CVR to local storage

[PiquetPK]

I'd like to request that the Arlo Q Plus CVR be stored locally rather than the cloud.  ISP's are placing bandwidth caps on most of their services now and I can see CVR to the cloud for a bunch of cameras as a problem.  I know that you can record to a micro SD card, but this only records motion and sound events, not CVR.  Additionally, according to the support site, there is no way to view the SD cards remotely.  You have to pull them from the camera and plug them into a PC.

[Johnny51714]

I understand the business case behind this but it is a serious flaw in the long-term model.  

Forcing users to buy a subscription for CVR after paying a premium for your product is a slap in the face to a lot of us (and a deciding factor for a lot of returns and no buys, as seen in your forums). 

As so many have pointed out, ISPs are throttling or charging users who use too much data so uploading multiple streams to your cloud storage 24/7 is not only expensive through you guys ( and unnecessary since local storage is easily available) it will affect streaming of other services used through the internet (Netflix, Hulu, gaming, etc.).

I suspect you will have lots of people who would sign up for your cloud CVR service even if local storage was available because most people are not tech savvy enough or just don't want to hassle with external drives or NAS.  But the rest of us would now have MORE of an incentive to buy more Arlo cameras and refer Arlo to colleagues, clients and friends/family if local storage was an option. 

Cost and Internet performance that can be avoided is not a very wise marketing tactic.

But what do I know, I'm just a Data Analyst/Business Intelligence Developer that has worked for some small companies known as Citi, Experian, and Disney. haha

[mloder]

I recently got Arlo’s email regarding the new Arlo Smart system. After reading that email I have determined that I am done with this system and more importantly this company. I will be returning my $899 Arlo Pro 2 five-camera system this weekend. From the beginning I was disappointed that you could not utilize Arlo’s continuous video recordings (CRV) capability without spending $99 per year for a subscription, even if you only wanted to store your recordings locally. I looked past this and figured that’s just how they budgeted funding for additional research and development, but the fact that the Arlo Smart subscription, which should undoubtedly be a free upgrade, is going to cost another $10 a month is an unashamed slap to their customer’s face.

This new subscription adds on things that should already be included with your initial purchase, like sending a snap picture of what triggered your alert as well as a better motion detection system. Don’t get me wrong, the Arlo Pro 2 is a fantastic system. It is wireless, pretty much ready out of the box, and has decent video quality, but it is clear to me that NetGear is not interested in taking care of their customers, no matter how much they pay. I highly recommend that before purchasing this system, you weigh the pros and cons and know exactly what you are paying for. This way you don’t waste your hard earned dollars on a system/company that does not take care of you and is only interested in how they can get more money from their loyal customers.

[huynhtomd]

I'd love to this feature added to Arlo.

[Woodsey32]

There should be an option to record locally with CVR instead of using bandwidth to the cloud. I would be willing to pay per month for the CVR feature, but it must have local storage instead of cloud. The cameras are a premium price and work well, but as a consumer, they are not providing the best option for video storage.

[crabbag]

I just bought the Arlo Pro2 5 camera system for big a chunch of money.  But I will return it for sure since I can't do CVR to a local USB drive.  What a disappointment!!!

[SuperAWE]

This is really a deal breaker the way CVR is currently implemented.  Arlo has so much potential but so many little misses like this that just add up to an overall failure.

CVR only to cloud

As stated above it uses up bandwidth to upload and then to view.

CVR playback from cloud only with no download option

Having the ability to only view the CVR recording, via the cloud,  with no option to download or snippet out pieces of the video without a 3rd party tool is ridiculous.

[AODfan]

Good thing I read this thread, I was about to throw down on an Alro Pro 2 5-pk, if we cannot locally record(CVR) without increasing other data bills then what is the point.  Looks like I will being going to a competitor.

[Kliptic]

I just bought the Arlo Pro 2 system with 4 cameras and seeing the lack of local CVR recording makes me want to return it. This feature has been asked for years ago and still no updates from Arlo? 

I was about to recommend this product to my friend as well but with the lack of this feature, as well as all the other add-on features that should come standard on an expensive system like this but are monthly extras...I  just don't see myself or many others recommending this product.

You'll still get those who want the cloud service and willing to pay monthly even if you enable local cvr and screenshots of activity. It's a terrible business model to hold clients hostage like this. 

[nrnfms]

Please add this functionality. This is clearly not a technical limitation, but rather a business decision. While I understand the reasoning for pushing the Cloud CVR service, for as expensive as this camera system is, users should have the option to store CVR locally if they choose.

[comanbo]

any chance of implementing this anytime soon?