most of their customers won't know the difference and wouldn't pay more for a better system anyway. They don't really want to pay anything if you read these forums and then wonder why they're getting slapped together technology.

Down the road IPTV may allow competitors into the marketplace again...but I'm sure there's a lot of effort and money being spent to limit that from happening.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Ken S said:


> I doubt it will happen. DirecTV doesn't need to compete with anyone in the DVR market...they get to dictate what plays on their system. They really have little financial incentive to make a great machine...cheap is more the goal.


I don't know about that, while D* doesn't have to compete with selling an open DVR they do need a DVR that will compete with the DVR's that other service providers offer. If you look at comments from E* customers there's a number that say they would switch to D* if it wasn't for their DVR's not having all the features that the 622/722 does. IMHO D* needs to add some features that help differ their product from the others, and adding things like remote booking and MVR would help do that, both of these features Replay had in their DVR's years ago.


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

mitchelljd said:


> .......the HR20 and HR21 are finally more stable, though not completely......


Much as I liked my DirecTivo and still like the one we have in use on a non HD set, its no more stable than my HR20. Ive had to reboot (unplug) the DTivo a few times and I have had to reboot the HR20 a few times. In both cases during strong rainstorms or shortly after. One of the failings I see with the HR20 is it seems that if an extended outage occurs and it shuts down and powers back up later while the storm is still bad if one tuner cant catch a good signal than recording will be disabled requiring a red button reset.

Not perfect but then again my kids Vsmile has a reset button that needs occasional exercise too as does my pda, cell phone etc.

Perfect, no but then again what personal electronics ever makes it to completely stable nowadays.

I hope the D* uses some of the new features its getting but it will be at lease a year I'd be willing to bet before we know or see anything.


----------



## Ext 721 (Feb 26, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> The DVR concept can't change too much. All that really changes with the core DVR functions is just the way they work. And if you think back to your first Tivo, and then look at Tivo's DVRs today, what have they changed? Folders. Their subscribers have been asking for other things, but Tivo doesn't listen. A free space indicator? Hah! Longer buffers? Not a chance. How about simply being able to look at the guide while you're watching a recording? Nope, why would you ever want to do that?


some of the things that differentiate tivo from the HR-20 cause space indicators to be tricky, if not impossible....tivo uses the HD for unlimited space for non-program data, hence thumbs/suggestions data, nearly unlimited memory of shows watched, and nearly unlimited passes/to do list.

The HR uses dedicated space for all that, (I assume) thus the "to do" limit griped about, and lack of "thumbs"

a space indicator requires a segment of the disk relegate ONLY to recordings.

A wise man once said something about pleasing all the people all the time....what was that....?


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Ext 721 said:


> tivo uses the HD for unlimited space for non-program data, hence thumbs/suggestions data, nearly unlimited memory of shows watched, and nearly unlimited passes/to do list.


Do you realize how incredibly little space all of that information takes up? It's nothing. If you look at the most Tivo-crazed person out there, and add up all of the space that information takes up on their HD, I guarantee it will be less than 10MB. And that's being extremely generous.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> I don't know about that, while D* doesn't have to compete with selling an open DVR they do need a DVR that will compete with the DVR's that other service providers offer. If you look at comments from E* customers there's a number that say they would switch to D* if it wasn't for their DVR's not having all the features that the 622/722 does. IMHO D* needs to add some features that help differ their product from the others, and adding things like remote booking and MVR would help do that, both of these features Replay had in their DVR's years ago.


If that was really all that important they would have probably stayed with Tivo which had those features already. Don't get me wrong, I'd like those additions, but I think DirecTV's goal is to produce a DVR that is extremely inexpensive to make and gives them a few selling points (recording hours). Even reading this forum you'll see people more concerned about the color of the unit than about any advanced features.


----------



## kb7oeb (Jun 16, 2004)

inkahauts said:


> I'd say patents are money makers more than monopoly makers.. They generally led to licensing deals, not monopolies. Patents are usually to do with a way to do something, and usually companies let others in on it because they realize that if they are the only ones making a product, its a lot harder to be successful if your the only one selling a kind of technology. But if everyone is making that product, you'll make lots on yours and a little on every unit sold, so you make more because more people use it, and it can become a cash cow for you if it becomes a true standard... i.e. cds and dvds. Why do you think HDDVD and BluRay are still fighting it out. It has nothing to do with what might offer the better solution for the consumer, its about who's going to make all the money in the long run...


What you describe is a monopoly on an idea or invention, the patent holder is the one who decides who can use their patent if anyone. Patent holders usually license them but they don't have to.

A good example is poloroid who as far as I know never licensed their patents and stopped Kodak from selling an instant camera.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Just a question, i've seen a lot of people praising the Replay, I am not bashing it, but what about the "Ultimate TV DVRs". Were those any good? I never hear anyone saying to bring those back, but from what I've heard about them they seem pretty cool with the built in MSN....


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

dodge boy said:


> what about the "Ultimate TV DVRs". Were those any good?


The people that had them seem to defend them just as fiercely as the Tivo-tees. I never had one, but from what I have heard, they were actually better than the Tivos.


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> what about the "Ultimate TV DVRs". Were those any good?


Considering that they were the only DIRECTV DVR that featured Picture-in-Picture.

Slightly related, it also looks like we have a spin off, newteevee.com is asking (with DIRECTV's purchase of ReplayTV) why Echostar is not buying TiVo?

After all, it's an easy way to kill a lawsuit, buy the company that is sueing you.

Why the New EchoStar Should Buy TiVo
http://newteevee.com/2007/12/17/why-the-new-echostar-should-buy-tivo/


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> The people that had them seem to defend them just as fiercely as the Tivo-tees. I never had one, but from what I have heard, they were actually better than the Tivos.


so much better than tivo....

but that is one system that has no chance of coming back to us, so we gave up long ago. Frankly, the HR20 is on its way to being better.... I think to many people think tivo is the best for the same reason many people think bose makes the best sound systems, they are told so by the marketing department, and they are very good at what they want to accomplish... but that just isn't good enough for me... I hate being pigenoholed and controled, like tivo and bose does to its users...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Ratara said:


> Considering that they were the only DIRECTV DVR that featured Picture-in-Picture.


I have a 116" screen with one of my 3 HD DVR's and 55" on another, but have no interest in or use for picture in picture, so I can't image that anyone watching on a 42" screen really could either...

...maybe that's why the feature is still rare in most HDTV's as well - no practical need for it...


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I have a 116" screen with one of my 3 HD DVR's and 55" on another, but have no interest in or use for picture in picture, so I can't image that anyone watching on a 42" screen really could either...
> 
> ...maybe that's why the feature is still rare in most HDTV's as well - no practical need for it...


Its great for sports though, NFLST.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

theratpatrol said:



> Its great for sports though, NFLST.


I've had NFLST since it came out - never seen the need to watch any games in less than full screen.

That's what the interactive menu features are for - keep you abreast of what's going on in other games. I switch to other games during timeouts and commercials all the time. I have a second HDTV display available in the Home Theater with the 116" screen if I needed it, but quite frankly, never have used it for that purpose.

If you look at the HDTV's out there, less than 1 in 30 has PIP. It just has never been a high-demand feature, but I respect your desire to see everything going on in the games!


----------



## mikek (May 18, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I have a 116" screen with one of my 3 HD DVR's and 55" on another, but have no interest in or use for picture in picture, so I can't image that anyone watching on a 42" screen really could either...
> 
> ...maybe that's why the feature is still rare in most HDTV's as well - no practical need for it...


Huh? You watch one game on the main screen and another in a smaller screen. During commercials you switch screens. Seems practical.

-mk


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I've had NFLST since it came out - never seen the need to watch any games in less than full screen.
> 
> That's what the interactive menu features are for - keep you abreast of what's going on in other games. I switch to other games during timeouts and commercials all the time. I have a second HDTV display available in the Home Theater with the 116" screen if I needed it, but quite frankly, never have used it for that purpose.
> 
> If you look at the HDTV's out there, less than 1 in 30 has PIP. It just has never been a high-demand feature, but I respect your desire to see everything going on in the games!


True, but not all of the sports packs have interactive features.

Yeah my 4 year old RPTV has PIP, but my friends new Panasonic 50 inch plasma does not.

BTW, dang, 116" is huge. Is that a screen or a projector?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

It's a projector onto a screen.


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Tom Robertson said:


> It's a projector onto a screen.


Yeah thats what I figured.


----------



## Pink Fairy (Dec 28, 2006)

My 56' screen is big enough! I can't comprehend having one that size, even if it was projection. There honestly is not anywhere in our house that would work at the moment in our home.


----------



## Tyralak (Jan 24, 2004)

okietekkie said:


> I get to vote for who is replaytv??


The ones who invented the DVR.


----------



## ApK (Mar 6, 2006)

Tyralak said:


> The ones who invented the DVR.


I prefer Tivo, the ones who perfected it.


----------



## Kevin Dupuy (Nov 29, 2006)

dodge boy said:


> Just a question, i've seen a lot of people praising the Replay, I am not bashing it, but what about the "Ultimate TV DVRs". Were those any good? I never hear anyone saying to bring those back, but from what I've heard about them they seem pretty cool with the built in MSN....


I understood it as Microsoft backed out of the deal, but that was just me reading on the Internet.


----------



## bhelton71 (Mar 8, 2007)

Kevin Dupuy said:


> I understood it as Microsoft backed out of the deal, but that was just me reading on the Internet.


Microsoft TV isn't dead yet - Mediaroom is the latest incarnation. And in my opinion the most successful 'version' to date.

http://www.microsoft.com/tv/default.mspx


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

bhelton71 said:


> Microsoft TV isn't dead yet - Mediaroom is the latest incarnation. And in my opinion the most successful 'version' to date.
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/tv/default.mspx


The AT&T U-verse system uses Microsoft software on their DVR. It's a direct decendent of the DirecTV / Microsoft UltimateTV DVR (which was the best DVR in history in my opinion).


----------



## itguy05 (Oct 24, 2007)

> I understood it as Microsoft backed out of the deal, but that was just me reading on the Internet.


Typically if Microsoft can't dominate or monopolize an industry they give up. That's what happened to their DVR stuff. It's why you will never see an Office for Linux (although they do a Mac version), why IE for UNIX was discontinued, why they don't make much of their software for other platforms. With MS it's not about improving your computer, life, or whatever, it's about dominating every aspect of your life.

Yes, I know that it's in their IPTV stuff, but that is based on WinCE (a somewhat polished turd of Windows) and WMA and not really a descendent of the UltimateTV stuff.

I'd *NEVER* use any MS powered stuff - if DTV ever goes down this route, they will loose me as a customer. We as consumers just need to send them packing in everything else and we will have a much more reliable and better experience in our digital lives. Being in IT, I deal with MS all day and while I used to think they were the only way, gaining experience in other technologies (Linux, Mac) has shown me how poor Microsoft technologies are.

Sorry for derailing the thread - this is a passionate subject for me.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

ApK said:


> I prefer Tivo, the ones who [strike]perfected[/strike] *marketed* it *the best*.


Fixed.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

itguy05 said:


> Typically if Microsoft can't dominate or monopolize an industry they give up. That's what happened to their DVR stuff.


But they didn't give up on their DVR stuff. Not even close.


----------



## Tyralak (Jan 24, 2004)

ApK said:


> I prefer Tivo, the ones who perfected it.


That's a laugh. The Replay interface was far more intuitive and and elegant than the klunky, slow Tivo interface. It was also laid out much more logically, plus had features that took Tivo years to implement.


----------



## ApK (Mar 6, 2006)

Tyralak said:


> That's a laugh. The Replay interface was far more intuitive and and elegant than the klunky, slow Tivo interface. It was also laid out much more logically, plus had features that took Tivo years to implement.


You're entitled to your opinion of course, but the facts of which system survived, popularized DVRs with the largest audience , created and kept a large enthusiastic paying customer base, and made it's name synonymous with 'DVR', speak for themselves.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

ApK said:


> You're entitled to your opinion of course, but the facts of which system survived, popularized DVRs with the largest audience , created and kept a large enthusiastic paying customer base, and made it's name synonymous with 'DVR', speak for themselves.


Actually they don't speak for themselves. Tivo had the money and marketing, and that equates to sales and survival, period. They came to the plate on all their "technological breakthroughs and perfecdtions of capabilites" if you will, after replay had been showing the same featuers, perfecdted and running smoother than tivo. If the money behind tivo was put behind replay, everyone out there would be complaining about what features directv recievers didn't have that their replays did. The only reason they don't do it now is because of the almighty dollar. :nono2:

It is the exact same reason bose has survived. They are way overpriced and underperform against just about any seperates put together that cost 1/2 as much, but its bose that sells because of marketing and looks. It has nothing to do with quality.


----------



## hhh222 (Sep 20, 2004)

I had Replay and Tivo at the same time and preferred Tivo.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Sometimes, like with word processors in the "old" days of DOS, the system you learned first became your preferred one, and the one you measured all the others by.  /steve


----------



## dlm (Jan 3, 2008)

I fell madly in love with my ReplayTV almost the minute I got my first one....I loved how it operated, especially in light of how TIVO worked. The interface and setup of it always felt a lot more natural to me than TIVO.

I was sad to let it go when I moved to DirecTV to get HD last year....but I am hopeful this signals some melding of the ReplayTV software into DirecTV's equipment. I do like my HR20 much more than any TIVO I have ever used, but I liked my ReplayTV 4532 even more.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Steve said:


> Sometimes, like with word processors in the "old" days of DOS, the system you learned first became your preferred one, and the one you measured all the others by.  /steve


I agree. I also think that peoples preference between the two also has something to do with how people think. If I listed all the DVR's I've owned and used (Replay, UltimateTV, Tivo, HR20) the tivo will always come in last. To me it is not intuitive as the others, but to others it is more intuitive. Peoples minds and thought process work differently, and this makes a big difference as well.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

My coworker and her husband were Replay users and tried TiVo on my recommendation ... and they absolutely hated TiVo. Every day my coworker had a complaint about it, until they finally decided they had it with DIRECTV and went back to cable. 

Let me tell you ... I've never seen Replay in action, but from the way my coworker talked about it, there never was and never would be an equal to it ...

Hmm, now that I think about it, isn't that the way many of the TiVo fans sound?


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

I was a TiVo die-hard myself. Since I bought TiVo first, I never even tried Replay or Ultimate TV. Based on everyone's comments, tho, I wish I could have spent some time with both those alternate UI's. /steve


----------



## ApK (Mar 6, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> I agree. I also think that peoples preference between the two also has something to do with how people think. If I listed all the DVR's I've owned and used (Replay, UltimateTV, Tivo, HR20) the tivo will always come in last. To me it is not intuitive as the others, but to others it is more intuitive. Peoples minds and thought process work differently, and this makes a big difference as well.


I agree also. And that's far more reasonable (and far less insulting) than your previous stance of "what I like is obviously best and everyone else was just duped by marketing."

ApK


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Steve said:


> I was a TiVo die-hard myself. Since I bought TiVo first, I never even tried Replay or Ultimate TV. Based on everyone's comments, tho, I wish I could have spent some time with both those alternate UI's. /steve


I had a Dishplayer, which the Ultimate TV was the next generation of and it was a prtty nice system. Very intuitive and easy to use. In the early days it had its share of issues. (probably worse than the HR20 at introduction) but once they get the SW settled, it was quite the nice unit.


----------

