Home Blogs Forums Dev Community Feedback

Jon's Digital Dreams

As a passionate advocate for technology design, home entertainment and elegant, functional experiences, I dream of a world where solutions like Windows Media Center can effortlessly collect, manage and display the things I want, when I want them, and how I want them. My digital dream is enabling technology to work for me, as a partner in helping me enjoy and be productive in my life. The focus point of this blog will be Windows Media Center, but I might tangent off from time-to-time to make broader points around elegant enabling technologies. Whenever something inspires or irks me enough to step up and share, you'll see them right here in Jon's Digital Dreams.

New CableCARD rules create new potential for Media Center

Back when Microsoft announced support for CableCARDs, there was widespread excitement around the commitment Microsoft had made to the future of Media Center and high-definition television (at least stateside; a bit less hi-def love has been doled out to our friends abroad).  Yet, when the news came out about the serious restrictions around CableCARD, there was a mixed reaction at best.  Yes, the restrictions were a big set back for the enthusiast market and for those who had already invested in hardware for existing Media Center installations. However, there were reasons for some optimism: 

1) Many (including myself) believed that in good time a hack/work-around would be available in short order so that anyone could easily attach a CableCARD tuner to any PC.  

2) Microsoft telegraphed that it was hard-as-nails to even get what they got past CableLabs, and to hold tight because they were going to keep plugging away to open things up.

The first reason eventually came true, but at the time I never would have guessed it would had taken over two years!   The second reason seemed like an empty promise until Microsoft unleashed a bombshell of openness on us this week when they announced the lifting of several serious restrictions on CableCARDs and Media Center, including: removing the OEM cable-ready requirement, removing DRM encryption for most digital content, and adding support for switched digital video (SDV). 

Now, finally, we have something to work with.  The removing of the OEM cable-ready requirement opens up potential for the platform like no new feature could.  For starters, starting with Windows 7 -- reportedly the most robust, fulfilling Media Center version yet -- anyone who has a PC today can turn their XBox 360 into a cable box killer tomorrow.

This opens up a few markets.  First, the simple win: there's a new market for all the current enthusiasts' friends and families, who previously wouldn't invest in a whole new PC and accessories to enjoy Media Center.  Starting with Win 7, many of these hold outs might now invest the extra $200-$400 and plug in a USB CableCARD or two to get rid of their $15/month Cable box.  True, the math isn't great (with a 12-month recoup timeframe for each CableCARD), but the additional benefits of switching to Media Center help bias the equation, not to mention the existing disdain out there for monthly cable bills.  Prior to Win 7, you really needed to be passionate to go digital cable with Media Center, but with the restrictions lifted, it'll be much easier to get the intrigued audience to jump aboard.  An intrigued market is larger than a passionate market, but it's by no means a huge market (I can hear Chris Lanier in my head right now saying that the enthusiasts' friends-and-family market would still be a drop in the proverbial bucket for a company the size of Microsoft -- which I completely agree with). 

The next market is a bit more interesting.  We'll have to see how Microsoft decides to play it, but in a few months, there will be millions of people with a Win7 PC in their homes.  Some of them will already have Xbox 360s, and some won't.  For customers who have both, Microsoft has a unique opportunity to connect their Win7 boxes with their Xbox's, which creates an interesting narrative for Microsoft to share with content providers:  "We've put in place a Microsoft-managed aggregation, delivery and home distribution platform for broadcast, cable TV, and internet content.  Would you like to learn more about aggregate viewing behaviors across mediums?  Or maybe you want to sponsor something in the stream we are enabling?  Let's have lunch."  For those who don't have Xbox 360s but do have Win7, Microsoft has an equally interesting opportunity to sell Xbox 360s to a new, non-gaming market through a Give Back Your Cable Box campaign where Microsoft can not only save customers money in monthly bills (compelling in this economy), but arm them with the ultimate home invasion technology that will not only replace their cable box, but give them a great entertainment device as well.  In this scenario, the "X" in the Xbox 360 finally starts to resonate -- it's clearly more than just games.  It can now be marketed as a set top box that reduces clutter, boxes and monthly fees (oh, and it's a kick-ass game machine that will Natal your pants off soon, too). 

[This is all presuming, by the way, that there will be no other competing extenders in the market.  I'm not entirely convinced of this, but for simplicity's sake, let's just assume that the Xbox 360 will be the only viable extender.  And keeping with this simplicity, let's also assume any issues we as enthusiasts have with Xbox 360s as extenders are not a serious problem for most consumers.]

However, attempting to grow the Media Center / Xbox 360 market into the CableDVR market will require Microsoft marketing Windows 7 Media Center as a consumer product.  This means a multi-faceted campaign that includes (tasteful) "within Win 7" promotions, television ads, and preparing slick promotional materials around Win 7 PC showrooms across the nation.  Imagine again this Give Back Your Cable Box campaign theme where if you buy a new Win 7 machine and a digital cable tuner, you get an Xbox 360 at 1/2 price.  Included in this package deal would be a big, fold-out instruction manual that would be no more complex than that of a TiVo. 

Can Microsoft pull off such a feat?  Well, this is where I have my doubts.  Microsoft is a software company first, not a consumer-experience company.  Yes, they are trying.  And, yes, they are making progress.  And I do think they will eventually come around with some good consumer experience competencies as an organization.  But they're just not there yet, and I'm not all that convinced that they're keen to invest in market research business models like consumer behavior tracking, even if they decide to push the compelling linkage of Win 7 and Xbox 360.   It would take a lot of vision to bring all this together (which I think is within Microsoft's grasp), but it would take a whole lot of non-engineering skills to implement a consumer-friendly roll-out, promotion, and support system along the lines of TiVo.  Unfortunately, I don't think Microsoft has enough TiVo DNA in it yet to really pull it off.  I hope I'm wrong.

But, hey, even if the grand-takeover-of-consumer-eyeballs might be out of reach, at least now I will be able to evangelize and sell-through new media center installations to a new set of friends and family.  Everyone who experiences my Media Center-powered home theater loves it.  Soon, I'll be able to honestly tell more people: "I have some good news; it's now easier and cheaper than ever to add this to your home, too."  

With these new digital cable restrictions lifted for consumers, Media Center is finally free to enable digital dreams for more people. 


Published Sep 12 2009, 04:20 PM by JonDeutsch
Filed under: ,

Comments

 

Chris - Moderator said:

Great post!  What is your opinion on the distribution channel that Ceton might go after?  This is a big piece that I don't think many people have thought about.  If the device is sold online only, it really just opened the marketplace for members of TGB and does nothing to create a larger market.

I have my doubts that a small company like Ceton will be able to get distribution in a Best Buy or alike (maybe a Fry's or Micro Center??).  Without distribution this really means nothing.  Maybe if/when Hauppauge does a tuner the distribution question will not be as big of a deal (although, the HD PVR isn't sold retail AFAIK).

And no, I don't think Microsoft will market this one bit.

September 12, 2009 3:29 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Hey Chris,

Ceton looks like a product innovator that is lacking the size and muscle to market and distribute to mainstream audiences.   However, their location indicates to me that they just may have some connections within Microsoft that might help them navigate the terrain a bit.  For instance, I could see relationships within MSFT aligning Ceton with their OEMs for some next gen Media Center PCs.

In terms of distribution and market presence and mindshare, I think the Hauppauge announcement is the biggy.  They might not be as innovative and tech-chique as Ceton, but if they can introduce their CableCard tuner via retail stores (which they already know how to do -- a huge plus), then store clerks may slowly get up-to-speed with the potential and begin to educate Win 7 customers.

Again, I think this all needs some nudging from Big-M!  Sales training, sales kits, in-store WMC kiosks... the standard things that most consumer product organizations do to educate consumers at the point of sale -- these are all needed if the needle is to be moved.

I really disagree with Charlie Owens' assessment that bundling WMC into an OS is the right way to approach this.  An OS is an OS for the PC.  WMC is an OS for your TV.   They're different OS's for different devices, for heaven's sake.  But we are where we are, and the bundling makes it confusing for sales clerks and customers to make sense of it all.   General purpose devices are great if their purpose is generally the same.   Not so with Win 7 and WMC.  

In conclusion, I see Ceton in the bundling market with OEMs, and I see Hauppauge as the Great White Hope for reframing a Win 7 PC as a no-monthly-fee replacement for your cable box.

Hmmm... now you got me thinking... WHAT IF Hauppauge gets into the extender business as well and sells a bundled extender + cablecard in Best Buy's and Fry's?  Hmmm....

September 12, 2009 4:06 PM
 

teddyboy16 said:

Brick and mortar retail is a whole other beast. It's one thing to sell it in a white box if you buy it online at Newegg, but people like to see a nice shiny box with lots of pretty pictures and eye catching graphics. You're competing for shelf space, and the higher in the shelf you are the more likely you'll be noticed by a customer.

You have to get people to understand what this thing is and what it can do for you. Cable is extremely pervasive in the US, and it's not going away anytime soon. If Ceton can get the point across, that you can take this thingy and stick it in your pc in the den, and remotely control and view content on an xbox360 in the living room people will be all over it.

This is really the only way that you can get access to premium cable content, but the hardware has to be set it and forget it. The ATI DCTs were first generation hardware with a lot of growing pains. We've learned a lot since they first were introduced. It looks like Ceton has done it's homework, but it remains to be seen how well they will perform once they are out in the wild.

Best Buy is a big box store with merchandise that is really very mainstream. They have to be able to present in such a way that Joe six pack can take this home, install it, call the cable company, and then sit back and enjoy premium content with minimal hassle.

I think they would stand a better chance with Fry's or Micro Center since they tend to carry merchandise that is more esoteric as well as mainstream.

September 12, 2009 4:07 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Teddyboy16,

You're obviously right-on regarding B&M retail vs. online.  White box is for enthusiasts... B&M is for Joe+ consumer.

I say Joe+ because Joe consumer really doesn't even have a Cable DVR yet.  Joe+ does.  So, there's a slightly better chance of conversions of current Joe+'s than the education of Joe the Plumbers.

This is why I'm the most bullish on Hauppauge -- their retail boxes are, well, retail-savvy.  Ceton is going to make the best technology, but Hauppauge is going to balance their investment between tech innovation and marketing savvy.   That marketing savvy is what's going to make it something understandable in the store isle.

This is why I start "hmmm'ing" when i think about Hauppauge getting into the extender game as well.  Honestly, Sony should be in the extender game -- not a networking or PCI board manufacturer -- but I'd take Hauppauge over Linksys any day for being the brand in front of the extender.  

Speaking of which, where is Sony?  They'd be the perfect brand to do the bundling needed to make this all come together.  How about a Sony package that includes their PC, OEM'd Ceton tuners, and Sony-designed extender in a single box?

September 12, 2009 4:21 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

Sony figured out long ago that their isn't a market for Media Center products.  They have been through several different generations of living room based PCs running Media Center (w/ CableCARD) and even the 200-disc DVD Changer from a few years back.

"WMC is an OS for your TV"

I'd highly disagree with that.  Media Center used to be about 10-foot, it isn't anymore.  Show me the last bit of marketing Microsoft did talking about Media Center as a 10-foot UI.  Hell, even at CEDIA they don't really come out and say the platform is for the living room.  Instead they make sure that Media Center is demoed on a desktop at an office setting with a mouse/keyboard.

September 12, 2009 4:30 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Hey Chris,

I think we agree, but disagree based on Microsoft's marketing-plan-of-the-day.   Yes, Microsoft is pushing TV-on-the-PC.  But that doesn't mean that it's true.  It just means what they want to be true.  There's a difference.

The reality is that what they've delivered to the public is a phenomenal OS for your TV.  The best.  Ever.   And here's the good news -- Microsoft is such a bad consumer marketing company that their own marketing plans might not have the effect on consumer mindsets that you might think.  As you know all too well -- we're the enthusiasts, so we have more "resolution" to all aspects of the environment (which includes me and my hype around the potential, but I'd argue also includes you in being too influenced by their marketing messages that have a virtual 1-mile radius).

Media Center IS a fantastic 10-foot interface (16-foot in my case, btw :)), whether Microsoft wants to market it that way or not.  And I'd argue that this DRM lifting really supports the 10-foot experience use-case.   I honestly don't see CableCard being a killer technology for those who want to use their laptops in their dorm rooms.

So, wouldn't you agree that the innovations at Microsoft are kind of counter to their marketing positioning du jour?

PS - I'd be jumping out of my skin if I saw them demo WMC on a PC with a keyboard and a mouse.  In fact, I might have screamed out "you lie!" :)

September 12, 2009 4:47 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

Your kind of assuming I base my opinions purely on their marketing, which isn't true.  I base on opinions on what I have seen over the past 6+ years watching Microsoft develop Media Center.  People often discount how much history matters.

Anyway, I hope you are right (as always), but I firmly believe the days of Microsoft paying attention to the 10-foot UI are over.  It might be the best UI in the world, but it doesn't make business sense to keep developing when no one outside of TGB really uses it as such.

September 12, 2009 5:12 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

BTW, has anyone checked out the banner at the top of this site lately?

September 12, 2009 5:17 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Hey Chris,

I agree - history matters.  Trajectory matters.  And nothing is more powerful than inertia.  That said, I'm not seeing how history's guide proves that TV-on-your-PC matters more than their marketing message.  Maybe you can blog the chronology of Media Center and share why you think this latest turn is going to stick?

And, your BTW is both poignant and unnerving.  Yes, I see the laptop with Media Center on it.  

However, I have to say, I was deeply annoyed back in 2006 when I saw 'softies at MSFT HQ demo'ing the as-yet-released Vista Media Center all over YouTube in a non-maximized window (i.e., not full screen) to demonstrate their pride how it's "just another app" in Vista and it could multitask!   Blech.  I chalked it up to Geeks Gone Wild... and not to the long-term vision of the Media Center success story.   So, how is this any different than today's messaging and TGB banner treatment?  It seems that some in MSFT have always had ideology around WMC-as-PC-app vs. WMC-as-TVOS.   Doesn't mean they're right.  Bob wasn't right. MSN wasn't right.  Vista wasn't right.  Microsoft is pragmatic if not innovative...  if TV-on-your-PC doesn't fly, they'll find another angle before dumping a big pet project that feels like a weapon against Apple (even though it's really not).  

Nobody I know who uses Media Center uses it as a Windows app.   Do you?  Does anyone?  This must be partially why I see this TV-on-your-PC drive as a marketing pipe dream for MSFT, and not a trend line.

I work in a publicly-traded, mid-sized company (about 1/4th the size of MSFT), and often the marketers are not in line with reality.  They're dreamers who have enough political power to frame their visions outwardly.  But it doesn't change reality.  Our customers do what our customers need with our solutions -- marketing messages be damned.   Needless to say these few marketing visionaries in my organization don't rank very high in my book (or our customers' books).  

September 12, 2009 5:45 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

Jon

Your concept for the platform seems to revolve around this basic concept.

1.  Media Center is an awesome 10-foot platform (agreed!)

2.  Microsoft should just market Media Center for this

3. Everyone wins, Media Center now rules the world

Several issues with this.  Among the top are that Media Center has never connected with any other Microsoft platforms (and likely never will).  Microsoft has never marketed Media Center with any mainstream presence (and likely never will).  Media Center has never been a success outside of TGB who actually use it for what we consider the "intended" use.  Truth is, Microsoft numbers show we are a very very small minority and the rest of the world uses it as a desktop application.  I don't use it this way, and you don't, but outside of TGB it seems to be a fact that everyone else who uses Media Center does so with a mouse and keyboard.

Given this, and despite the fact that Media Center is a kick ass 10-foot platform why in the world would Microsoft focus or market Media Center for use as a 10-foot application?  In fact, why would they continue to develop Media Center for such?

I'd love to see you write a post about this because you are eloquent with your writing.  The hard part is understanding that you are in the minority.  This is why so many people tend to disagree with what I say.  Everyone reads what I write and assumes I'm suggesting Microsoft make these changes.  Truth is, I'm taking the reality of the situation and writing about it.  I lost interest in proving feedback to Microsoft on what they need to do to make the platform successful.  They know exactly what all of us at TGB want and they know how to get there.  However, at the same time they could care less because they don't develop Media Center for us.

Write a post explaining why Microsoft should keep developing and (start) marketing Media Center as the best 10-foot product for the living room when all of the data points to people using it as the exact opposite.

September 12, 2009 6:01 PM
 

superswiss said:

It is puzzling where Microsoft is going with all this. TV on your PC just doesn't make sense in my opinion. Who watches TV on their PC? If I'm in front of my PC I rarely fire up Media Center. Only if I need to schedule a recording. I use applications better geared towards the 3-foot experience like Media Player, Live Photo Gallery, Picasa etc. I've never launched Media Center to look at my pictures when sitting in front of my PC for example. Why would I launch Media Center, when I can just open up the picture or video library in Windows Explorer and open up a file by double-clicking on it. On the PC itself, Media Center is reduced to a competitor to Media Player and one has to ask themselves why they need Media Center when they already have Media Player. The only thing different between Media Player and Media Center on the PC is that Media Center does TV, but then that brings me back to the original question. Who wants to watch TV on their PC?

September 12, 2009 6:05 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Hey Chris,

I will accept your challenge.  And, it will be a challenge.  

I do take a little issue with the level of glibness you ascribe to my worldview item #3, though.   That's obviously a caricaturization of my position.

I know you're just as much of an advocate as the rest of us, and that you're just trying to give us some tough love and bring us back to earth.   That's cool.  And frankly, I think your voice is doing more to drive the debate inside and outside the community than anyone else's right now.  

In the meantime, in response to some of your points:

I do not think integration with other aspects of MSFT's world is critical to WMC success.  As WMC stands right now is success for those who own it, esp. when you compare it to the viable alternatives.  For instance, it doesn't need Zune HD integration until TiVo supports iPod integration with digital cable content.   And even if it did integrate with the Zune -- talk about a niche-to-niche solution!   Better that WMC use open standards and open DRM to interface with anything and everything.  Plus, there *is* integration today -- WMC -> Xbox 360.   That's 2/3rd of eHome, right?

I would like to see the numbers of desktop vs. 10 foot WMC users.  I have a difficult time understanding the environment until I see the numbers, and more importantly, how the numbers are gathered.  I've seen too many market research reports lead managers to misplaced conclusions based on faulty presumptions and gaping holes in the analysis.   Does accidentally starting WMC from the start menu and then closing it in abject confusion count as a "desktop usage hit?"   Y'know, when someone visits my company's website and immediately leaves, we still count it as a visit, because our management prefers big numbers to justify further investment dollars.  Stats often do not represent reality one level beneath the surface.  Seriously, I would love to know more about the numbers.

And, stepping back to the larger question... what the heck is "success" for Media Center (no matter how it's used)?  Are there revenue targets?   OS SKU targets that people say are driven by WMC?  # of eyeballs tracked?  Does anyone know?  

I'm not sure I can even comment on the pros/cons of 10-foot vs. mouse&keys for MSFT unless I have a general understanding of what the heck drives MSFT these days to invest in WMC in the first place.   If laptop-watchin' is the new killer app, then why the heck invest so much time and energy in digital cable?  That's not likely what laptop watchers are watching -- they're watching YouTube, Hulu and other "small screen" content sources.    Y'know, snippets, best of's, clips sent via email, porn, etc.  We all know this.  Sure, it'd be great if I could use my lappy as an additional extender -- but I just don't see it as the primary use case for digital TV content consumption.  And I'm struggling to envision which large popular segment would.

Most everyone I know rents a DVR from the cable company -- and nobody I know complains that it's not available on their PC.   It's just not a missing piece.   Nothing in my media center or non-media center universe leads me to think that the growth opportunity for WMC is on the PC via mouse & keys.  Like superswiss says above, all WMC started out being was a 10-foot skin atop of Windows Media Player.  At the 2-foot level, it's quite redundant for everything but guide and TV content.  If TV and DVR is the killer app for the PC, then why not just bake that functionality into Windows Media Player, which already has 95% of the PC media-consumer eyeballs on it?

If this all made sense, I wouldn't argue.  The problem is -- it's not about me or us being the minority and not getting that we're the minority.  It's about the alternative just making no logical sense to me, and the empirical data doesn't help make the case either.   In other words, WMC via 10-feet might indeed never be a large enough market for a project as big as WMC (self-imposed or not), but it's terribly difficult for me to envision a real Media Center growth strategy hinged on the small screen vs. the big screen.  

I think Ben D. might be right when he says WMC is all about optimizing for "three screens."  This need not be an either/or situation.  The world is not binary.  Maybe there is a 16bit level of gradation to this conversation that is eluding us.   Maybe they grow the market by growing the # of situations its usable in.  

September 12, 2009 8:37 PM
 

sgtpokey said:

the state of debate can easily be summed up as follows.  If either of you think THIS summary is glib, it's no more glib than Chris saying "everyone happy with Cablecard news now will moan about how it's not enough in a few months time" or Jon saying... well... something :)  [COMMENT: Jon's posts are very verbose and I think that is in part to avoid the charge of oversimplification]

Chris' position is: "Microsoft has no interest in promoting the 10' experiece, the majority of people don't use the 10' experience."  If the 10' users are a tiny tiny minority, then Microsoft won't spend (and waste) money on that, hence the TV on PC movement.  10' footers, face reality Microsoft will not develop for you.

On the other hand, Jon's saying:  "That may be what they are saying, but it makes no sense.  TV on PC is a dumb, dumb model, that adds no limited incremental value to Microsoft or the end user".  Then Jon lays out ways that Microsoft might  monetize the 10' experience, making it worthwhile to Microsoft and the end user.

At this point I should note that  this is not a "with me or against me" debate.  The two positions can co-exist since one is explainging what Microsoft is saying (and attempting) while the other is saying what they SHOULD do (and are doing in spite of themselves).

The only thing new to this debate is the set of CableCard news we've all read about.

In light of those developments, what struck me as interesting is that Chris commented in one of his posts that the news supported the idea that 10' development was dead.

I'm not sure where he gets that interpretation. On the whole, all of the news, including the news of the CETON card, works best within the context of the 10', whole home experiance.

If the focus was 100% TV on PC, then the need for relaxed DRM, multi streaming, and even OEM cablecards is minor.  So why did a bunch of 3rd parties, Microsoft, and an entire ecosystem move to make that happen?  That tells me the 10' experience is still alive.

And yet, Microsoft IS saying that WMC is "TV on PC", whatever that means (I'm with Swiss, what the h*ck does that do for anyone?).  So yes, they'll come out with some internet content aggregation, something better than what they have currently.

But it certainly doesn't mean they've abandoned the 10' market.

Especially since I fail to see how they monetise "TV on PC".  They can't even run ads, since the content sites own that.

The only way for them to leverage their investment is to go BIG, perhaps inways that Jon is suggesting.  But the problem with that is Microsoft really is not making that happen from an organizational or marketing standpoint, citing the points that Chris, jon and various others have already made.

September 13, 2009 1:58 AM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

Jon:

“That's not likely what laptop watchers are watching -- they're watching YouTube, Hulu and other "small screen" content sources.”

You’re assuming TV on your PC means traditional broadcast TV in a small window, why?  “TV” goes far beyond broadcast.

I don’t have too many numbers to share.  The only numbers Microsoft has made public are from WinHEC last year.  Rundown is simple.  At the time there were 180 million Vista license.  Media Center had 7 millions monthly visits.  70% of usage was “TV.”  Microsoft then compared this to Hulu.com and ABC.com and attempted to show they have a higher unique minutes/visit then Hulu and ABC.

They basically ended with this

"The PC is becoming a “TV screen” where users seek to consume TV content whenever and wherever they choose."

Media Center is not built for three screens, unless your grouping it with the PC screen.  PC=Windows 7 (Media Center is a part of this).  TV=Xbox 360.  Mobile = Windows Phone.  That’s what I see clearly.  The number of people with a Media Center connected to a TV is incredibly small (basically those who frequent TGB).  Percentage of those who have an Xbox 360 connected to a TV is 100%.  Why even consider looking at Media Center for the TV in a 3 screens concept?

September 13, 2009 5:50 AM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

sgtpokey:

To answer your question about firmware updates and DRM, the answer is really simple.  These items were planned for release well over a year ago with the TV Pack.  The DRM changes were made by CableLabs, not Microsoft.  The additional of MOCUR to replace OCUR happened almost two years ago in the specs.  And as for opening CableCARD up, from Microsoft's perspective it could very well be because there are so few out there.  Remember, there are less than 400,000 CableCARDs out in the US for use with Media Center, TiVo, and other third party devices with CableCARD.  I think it would be pushing it to claim Media Center has more than 50k of those.

September 13, 2009 5:58 AM
 

DFox said:

My personal feeling is that the Media Center community as we know it today will pretty much remain the same in the near future. Microsoft has a great 10' product and as small as TGB population is, it exists. But I do agree though with Chris that any “TV screen” enhancements will first be geared for Xbox.

One thing Jon I think you underestimate is the technical prowess of “Joe,” and overestimate that of “Joe+.” I think there are plenty of Joes that have virtually zero understanding of home computing and are paying an extra few bucks a month to their cable company for a “Tivo” box (i.e. DVR). Then you have Joe+ that is comfortable with computers and understands he can get TV on the PC. So Joe+ says to their spouse, “honey, I picked up a TV tuner card on my way home from work at Best Buy. After I install it and the drivers, I can watch TV on the computer in the office.” But I don’t think Joe+ is that networking savvy, nor willing to invest in the time and money to expand that PC into a home media server and distribution system. And being that the marketing isn’t there that explains how you can watch premium cable content through your Xbox 360, I don’t think the Best Buy employees are going to be able to pitch it in the PC section when Joe+ picks up his tuner card. That’s a pretty big step from tuner card to home content streaming.

When it comes to “selling” Media Center to this demographic, we are pretty much talking about the TV portion. Joe+’s music is in iTunes synched with their iPods/iPhones. Their photos are not organized in Windows Live Photo Gallery. And even then some of their DVRs are running fairly impressive software provided through Verizon, AT&T, and others (those guys at least have WebGuide and multi-room functionality, what’s up with that?).

It’s the Joe++ (Joseph?) that already understands home computing, basic PC hardware and software, and basic networking that will benefit from the announced changes. What I meant by my first statement above that the community will remain the same is that this will grow the population within the existing demographic, but I don’t think will add many new ones. The people that have been following OCUR, ClearQAM, DRM, and PIDs are the ones excited about this or even understand this. For that matter, even understand what a CableCARD is to begin with. That’s not Joe+.

Imagine if Best Buy sold “PC-based DVR replacement bundles” as Media Center. It would include a copy of Windows 7, CableCARD tuners, an HDCP video card, a hard drive, Xbox 360(s), a wireless N router, wireless N access points, 100 meters of CAT6e cable, m4u to mp3 conversion software, and a link to this website.

...Or, Hulu/Netflix on the Xbox 360 and a Media Center/Natal UI for NXE 2.0.

September 13, 2009 11:22 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Chris:

CL: "You’re assuming TV on your PC means traditional broadcast TV in a small window, why?  “TV” goes far beyond broadcast."

Well that's an interesting point.  To me, TV = broadcast.  And if you took a poll, I'd venture a guess that this is a majority opinion, esp. if you look at Joe+ consumer.  

And, if this is the case (though I'm open to it not being the case if there's evidence to support), and what you say is how MSFT sees "TV" being defined, then it's a very odd position to take -- calling "TV" something that most people don't consider it to be.  I don't think YouTube, Hulu, Joost, MSN videos, et. al., are considered "TV" by most.  And if MSFT does (esp the MSN bit), then they're just going to continue to confuse people who are already confused.

Now, I know they call their MSN content "Internet TV (beta)" which I think is cool.  And I hear that it's better integrated into the guide in Win 7 (which is fantastic).  But just because they're making it usable and integrated doesn't mean it stands on its own as "TV."   I'm more comfortable with the notion of "TV" expanding to include internet sources, but I certainly would not be comfortable agreeing that it excludes broadcast/cable content.  Not at least for another 7-10 years, at a minimum.

CL: "Rundown is simple.  At the time there were 180 million Vista license.  Media Center had 7 millions monthly visits.  70% of usage was “TV.”  Microsoft then compared this to Hulu.com and ABC.com and attempted to show they have a higher unique minutes/visit then Hulu and ABC."

Oy.  So, this might very well be a situation of management making decisions on a poorly developed survey or analysis.  One thing that these numbers in no way indicate is how many Media Center users were 2-footers vs. 10-footers.  Or am I missing something?  How do they know that the 70% that were "TV" was watching from over their keyboards?   I'm so confused.  To me, these stats support continued investment in Media Center being a TV tuner....which the 10-foot interface is great for.

CL: "They basically ended with this: 'The PC is becoming a “TV screen” where users seek to consume TV content whenever and wherever they choose.'"

I can see how you would read into this being anti-10-foot.  But I'm not all that convinced that it actually indicates this.  It would seem to me that they're not even delineating 10 v. 2 foot operation.  They're just saying that the platform is becoming more TV-centric.  Maybe they had an 'ah-ha' moment because prior to that they thought it was all about the music library.  Seriously... do we know?  

CL: "Media Center is not built for three screens, unless your grouping it with the PC screen.  PC=Windows 7 (Media Center is a part of this).  TV=Xbox 360.  Mobile = Windows Phone.  That’s what I see clearly.  The number of people with a Media Center connected to a TV is incredibly small (basically those who frequent TGB).  Percentage of those who have an Xbox 360 connected to a TV is 100%.  Why even consider looking at Media Center for the TV in a 3 screens concept?"

So we kind of agree here, though I'd say 3-screens is conceptual:  Your TV, your PC, and your portable device.  So, less '3-screens' and more '3-use cases' for consuming content: On your couch (10 feet), On the road (laptop), and On the Move (portable).

I think WMC via your Xbox is still a 10-foot use case, so I think it just fits into that slot (as do the tiny % of people who do what I do and go direct on my primary TV).  Yes, I do think it'll be a lot easier to look at WMC as an at-home service for your Xbox than a stand-alone product that directly connects to your TV.   True - the Netflix approach damages this theory, and the shut-down of extenders doesn't bode well for the host/extender model.   So, again, I completely see how you're taking the data points and concluding the future.  However, what about the things we don't know about?  What if an extender 3.0 framework is in the works that will support Silverlight so that Netflix WILL work on extenders in 2010?  Wouldn't that change the assumptions once again?

I'd have to say that the OEM requirement lift news bodes well for those of us who see WMC having a future being our TV tuners.  Direct, Xbox, on a desktop screen, or whatever... there seems to be positive movement in this use-case.  And, with the removed content restrictions coming up, getting DVR content to a Zune or DAP seems more feasible now, too.  So, positive movement toward "3 screens" if you will...

September 14, 2009 11:55 AM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

TV really means TV shows, video, something to watch that includes moving pictures and sound.  People will only be confused if they don't attempt to market it right.  Look at the Netflix announcement on Windows Vista.  The press release was full of "Media Center is the best place to experience TV on your TV."  This is despite the fact Netflix doesn't hall into broadcast "TV".  The world is changing, and online is real.  The term TV will change, but I agree that Microsoft needs to really define what they mean by TV.

They didn't release numbers on 2-foot vs. 10-foot, but I'm sure they have a really idea.  The First Run Wizard can tell them all of that goodness.  Also, I never said Microsoft is looking to take out the PVR (eg. TV tuner), but you have to realize that you can have a TV tuner and not market or focus on a whole home PVR.

Why in the world would Microsoft add a layer of complexity in their marketing for Media Center over the Xbox 360 vs. just the Xbox Dashboard?  They have complete and total control of the NXE.  They have very limited control over Extender without adding a ton of resources and adding core functionality like Silverlight.  Plus, Xbox release schedule is bi-yearly.  Media Center release schedule is every 3 years (eg. every new version of Windows).  That brings up the last point, you suggesting that people go back to their PC and input the Extender PIN the first time they want to enjoy this functionality?  That cripples your market big time.  Again, why not deploy directly to the Xbox and leave Media Center out?

Netflix is not supported on Extender's for two reasons.  1 is technical (Silverlight).  The only is because the Xbox Dashboard supports it.  Go back and read my blog on this, it is a very real fact that the Extender will never get media deals that Microsoft scores on the Xbox.  Trust me, this was told to me under NDA but another site published the news.  I'm really not making assumptions about the issue.

I'm not even sure where I was with making a point, but there you go.  :)

September 14, 2009 12:11 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Dfox,

Interesting insights into Joe, Joe+ and Joe++/Joseph.   I need to read it a few more times to fully digest.   But one quick point -- you're absolutely right that Xbox makes more sense than the PC for the TV experience, but I still think there's a place for WMC for cable content.  If MSFT makes Xbox another AppleTV or another internet streaming device only, then they're in highly competitive waters.  If they offer a replacement for the Cable box, then that's a competitive differentiator.

September 14, 2009 1:47 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Chris,

I completely agree that the xbox is the natural media client/STB for MSFT.  That's not really at issue here, is it?  If you look at my post, I'm suggesting that Xbox is core to the future of WMC as a solution; period.

I think what you are saying is that MSFT plans on completely bypassing WMC as a host service for Xbox.   Is that what you're saying?   If you're saying that, then aren't you also saying that the future of home media for MSFT excludes digital cable content (i.e., 90% of all "TV" content?)?  

Do we all believe that Xbox dashboard is a "media-friendly" GUI (I don't)?   Does MSFT care if it is?  I would hope so if they see Xbox being a more broadly-utilized media hub.

September 14, 2009 2:21 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

I don't believe Microsoft has a huge interest in providing a whole home DVR at this point.  Maybe they have interest in providing software to allow you to record something on your PC and play it on your Xbox, but I think the lack of Media Center taking off has put the idea of a networked whole digital home solution off to the side.

Microsoft might be learning what companies like Apple already thought of.  A successful business plan for the digital home might not include a broadcast DVR as a main feature.  Maybe they see the web as a way to actually make a profit.  I'm doubting their ability to do this using a broadcast DVR at this point.

As for the Xbox Dashboard being a media friendly UI, to most it isn't.  That's not the point really.  The point is people are happy with it and most don't feel the need to use something like Media Center.  I wrote a post on this about 2-3 years.  Truth is, the interface may suck, but it is right there and more people use it right out of the box.  And yes, going forward I think most people would like to see the UI changed for better access to larger music collections.

September 14, 2009 2:40 PM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

Guys, I don't know why we keep talking about using the Xbox as the DVR.  I don't like this idea at all..  Who does?

I use my Xbox for gaming a LOT... and if it needs to be a DVR to record shows...  You're basically telling me I need to not play games while I record TV?  Nooooo thanks...

I know there's a lot of good reasons to push the "media center" environment on the xbox for all the reasons you guys have mentioned above and the tons of thoughtful posts I've read on TGB over the months....

I'd rather see MC go the "appliance" route before it went the Xbox route.  Maybe on a small, lower powered PC that's completely silent... blah blah....  Besides, look at the failure rates on 360's..  would you really want to depend on that as your device that records, stores, and aggregates all your content in the home?

You'd have to have two minimal if you're a gamer.... (one for gaming when the other is used as a DVR).... and you'd need two minimal if you watch a lot of TV...  one as backup for the other when its in its coffin getting fixed after it goes RRoD

September 14, 2009 2:46 PM
 

DFox said:

I think we might need to define the terms with regard to “TV” and “DVR.” FSUGrad1999, if we are talking about heavy lifting of decrypting cable streams and recording to hard drives, then I agree that’s probably taxing on the Xbox.

But in the end, I think we are talking about content (TV) and the way to access it (DVR). So Apple sees this as shows you purchase from iTunes. Xbox Microsoft sees this as movies and shows from Netflix and Zune Marketplace. And Media Center Microsoft sees this like Tivo, which is cable and broadcast (primarily right now). All of these examples above have revenue streams (no pun intended) except Media Center. What is the incentive to enhance this: to drive the purchase of Windows? I doubt it. The whole “selling” point of Media Center is that people already have it with their copy of Windows. Or to drive the purchase of Xboxes as Extenders? I doubt that too, except to this community.

The main advantage of cable right now is the content. Media Center leverages this through an elegant interface. But given the direction and progress of Internet content, what is their incentive from a business standpoint to market Media Center for the masses?

Like I said , I don’t see it going away because there is value in marketing it to us. And there is value in eye candy for the general consumer at the Microsoft store as a glorified Media Player and Netflix player on their laptops. But when it comes to getting enhancements for “TV” content, I think the Xbox will get it first, and possibly exclusively.

September 14, 2009 4:47 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

CL: "I don't believe Microsoft has a huge interest in providing a whole home DVR at this point.  Maybe they have interest in providing software to allow you to record something on your PC and play it on your Xbox, but I think the lack of Media Center taking off has put the idea of a networked whole digital home solution off to the side."

Well, that's certainly possible.  It makes sense from one perspective -- that Microsoft was never a media or digital aggregating type of company.  WMC was always a surprise child from Momma M.   Windows Media Player was always solid, but never inspiring... and seemed to be more about file types and codecs than experiencing media.

However, Microsoft is heavily investing in Zune the device and Zune the service.  And Xbox is obviously going beyond the game.  So, there are elements within MSFT/eHome that seem to indicate some interest in doing something in the home.  

Microsoft already has a whole-home DVR solution.  I'm not quite sure why they'd want to give up on something that -- although not yet profitable -- already has such a leg-up on all the competition.  To me, being ahead with that kind of infrastructure can only be a good thing.  All that's lacking is a killer idea to monetize it and market it.  

And, it's worth repeating again:  Media Center has been on a steady path of growth and maturity in very recent memory:

In 2007, Vista Media Center was a substantial upgrade from 2005MCE, including all-new GUI, CableCard support, a whole new extender spec, and a whole new development language.   This was a HUGE step forward.  And it was only 2 years ago.  That's "yesterday" for Microsoft!

In 2009, Win 7 Media Center launches with a substantially improved GUI (so I've read), free-for-all CableCard support, multi-tuner support, vastly improved guide infrastructure and experience, limited NetFlix support, and reduced DRM so that sharing TV content across PCs, Zunes and whatnot now seems feasible.  Oh, and let's not forget that PlayReady is now built-in, enabling the potential of Zune content extending to the WMC arena.

To me, these facts do not represent a dying platform, abandoned platform, nor a shift in strategy (marketing messages be damned).  No, they're not moving fast enough to be competitive for very much longer, but they still have a leg up in many, many ways.

I don't see the clear path to WMC oblivion, that's all.  And I'd argue that it's partially up to us -- the market -- to show Microsoft the way.   Let's get WMC into more homes, folks!

September 14, 2009 7:40 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Dfox,

DF:"The main advantage of cable right now is the content. Media Center leverages this through an elegant interface. But given the direction and progress of Internet content, what is their incentive from a business standpoint to market Media Center for the masses?"

As I've blogged before, I think WMC is way behind the curve on internet content aggregation.  It's frustrating.  But, it's years out before it becomes a mainstream content source.  Today, CableCard is really the only alternative to cable boxes.  And only WMC has it.  It'll be much easier to build in InternetTV "tuners" than for others to add digital cable tuners.

September 14, 2009 7:43 PM
 

DFox said:

Jon,

I know we hashed a lot of this discussion out in previous blogs and comments, and I think sgtpokey captured it pretty well by saying that one is what we want, and the other is speculating what will happen. I really want Media Center to be Microsoft’s strategic home media solution, but realistically I don’t think that will be the case. Keep in mind I am referring to general consumers and not enthusiasts and custom installers.

I agree that we are a little ways away from the content being predominantly Internet-based for the mainstream customer. Until then we will have the coolest DVRs on the block. And I agree that CableCARD is the only true alternative to current cable boxes. But what is the benefit to Microsoft from a business standpoint for people to use Media Center as a DVR (excluding this community)? Most people aren’t going to buy Windows for Media Center; they might to use Media Center because it’s free and comes with Windows. Sure, advertising and other marketing could help this by persuading those that were considering Tivo or Apple TV instead, but I don’t think that would translate into a significant impact on the sales of additional copies of Windows. I think the pitch is more along the lines of, “Did you know that with the purchase of your new Windows PC you can also replace your DVR?” instead of, “Did you know that for your new personal computer purchase you should choose Windows over Mac or Linux because it can also replace your DVR? (Disclaimer: DVR services are not recommended with the purchase of a laptop because if you take it with you then no one else in the house can watch TV.)”

And once Internet content starts to catch on, I don’t see the overall benefit for Microsoft to use the Media Center platform over Xbox gold membership to capitalize on this. Whereas I don’t see most people buying Windows just for Media Center, I do think it is feasible that people will eventually buy an Xbox and gold membership just to get Internet content (I actually know a few friends that did that just for streaming Netflix.) One way earns them virtually no extra money, and the other sells a console and earns an annual fee, in addition to the subscription content and one-off purchases.

Coincidentally there was an article on msnbc.com yesterday talking about getting Internet content into the living room and it those TVs “becoming the norm.” I posted about it, and my similar frustration as you about this, here:

thegreenbutton.com/.../78621.aspx

September 14, 2009 11:45 PM
 

Chris - Moderator said:

Jon

Your letting yourself get caught up in all of this.  Microsoft has no "leg up" on a DVR solution.  They have very few installations in comparison to the competition.  The competition is not SageTV or MythTV or any other PC-based PVR.  The competition is cable and satellite STBs.  Dish has a multi-room aspect.  Verizon has a multi-room aspect.  DIRECTV has it in beta.  AT&T has it (MediaRoom).  Sure, these might not be as robust as Media Center's but your missing the point if you think that matters.  The point is everyone above has their foot in the door with the customer, i.e., they provide the service/boxes/cards to make everything happen.  Microsoft has no leg up on them. You can have all the features in the world, but that doesn't mean you have all the sales.  Ferrari will never push as many units as Ford.

I highly agree with the what DFox said (most of it I have said somewhere on TGB as well).

I really enjoy your posts because of the perspective you bring.  You really good at looking at things with a business sense.  I see it slipping away though in favor of your desire to see Media Center succeed.  There are two different sides to this for all of us.  #1 is always that we love Media Center and want to see Microsoft complete the final 10% to make it the killer platform we want.  #2 is the hard part, and that is looking at the market as a whole and making assumptions and predictions based on it.  More and more the attitude seems to be "throw ads at it, that will work."  It might, but simple fact is Microsoft has other platforms that may be better to bring content (not necessarily broadcast TV) into the living room.

BTW, Zune doesn't support PlayReady unless something recently changed.

September 15, 2009 5:13 AM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Hey Chris,

CL: "Microsoft has no "leg up" on a DVR solution.  They have very few installations in comparison to the competition."

Not market-wise; I meant technology-fundamental-wise (digital cable), usability-wise (the GUI), and platform-wise (a "PC in every home").  These are real advantages that MSFT is not capitalizing on.  

I would never consider Sage or Myth competitors -- I think you're misreading me.  I have always maintained (read my post again) that the competition is cable boxes (esp. the ones with DVRs in them).  TiVo is competition in my mind from the "consumer-friendliness" of the packaging as well.  In both of these areas, WMC is far behind, and as of this moment, not competitive at all.   It's just that I was not talking about this in my prior comments.  

CL: "You really good at looking at things with a business sense.  I see it slipping away though in favor of your desire to see Media Center succeed."

Please understand the difference between my posts and my comments.  I feel that the comments area is for ad-hoc conversation and debate (and primarily playing devil's advocate to spark debate and discussion).   As a blogger, my rule is that my posts have more responsibility to maintain a certain level of editorial polish and intellectual rigor.   That's why they're usually a few days after the big news -- I take time to process, compile and come up with something of value.   So, just keep that in mind... in addition, Chris, I intentionally named the blog "Digital Dreams" because I want my message to be, overall, aspirational.  

If you want to see all the things I think are majorly screwed up and are destined to make WMC a failure, just search for my forum posts on TGB.  I'm much more prolific there, in part because there's so much to complain about, and I find it's much easier to *** and moan about problems (and there are a host of them) and to predict demise than the contrary.

September 15, 2009 5:51 AM
 

DFox said:

Chris - I am an avid reader of your blogs and posts, and it is the ones about the Xbox being a competitor to Media Center has helped shaped my thoughts about this.

It is pretty clear to me that the Xbox is the strategic direction for media in the living room. But with the release of the Zune HD and new Zune software however, I actually see the new competitor to Media Center- and that is Windows itself. Reading the press release:

www.zune.net/.../0915-zunelaunch.htm

“…combined with a new Zune video offering on Xbox LIVE coming later this fall, bring customers instant access to their favorite music and videos anywhere, across their mobile device, PC and TV.”

The interesting part here for me is that Microsoft already considers Zune content available on the PC screen. I read elsewhere that it is deeply integrated with Windows 7 like Jump Lists and preview. When Xbox got the Netflix plugin, we all patiently waited for it to come to the “PC” screen with the addition into Media Center. However, if Media Center is not their living room platform and just their PC platform, then what is the incentive to add something like Zune Marketplace content into some “proprietary” (ha!) application running in Windows? As a Windows technology fan, I want their applications and services to be as closely integrated into the operating system as possible instead of running through some “3rd party” (ha!) hosted process. As a Windows user I think they made the right choice by having robust Zune software to buy/rent and play videos and music. But I am disappointed as a Media Center fan.

I think the only saving chance for us Media Center users is when all of their applications and services converge on Silverlight, where that becomes the platform these applications run on instead of specifically Xbox, Zune, PC, or Windows Phone. Doing so would help complete the vision of Silverlight and would also provide business incentive for Microsoft to push the same services across any platform. How cool would that be to offer the Zune app on Tivo?

September 15, 2009 8:29 AM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

I think that there are too many hurdles for mass adoption of media center...  

To me one of the largest hurdles has no become much less of one (that is getting premium content into MC)...  With the loosening of CableCard restrictions, that hurdle is more of a speed bump now, although the tuners themselves are still too expensive.

IMO, one of the main hurdles besides cost is infrastructure.

Most people don't have Cat5 in their living rooms (where they would want to use media center, either by extender or from a PC hooked up directly to their TV)

This means they will probably go wireless.... and wireless is fine if you only have that one TV and your PC just needs internet access (to download the guide, updates, surf the web, etc, etc)

But if you want to EXTEND media center to any other rooms (which is one of the best selling points, IMO) then you have to run CAT5 from the living room to the other rooms.

What if the PC is in the office and you're recording back there....  okay, so you go the extender route....  Same problem...  no CAT5 in the living room and bedrooms, and now the model breaks.

The only thing that seems to get us around that is maybe those Netgear powerlink adapters that send ethernet signals over your home's existing power lines...  That's a way around it...  But there again, you have to spend more money for those....

For most common folks (Joe Plumber and Joe+) that's just too much trouble.  If the Xbox had a wireless (especially N) adapter built in, I think that would cut down on some of the infrastructure hurdle..  But again, most people don't have N routers, so they'd have to buy that.... and this would only be a solution for the folks who could hardwire their PC's somehow...  or use the powerlink adapters...

That's just too much trouble and extra stuff for most people...  The cable DVR is just $10/month....  Once you start comparing that to hardwiring everything ($$ and time), cableCard tuners ($$ and time) you've really narrowed down the market to just enthusiasts...

This thing needs to just work when people get home, unbox it, and plug it in...  All that extra work is more than what most people are willing to do...

My knees were bruised for days after running all my CAT5 under my house in the crawlspace... crimping the connectors....  Re-routing all my coax back to my office for the best signal, etc..  that's a whole lot of work for your avg Joe Plumber.... way too much for mainstream adoption.

September 15, 2009 10:20 AM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

I also realize they have devices that will allow you to run a LAN over your existing coax too... either way that you go....  powerline or coax ethernet adapters to avoid running Cat5, its going to cost you $$.

Lets don't forget that the cheapest extender that gives you the best experience and most likely to be supported further down the road (the xbox 360) is still $199 for the arcade...  And this doesn't include the component cable hookups if you don't have HDMI on your TV...

Its like every way you turn if you're a Joe plumber type, you've gotta spend money at every turn to get MC working in your home...  Most ppl don't have that kinda extra cash laying around for something that's primarily a luxury anyhow...  

Even IF they use an existing PC and add a cable card... and they already own in Xbox 360, there's still major hurdles they have to overcome to get it all working (multi-room)

September 15, 2009 10:33 AM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Conflicting strategies create conflicting points of view.

I think what's happening here is that there are a lot of facts, and depending on how you weigh fact A vs. fact B might lead you to varying conclusions.  

All my article asserts, however, is that the opening up of these technologies creates new potential.  The key word is potential, and I feel that notion is being missed in most of this debate in the comments area.  

Chris, you continue to follow the realpolitik path of "here's how things are going to be, so get ready to be disappointed, advocates."  Yet, with this lens, you risk down-weighting other data points that don't fully support this perspective.  Again, unless you have the inside track on their long-term strategy, there is only so much we can be sure of.  You see the "PC on your TV" as a strategic data point that supports your POV, and I see the purchasing of a forum of power users who love 10-footing and extending things as a data point that supports my POV.

It's all about the weight.  

And it's all due to the lack of a cohesive vision that allows us to tie these various facts together... and more importantly, to weigh them appropriately.  

September 15, 2009 10:56 AM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Just for the record...

I do not see "mass adoption" of media center, ever, in its current form & packaging.  They would need to set-top-box it to make it truly mainstream.  I just want to see it popular enough to continue to be invested in, improved and kept alive.   I hope this market ends up being the custom installation community, where firms like Escient live and breathe.   Yeah, it's not a huge market, but it's a huge mark-up market.  So, maybe there's hope in profit margins and elite client base where the eHome team can do some live pilots that will eventually filter down to Xbox for "the rest of 'em"

September 15, 2009 11:01 AM
 

DFox said:

Jon,

I do respect and appreciate your use of the term “potential,” and I without sounding glib I agree that adding any new feature will always create potential.

More specifically though in your initial post you mention the two markets this opens. The first I completely agree with; those are the ones that know what a CableCARD is. I am looking forward to visiting all of my friends’ and family’s homes to adjust their router’s flow control and uninstall QuickTime.

It’s the second market you mention where the disagreement seems to be. These are what you referred to as Joe+, and the discrepancy here is that you give them more technical skills and tenacity than I do. Also, I don’t see the incentive for Microsoft to target Media Center for that demographic from a business standpoint because it doesn’t bring in any additional revenue. They already paid for their copy of Windows. You also mention that it could be used as a way to market Xboxes for these Windows users. I think the Joe+ you speak of will end up paying for their gold membership anyway and have access to Netflix, Zune Marketplace, gaming, socializing, etc. Plus those services are much easier to market.

I am not discounting the potential by educating that second market. I just don’t see it happening without people like us to support, or even initiate those folks.

Again, I think the first market is very valuable and these new features do expand the Media Center adoption incrementally, but not in any significant way to compete against other living room solutions. There would need to be an overhaul like an appliance, set-top box software (Media Room?), embedded chipset in TVs, or Xbox add-on (i.e. not just Extender) for this to get adopted by the masses.

September 15, 2009 12:58 PM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

@DFox:

"I am looking forward to visiting all of my friends’ and family’s homes to adjust their router’s flow control and uninstall QuickTime."

Why are you doing this?  What did I miss?

September 15, 2009 1:14 PM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

I wonder if Microsoft could move to the "appliance" model....  But maybe do some type of rental plan like the CableCo's do?

Maybe partner up with one of the OEMs that are already selling cableCard enabled PC's...  work with them directly to make a more "applicance" type of HTPC and then encourage them to do a rental model...  or something like that...  to compete directly with the CableCo DVR's.  (I'm trying to come up with an idea that I haven't seen anyone throw out...)  I know this is highly unlikely....  Maybe if you sold them, you could price them in the Tivo price range... then work with stores to get them on shelves right next to the Tivos with a big ol' sign that says "No subscription fees"...  Heck, I dunno...  just a thought.

September 15, 2009 1:20 PM
 

sgtpokey said:

I think part of our community's problem is people are debating the same data points over and over again.

I think the only new and interesting discussion recently on TGB (besides the CEDIA news) for me is the CETON Q&A thread..   That has NEW info with relevance to many people,  [ except for the long suffering non cable-card dwelling parts of the world :(.  ]

Maybe we should let the data points play out as they may and start talking about the new and interesting stuff that we'll be able to actually play with in the near future.  

ps. heck even the article describing touch is interesting, completely useless for the 10' experience but good info to know.  Whole-home, integrated-wise --> if I ever set up my tablet pc's media center and I'm NOT using the remote, then I for one would play with it...  but to me touch is overrated (and this is coming from a tablet pc user) and just leaves too many smudges to clean.

September 15, 2009 1:21 PM
 

DFox said:

FSUGrad1999:

“Why are you doing this?  What did I miss?”

Flow control:

support.microsoft.com/.../929707

The QuickTime reference was regarding native .mov codecs in Windows 7. I was making light of the notion that I don't think even Joe+ is going to know how to configure or troubleshoot this platform.

September 15, 2009 2:30 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

Dfox,

That "second market" is the contentious one, isn't it?  And that's because it's the most exciting to think about.  And I mean exciting not for me, but for "me as a pretend leader within eHome."   If there were any big-time visionaries at eHome who were audacious enough to define an undefined market, there are opportunities at hand.  Steve Jobs has done this time and time again through multi-dimensional design-driven innovation.  

Yeah, it would be hard.  Yes, there are serious road blocks to success, but there are so many pieces already in place that it would appear a compelling risk to take for a company that has taken so many other risks with 0-to-negative ROIs attached to them.  

Microsoft started with "A PC in every home running Microsoft software" vision.  Media Center could offer the first, real natural extension to Bill Gates' vision.  As PCs become relegated and dis-interesting, Media Center puts Microsoft software at the hub of media consumption in the home (in concert with media consumption on-the-road or at the desktop).  

And here's some math (or maths for my European friends) questions for us to chew on:

1. What's the profit margin on Xbox hardware?  Nobody seems to know for sure, but it's probably at a loss, even though Xbox as a division is profitable (news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10318991-17.html).   Why does this matter?  Because we don't know if Xbox profitability comes from Live or from game royalties (or what percentage of each).  If Live is still a loss-leader for game royalties, then selling an Xbox + Live for home media consumption primarily is not a viable business model for MSFT in and of itself.   The question is... is Xbox + Live profitable?  And, Live is a great service for MSFT on many, many levels, but it's yet to be proven out that people will buy Live just for NetFlix and content consumption en masse.  We only know Live sells for gamers.  Correct?

2. For all the talk of WMC being a step-ford child in terms of updates, the XBox 360 hardware remains quite a problem.  It's the #1 most unreliable console (or any STB?) in the industry (community.winsupersite.com/.../latest-xbox-360-reliability-study-industry-worst.aspx).  Also, the software is getting some amazing updates (and Naral is insane), but despite all of this, it's still a game machine.  And the efforts of that box are likely going to continue to be game-centric.  If this were not the case, then wouldn't you think the music library function would be beefier by now?   How much effort is really being put into Xbox to be the next Media Center?  

It's easier to market extensions to Xbox, yes.  But what we don't yet know (or do we?) that these "easier" marketing techniques will yield business results.  Just because XBox is a no-brainer hub for media doesn't mean the majority of Xbox owners care to see it that way, or are interested in a multi-function gaming device.   Or do we?  I'm not tracking the stats on Xbox behaviors.  I know that everyone I know who has an Xbox uses it for gaming and has no idea it does anything else.  Just sayin'... might have similar issues no matter what device we're looking to infiltrate the home with.

What I'm advocating for is market leadership vs. market followship.  Leaders don't look at stats, they look at trends in an innovative fashion so that new offerings are introduced that might not have been expressly asked for.  Again, Steve Jobs is the poster-boy for pushing for things that make sense that nobody expressly asked for.

September 16, 2009 7:02 AM
 

FSUGrad1999 said:

@DFox:

Oh I guess I never ran into that..  Thanks for the link tho

September 16, 2009 7:43 AM
 

egoforth said:

From an outsider's perspective (I'm new to TGB in a since so I guess I can say that) it seems that for the past year or so the providers have been looking for the easiest (or maybe cheapest/most profitable) way to bring a multi-room DVR to their customers.  Some have chosen to focus on bringing it to TVs, some to PCs, some to more settop boxes.  But none of them are meeting my need, and that is bringing the content in HD.

For me the first to bring a multi-room HD DVR solution wins!  With the recent news from CEDIA Media Center is once again my closest option.  If all goes right in the next six months or so I will be dropping Dish and my ViP722 DVR and switching back to Comcast and installing a Ceton tuner and a media center extender in my bedroom.  --Don’t get me wrong, I’d rather have a card capable of recording four Dish channels.-- Now if someone (come on Toshiba!) comes out with a blu-ray player that is also an extender then the planets must truly be in alignment.

Now for the hard part.  For my wife it has to be as easy as a TV and a remote.  And her impression of Media Center so far is that you always have to keep the keyboard and mouse close by just in case.  If Microsoft can make the multi-room HD DVR experience as easy for her as the Dish 722 then I’m all set.

Then from there, the enthusiast side of me can start digging into managing my ripped blu-rays and music on my home server, setting the lights, monitoring the network cameras, setting the alarm, and controlling the thermostats all from my laptop in the office.

Other wish list items:

* Move WMC to WHS (Home Server) where the multi-room DVR needs to be

* Softsled – with all of the tuners in one PC I need to be able to watch live TV on the other PCs.

September 18, 2009 5:13 PM
 

johnhardyiv said:

@egoforth, take a look at moxi.com.  Multi-room solution w/ mate in HD.

September 18, 2009 5:30 PM
 

egoforth said:

@johnhardyiv, Impressive but for me I need the ability to access live tv in each room.  Multiple MOXI DVRs is an option but starts to get expensive.  Thanks for bringing it to my attention though.  I don't know how in all my reading I had missed that as an option.

Still, it just goes to show that the race is on to bring the best multi-room solution.

September 18, 2009 6:00 PM
 

egoforth said:

My last comment about live TV to every room reminds me of one reason that I like extenders as a solution.  When you've done as much climbing around in insulation as I have trying to run cables from one part of the house to another, you realize that running a good ethernet connection is a lot easier that running coax, composite, or hdmi.  (And then again, 802.11n is ever easier)

September 18, 2009 6:06 PM
 

JonDeutsch said:

egoforth,

Media Center does not require a keyboard or a mouse, ever.  I run my WMC full-screen on my TV, and people think it's a super-duper set-top-box.   Sure, every once in a while you need to break out to install something new, but that's not "using" it... that's "configuring" it.   So, your wife will be fine to use it no problem.  You will need a wireless keyboard/mouse to mess with it.

September 18, 2009 6:12 PM


Terms of Service | Privacy Statement | Code of Conduct | About