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

DIRECTV Re: OTA: "We Will Have a Dual Tuner Solution"

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Tom Robertson, Oct 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dec 7, 2007 #841 of 1344
    General Custer

    General Custer AllStar

    77
    0
    Nov 5, 2007
    The powers that be need to require that satellite TV be treated like cable with a version of the cable card system mandated. This way Directv would become more responsive to their customers needs.

    They don't want to include OTA or DLB. Fine.
    You can't create a distribution system that lets you specify the exact model of dvr your customer wants. Fine.

    Rent an access card from them and take your hardware dollars to TIVO or Apple or whoever else offers these features or any others that a customer deems important.

    Competition would be a good thing.

    Maybe someone would create a set-top box that would allow you to access Satellite programming from either provider, OTA, cable, Fios and the net. You could potentially buy pieces of programming from each provider.
     
  2. Dec 7, 2007 #842 of 1344
    loudo

    loudo Well-Known Member

    4,755
    59
    Mar 24, 2005
    Central Maine
    Mike, you hit the nail right on the head. The reason for all of the concern is because we have had OTA tuners since the first E8 HD receiver came out, and now it is going away, with the new HR21. If we would have not had it from the beginning, this thread wouldn't be here, as we would have all found alternative ways to get the HD and digitals OTA.

    On the other hand my reason for making the switch from C-Band to DirecTV, years ago, was because they had an OTA tuner built into the E8 HD tuner, and I wanted HD locals as soon as they came out. I am sure that is one reason why many others made the move also.

    This is not the first feature that has been dropped when a new model came out, I remember when we went from the Hughes HTL-HD to the H10, a lot of features we felt were nice were re-moved. As I remember some of them were:
    1. No lighted remote.
    2. No OTA analog locals.
    3. You can't control a VCR from the receiver, like you can with the HTL-HD.
    4. The ability to look at the receiver and see what channel you are on.
    5. The ability to shut your TV off, while on XM radio, and see what song is playing, in the receiver window.
    6. The ability to connect your OTA antenna and your cable to the receiver at the same time.

    But in time we got over it, as I am sure we all will with the removal of the OTA tuner. We will have alternative ways to get our OTA fix.
     
  3. Dec 7, 2007 #843 of 1344
    harsh

    harsh Beware the Attack Basset

    21,192
    182
    Jun 14, 2003
    Salem, OR
    Are you sure that the "quote" in post 672 is from DIRECTV and not from someone else? Who was the target audience? Where did you come by the "quote"?

    I'm about as far from a DIRECTV apologist as you can get.
     
  4. Dec 7, 2007 #844 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    I can't be sure that anything on the net is valid until I see it happen with my own eyes. What I can do is piece things together that make sense, like the first statement followed by the second. The wording and attitude are consistent, and the 3rd party company is real. Beyond that, I leave it up to you guys to play lawyer with the data. I don't have time to participate in a simulated courtroom drama in here.
     
  5. Dec 7, 2007 #845 of 1344
    arob

    arob Mentor

    41
    0
    Nov 30, 2007
    I live in Oakland, CA in the hills. I have line of sight across the SF Bay to the transmission towers and get 20+ OTA signals. I get 85+ signal strength on all of them. I'm not willing to give them up. WB broadcasts some shows in HD which I record OTA on my HR10-250's. To my knowledge D* is not provding this yet in HD (I could be wrong).

    I cancelled my install of a 5LNB and 2 -DVR install for Monday (all free) as the local install co. said they had no HR20's. Bummer. Hopefully enough people like myself will be cancelling and D* will get the picture.

    I could live with the HR21 if I knew I would get all the same local HD I get from OTA. Until then there is no benefit. I'll cross my fingers for FIOS or some other better offering.
     
  6. Dec 7, 2007 #846 of 1344
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    For $5/month you could have taken the free upgrade and waited for the OTA solution to be available for the HR21 .. just keep the HR10 active for now. I too am in the bay area, but being on the back side of a mountain keeps me from getting any OTA signals, alas.
     
  7. Dec 7, 2007 #847 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    So they should be responsible for a signal source, that they have no control over?

    DirecTV is a content carrier/distributor.
    Except for the 101... they don't create the content.

    Who get's the support calls first if the OTA signal is having issues... on a DirecTV receiver?

    And is very different (IMHO). Since they can't just supply one set of feeds... they have support each and ever DMA independently of one another... because of the laws.

    There is the royalties on the ATSC tuners...
    There is the cost for the Guide Data....
    There is the development of software to handle the tuners, and any issues that arrise...

    Ect.... with what in return?
     
  8. Dec 7, 2007 #848 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    And again...

    Where has this uproar been for the last 10ish years.....
    There haven't been any NTSC tuners in any of their DVRs...
    And I think (the last time I asked this) there was only two receivers that had an NTSC tuner....

    Where was the outcry and demand for NTSC...
    And why is ATSC so different?
     
  9. Dec 7, 2007 #849 of 1344
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member

    8,687
    38
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    And who gets the calls when a non-OTA signal is having issues? There is no difference.

    Sorry, but your argument fails due to lack of consistency.
     
  10. Dec 7, 2007 #850 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005

    We are going to have to agree to disagree.

    It would be identical to me purchasing an XMRadio and be upset that it has issues receiving an FM/AM signal on it.

    There are so many factors involved with the signal out of their control... that could be the issue...
     
  11. Dec 7, 2007 #851 of 1344
    Lord Vader

    Lord Vader Supreme Member

    8,687
    38
    Sep 20, 2004
    Galactic Empire
    That's fine. As a veteran NCAA Umpire, I expect it. People disagree all the time with my being correct. :)

    However, the XM comparison isn't proper, because the music coming from XM is generated by them from their studios in D.C. DirecTV simply retransmits what's sent to them, whether it be OTA or non-OTA. You're still continuing to compare apples and oranges.
     
  12. Dec 7, 2007 #852 of 1344
    General Custer

    General Custer AllStar

    77
    0
    Nov 5, 2007
    Think about it for a second.

    The difference is that ATSC provides HD signals in most markets with better picture quality and a more complete offering then what directv can provide. If directv provided all of the nations HD channels with all of the sub channels in all of the markets, most would not complain about the lack of OTA. Some would still want it for rain fade issues.

    In the past early adopters to satellite would keep a basic cable package for a few bucks a month to get all of their local channels. No one wants to have to have a 2 box solution at this time.
     
  13. Dec 7, 2007 #853 of 1344
    bhelton71

    bhelton71 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '09

    2,390
    0
    Mar 7, 2007
    Just a theory - I think when DVR's first came out (around 99 I think) we (ie the US) were well on our way to the DTV transition. So any forward looking product (and I would characterize most of DirecTv's DVR offerings to be forward looking - the HR10-250 for example was way ahead of the curve) would be better served to just have ATSC. But then the delays started - now we have all of these hybrid devices cropping up.

    I personally did not miss NTSC tuners in my first DVR (DSR 704). I was getting the major channels in my area off of satellite. When I bought an HDTV - I bought an HR10. The HR10 obviously had ATSC tuners so I setup an antenna and got my channels that way. Improved picture and sound were the compelling factors. Fast forward to now - DirecTv is only able to provide 3 of the 6 they originally gave me - thru no fault of theirs I am sure ( 2 are a particular corporation - 3 letters starting with L). So I do use off air still to supplement the current offering. I don't necessarily expect anything - but I would appreciate any effort they make to keep my current service as close to my original service. I only ever watched 1 sub-channel - the Tube - and it is gone now so really if they get the other 2 channels ( I don't ever actually watch UPN so thats not an issue for me - the other 2 are CBS and CW) on satellite - I would have no reason for an off-air input.

    Hopefully the analog shutoff will 'force' the issue with holdouts.
     
  14. Dec 7, 2007 #854 of 1344
    jdcolombo

    jdcolombo Cool Member

    11
    0
    Aug 25, 2006
    Earl, it's not like this at all. We both know that DirecTV decided to include OTA tuners so they could market a one-box solution as a competitive advantage or at least match the convenience of the "one box solution" that cable systems provide. They clearly received an economic benefit from being able to do so, or else they wouldn't have done it in the first place. A more appropriate analogy would be that XM decides to market a radio that gets both XM and AM-FM because they know consumers hate having two radios in their car, and would much prefer having only one radio. Having gotten an economic benefit from doing so (getting consumers to buy their "one box radio"), they shouldn't complain about customer service calls from poor AM-FM reception. What did they think would happen? And they sold all those radios that they wouldn't have sold without the one-box solution.

    Here's another analogy. One day GM decides to build a car with a new-fangled device called a radio in it. GM does that because it believes that having a radio in their cars gives them a competitive advantage to attract new customers, even though GM doesn't own any radio stations and makes virtually no money on the radio hardware. In fact, however, customers are attracted to cars with radios and buy them in droves. Then one day GM says "No more radios. People with static on their radios have been calling us for service, when it's really the radio station's fault, not ours; radios break, and then we get blamed for it, even though it doesn't affect the performance of the car; it's cheaper to build cars without radios; etc." Only it turns out that folks have gotten so attached to radios that they get really mad at GM for its decision.

    GM has no obligation to provide cars with radios, but it can hardly complain when people get pissed off about no longer being able to get a radio. And it doesn't help that GM tells folks they can simply get a portable radio and take it with them in their car; portable radios aren't as convenient for the consumer; now that they've had a taste of an integrated radio in the car, they don't want to mess with a portable radio sitting on the seat. It's true, of course, that before GM started including radios, no one much cared. But now they do. If GM doesn't want to provide radios, fine, but they can hardly blame the consumer for being mad at them or somehow try to make it the consumer's fault that they got attached to having radios and now want radios.

    If DirecTV wants to eliminate OTA from their receivers, it is of course within their discretion to do so. But don't whine about my getting mad about it.

    John C.
     
  15. Dec 8, 2007 #855 of 1344
    Maruuk

    Maruuk Hall Of Fame

    1,951
    9
    Dec 4, 2007
    Add to that a guy who buys a Pontiac Vibe. GM says call us and schedule a delivery to your door of your new Vibe. Vibes have always had AM/FM radios even in base form. The car shows up, it's called a Pontiac Vibe. It's looks the same as any other Vibe. The delivery guy leaves, and then the new owner discovers to his shock there's no radio. But he's stuck with the car.

    My DTV installer had no idea about model numbers. It was just a generic box to him. He did know you couldn't run an OTA antenna off it anymore.

    I always apply the jury system in cases like this: "What was the reasonable expectation of the consumer in this situation? Did company X deliver a product at significant variance with a reasonable set of expectations of the consumer?"

    Juries care far less about crossed t's and dotted i's than basic fairness. And in real life, contracts count less than handshakes. The DBSTalk jury's verdict is in, and DTV is prepared to make restitution. As my lawyer friend would say, if both sides are equally unhappy, justice has been done.
     
  16. Dec 8, 2007 #856 of 1344
    houskamp

    houskamp New Member

    8,636
    3
    Sep 14, 2006
    This is problably one of the best analogies I've seen.. Having a one box solution is either the #1 or 2 reason why I have Directv...
     
  17. Dec 8, 2007 #857 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    And it had nothing to do with at the time of design of the original box (and the original HD boxes)

    That vast majority of HD content was via the locals... which were not in the SAT stream yet? But now they are?

    That couldn't have anything to do with it?
     
  18. Dec 8, 2007 #858 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    In 1999 we were 8 years away from the original Digital Transition date.
    So I highly doublt the lack of an NTSC had anything to do with something that wasn't happening for 8+ yeras.

    The lack of NTSC tuners had more to do with:
    1) The SAT Signal had MUST-CARRY laws, and most DMAs had every channel already up on the SAT
    2) The cost of not having to include encoding hardware into the DTiVos, two sets of it to keep up with SAT Stream.


    BINGO!!!!! Because they were on the SAT, which most DMAs are getting their core channels, and that will only expand over time.

    And as more of those channels get into the SAT stream... IMHO.
    This lack of an ATSC tuner in the HR21... becomes less and less and less of an issue.
     
  19. Dec 8, 2007 #859 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Alright...

    I am going to re-instate my personal ban on this topic...

    Here is a recap:

    1) DirecTV has launched the H21/HR21 with out ATSC... that is a fact
    2) DirecTV is working on ATSC solution for those that MUST have ATSC on their boxes, for what ever reason... that is a fact
    3) If you must have ATSC today... contact a RETAILER and secure an HR20
    4) If you have an HR20, and need it replaced... DirecTV will attempt to replace it with an HR20.
     
  20. Dec 8, 2007 #860 of 1344
    General Custer

    General Custer AllStar

    77
    0
    Nov 5, 2007
    "Vast Majority" doesn't cut it.

    They need to cover all the HD locals.

    I'm in the #1 DMA in the country. Where is the CW in HD, My9, PBS. Can't offer them? Include the OTA tuner. Put them up on the satellite-drop the tuner in NY. Its as simple as that to most of us on here.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page