The New York Times published a front-page article about MythTV this past Sunday (1/30/05). MythTV is one of dozens of home-brew PVR (personal video recorder) websites - it basically is a DIY TiVo. However, the Times lumps it into a genus of technologies dedicated to helping people steal pay-per-view and premium television. The builders of these systems will tell you that the units are not for stealing content or skipping commercials, but then why build them - they're cheaper to buy.
Is it possible for a few gifted geeks to build a PVR that is functionally better than a TiVo or an SA8000 (Scientific Atlanta's cable set-top box with a PVR built it)? Of course it is. Should that worry the TV industry? No. Is it possible for the average, motivated DIY-guy to build one? Yes, but it's not practical. You still need to spend way more on the system than it's worth. Will it soon be possible to get one of these devices pre-built, cheap and easy? You bet! In fact, most of what makes the device dangerous to the TV industry is software, not hardware. Its only a matter of time before you can buy an off the shelf computer with a set-top form factor, download a Napster- or Limewire-like software package and live in a free TV world.
When? Very, very soon.
So the conversation has to turn to why. Why do people want free TV? Is is because TV is too expensive? Yes. Is it because the current commercial structure is so emotionally unsatisfying that people will do anything to skip commercials? Yes. Is it that programming mostly sucks and individuals who can take control of their viewing experiences will take control? Yes. In fact, is there any possible reason that someone who could change the way they consume television wouldn't change it? No.
So, the problem really isn't the technology. The problem is that the TV industry has been enjoying a technological monopoly for so long that it has forgotten how to serve its customers. How quickly will the industry learn that the past decades of research never, ever asked the most important question: If you could watch this show at your convenience, on any device, anywhere you are at anytime, would you still watch the show?
This particular media advancement is the true definition of Advanced Media. The solution for the television industry is explosively complicated in practice, but in principle it's easy: improve the customer experience and clarify the consumer value proposition to keep your customers.
Anyone who has ever created a promo for television will tell you that people don't watch networks, they watch shows. For the past 50 years or so a good promo contained three things. The show title, time and channel location. In a virtual world where time and location cease to exist, the show title simply might not be enough. And, with a generation of viewers getting ready to break out of television technology prison, the industry needs to understand that the desire for freedom is not a myth!
Posted by: John Sturrgeon | February 01, 2005 at 11:25 AM
Posted by: John Sturgeon | February 01, 2005 at 11:32 AM
Posted by: Paul Williamson | February 03, 2005 at 07:05 AM
Posted by: Amy Overmyer | February 03, 2005 at 10:39 AM
Your article sounds suspiciously like the hand-wringing I remember from the television industry back when consumer VCRs were introduced. At that time, it was okay for video professionals or dedicated hobbyists to be able to record content, but if these devices became cheap and readily available, the entire financial structure of the studios would collapse. Woe! Cue gnashing of teeth! Obviously, this didn't happen -- after the courts ruled that timeshifting content fell under fair use, the studios adapted, discovering that VCRs were really a new, profitable outlet for their content. My 2005 MythTV DVR is functionally no different than a 1976 Sony Betamax: I record shows that are on at inconvenient times to watch later, and maybe save shows for repeated personal viewing. Sure, I skip commercials when I watch my recordings, but that viewer behavior is nothing new.
Your main concern seems to be that DVR software promotes illegal distribution of copyrighted content over the Internet. This problem has nothing to do with MythTV, the ostenable subject of your article. The community of developers and users of MythTV are all very aware of copyright issues for the simple reason that it would only take a single lawsuit to completely shut down the project. Read the discussions that were triggered by the New York Times article on the mythtv-users mailing list at http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/mythtv/users/ to get a feel for what the actual makers and users of PVR software think of copyright violation and fair use.
You are correct when you state that the television industry must change its methods of delivering content to conform to consumer expectations. Until that day comes, many of us will continue to use tools like MythTV to bring the current content delivery methods in line with how we as consumers want that content to be brought to us.
Posted by: Paul Mietz Egli | February 03, 2005 at 01:54 PM
Most people running MythTv are doing so in *exactly* the same way as Tivo users (just not paying a monthly sub). They're not getting TV they wouldn't otherwise get, they're not typically downloading the programs off the net. MythTv is definitely a geek thing, but it is not fundamentally impractical.
The price comparison is between a MythTv box and a Tivo + subscription cost. The MythTv box is not actually more expensive at all, even to buy it all new. For those of us with a spare, outdated compouter, the cost is simply the cost of a TV card, about $150 max.
Posted by: james | February 03, 2005 at 05:28 PM
Posted by: Griffon | February 03, 2005 at 11:19 PM
Posted by: dan | March 23, 2005 at 08:36 AM