<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Everything Always &#8220;On-Demand&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590</link>
	<description>Nielsen TV Show Ratings, Data and More</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:43:57 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Robert Seidman</title>
		<link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590#comment-14987</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Seidman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:44:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tvbythenumbers.com/?p=4590#comment-14987</guid>
		<description>From a technical perspective, having it work differently than the way on-demand works on the backend doesn&#039;t make any sense.  Why record it 25,000 times, when you can record it once and make it available to everyone.  How it will be rolled out, presented to the customers may be different, but technically this will put the full workings of &quot;on-demand in place&quot;.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It&#039;s interesting that this was a reversal on appeal. Brian writes that it&#039;s unclear whether the case will be appealed.  I don&#039;t know what recourse they have, but I think it&#039;s very clear that if the networks have any recourse whatsoever to delay the decision or reverse it back in their favor, they will avail themselves to it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From a technical perspective, having it work differently than the way on-demand works on the backend doesn&#39;t make any sense.  Why record it 25,000 times, when you can record it once and make it available to everyone.  How it will be rolled out, presented to the customers may be different, but technically this will put the full workings of &#8220;on-demand in place&#8221;.</p>
<p>It&#39;s interesting that this was a reversal on appeal. Brian writes that it&#39;s unclear whether the case will be appealed.  I don&#39;t know what recourse they have, but I think it&#39;s very clear that if the networks have any recourse whatsoever to delay the decision or reverse it back in their favor, they will avail themselves to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Holly</title>
		<link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590#comment-14986</link>
		<dc:creator>Holly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:16:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tvbythenumbers.com/?p=4590#comment-14986</guid>
		<description>OK, so your point is that this could lead to all shows being available &quot;On Demand&quot; so you wouldn&#039;t have to choose to record something, it would just all be there. I get it now, thanks ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, so your point is that this could lead to all shows being available &#8220;On Demand&#8221; so you wouldn&#39;t have to choose to record something, it would just all be there. I get it now, thanks <img src='http://tvbythenumbers.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert Seidman</title>
		<link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590#comment-14985</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert Seidman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tvbythenumbers.com/?p=4590#comment-14985</guid>
		<description>I think what you&#039;re missing Holly, is the long view. Or rather *my* long view. This may be the first step in the direction of complete on-demand access for some period of time to any content you&#039;re subscribed to.  It will especially be the broadcast networks who bemoan this at first.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Just offsite vs. onsite is no particular advantage for the customer if everything works exactly the same and you have to pick what shows to record, season pass, etc. though even that seemingly would allow more flexibility. you could conceivably record 5 shows airing at 10pm without the need to have a box that supports multiple tuners.  But again, I&#039;m looking at it as something that more than inches us to everything on-demand. On Demand works great (minus the lousy UI to navigate programs).  But while it offers a lot of content on-demand, it is still only a tiny subset of all programs available to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think what you&#39;re missing Holly, is the long view. Or rather *my* long view. This may be the first step in the direction of complete on-demand access for some period of time to any content you&#39;re subscribed to.  It will especially be the broadcast networks who bemoan this at first.</p>
<p>Just offsite vs. onsite is no particular advantage for the customer if everything works exactly the same and you have to pick what shows to record, season pass, etc. though even that seemingly would allow more flexibility. you could conceivably record 5 shows airing at 10pm without the need to have a box that supports multiple tuners.  But again, I&#39;m looking at it as something that more than inches us to everything on-demand. On Demand works great (minus the lousy UI to navigate programs).  But while it offers a lot of content on-demand, it is still only a tiny subset of all programs available to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Holly</title>
		<link>http://tvbythenumbers.com/2008/08/04/everything-always-on-demand/4590#comment-14984</link>
		<dc:creator>Holly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 2008 19:40:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tvbythenumbers.com/?p=4590#comment-14984</guid>
		<description>So...using a network DVR is kind of like working off a server instead of saving things to your own hard drive, right? I&#039;m not questioning the ruling (which just seems to make sense), but I&#039;m not sure I get what is so great about network DVRs. Maybe I&#039;ve just worked with too many bad servers, but it seems like this would set users up for a lot of problems. Right now if there is a glitch or a hardware problem, it affects one person. If there is a glitch in a network DVR, it will affect everyone. I&#039;m missing the advantage here...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So&#8230;using a network DVR is kind of like working off a server instead of saving things to your own hard drive, right? I&#39;m not questioning the ruling (which just seems to make sense), but I&#39;m not sure I get what is so great about network DVRs. Maybe I&#39;ve just worked with too many bad servers, but it seems like this would set users up for a lot of problems. Right now if there is a glitch or a hardware problem, it affects one person. If there is a glitch in a network DVR, it will affect everyone. I&#39;m missing the advantage here&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
