Written by Chris Albrecht
Posted Friday, September 19, 2008 at 9:47 AM PT

Cablevision Provides More Details on Network DVR

Hot on the heels of its legal victory in August, Cablevision is going full steam ahead with its plan to roll out a network DVR early next year, offering up a few more details about the service to the Associated Press.

Cablevison’s network DVR would offer 160 GB of storage (roughly the same as a standard DVR) and would cost $9.95 a month (the same as a current DVR service), according to Cablevision COO Tom Rutledge. And rather than a box that requires company installation, there will be a new screen with the DVR interface for users to record and play back their TV shows.

Rutledge has said that the network DVR will save the company $100 per customer, but Tuna Amobi, an analyst with Standard & Poor’s, predicted that no savings would be realized until 2009 or 2010. That makes sense, given the roll-out timeline, but why is Cablevision being so stingy with the storage? The company will be getting it in bulk and distributing it without using installed hardware, so why can’t pass along some of those savings to customers?

Meanwhile, Comcast and Time Warner are both interested in developing their own network DVRs, but there are legal and bandwidth concerns that remain. Though Cablevision won its copyright infringement case against the Hollywood studios, the courtroom wrangling could continue on appeal.

Network DVRs also require a ton of bandwidth, a particular problem for companies with analog systems. Network management is the reason Cox isn’t hopping on the network DVR bandwagon just yet.

Sphere Tweet This

Topic: Distribution, Hitlines

Comments (2)

They’re being stingy because they want to get you hooked before they offer the 250GB or Terabyte package at a higher rate. ;)

Dave Zatz — 10:01 AM on September 19, 2008 Reply
It’s amazing how all of the cable companies claim that online video is threatening to bring down the internet and that bandwidth hogs are taking more then their fair share, but then they have no problem delivering their own content at levels that are comparable to what the “bandwidth” hogs are using today. I think that the real reason they are so interested in capping our broadband usage is because that they want to make sure that you’re buying your video from your local monopoly instead of having to compete fairly like everyone else.

Davis Freeberg — 12:58 PM on September 19, 2008 Reply

Linkbacks (4)

[...] it seems like a win-win-win situation. Cable subscribers would have one less box in the home and get more storage, cable companies could save money by not distributing boxes to every home, and content owners could [...]

Is There Still a Need for Network DVRs? … — 9:12 AM on January 13, 2009
[...] slew of studios and TV networks including Paramount, Disney, CBS, and NBC were opposed the technology, which moves the recording of TV programs from a home-based set-top box to the cable company, [...]

Justice Dept. Sides with Cablevision Over… — 3:47 PM on May 29, 2009
[...] have been following this story pretty closely, and frankly, it is good to see an end to litigation around this technology. Many studios and TV networks such as Paramount, Disney, CBS and NBC are opposed to network DVRs. A [...]

Cablevision Network DVR Gets Supreme Court… — 12:11 PM on June 29, 2009
[...] they don’t have to deal with distribution and installation of boxes in the home. Last year, Cablevision said its remote storage DVR would offer 160 GB of storage, would cost customers $9.95 a month, and would [...]

Supremes Won’t Hear Cablevision Case… — 12:34 PM on June 29, 2009