begin oe_protect.scr
Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxx> espoused:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Tim Smith belched out this bit o' wisdom:
>
>> In article <h7ydnewxpqHwr5HYnZ2dnUVZ_qqdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Anyway, the TV follows Microsoft's typical path in its forays into new
>>> endeavors. Cobble together a piece of crap, get someone to buy it, then
>>> gradually fix it over the course of years until it is somewhat usable.
>>> Much like their course with Windows.
>>
>> Except that is not the path Microsoft has followed in this area. This
>> is the path they followed:
>>
>> 1. They started with something that was OK, but not as good as the
>> competition. (First version of Microsoft UltimateTV vs. Tivo). (I went
>> with UTV over Tivo, because UTV had PIP, which I thought I really
>> wanted).
>>
>> 2. They improved it until it matched the competition. (First update of
>> UTV after I got it fixed the things where it lagged Tivo, and put it
>> ahead in some areas).
>
> That's not what I read in the IEEE Computer magazine. The article noted
> it was extremely buggy at first.
>
>> Recently, I switched to Comcast, and the HD DVR they provided has some
>> Microsoft software in it. The guide software is Microsoft's. Not sure
>> about the "on demand" software and the actual DVR software.
>>
>> Feature-wise, this software is primitive. It is way behind UTV, and way
>> behind Tivo. It's one saving grace is that it is much much much faster
>> than the UTV software.
>
> The other saving grace is that it has Microsoft's weight behind it.
>
Why else would Tim use it?
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
In Minnesota they ask why all football fields in Iowa have artificial turf.
It's so the cheerleaders won't graze during the game.
|
|