That’s my plan here. I already have antenna direct to 3 of the 4 TVs. Channel surfing will be done on the TV if we’re so inclined. Once we decide what we are watching we can switch to Tablo if we want to have the pause and stuff. We’re familiar with how streaming works now. Only really got the Roku a couple months ago. But streaming darn near anything, from any source, has some inherent startup delay.
I understand some people find the wait inconvenient. But… isn’t that the reality of streaming? If you buy a device whose function is to stream, then isn’t the instant gratification of immediate channel changes kind of a lot to ask? That’s kinda how I’m looking at it, but honestly we’re kinda new to streaming having been on satellite for many years, then cable. What little streaming we did before the Rokus was whatever streaming apps are on the TiVo like Prime, Netflix, Hulu… and you know what? The Tivo on live TV might be instant change, but every streaming app run on the TiVo has startup buffering just like any other streaming service.
So, buy a $100,000 Tesla today, drive it once, throw it away tomorrow… ok… I suppose I am wrong. Thanks for the enlightenment. I’ll admit, my Economics training might be too out of date. I suppose I’m out of touch with the new generation.
You are 100% correct that there is a startup time for streaming. When I tried out the Tablo last time, it would take upwards of 12+ seconds to start. My wife doesn’t have that kind of patience. Said it was annoying and went back to TiVo.
Now…we have been streaming a lot of other things for awhile…and if the startup time is under 10 seconds with the new quad, it might be bearable enough that she will be ok with it.
There will be no change with the “start up time” with the new Tablo QUAD. The Tablo creates a 10 second stream or buffer segment of h.264 video before it starts steaming to your playback device. This is real time, so you have to wait at least the 10 seconds. So unless the new QUAD can time travel into the future, it is what it is.
If that was a deal breaker last time, it will be again.
Tablo told me yesterday the fastest a channel can tune is 6 seconds depending on your setup. But can vary anywhere from 6-12. If I can get sub 10 second then it might be doable.
I wonder if that’s referring to changing to and from channels that have already been tuned recently. I can see the 3-5 seconds in those situations, maybe even a little less. But with my setup I’m generally seeing a consistent 10 when tuning to a “new” channel.
In this case, the Tesla has some market value so you can recoup most of the cost. What the Sunk Cost Fallacy is dealing with is situations where them funds cannot be recovered. If you read some of the examples in the link I provided it will help you understand the concept.
In this case that started the thread, the OP stated he spent $972 on Tivo service fees. That money is gone and cannot be recovered. So in looking to change his configuration the Sunk Cost Fallacy would state that $972 has no bearing going forward on making a rational choice. The fallacy would hold that continuing to pay service fees on a service you are no longer happy with just because you “invested” so much in fees in the past is an irrational choice.
Come on. That is not what we are talking about at all. If the OP was happy with Tivo this thread would not exist. The premise here is that he is debating about getting rid of Tivo for Tablo but is concerned about all the money already spent and unrecoverable on Tivo.
Debate is a good thing… you closed your door and ears early on… not recommended. To suggest that the amount invested on a relationship is a “throw away” simply might not be the case. And it does weigh in on our choices. And it’s not simple “fallacy”.
My point is that the Tivo ecosystem, like Apple or any other, gets more difficult to justify “getting out of” the further you get in. You can call it whatever… but it’s truth. Btw, the same argument can be made for Tablo and cord cutting in general. I know people that “change horses” every year (perhaps big believers in Sunk Cost, etc…), but at the end of the day, they waste a lot of money and sometimes even come full circle.
I’ve struggled with this type of situation for years.
My happiness increased immensely when I discovered that grief linked to the product outweighs the money spent on the product.
Even giving away an expensive product causing me grief made me happier than keeping it.
Best to get rid of phychological, and emotional baggage.
Life is way too short.
Sounds like relationships, don’t it?
And giving the product to someone who needs it increases happiness even more.
Actually, the original intent was to show the costs that can accrue. I can relate to Sunk Costs, but my emotional involvement at this point is not so much about being reluctant to abandon the “investment” as much as it is about stopping the bleeding
I retired about 5 years ago. My wife just retired last year. Our income is changing. We have a few months to go before her social security kicks in. We’re at a stage where we’re re-examining everything. Any money saved is more money for traveling and doing stuff.
Things like… ditching cable tv … saved us $1200 a year. And of course lots of smaller things.
