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

HR20 - DLNA Certification Campaign

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Spanky_Partain, Aug 18, 2007.

Do you want the HR20 and other networked D* equipment DLNA certified?

  1. Yes

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. No

    80.1%
  3. Don't Care, everything seems ok the way it is

    1.8%
  4. Don't Care, I do not use the media share

    18.1%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Aug 23, 2007 #81 of 100
    hdtvfan0001

    hdtvfan0001 Well-Known Member

    32,456
    258
    Jul 28, 2004
    So I guess DLNA non-certified certification. :lol:
     
  2. Aug 23, 2007 #82 of 100
    tgater

    tgater Godfather

    266
    1
    Jul 24, 2007
    Seems to me that DLNA is still in its infancy just as the HR20-xxxx is still in its infancy. Meaning that every firmware, software, feature or whatever one wishes to refer to it as will indeed cost money for D* to keep up with therefore costing us the consumer more coin out of our pocket. I say let the HR20-xxxx become a stable viable product first or have a version of the HR20-xxxx available for purchase not lease that all of you whom wish to have this standard implemented get to pay for. You can’t sit back and tell me that if the cost to D* is minimal the cost to us will minimal as well. This will not be a build it and they will come, it will be a demand and supply. Meaning if enough beg for it they may supply it and pass not the cost of the service but the value of the service to the consumer. Just like I would like to see all of the NFLST games in HD I have to purchase Super Fan and get a whole bunch of frills that I don’t need. Let me watch streaming video from HR20-xxxx to HR20-xxxx thus not having to add larger hard drives to increase recording capacity and not having to record the same program on multiple DVR’s incase I wish to view that program in a different room.
     
  3. Aug 23, 2007 #83 of 100
    Spanky_Partain

    Spanky_Partain Active Member

    5,500
    0
    Dec 7, 2006
    Lets not jump the gun yet. I am gathering more information and will post the questions and answers as I get it. I'm sure you are well aware of how enormous of a project like this can be and what it takes to get cooperation from the entire community. At least an organization has recognized a problem is trying to make things better by making a standard that is acceptable by all who do participate. How can that be LAME? Have you ever wanted to try and make a difference in something that not only affected a large amount of consumers but industry giants as well? This is that difference and opportunity.

    I still encourage the campaign and I see a "good" coming for the consumer in the DLNA effort.
     
  4. Aug 23, 2007 #84 of 100
    Spanky_Partain

    Spanky_Partain Active Member

    5,500
    0
    Dec 7, 2006

    I agree with making the HR20 a stable viable product. I must ask, do you think they haven't already put the cost of doing development/support/warranty in the cost of the product? Of course they have. Those formulas are taught in project management 101. In an earlier post a press release from Directv was shown that they are already considering the DLNA certification and plan on doing it. The cost has already been built in.
     
  5. Aug 23, 2007 #85 of 100
    armophob

    armophob Difficulty Concen........

    7,393
    65
    Nov 13, 2006
    Fort Pierce, FL
    I think it is easier to say that there has to be a policy in place with rules, before there can be compliance and cooperation with the rules of the policy. :) Or did you just say that?
     
  6. Aug 23, 2007 #86 of 100
    Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    There is a process for this...it's called Consumer Fraud protection. If a company advertises something and sells a product that does not do as advertised they can be sued. Both the class action bar and the various state attorney generals handle this type of action regularly.
     
  7. Aug 23, 2007 #87 of 100
    AlbertZeroK

    AlbertZeroK Icon

    914
    0
    Jan 28, 2006
    Reallistically what are they going to do? Change the by-laws for members who have already signed up? Force companies to accept heavy fines or a return program which allows a customer the ability to return a device to the manufacture at full MSRP when certification is lost?

    Does anyone think you can really get members to agree to terms like this? Not likely.
     
  8. Aug 23, 2007 #88 of 100
    Ken S

    Ken S RIP

    6,201
    0
    Feb 12, 2007
    I've served on some interoperability committees (email being one of them) and the answer is no, you can't force anyone to do anything. You have to assume that they are a part of the consortium in order to work out the details about HOW things can work with each other. You come together set some sort of standard for the communication and then figure out a way to market that standard as a positive.

    If a company claims they are complying with that standard and doesn't the consortium then can sue to get them to stop that advertising.
     
  9. Aug 23, 2007 #89 of 100
    Steve

    Steve Well-Known Member

    23,041
    148
    Aug 22, 2006
    Lower...
    I've just added a request for DLNA-certification to the HR20 Wish List. If you haven't already done so, please visit the survey and let us know how you value this suggestion. TIA. /steve
     
  10. Aug 23, 2007 #90 of 100
    hoopsbwc34

    hoopsbwc34 Legend

    211
    0
    Aug 13, 2002
    +1

    But FYI, from my perspective, that wouldn't really include MRV either which is prominent in your sig :grin:
     
  11. Dec 5, 2007 #91 of 100
    Spanky_Partain

    Spanky_Partain Active Member

    5,500
    0
    Dec 7, 2006
    So now that more have been working on the network and have found the importance to make this easy, are there any more people who would like to see the poll and post thier perspective on DLNA?
     
  12. Dec 6, 2007 #92 of 100
    AlbertZeroK

    AlbertZeroK Icon

    914
    0
    Jan 28, 2006
    Nothing like beating a dead horse. I've said it before, I'll say it again. DLNA has no capability to police those who use it's logo or licensing which makes it useless. Until an organization can promise consumers full functionality at every release of firmware in a controlled testing environment (and no manufacture will readily allow a 3rd party to pass or fail their firmware), the whole idea is a waste of time. It's best use is as an propaganda tool for the sales force - doomed to be yet another useless icon on the back of a box somewhere to fool consumers into thinking they have purchased a useful product only to have cooperate greed and shotty programming by someone in a 3rd world country change, break or even completely drop DLNA compatibility.

    Besides, I think the time of the programmers is best spend in implementing more useful items like MRV than DLNA.
     
  13. Dec 6, 2007 #93 of 100
    Spanky_Partain

    Spanky_Partain Active Member

    5,500
    0
    Dec 7, 2006
    I too will say it again. Manufactures pay money for the priviledge of putting the DLNA logo on the product. The logo means it was tested by a third party and passes the criteria for the logo. If you do not think OEM will not do this, you are wrong. Large corporations like HP already have products that carry the DLNA certified equipment. Who cares if it is a marketing tool. If the tool works and it makes equipment meet criteria of a written standard then why not have it work in an environment like the consumers house.

    I spend many hours trying to get people hooked up on the network with a LOT of different equipment. If eqquipment had the logo of DLNA then it would be a plug-n-play environment and "Joe Six Pack" would have an HR2x hooked up and getting DOD instead of spending hours on a website and on his computer trying to get a internet connection on the HR2x.

    I appreciate your comment Albertzerok, but the horse ain't dead yet. It is worth bringing the Poll to the table again for others input and awareness. My intention is to get DLNA on the wish list and that is why I pulled the Poll back up.
     
  14. Dec 6, 2007 #94 of 100
    bhelton71

    bhelton71 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '09

    2,390
    0
    Mar 7, 2007
    I used to do WHQL testing and CableLabs testing. Yes - third parties do test manufacturers hardware and firmware. And certifications are only given for particular firmware versions - certifications do mean something and they are big bucks.

    As for the HR20 - that horse is not even sick - let alone dead. I think Directv probably has every intention to have it certified eventually. I don't think they would submit it now though - if it is like other h/w logo programs they would have to get each national release certified. Those are coming way too quickly at this point.

    However - the HR20 does state it is DNLA 1.0 in the device description. From all appearances they are using Intels SDK to implement the media share - which supports DNLA. And from a high level it does support that spec level as far as I can tell.

    DRM/CP Technology
    N/A

    Formats:
    required: JPG LPCM MPEG2
    optional: GIF, TIFF, MP3, WMA9, AC-3, AAC, ATRAC3plus, MPEG4, MPEG1, WMV9 (VC-1)

    Transports
    HTTP 1.0

    Discovery
    UPnP v1

    Network
    IPV4

    QOS
    N/A

    Network
    Ethernet or 802.11 a/b/g


    But if you run the automated UPnP verification suite against it - it fails on some items. So it is not quite ready.
     
  15. Dec 6, 2007 #95 of 100
    AlbertZeroK

    AlbertZeroK Icon

    914
    0
    Jan 28, 2006
    I'm not saying DLNA isn't a good idea, it just doesn't mandate recertification with firmware updates - this means DLNA could be broken after a device has been previously certified. And while the DLNA could take legal action, it leaves the end user in a very screwed position.

    Besides, DLNA isn't that great of an idea anyways, with the number of third party security tools on computers now days, there is no way to ensure communication between a PC and a device.
     
  16. Feb 15, 2008 #96 of 100
    bhelton71

    bhelton71 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '09

    2,390
    0
    Mar 7, 2007
    Ok I have had an educational afternoon - yes yes yes DLNA all the way.

    DirecTV has committed to this in the past - so heres to hoping that this commitment has not been forgotten.

    http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=127160&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=801314&highlight=

     
  17. Feb 15, 2008 #97 of 100
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    246
    Nov 15, 2005
    I believe it has not been forgotten. The MediaShare implementation is a subset of DLNA. Streaming content from HR2x to PC (shown at CES) will be another advance forward as well.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  18. Feb 15, 2008 #98 of 100
    bhelton71

    bhelton71 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '09

    2,390
    0
    Mar 7, 2007
    Yes 'subset' is a very good description. And the source of my personal renewed interest.
     
  19. Feb 15, 2008 #99 of 100
    Thaedron

    Thaedron Hall Of Fame

    1,886
    0
    Jun 29, 2007
    I tried to vote in the poll before I realized how old most of this thread was and that the poll was closed.

    I'd love to see renewed interest in this even if it's enough to bring DNLA back onto the "front burner" of the wishlist.
     
  20. bhelton71

    bhelton71 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '09

    2,390
    0
    Mar 7, 2007
    Yes apologies - I brought Lazarus back - I didn't realize it was a poll at the time - I just remembered spanky had some thread somewhere and did a search.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page