1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A better OTA solution please

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by aa9vi, Jul 9, 2008.

  1. Jul 13, 2008 #61 of 149
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    This is not true at all. If you read it in the past, that was someone speculating - and they were wrong.
     
  2. Jul 13, 2008 #62 of 149
    Chris Blount

    Chris Blount Creator of DBSTalk Staff Member Administrator DBSTalk Gold Club

    17,312
    28
    Jun 22, 2001
    What Doug said. Totally not true. OTA was delayed because DirecTV needed to do a few more tweaks before release.
     
  3. Jul 13, 2008 #63 of 149
    Drew2k

    Drew2k New Member

    14,514
    228
    Aug 16, 2006
    Thanks Doug and Chris. I really doubted that was true, as enough people have seen the innards to have identified the tuner components and I'm sure there would have been much discussion about this if the tuner was QAM-capable ...
     
  4. Jul 14, 2008 #64 of 149
    Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    I think someone got confused. The Broadcom chips that power the HR2x series are also used in some QAM-capable products but the only tuner chips in DIRECTV receivers are DIRECTV and ATSC chips.
     
  5. Jul 14, 2008 #65 of 149
    bobnielsen

    bobnielsen Éminence grise

    8,473
    92
    Jun 29, 2006
    Bainbridge...
    I don't know what OTA tuner chips are in the HR20 (the first look document doesn't say and I haven't pulled the cover off mine), but the AM21 uses the ATI Theater 311 chip, which does not support QAM.
     
  6. Jul 14, 2008 #66 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    That is a completely different issue, in my opinion. DirecTV not carrying the program data for a subchannel when the main channel is in the guide is a problem they should fix immediately. This does not require scanning, only that they have the program information.

    One of my locals has a weather subchannel and the programming information is carried by DirecTV. Scanning should only be necessary when it is a channel (not subchannel) that is not in your local area but can be picked up via antenna. The situation you refer to should be simply getting good guide data to them and having them enable it.
     
  7. Jul 14, 2008 #67 of 149
    Kansas Zephyr

    Kansas Zephyr Hall Of Fame

    1,489
    0
    Jun 29, 2007
    Sorry, but there are other cases where scanning helps.

    In some urban areas, there are digital low-powers that D* doesn't and most likely will never have guide data for.

    I'd still like them integrated into the IRD's channel list, even if guide data isn't available. Why should a user be "punished" for being able to receive a distant station OTA and not have it available?

    If scanning is so bad, and a database is so much better, why doesn't a new HDTV ask for your zip-code during set-up, and use a database of "what you should get OTA"? :p
     
  8. Jul 14, 2008 #68 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    Again, covering multiple topics. I was responding to someone that wanted a subchannel of a channel that was provided by DirecTV. That is different than wanting a channel not provided by DirecTV.

    Has DirecTV specifically refused to carry them? Do they provide guide data currently?
     
  9. Jul 14, 2008 #69 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    Scanning is not bad for finding channels. It is bad for tracking future program information. You have to store the information well in advance to be useful for a DVR. A new HDTV has no particular use for a database because it can't, by itself, schedule recording well into the future.

    Is it worth DirecTV to deal with the calls from users that want to record something on these low-power channels that don't have programming information. Weigh the cost to support those channels on a DVR platform versus the possible gain in subscriber base.

    It would seem that DirecTV is either leaving them out because they have no program information or because they don't want to use the space to transmit it. If it is the former, the station can fix that. If it is the latter, it would seem they didn't make the cut.
     
  10. Jul 14, 2008 #70 of 149
    EricJRW

    EricJRW Icon

    507
    0
    Jul 6, 2008
    Keller, TX
    Interesting question...

    I wonder where my "subs > 1" guide data is coming from?

    I don't have a TV with an ATSC tuner, but my in-laws do... A Vizio...

    I never really looked (I will next time) how far in advance the TV's OTA guide data is, but it's a least 2~4 hours...

    Enough for a DVR, but not enough for a 14-day guide.
     
  11. Jul 14, 2008 #71 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007

    It is not a matter of punishing them for pulling in a distant channel. It is a matter of managing the data. Right now, the guide data works in a specific way.

    • You enter the primary zip
    • DirecTV sees the list of channels available from that zip
    • the programming data for those channels is integrated into the guide
    • the programming data is all from the satellite and not from the PSIP information transmitted by the stations

    They may or may not have a way to add a channel to the list without programming information, I don't know. The list of local channels has to be there so they can determine which channel 38-1 they see on the antenna. The guide data has to come over satellite to fill out the ~14 day guide data.

    I suspect it is not a conspiracy to keep someone from seeing distant programming more than a lack of incentive to do the engineering.
     
  12. Jul 14, 2008 #72 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    Many -2 subchannels are included in the stream from DirecTV. We have one that is a weather subchannel and two that are completey different stations from their main channel. All are handled appropriately in Eastern NC without the need to scan.
     
  13. Jul 14, 2008 #73 of 149
    EricJRW

    EricJRW Icon

    507
    0
    Jul 6, 2008
    Keller, TX
    I have one channel that has 4 subs, and another with 5... I wonder if D* is really providing that as well?? I guess it would be easier, though obviously more bandwidth, if they just transmitted everything and let the receiver sort it out, but dang, all guide data , for channels with all subs, nationwide, that's a lot of data (though obviously quite small when compared to the content's bandwidth).
     
  14. Jul 14, 2008 #74 of 149
    DarinC

    DarinC Hall Of Fame

    1,183
    0
    Aug 31, 2004
    They did with the HD-Tivo... it was called scanning. They omitted that from the HR2x. I think that's the whole point. ;)
     
  15. Jul 14, 2008 #75 of 149
    Herdfan

    Herdfan Well-Known Member

    6,500
    98
    Mar 18, 2006
    Teays...
    D* will provide the guide data if TMS provides it to them. That is where the disconnect is. My local station doesn't feel the need to provide, and hence pay for, the guide data for their weather radar as D* customers are such a small percentage of their base.

    I get guide data for the MyZ subchannel because that is a revenue generating channel.
     
  16. Jul 14, 2008 #76 of 149
    Kansas Zephyr

    Kansas Zephyr Hall Of Fame

    1,489
    0
    Jun 29, 2007
    I'm aware of how it works now.

    We are saying "let the tuner scan", if it can't match guide/program info to the database, still, using the virtual channel info embedded in the PSIP, just add it to the D* channel list anyway.

    BTW..."Punishing" was in quotes to emphasize the tongue-in-check aspect of that statement.

    My HR10-250 scans, and displays the label embedded in the PSIP...with at least one other D* box doing the same.
     
  17. Jul 14, 2008 #77 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    And the codebase for the two products is not the same. I suggest keeping your HR10-250 running as long as you can if the feature is important to you.
     
  18. Jul 14, 2008 #78 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007
    It sounds like the issue is with the local channel, then. Complain loudly, listen for desired response, repeat.
     
  19. Jul 14, 2008 #79 of 149
    leww37334

    leww37334 Hall Of Fame

    1,529
    0
    Sep 19, 2005
    I have to ask, if only 6% of households use OTA, and there are 78M households in the US (that means 4.68M households use OTA)

    http://www.census.gov/prod/1/pop/p25-1129.pdf

    Then why does the Government converter box program cost 1,500 million?

    In fact, if you assume the government is correct, then the 1.5 billion dolor program will buy 37.5 million converter boxes (@ $40 each), assume 2 per household, that is 18.75 million households with OTA. That is about 24% of all households with OTA.

    Does anyone want to try to spot the flaw in my argument? (Hint: I assume that the government knows what it is doing)
     
  20. Jul 14, 2008 #80 of 149
    gregjones

    gregjones Hall Of Fame

    1,333
    0
    Sep 20, 2007

    The one other box isn't a DVR though. This issue has everything to do with guide data used for the DVR.
     

Share This Page