This sudden decision does make me feel a bit like this:
Or perhaps they played their “coup fourre” Card.
Boy, I fly off to London yesterday, and I miss all this drama.
Here is my take. While not being to add units to your subscription is a big change, at least we can still replace units for free. This is still better than the Tivo model of subscriptions tied to each device.
What no one has talked about is the change to the Cloud DVR pricing. I used it for quite a few months, and it worked as well as a hard drive, though commercial skip could not be used. I just don’t see any scenario where a user would pay a monthly fee to use it. A hard drive pays for itself in less than a year.
That is a fair point, hard drives are so cheap these days and if commercial skip doesn’t work with the Cloud DVR you can bet no one will pay for the service when an HDD gets them commercial skip already included in their subscription.
Isn’t commercial skip an extra fee as well when implemented? It’s not going to be free since it requires so many extra resources.
The blog post didn’t say anything about charging a separate fee for com skip did it?
I would never expect them to offer free cloud storage though. That storage (and more importantly, bandwidth), costs them money. How would you expect them to offer that for free for any amount of time?
I think that is what they are running into on the commercial skip. Their implementation of it is using more resources than they anticipated. Probably need a way to offset some of these additional costs. People would be just as upset if that feature cost money versus the change they made with the subscription model (likely even more upset).
lol, ok, that was more than 15 minutes
Yeah, I was thinking about that last night too. In response to what though?
The only reasonable scenario is that if someone bought 1 lifetime subscription, purchased 10 Tablo’s, added them to his account, and then sold them with lifetime subscription. So going forward the person can no longer do that (problem fixed). But there was no need to change the terms of the paid lifetime subscription for existing customers.
And I 100% don’t buy “our software doesn’t support this” (or whatever Tablo said). For a company that makes software for a living, that’s a poor excuse.
Changes to any new subscription to make more money? Check. No problems here. Don’t think anyone is upset here. Out of all subscription costs, probably where they anticipate most of their future subscription revenue will come from.
Changes to existing subscriptions to make more money? Pisses people off, and is likely a very small percentage of potential new revenue. Also insures people who already have lifetime subscriptions, a lots of them won’t be buying another Tablo (see Facebook comments for proof/source), so lost revenue on the hardware front.
Look back at the first post in the beta thread…
I agree with this part 100%.
And Leonard Cohen…don’t forget Leonard Cohen!
They should have made this announcement for new subscribers effective immediately, and give current subs a month to get an additional box if they felt they would need one. I understand they might need more revenue, but this could have been done with more warning.
I’m really happy with my Tablos and glad that I recently got the two units that I wanted set up before this happened. Sometimes in life, you just luck out! lol
Information released in blog post and Face Book are more press release and consumer marketing terminology. Not necessarily facts… not inaccurate - they just want to provide the most enjoyable experience available.
“overall number” is not a fact, it’s a vague reference. “We debated … just wasn’t possible” What debated facts made it impossible?
Yep I was waiting for the new Tablo QUAD to supplement my 5 year old OG Tablo 2 tuner, guess now I won’t be doing that until they stop supporting the old devices.
They are not going to release hard numbers outside the company, they’re in business and competing against other OTA DVR manufacturers. That’s as close to facts as we’re going to get.
This isn’t as straight-forward as communications corps would have us believe. You have a data transmission cable, weather it’s idle or transmitting full capitally doen’t change the cost of the infrastructure. (of course it’s not exactly that clear cut) It limits the overall amount of data - users can access. It’s US corporations not wanting to invest to increase capacity.
Wouldn’t that be the people running Nuvyyo? Who came up with the idea in the first place?
Terms of Service are explicit, carefully wording to avoid implications. Clearly states they have the right to modify …whenever
A. They added that to their TOS later on, if you continue reading, you’ll see the one most people agreed to didn’t even have that clause in it.
II. If I add a statement in the TOS that isn’t… “legal”, it doesn’t make it enforceable. That’s why a lot places add a severability clause.
3. We see how well changing the TOS for something you paid for worked for ATT and other cell providers who tried to take away unlimited data, retroactively, for customers who already paid for it. And I bet ATT’s TOS is MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCH stronger than Tablo’s.
Your point is flat out wrong.
ETA – so if they add a clause hidden in the TOS stating that if you ever used the Tablo lifetime guide data in your life, you now owe them your left arm, $100k and your firstborn. Does that make it legal? Enforceable? Buuuuuuut – “Terms of Service are explicit, carefully wording to avoid implications. Clearly states they have the right to modify …whenever”. Sorry, that’s not how contract law works.