Equipment

[curt8403]

Would you support Directv choosing to provide only one type of Rcvr?

[dodge boy]

It would have to be able to have the DVR and HD capablities turned on and off based on customer requirements, so sure, also it is no secret D* wants to move this way....

[kevinturcotte]

That's the plan eventually anyway. Technically they'll be 2-a main house server, and clients.

[Stuart Sweet]

What do you mean, cutting all support for all but the following:
D10,D11,D12
H20,H21,H23
R15,R16,R22
HR20,HR21,HR22, HR21Pro

or are you saying only support:
D12,H23,R16,R22,HR22

or are you saying that everyone gets an HR40 with certain options turned off in software?

What are you saying?

[dodge boy]

That's the plan eventually anyway. Technically they'll be 2-a main house server, and clients.

I thought the server would be the PC card....

[krock918316]

Doesn't matter to me. However DirecTV sees fit that my TV's get a signal is fine.

[curt8403]

What do you mean, cutting all support for all but the following:
D10,D11,D12
H20,H21,H23
R15,R16,R22
HR20,HR21,HR22, HR21Pro

or are you saying only support:
D12,H23,R16,R22,HR22

or something else?

I mean, All new and replacement equipment would be HD DVRs, those who did not want HD would not have the HD access added, those who did not want to record would not have the DVR service added.

[dodge boy]

What do you mean, cutting all support for all but the following:
D10,D11,D12
H20,H21,H23
R15,R16,R22
HR20,HR21,HR22, HR21Pro

or are you saying only support:
D12,H23,R16,R22,HR22

or are you saying that everyone gets an HR40 with certain options turned off in software?

What are you saying?

I think he means 1 reciver that can have the DVR functions on or off, or maybe just send an external drive out, for DVR orders, and it will also let you activate and deactivate HD access on it, based on HD orders.

[tcusta00]

I mean, All new and replacement equipment would be HD DVRs, those who did not want HD would not have the HD access added, those who did not want to record would not have the DVR service added.

As long as it works I don't see why anyone would object to it... as long as the cost is similar to the current program :confused:

Was this meant to be a rhetorical question?

[Mertzen]

I'd go as far as only making two units. One HD and one HD DVR. I think the cost of the HD DVR can never be offset by higher production numbers.

[scrybigtv]

It would be fine with me, but there's no telling what would happen if my 80s-something parents were forced to use a DVR receiver. They would probably wind up watching a year-old baseball game, and all the time thinking they were watching it live.

[curt8403]

how many times have you gotten a HD unit, and then wished you had gotten an HD DVR (I have seen 1000s of cases)
this would solve that issue. just call and have the package added.

[MIKE0616]

I'd go as far as only making two units. One HD and one HD DVR. I think the cost of the HD DVR can never be offset by higher production numbers.

Never worked in the electronics industry, have you?

I can easily see where the cost per unit for one model from on line could be as cheap to make as the current non-dvr units are currently costing. Components are NOT that expensive and whoever keeps throwing out that $800 per DVR for D* is way, way overstating the costs or on drugs. For $800 each, quantity in the millions, you could have one heck of a media center.

[scuba_tim]

What about size? I like my tiny D11 in the office, hooked up to my pc. So until DirecTV and Microsoft get their act together on my HDPC, I like my little box too.

(yes, I voted go all HD DVR though, as anything to keep costs down, if that did it).

[dcowboy7]

yes....the less models of something the better.

[kevinturcotte]

I thought the server would be the PC card....

That's a different product.

[evan_s]

Assuming it does actually work out to be cheaper for DirecTV if have no problem with it. I can definitely see going down to just a hd receiver and HD DVR with no SD versions but I still think we've got a while to go before the DVR becomes standard for everyone. The HD, the additional tuner, the additional memory etc all at a lot to the cost.

[gregjones]

If the first options said:

Yes, IF it kept costs down


I would be inclined to vote for it.

[Stuart Sweet]

I agree. I must abstain from this poll because I think that it's unlikely that the unit cost could be lowered enough so that every single receiver out there would have every function.

Here's what I would support:
Scenario 1
Whole-Home DVR as basically a headless server with multiple MRV clients each with enough storage to provide a local, 90-minute buffer and trickplay feature

Scenario 2
Modular receiver that would have an empty bay for a user-installable drive sled to convert the receiver to a DVR.

I do support sunsetting MPEG2/SD receivers. The sooner you stop making them the sooner you can (some time in the far future) sunset MPEG2/SD altogether.

[houskamp]

Guess it wouldn't matter to me.. I'm all HDDVR already :D

[Jhon69]

I agree. I must abstain from this poll because I think that it's unlikely that the unit cost could be lowered enough so that every single receiver out there would have every function.

Here's what I would support:
Scenario 1
Whole-Home DVR as basically a headless server with multiple MRV clients each with enough storage to provide a local, 90-minute buffer and trickplay feature

Scenario 2
Modular receiver that would have an empty bay for a user-installable drive sled to convert the receiver to a DVR.

I do support sunsetting MPEG2/SD receivers. The sooner you stop making them the sooner you can (some time in the far future) sunset MPEG2/SD altogether.


What? No DLB?.;)

Otherwise a good idea!.:D

[curt8403]

What? No DLB?.;)

Otherwise a good idea!.:D

dlb was not mentioned. but what about QLB

[Jhon69]

dlb was not mentioned. but what about QLB


I could live with that!.;) :D

[curt8403]

I could live with that!.;) :D
4 tuners, all live buffered, and smellovision

[curt8403]

IDEA

make the unit ready to be a HD DVR, but have the hard drive external and offer different sizes of recording time for different prices

[Jhon69]

4 tuners, all live buffered, and smellovision


You big teaser!.:D :lol:

[curt8403]

You big teaser!.:D :lol:
It is doable, (The Smellovision part)
they have equipment now that provides motion based on embedded info in the sound track

[rudeney]

IDEA

make the unit ready to be a HD DVR, but have the hard drive external and offer different sizes of recording time for different prices

I would definitely support D* going to a model where they provide only one receiver. I really find very little use for a non-DVR receiver. We’ve gotten so used to having the DVR functionality that I had to upgrade the H20 in the kitchen to an HR20 so my wife would stop complaining about the “bonk” sound every time she tried to press one of the DVR buttons. The idea of selling an “HR” without the hard drive sounds good to me. My advice though, would be to make it like a laptop, with a user-accessible bay to mount the hard drive. I don’t want to have to deal with an external drive and its data and power cables.

I would not support a receiver that has been electronically “crippled” and then making the customer pay more up-front fees to “uncripple” it. I understand all the reasons such a strategy and that it’s common practice in software, but for hardware, it just leaves a bad taste in the customer’s mouth to do this. Now, as for having to subscribe to and pay monthly for account-wide HD and/or DVR services, that I have no problem with.

[inkahauts]

HR2x's, and the pc card is all they should make... Features should just be turned on and off by software authorizations...

[Herdfan]

IScenario 2
Modular receiver that would have an empty bay for a user-installable drive sled to convert the receiver to a DVR.

Don't even make it that hard. Just put an eSATA port on all receivers and sell a the solution just like an AM21.

[techrep]

Don't even make it that hard. Just put an eSATA port on all receivers and sell a the solution just like an AM21.

I voted yes and, I would like to vote yes on this suggestion also.

[dduitsman]

So in 3 years (2011) we would all still have 2008 technology?

And every so many years, D* would decide its time to update all of it's subscribers to the current technology? How often do you think that will happen?

Seems unworkable to me.

dd

[Sixto]

Would love one box with no drive that any size drive can be added later. With no drive it's a H2x, or add a drive and it's a HR2x ... cool ...

[carl6]

I did not vote, as I don't think any of the poll options accurately reflect my feelings.

I think that there are far too many customers/situations where a receiver only is sufficient, and the cost to provide a DVR where only a receiver is needed is going to prevent a single box solution.

I've seen some good suggestions in this thread, and I do think the product line could be narrowed to perhaps one DVR model and one non-DVR model. But all existing receivers in service would have to have some sort of (lengthy) sunset on them. It is not cost effective to replace millions of receivers just to standardize one one specific model.

Carl

[TheRatPatrol]

4 tuners, all live buffered, and smellovision
And quad PIP. :D

[gfrang]

I voted that i have no clue.
:confused: WTF
gfrang
I think the smellovision thing i great when you watch dirty jobs just make sure all the windows are open.But until this hole thing comes into being i remain clueless.

[jediphish]

One downside to DVR-only boxes is disk-chatter. I had an HR20-700 in the bedroom for a while and the disk-chatter drove me crazy. Assuming the DVR noise can be reduced, I see no other reason not to make all boxes DVRs (or HD DVR's as the case may be).

[rudeney]

I’ve not been bothered by the disk chatter, but all of our HR20’s are in closets or cabinets. I just replaced the H20 for the kitchen with an HR20. it sits on a shelf in the pantry/laundry room right at ear level. I walked in there last night and noticed that that it sounded like I had mice!

[Herdfan]

I think that there are far too many customers/situations where a receiver only is sufficient, and the cost to provide a DVR where only a receiver is needed is going to prevent a single box solution.

But if all boxes could be upgraded to a DVR via an external drive, what is the marginal cost of a second tuner? Everything else could be software.

[tonyd79]

I really don't care but if it did keep the costs down, all should be HD DVRs. If not, well, make a business decision.

For main TVs, I don't understand why anyone would not want a DVR. I can understand not needing HD but even with an SD television, HD brings a better picture.

[ziggy29]

If this "one box" option would actually save money and keep costs/fees down -- even after factoring in sending more "advanced" and costly equipment to people who are on SD with no DVR -- then yes. If it increased costs that meant higher bills, then no. Presumably the DVR function could be turned on and off with software that says which features your card is eligible to use.

[SteveHas]

I like the cost savings of having a tuner only option for some locations in my house
that would not be suitable for a recording

[ziggy29]

I like the cost savings of having a tuner only option for some locations in my house
that would not be suitable for a recording
I think the assumption was that only having one type of box would mean overall cost savings -- and thus those who didn't need DVRs wouldn't have to pay more for their box as a result.

[dpfaunts]

I know there would be added costs, but you might be able to generate more revenue with the following idea.

Only DVRs, no extra fee, just a cost of DTV service. Moderate sized hard drives in every receiver, and an esata or AM21 solution for more storage. Be the only provider the DVR for all.

[davring]

If they only made one or two different receivers you would have a far better chance guessing what you are going to receive from them when you order or replace a unit:)

[Stuart Sweet]

There are a lot of places that DVRs just wouldn't be worth it. Businesses for example. I like the idea but the underlying philosophy is that you would be able to save money that way. It's just not likely. Right now there are three manufacturers making DVRs, so it's not like the assembly line is running slow. They're already making as many DVRs as they choose to right now.

What I do think is right is consolidation. The SD DVR line is slowly being folded in so the hardware is very similar to the HD DVR line. This cuts development costs a lot, and with the hardware being more mature, the cost savings is there (where it wasn't two years ago.)

Also davring, realize that they do currently manufacture just one SD receiver, one HD receiver, one SD DVR, and one HD DVR. Different companies are involved in making them, and because refurbished units hit the market as well, there are several different models being put on trucks.