philips to stop making dvd recorders

[victoriabears]

http://www.dvd-recordable.org/Article3826.phtml

[edDV]

The US ATSC digital tuner requirement* change plus protection lawsuits by Hollywood, plus upcoming US election, plus dollar exchange rates, plus Euro apathy ... isn't their decision correct? Enjoy the unemployment Philips workers. Not your fault.

*no way to sell an S-VHS recorder with an ATSC tuner and expect a profit.

This is an example of misguided "social" policy removing jobs for the near poor.

[orsetto]

Oh, CRAP!!! Here we go again with runs on stores and eBay bidding wars. I suppose it was too good to last- the 3575 and 3576 are ridiculously cheap considering what they include and the economic pressures involved in US retail. Too bad- if Phillips is giving up even with Funai as partner, its a really bad omen. Can Pioneer be far behind?

Sadly I think DVD recorders are following the well-trod path of standalone CD audio recorders: nobody wants to pay for them, those who do will use their PC instead. Personally, I look for reasons to get AWAY from my computer: I'd kill for a decent CD recorder and I *love* my Pioneer DVD recorders. Guess I'll have to get a night job and stockpile a few more DVRs.

[edDV]

Oh, CRAP!!! Here we go again with runs on stores and eBay bidding wars. I suppose it was too good to last- the 3575 and 3576 are ridiculously cheap considering what they include and the economic pressures involved in US retail. Too bad- if Phillips is giving up even with Funai as partner, its a really bad omen. Can Pioneer be far behind?

Sadly I think DVD recorders are following the well-trod path of standalone CD audio recorders: nobody wants to pay for them, those who do will use their PC instead. Personally, I look for reasons to get AWAY from my computer: I'd kill for a decent CD recorder and I *love* my Pioneer DVD recorders. Guess I'll have to get a night job and stockpile a few more DVRs.

Huh? You represent a different market subset?

[raffie]

What sense would it make to invest in a technology thats on it's way out.

[bendixG15]

Try reading the link..
Philips is getting out because it thinks it can make more money elsewhere - period.

Here's a piece ..........
Philips has been outsourcing its television and electronic appliance divisions and, with an eye on an ageing population, investing increasingly in the health sector, the FD says. Philips managers say the company plans to become a world leader in the 'wellness' sector.

[PuzZLeR]

Looks like I have to stockpile a couple of units myself. I love my DVR and can't imagine a better alternative than a stand-alone unit, away from hogging the PC, that works night and day for me reliably that's tons better than VHS.

What sense would it make to invest in a technology thats on it's way out.

It's not a technology on its way out since VCR would be the alternative with nothing else in the horizon replacing a stand-alone television recorder/archiver.

It's a market that is on it's way out - a majority population that finds these units "too complicated".

[SmokieStover]

In my view, the 1996 Act requiring the transition to digital TV broadcasting, combined with broadcast flag hardware mandated by license agreements, and the expansion of Copywrite treaties and lawsuits, are clear evidence of a concerted effort to undo the VCR (the ability of the individual to record TV, regardless of the source, for their own personal use). Greedy bastards can't appreciate how that one simple device expanded the market place for existing and future copywrited content, which at prior times held value for only a very short time.

It isn't just DVD recorders. VCRs are no longer made either.

If the future of TV means I'm tied to a Mother-May-I set top Lock-Box, then TV and I shall part company.

[victoriabears]

All they have to do i place alevy on blank media and hardware and allow such recording and we would all be happy

[edDV]

In my view, the 1996 Act requiring the transition to digital TV broadcasting, combined with broadcast flag hardware mandated by license agreements, and the expansion of Copywrite treaties and lawsuits, are clear evidence of a concerted effort to undo the VCR (the ability of the individual to record TV, regardless of the source, for their own personal use). Greedy bastards can't appreciate how that one simple device expanded the market place for existing and future copywrited content, which at prior times held value for only a very short time.

It isn't just DVD recorders. VCRs are no longer made either.

If the future of TV means I'm tied to a Mother-May-I set top Lock-Box, then TV and I shall part company.

It goes further than that in the USA.

Last year it was mandated DVD/VCR recorders with analog tuners must have ATSC tuners as well. Or no tuner at all. Old stock could be sold with a warning sticker. This forced a redesign for all products. New DVD recorders come with ATSC and NTSC analog tuners or no tuner. The price difference is about 50% so sales of models with ATSC has been slow.

Beyond that, there is a longer term effort to close the analog hole. Soon new model cable boxes and DVR will lose their analog connectors forcing people to use HDMI with HDCP. Legacy TV sets will need to go SD or use older generation cable boxes. Over time these boxes will become scarce. The DVD recorder will be absorbed into the HDMI island becoming part of the DVR.

[FulciLives]

Surely someone will make a device that can take HDMI and output component or S-Video while defeating HDCP and other such nonsense.

No?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[edDV]

Surely someone will make a device that can take HDMI and output component or S-Video while defeating HDCP and other such nonsense.

No?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

Illegal at HD resolutions. It must follow HDCP rules.

HDCP defaults to SD* unless an encryption handshake is present with a valid device.


*720x480i but there was some announcement about 960x540p (quarter 1080p) for legacy HDTV sets.

[FulciLives]

Surely someone will make a device that can take HDMI and output component or S-Video while defeating HDCP and other such nonsense.

No?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

Illegal at HD resolutions. It must follow HDCP rules.

HDCP defaults to SD* unless an encryption handshake is present with a valid device.


*720x480i but there was some announcement about 960x540p (quarter 1080p) for legacy HDTV sets.

Illegal is a bit harsh don't you think ... 8)

I'm sure some enterprising company will make such a device for *cough* legacy use *cough*

If the end result is standard D1 resolution on a DVD then you could argue it is for legacy use.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

[budz]

Whoas! Watch all the wally worlds sell out on the remaining Philips dvd recorders.

[edDV]

Surely someone will make a device that can take HDMI and output component or S-Video while defeating HDCP and other such nonsense.

No?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

Illegal at HD resolutions. It must follow HDCP rules.

HDCP defaults to SD* unless an encryption handshake is present with a valid device.


*720x480i but there was some announcement about 960x540p (quarter 1080p) for legacy HDTV sets.

Illegal is a bit harsh don't you think ... 8)

I'm sure some enterprising company will make such a device for *cough* legacy use *cough*

If the end result is standard D1 resolution on a DVD then you could argue it is for legacy use.

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

The DMCA makes it illegal to break the HDCP handshake requirement to pass HD/AC3 content but it would be interesting to get an opinion on an HDMI to analog component SD video + stereo audio converter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act

[thecoalman]

All they have to do i place alevy on blank media and hardware and allow such recording and we would all be happy

Why the hell should I have to pay a "tax" if I want to record my own material? For example if I want to record my friends band on a standalone CD player part of the money for the recorder and the disc is going to the RIAA... screw them....

Additionally just like CD recorders they will always be expensive. When Joe Schmoe walks into Wally World ans sees a player/recorder for $300 sitting next to a player for $100 he's walking out with the player. They'll never sell enough units to make them profitable on a small markup. Manufacturers make profits on volume. If there wasn't a tax on the CD recorders undoubtedly every CD player on the market today would also be recorder.

[Chopmeister]

Not sure I agree with that. When VCRs were new, I recall that there were video recorders, and also video players that were considerably cheaper than the machines that coul;d record as well - I recall that part of the logic was that consumers mainly only wanted to play rental tapes, before the manufacturers realised that the main use would be for recording and timeshifting TV. The players disappeared quickly, and it was the recorders that sold, despite costing significantly more.

Couldn't the manufacturers comply with the US law the same way they dealt with hugely unpopular (at least in this country) regions on DVD players - disable the tuner in firmware so that it "has no tuner" and is compliant - then ensure that an easy hack "leaks" onto the internet to re-enable the tuner post-purchase?

[thecoalman]

Not sure I agree with that. When VCRs were new, I recall that there were video recorders, and also video players that were considerably cheaper than the machines that coul;d record as well

True but you didn't have a tax that was increasing the cost of the recorders either. The recorders at that point would have appeal and would cost a lot more to manufacture and could be sold at a premium price. The basic player eventually gets phased out because of three things. The cost associated with making a recorder drops. Tts simply cheaper to produce a single device than two devices. One manufacturer starts offering a recorder that is similarly priced to a just a player and the rest have to follow suit. If there is tax though the price of the recorder can never approach that of just the player.

In the case of the CD recorders it was few things that did it, the tax itself and the additional hardware. I believe the hardware itself was proprietary and had to be licensed from the RIAA or one its lackeys.... End result is a recorder cost a lot more than a player before its even out of the starting gate.

DV cams are a pretty good example of this, in Europe there was a tax on devices that could record. Same make and model sold in Europe would not have the DV pass through feature enabled as it would elsewhere to avoid the tax. Undoubtedly the only thing preventing this feature from working was probably the firmware.

[pchan]

Maybe it's time to setup a mail order tool kit for DVD recorders.

[victoriabears]

Why the hell should I have to pay a "tax" , well no one would deny that income to media industries and by default artists (actors/technicians) is falling because of our ability to get something without paying for it.

I have no problem the creative guys getting money its the mindless dumb asses who run the media companies that I object to.

So if the levy/tax was distributed to artists etc then that would help.

The thing that interests me is how do they know who is losing out !

[orsetto]

When VCRs were new, I recall that there were video recorders, and also video players that were considerably cheaper than the machines that coul;d record as well - (...)

Perhaps in NZ, but in the USA there was never a strong consumer market for VHS play-only units. The first Betamax and early VHS units were sold here primarily on the recording function: widely available pre-recorded rental tapes were a couple years in the future. Also with consumer videotape machines, it was not much cheaper to mfr play-only units since 80% of the hardware required for recording is required for playback, too: all they shaved off was the minimal expense of a tuner and record circuits. Since recorders sold like hotcakes, economies of scale made players no less expensive. Play-only decks for consumers became limited to specialty products for auto and boat use. In the "pro" market, it was different: since these units are held to a higher standard and the "pro" market was used to a large price difference between players and recorders, there were many different models of play-only and record decks with different features for different applications. The average Panasonic VHS industrial player cost 300-500% more than the average Panasonic consumer VHS recorder, and a "pro" VHS recorder easily could run ten times the cost of a consumer recorder.

Like audio CD, DVD began as a "play-only" format for pressed media and was redesigned significantly to make recording possible. DVD arrived well into a mature media-rental world, with playback much more important than recording to most users. The goal was to make the cheapest possible DVD players: recorders were always going to be more complex, more expensive, and less interesting to the average consumer. Since economies of scale never kicked in to make DVD recorders as cheap as players, recorders never got the traction in consumer households they needed to become commonplace. Yes, there are $50 recorders available at Wal*Mart as a loss leader to get shoppers in the door, but it isn't a mainstream product. There are no $50 Panasonic or Sony DVD recorders, and even if there were mfrs seem to be putting more features into the players anyway: thats where the action is. Nowadays, the people who like to record seem to be turning more and more to computers for full control of the process and more format options, once the discs are burned they like showing them on a big TV using a cheap but flexible player that can be replaced at low cost as new playback formats come along.

I find the standalone recorders much more my style, but then I'm 46 and more interested in straight cable or broadcast recording. Younger people seem more interested in converting downloaded files for TV playback. Sometimes the pace of change in technology usage patterns makes me feel ancient: in my head I'm 26 but nobody else knows...

[handyguy]

Well, I saw it at CC for $244, a drop from $299! Must be getting cheaper. Plus add one of those $40 off $199 coupons from Ebay & get it for $204!

At any rate, we can make our own dvd recorders on our computers.

[usually_quiet]

Couldn't the manufacturers comply with the US law the same way they dealt with hugely unpopular (at least in this country) regions on DVD players - disable the tuner in firmware so that it "has no tuner" and is compliant - then ensure that an easy hack "leaks" onto the internet to re-enable the tuner post-purchase?

Tuners are a physical device, not part of the firmware like region. I suppose they could be disabled, but assuming one could use a hack to re-enable them, an NTSC tuner is going to be of limited use after mid-February 2008. Aside from tuner regulations, that is another reason why they are being left out.

Except for people who live next to the Canadian border or the Mexican border, or those served mainly by low-powered stations not required to switch yet, there will be little over-the-air analog TV available. The digital-to-analog converter boxes being sold to get us through the transition contain a tuner. No need for another one to record using one of these. What is needed is an IR blaster.

Once the transition is completed next year, it won't be long before cable goes all-digital too. Cable companies are required to provide local broadcast stations in analog form until 2012, but can do that by providing a cable box that converts to analog if they wish.

They have a strong motivation to switch to all digital. Digital channels are encrypted to prevent theft, which the cableco's consider a huge problem. Getting rid of analog allows more HD channels, which customers pay extra to get. Getting rid of analog allows more standard definition digital channels to be carried, providing the opportunity to sell more packages that cutomers will pay extra to get. Cable boxes are needed for on-demand movies/TV shows, and pay-per-view events, which more people might take advantage of, if they already had a cable box. Cable internet and telephone service is also growing fast, and as it grows, more bandwitdth is taken up by that too.

They are already moving analog cable-only channels to digital packages, and offering deals on box rentals and digital service to those who switch over.

As of next month, I will have lost 10 cable-only channels in two years. (My provider said it was needed because we subcribers demanded more HD and broadband internet.) I expect to loose at least 6 more when broadcast TV switches over. That will be needed to make room for new channels that have to be carried as analog. Not hard to see where this is leading.

[victoriabears]

I can see that TV is far less an interesting medium of entertainment than in the UK (I left there in 2000 though) , and with all this control will come less interest, they are cutting their own throats.

[Seeker47]

Surely someone will make a device that can take HDMI and output component or S-Video while defeating HDCP and other such nonsense.

No?

- John "FulciLives" Coleman

Illegal at HD resolutions. It must follow HDCP rules.

HDCP defaults to SD* unless an encryption handshake is present with a valid device.

Illegal is a bit harsh don't you think ... 8)

I'm sure some enterprising company will make such a device for *cough* legacy use *cough*

Isn't DVD Fab illegal -- at least technically -- but the seller is located beyond the reach of the MPAA, or treaties on IP ? Software gets out over the internet, while the sale of hardware is much easier to stop. Still, I would be surprised if some vendor in some IP-scofflaw country does not harvest this opportunity, making a good solution available -- no matter how under the counter it has to go.

[DarrellS]

As of next month, I will have lost 10 cable-only channels in two years. (My provider said it was needed because we subcribers demanded more HD and broadband internet.) I expect to loose at least 6 more when broadcast TV switches over. That will be needed to make room for new channels that have to be carried as analog. Not hard to see where this is leading.

Exactly! Cox says that we don't have to do anything to keep receiving the programs we receive after February but they already force us to either pay for Digital Cable or loose the programming that they decide to move to Digital.

I believe in February that all the cable channels will be moved to Digital Cable and the only channels that we'll be able to view for $50 a month will be the local channels that they are forced to supply us. I was going to say give us but at $50 a month, that's no gift.

Everyone is taking more and more and the federal government does nothing to protect us. As a matter of fact, they do everything in their power to help the big corporations rip us off.

I've turned my thermostat up to 83*, turned my water heater down all the way and stopped using the dishwasher and I'm paying almost three times as much for electricity as I was in April (the rates didn't go up, they just say that my usage went up that much). I could turn my air conditioner completely off and I guarantee you my bill would go up even more. There are no protection agencies for the people anymore, they're all for huge corporations who keep them in office and keep their bank accounts full.

I don't see wages or disability checks increasing any.

[usually_quiet]

I can see that TV is far less an interesting medium of entertainment than in the UK (I left there in 2000 though) , and with all this control will come less interest, they are cutting their own throats.

I am not terribly happy about the changes either, in some respects, but we are getting more choices in programming. We just can't record it as we would like.

Truth to tell, if most programming becomes available on demand legally, for a reasonable price, a lot of people won't care to record it at all. Mostly it will be people using antennas, with no high-speed Internet service available to them, who will be interested in having the ability to record programming.

[thecoalman]

I have no problem the creative guys getting money its the mindless dumb asses who run the media companies that I object to.

So if the levy/tax was distributed to artists etc then that would help.

Disagree, I the consumer should not have to subsidize their income to purchase a device just because it *could* be used in a harmful way to their business. As for if they are actually losing money that is debatable. I think there is lot of factors there and at the most I'd suggest its the newer artists that are really losing out. One thing I rarely seen mentioned in these arguments is that if you have purchased a CD of your favorite arist you no longer have to purchase it again, I purchased most of music years ago and a majority of it was used CD's. I have perfect copies of all the music I want and they haven't seen a dime of my money in a decade.

The music world is changing, Radiohead was very successful selling their album online and I've no doubt many artists will follow their lead in the coming years.

[SmokieStover]

I can see that TV is far less an interesting medium of entertainment than in the UK (I left there in 2000 though) , and with all this control will come less interest, they are cutting their own throats.

I am not terribly happy about the changes either, in some respects, but we are getting more choices in programming. We just can't record it as we would like.

Truth to tell, if most programming becomes available on demand legally, for a reasonable price, a lot of people won't care to record it at all. Mostly it will be people using antennas, with no high-speed Internet service available to them, who will be interested in having the ability to record programming.

More programming choices are good only for the multi-channel service provider and the owners of the new channels. There are far too many choices now.

Commercial TV and its programming exist for the purpose of attracting an audience for advertisers. TV viewership is so fragmented that all the commercial channels now operate in Bulk Commercial Mode (with rare EXCEPTIONS that don't last long):find something, anything, to slip in between all that commercial time that's sold. The what doesn't really matter. The money is made wether anyone watches or not.

The only way I will ever watch live commercial TV, other than news and MLB, is when the commercial time is reduced to a max of 12 minutes per hour. The chances of that are slim to none.

[victoriabears]

Philips dvdr3576 now at best buy canada, $299.00 plus tax and shipping, my shipping to vancouver island was only $7 !