Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

DirecTV’s HD tuner set to debut with Windows 7?


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#101 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,726 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 12 November 2008 - 03:27 PM

Dish's 2-TV receivers limit the TV2 output to standard def, which is rapidly making them obsolete. Right now, CAT5 gives lots of options, is relatively inexpensive, and is a worldwide standard.

Also isn't Dish still using the Ku [only] SATs? If they are and [like DirecTV] use the 950-1450 MHz, there is a lot of the cable bandwidth not being use, compared to DirecTV.
A.K.A VOS

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#102 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 12 November 2008 - 03:45 PM

Jeremy, why do you have to be such a jackass?

If you don't agree, fine. If you want to debate, fine. There is no need to be such a jerk!

There, I feel better! :D

If you really want to get into this with me, feel free to PM me. I wouldn't suggest you do that, though. And that's all I'm going to say about that in this thread.

#103 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,542 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 12 November 2008 - 03:55 PM

As the move to x64 and Vista has shown us... you can't depend on developers for squat. The third party developers dragging their feet is mostly what gives Microsoft a bad name.

I respectfully disagree. The developers all made themselves "Windows NT" compatible with the advent of Win2K several years ago. And they're now re-compiling and tweaking their major apps to run on Linux for Corporate Europe. Most modern code is written in high-level languages and is relatively portable, so rewriting is not as big a deal as it used to be. The major Mac apps were all ported within 6 months of 0S-X (including Microsoft's and Adobe's). Besides that, the customers foot most of the bill for this anyway, having to pay for the upgrades.

And the fact of the matter is with the power of today's multi-core processors, the ability to run legacy apps in an XP virtual machine would make the transition to a new core much less painful all around.

The multi-core processors are also what's hiding this issue, somewhat, because as bloated as Vista is, it still runs reasonably well because the brute force computing power now available overcomes it's inefficiencies. But it's like making a baseball heavier and heavier and putting the players on more and more steroids so they can still hit it as far. At some point, you'll reach a point of diminishing returns. /steve
/steve

#104 OFFLINE   Ken S

Ken S

    RIP

  • Registered
  • 6,201 posts
Joined: Feb 12, 2007

Posted 12 November 2008 - 04:07 PM

I respectfully disagree. The developers all made themselves "Windows NT" compatible with the advent of Win2K several years ago. And they're now re-compiling and tweaking their major apps to run on Linux for Corporate Europe. Most modern code is written in high-level languages and is relatively portable, so rewriting is not as big a deal as it used to be. The major Mac apps were all ported within 6 months of 0S-X (including Microsoft's and Adobe's). Besides that, the customers foot most of the bill for this anyway, having to pay for the upgrades.

And the fact of the matter is with the power of today's multi-core processors, the ability to run legacy apps in an XP virtual machine would make the transition to a new core much less painful all around. /steve


Steve,

He's talking mostly about the the driver developers for things like printers, video cards etc. Some of them had over two years before the release of Vista to have drivers ready and didn't bother. Then when they do it they don't bother to do drivers for older devices (meaning the one they sold an hour ago)...they then blame the problem on Microsoft and hope the customer buys a new device.
The corporate side of things is far different...some update their applications quickly others will stay with an old app and OS to support it for years and years. I know of one major airline that was still running their ticketing application on Windows 3.1 in 2004. That's not a bad thing if it still works, but it does leave them open to security risks.

The other big issue with drivers is how many developers won't bother to get them certified for XP or Vista. Instead they instruct their users to bypass the warning and just install. That might be fine for their driver, but it really does instruct customers to avoid one of the better security/stability features that XP/2003/Vista/2008 offer.

Anyway, back on thread...I talked with a contact recently (same guy that told me in April that DirecTV drivers probably weren't coming until Windows 7) his belief was the delay was not on Microsoft's part...he wouldn't give specifics but did ask me how many HDPC-20s I had ever seen. He kind of intimated that DirecTV was in no rush to get this thing out.

#105 OFFLINE   mopzo

mopzo

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 127 posts
Joined: Jun 15, 2007

Posted 12 November 2008 - 07:36 PM

The size of the screen is unimportant, it's how far away you are from that screen. I'm typing on my 22" screen that is maybe 18" from me. To have that same ratio in my living room, I'd need a... 25' screen.

We network gurus can already use Direct2PC remotely... just gotta know what you're doing and have the bandwidth to back it up.

You won't be able to have high quality remote viewing on a standard DSL or cable connection... just not enough upstream capacity.



I could be wrong....but doesn't slingbox send HD content upstream?
Hitachi 51SWX20B w/HR20-100. LG 37LG50 w/HR22-100 and AM-21. Verizon FiOS w/Actiontec Router, Linksys PowerLine AV Network, Playstation 3, Wii, Dell XPS M1340, XM/Sirrus Satellite Radio, iPhone

#106 OFFLINE   mopzo

mopzo

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 127 posts
Joined: Jun 15, 2007

Posted 12 November 2008 - 07:43 PM

i have directv2pc installed on my htpc's and watch it on 62'' dlp's. its very nice as i have access to 6-hr2x's on those 2 hdtv's and i can watch whatever i want off of any of those receivers. thats why im excited


Goody for you.....I only have one set of eyes and only watch one thing at a time.
Hitachi 51SWX20B w/HR20-100. LG 37LG50 w/HR22-100 and AM-21. Verizon FiOS w/Actiontec Router, Linksys PowerLine AV Network, Playstation 3, Wii, Dell XPS M1340, XM/Sirrus Satellite Radio, iPhone

#107 OFFLINE   Jeremy W

Jeremy W

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 13,447 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 12 November 2008 - 07:56 PM

I could be wrong....but doesn't slingbox send HD content upstream?

Only the new Slingbox Pro-HD does, but it requires at least 1.5mbps upstream bandwidth to do HD over the Internet.

#108 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,726 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 12 November 2008 - 09:33 PM

Only the new Slingbox Pro-HD does, but it requires at least 1.5mbps upstream bandwidth to do HD over the Internet.

Now that must be HD-lite.
A.K.A VOS

#109 OFFLINE   nyelton

nyelton

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 32 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2008

Posted 13 November 2008 - 12:24 AM

Also isn't Dish still using the Ku [only] SATs? If they are and [like DirecTV] use the 950-1450 MHz, there is a lot of the cable bandwidth not being use, compared to DirecTV.


I believe they actually go up to ~2GHz with their DishPro/DishProPlus because they stack either both polarities from the same satellite simulataneously (DP) or stack the signals for both DVR tuners on one coax (DPP). Or something like that. I used to have Dish in an old apartment but that was a while ago.

But in any case, the Dish solution for MRV seems to me to be basically: run a long cable to the tv in the other room. I can (and do!) do the same thing with Directv. :)

#110 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,726 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:01 AM

I believe they actually go up to ~2GHz with their DishPro/DishProPlus because they stack either both polarities from the same satellite simulataneously (DP) or stack the signals for both DVR tuners on one coax (DPP). Or something like that. I used to have Dish in an old apartment but that was a while ago.

But in any case, the Dish solution for MRV seems to me to be basically: run a long cable to the tv in the other room. I can (and do!) do the same thing with Directv. :)

OK so they stack the "others" from 1550-2050 MHz [say] and still don't use the 250-750 MHz that DirecTV does.
What would you do if you had more than two TVs?
A.K.A VOS

#111 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,542 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 08:27 AM

Now that must be HD-lite.

Depends on the display. Data rates as low as 768kbps usually look very "HD" on a 15" or smaller laptop screen, which is probably the primary Slingbox audience. And the smaller the screen, the less kbps you need. /steve
/steve

#112 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,726 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 08:49 AM

Depends on the display. Data rates as low as 768kbps usually look very "HD" on a 15" or smaller laptop screen, which is probably the primary Slingbox audience. And the smaller the screen, the less kbps you need. /steve

And people complain about the 3 Mb/s SD PQ. :lol:
A.K.A VOS

#113 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,542 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 09:01 AM

And people complain about the 3 Mb/s SD PQ. :lol:

Ya, but when you're watching a Slingbox streaming video to your laptop, you have different expectations than sitting in your living room in front of a 50" display. :) /steve
/steve

#114 OFFLINE   BattleZone

BattleZone

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 8,969 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2007

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:33 AM

Also isn't Dish still using the Ku [only] SATs? If they are and [like DirecTV] use the 950-1450 MHz, there is a lot of the cable bandwidth not being use, compared to DirecTV.


Dish only uses Ku sats; all of them being DBS sats except for 118.7, which is an FSS sat, and used for Internationals. But while Dish's "legacy" LNBs and switches only used 950-1450, their DishPro and DishProPlus equipment uses band-stacking, placing one bank of transponders on 950-1450 and the other on 1550-2050 Mhz. This eliminates the need for voltage switching to select odd or even transponders, as both come down the line at the same time. Eliminating voltage switching means the receivers output a fixed 19V, which allows much longer runs of cable. Further, it means that only one cable needs to be run from each LNB to an external multiswitch, where legacy systems require 2 per LNB. Given that Dish systems often need 3 or 4 orbital locations, that's a big difference. Imagine having to run 8 cables from the dish to the switch inputs.

With DishProPlus, the receivers work something like a 2 channel SWM system: the receiver will send control messages for both tuners to the switch, and the switch will select the appropriate bank of TPs needed for the channel used by each tuner, and will output that bank to the 950-1450 band for tuner 1, or to the 1550-2050 band for tuner 2. A DPP Separator, which is just a custom diplexer, separates the two frequency bands and feeds the appropriate one to each tuner. That's how one cable can feed two tuners on the same receiver, but also why it can't be "split" to feed two single-tuner receivers (it can only have one "control" signal).

#115 OFFLINE   BattleZone

BattleZone

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 8,969 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2007

Posted 13 November 2008 - 10:41 AM

OK so they stack the "others" from 1550-2050 MHz [say] and still don't use the 250-750 MHz that DirecTV does.
What would you do if you had more than two TVs?


Dish doesn't have "MRV" in the sense that different receivers communicate with each other. What they have are dual (sat) tuner, dual-output receivers and DVRs that are designed to run 2 TVs. The second TV is output over coax, which is the only practical way to distribute the signal to rooms that may be on the far side of the house, etc. The remote for the second TV is RF, so if you're in a room connected to the TV2 output of the receiver, you have your own remote but no "box" in your room.

#116 OFFLINE   mhammett

mhammett

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 99 posts
Joined: Jul 18, 2007

Posted 13 November 2008 - 11:41 AM

I for one, would like to see the type of MRV that DISH has utilizing the existing coax infrastructure in your house. I don't want to have to run cat5 or 6 to every TV in the house and wireless won't cut it.


Also, and I may regret this but,

Jeremy, why do you have to be such a jackass?

If you don't agree, fine. If you want to debate, fine. There is no need to be such a jerk!

There, I feel better! :D


So instead of running a new Ethernet based infrastructure, you have to install coax from your receiver to a second TV, instead of from a central distribution area.... sounds like more of a PITA to me.

#117 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,726 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 12:09 PM

So instead of running a new Ethernet based infrastructure, you have to install coax from your receiver to a second TV, instead of from a central distribution area.... sounds like more of a PITA to me.

And have only one DVR feeding two TVs. What would one do if they had more than one DVR?
Dish = MRV 1.0
DirecTV = MRV 2.0
A.K.A VOS

#118 OFFLINE   nyelton

nyelton

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 32 posts
Joined: Sep 03, 2008

Posted 13 November 2008 - 12:10 PM

So instead of running a new Ethernet based infrastructure, you have to install coax from your receiver to a second TV, instead of from a central distribution area.... sounds like more of a PITA to me.


More importantly, you can only watch two simulataneous programs from the DVR, and all remote locations are standard definition.

#119 OFFLINE   Steve

Steve

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 22,542 posts
Joined: Aug 22, 2006

Posted 13 November 2008 - 12:14 PM

More importantly, you can only watch two simulataneous programs from the DVR, and all remote locations are standard definition.

Curiously, FiOS TV"s initial MRV implemenation was also only SD to remote locations, even though it was networked based and the source was HD. This may be because the first client boxes were only SD, but I"m not sure. I believe now HD is available to all locations. /steve
/steve

#120 OFFLINE   BattleZone

BattleZone

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 8,969 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2007

Posted 13 November 2008 - 01:06 PM

So instead of running a new Ethernet based infrastructure, you have to install coax from your receiver to a second TV, instead of from a central distribution area.... sounds like more of a PITA to me.


To be fair, it usually isn't done that way. Normally, the TV2 signal is diplexed back into the satellite line to get the TV2 signal back to the central distribution area, and then diplexed out and connected to the line going to TV2. This is assuming that there are already home-runs in place for the TV2 room. If not, then, yes, often the solution is running a coax directly from the receiver to the TV2.




spam firewall