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
- - - - -

Beta Firmware up to 0192


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   Shades228

Shades228

    Hall Of Fame

  • Banned User
  • 5,914 posts
Joined: Mar 18, 2008

Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:27 PM

I'm reading DirecTV (soft?) bricked some of their receivers today with a SW update. I wonder if it was a font update?


I haven't heard that but I did hear of a small issue with activations that, last I heard, was resolved.
All comments are my own. Unless specifically stated, my views do NOT represent the views of DIRECTV

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

#22 OFFLINE   BAMCAT

BAMCAT

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 74 posts
Joined: Nov 24, 2007

Posted 18 June 2012 - 10:14 AM

Has anyone heard any more about the new release?

#23 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,697 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 18 June 2012 - 11:15 AM

It's not that simple. I have done the forced download during multiple update streams and it doesn't see the beta. Just reloads 18A. I assume the firmware watcher references to "tp" is the transponder #. 18A stays on one TP and the beta comes on another. I don't know how to get the box to look at the other TP.


You are right ... latest 0194 and 0195 spooled from tp21 while production 018A stay at tp3.

#24 OFFLINE   mkdtv21

mkdtv21

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 192 posts
Joined: May 26, 2007

Posted 18 June 2012 - 10:30 PM

As for KidZone, I was told that is not coming back, ever. That's all I know about that.

I can certainly see, given the history, why one would be confused about who is doing the development, who is in charge of rolling it out, etc.

I can see why anyone would be confused, because it's confusing. As I understand it, TiVo does 100% of the development for the THR22, and before code gets to us, DIRECTV checks and approves it.

As far as I know, DIRECTV does NOT force them to remove features.


So your saying it was not Directv's decision to remove kidzone but Tivo's? I thought I read somewhere that Tivo wanted to do so much more with the THR22 but Directv wouldn't let them.

#25 OFFLINE   frankygamer

frankygamer

    AllStar

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 94 posts
Joined: Jul 01, 2006

Posted 19 June 2012 - 05:59 PM

So your saying it was not Directv's decision to remove kidzone but Tivo's? I thought I read somewhere that Tivo wanted to do so much more with the THR22 but Directv wouldn't let them.


The general consensus from people with connections with DirecTV is TiVo has control over what goes on the box. TiVo, for whatever reason, has assigned minimum man power to this box and we should blame TiVo.

The general consensus from the TiVo crowd is why would TiVo limit it's feature set on it's own? It doesn't make sense so DirecTV must be limiting features. TiVo has no official comment which seems likely related to contractual agreements.

In the end nobody knows who will talk on the record. My guess is DirecTV paid TiVo more of a flat fee to stay on board and extend the no litigation agreement. Less was paid for actually putting a TiVo quality DVR out and making money from monthly fees. So TiVo gets money for doing little and lets a couple of interns develop on the HR22. DirecTV gets to use the TiVo brand name to get people on the phone and switch them to HRx DVRs.

Win-Win for the companies. Big loss for people would like/prefer TiVo and satellite.

#26 OFFLINE   dsw2112

dsw2112

    Always Searching

  • Registered
  • 1,936 posts
Joined: Jun 12, 2009

Posted 19 June 2012 - 06:14 PM

...Big loss for people would like/prefer TiVo and satellite...


I think you summed it up quite nicely here. I just don't see the THR22 as something either company can be proud of... It also begs some questions regarding why a THR22 is "snappier" than an HR21/HR22.
SL3-Slimline to SWM16 - DECA
HR34-700, HR24-500, & HR22-100

#27 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,697 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 19 June 2012 - 07:45 PM

... It also begs some questions regarding why a THR22 is "snappier" than an HR21/HR22.


I think it's obvious.
HW is the same, system tables, a/v streams are the same, then only SW is different.

BTW, last version of TiVo SW is 0x0195, spooled today ...

#28 OFFLINE   inkahauts

inkahauts

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 14,653 posts
Joined: Nov 13, 2006

Posted 19 June 2012 - 10:42 PM

The general consensus from people with connections with DirecTV is TiVo has control over what goes on the box. TiVo, for whatever reason, has assigned minimum man power to this box and we should blame TiVo.

The general consensus from the TiVo crowd is why would TiVo limit it's feature set on it's own? It doesn't make sense so DirecTV must be limiting features. TiVo has no official comment which seems likely related to contractual agreements.

In the end nobody knows who will talk on the record. My guess is DirecTV paid TiVo more of a flat fee to stay on board and extend the no litigation agreement. Less was paid for actually putting a TiVo quality DVR out and making money from monthly fees. So TiVo gets money for doing little and lets a couple of interns develop on the HR22. DirecTV gets to use the TiVo brand name to get people on the phone and switch them to HRx DVRs.

Win-Win for the companies. Big loss for people would like/prefer TiVo and satellite.



I would imagine it came down more to Tivo not wanting to spend any more money on this project than necessary since it is the only box they have running on this older style platform. The question I have is, will they be allowed to create software for the hr34 hardware, since they have built a new system that is very similar for their stand alone tivo line.

#29 OFFLINE   P Smith

P Smith

    Mr. FixAnything

  • Registered
  • 19,697 posts
  • LocationBay Area
Joined: Jul 25, 2002

Posted 19 June 2012 - 10:46 PM

... The question I have is, will they be allowed to create software for the hr34 hardware, since they have built a new system that is very similar for their stand alone tivo line.

I would bet - they will not allow. For many reasons, major is money. Who will share if it not forced ?

#30 OFFLINE   frankygamer

frankygamer

    AllStar

  • Topic Starter
  • Registered
  • 94 posts
Joined: Jul 01, 2006

Posted 20 June 2012 - 09:24 PM

My opinion is the current contract gives TiVo little incentive to put out a quality TiVo product. This may not have been the original hope of the new contract but that is what it has evolved into.

One thing I do take from the DirecTV crowd is TiVo has little man power on the project. If they don't commit the man power they will never be able to have SW running on the latest HW. But if TiVo is getting any sort of resistance from DirecTV on what TiVo wants to do, I completely understand TiVo making a business decision to do the minimum effort. Something as simple as disagreement on MRV implementation (THR22 to THR22 - streaming vs moving) could have been a showstopper to TiVo on the THR22. To make any DVR without MRV is pretty much dead product to the masses. Sure there is a small group who doesn't care but TiVo can't make a dent into the DTV DVR market without MRV.

#31 OFFLINE   htroberts

htroberts

    Cool Member

  • Registered
  • 24 posts
Joined: Aug 28, 2009

Posted 21 June 2012 - 02:37 PM

TiVo people get mad when they call DIRECTV and the agents try to steer them away from these boxes but ultimtely it's because of this. After the TiVo wears off and features become important customers get upset.


I think there's a perception on DirecTV's part that they make more money by selling their own DVR than by selling a DirecTiVo, and _that_ is why they steer customers away from TiVos, not because of problems with the TiVo.

What pisses me off is DirecTV's dis-ingenuousness about TiVo. That and their constant insistence that they value my business while demonstrating near contempt at the value of my time.

As far as development yes TiVo is a vendor of DIRECTV but they handle the software development side of it. DIRECTV stamps it and sends it. It's not a blame game it's just who owns what and who is going to drive it.


I doubt TiVo is a 'vendor'. There's most likely a partnership agreement somewhere that spells out what each party has to do for the other.

Originally, DirecTV didn't know if consumers would buy a DVR, so they got someone else to fund development of a new 'technology'. TiVo happened to end up being the market leader for a while, and DirecTV happened to have a DVR product at a good time to be selling DVRs.

Eventually DirecTV (well, Rupert Murdoch) got tired of writing checks to TiVo and built their own, but with an arguably less elegant user interface. The agreement probably says that as long as DirecTV offers TiVos, they can also roll their own DVR, and TiVo can't sue for intellectual property infringement.

Then HD & MPEG4 came in, and TiVo's DirecTV wouldn't work any more. Of course, DirecTV could just wait until they all die in the field and say "so sorry, here's one of our _new_ DVRs," which probably would not have made them unhappy. So TiVo has a choice: build (software for) a new box that DirecTV can offer, or lose IP rights. DirecTV has a choice: offer TiVo's new box or be sued.

Result: a Mexican standoff that neither side is happy with or very motivated to put resources into resolving.

Of course, this is all speculation on my part.




spam firewall