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

Why the $3.00 charge for mrv


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   Beerstalker

Beerstalker

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 2,986 posts
Joined: Feb 09, 2009

Posted 27 July 2012 - 09:18 AM

Yes my h20's truly went dead. No, they refused to replace them with refurbed 21 and they sent 20's. Was told i would have to upgrade and lock in for 2 more years to get refub 21.


This sounds very strange, as far as I knew they were not sending out H20s anymore to anyone. How long ago did this take place? Did they ask you if you used OTA?

The next time one of your H20s breaks and you call in to get it replaced be sure to tell them you don't use OTA. If you do that they most likely will be replaced with an H21 or newer HD receiver.
Sometimes when I reflect back on all the beer I drink I feel ashamed. Then I look into the glass and think about the workers in the brewery and all of their hopes and dreams. If I didn’t drink this beer, they might be out of work and their dreams would be shattered. Then I say to myself, "It is better that I drink this beer and let their dreams come true than be selfish and worry about my liver."
-by Jack Handy

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

#22 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 570 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 27 July 2012 - 01:51 PM

lux·u·ry (lgzh-r, lksh-)
n. pl. lux·u·ries
1. Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort.
2. Something expensive or hard to obtain.

Yes pay TV is a luxury...you don't need it to survive


Obviously. The same can be said of many things that are considered essential.

Landline phone - only 911 is essential.

Gas - only for heating/cooking is essential.

Electricity - again only heating/cooking is essential.

Anything beyond that is a luxury. So why aren't these other utilities only regulated up to the essential level with the rest being unregulated luxury? For example, any phone service beyond 911, gas or electric usage beyond minimal level, etc.

Luxury isn't black and white.

#23 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 570 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 27 July 2012 - 02:10 PM

Let me know when U-who gets that working on par with DirecTV.


Obviously not there - yet.

From a technological standpoint it's possible now. The now discontinued Vudu box, the Channel Master box, etc. Things have slipped back a bit as they apparently think that pure streaming is good enough - it's not, especially with full HD. And less than full HD is a fail.

The only thing preventing it is the content providers and their tightly controlled distribution channels. They mistakenly believe that they will be able to avoid the fate of the music and book industries.

"Quality" content has become mostly an oxymoron with the "networks". A few successes mixed with a lot of failures. This is exactly like the music industry used to be - forcing people to buy an entire "album" rather than just the songs they want. It's gonna end for TV.

Movies are already widely available on many internet services. Vudu looks like the best at the moment.

If DTV were wise (which they evidently are not) they would be driving this revolution. The choice is lead the wave or be crushed by it.

#24 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,723 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 27 July 2012 - 03:07 PM

Obviously not there - yet.

From a technological standpoint it's possible now.

If DTV were wise (which they evidently are not) they would be driving this revolution. The choice is lead the wave or be crushed by it.

If you're talking about one show at a time, sure, if you have enough bandwidth from your ISP.
What happens when there is more than one viewer?

DirecTV already has a delivery system in place, why reinvent the wheel?

U-Who has a delivery system, but it isn't there yet and it is their game.

"Snatching" a show of the net every once and a while, doesn't really show "from a technological standpoint" it's really possible to feed enough to enough people.
A.K.A VOS

#25 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 570 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 31 July 2012 - 08:53 AM

If you're talking about one show at a time, sure, if you have enough bandwidth from your ISP.
What happens when there is more than one viewer?

DirecTV already has a delivery system in place, why reinvent the wheel?

U-Who has a delivery system, but it isn't there yet and it is their game.

"Snatching" a show of the net every once and a while, doesn't really show "from a technological standpoint" it's really possible to feed enough to enough people.


First of all, I'm not suggesting that "internet streaming" is a solution. The internet is not - yet - able to provide consistent high-bandwidth. However, a device can effectively shield the user experience from that issue using current technology. On Demand already does this; it's just (software) limited in what and when it will download.

Sat delivery system is extremely complicated and expensive. Requires dedicated dish at each subscriber location and all that installer cost. Not possible without bundling programming - getting a certain amount of $ on average per subscriber. Cable has same issue.

The internet is different. It's already in homes for other reasons. Using it for video entertainment delivery only requires additional investment in capacity - investment that is already going on. It's also source-neutral; that is, the delivery mechanism is completely decoupled from the source material and supplier. This allows true competition and pay-for-what-you-get.

Consider what has happened to music. Entire old distribution system was crushed. People used sneakernet to retrieve 600MB chunks of music (CD) from a brick-and-mortar store. Now you click with no thought of bandwidth or storage capacity. Plus you can now pay only for exactly what you want - and that price is very reasonable. You own what you purchased, within copyright restrictions, forever - play as many times as you want.

BTW, how successful are the satellite music services? Er, I mean service. Not so much. "Broadcast" is dying.

"TV" will go this way.

Just because we don't currently have a product out there that does exactly what is needed - and matches the characteristics of the internet - doesn't mean it isn't technologically possible.

I talked about this a little in my post.

The technology standpoint I referred to is that D* DVRs already has "On Demand". Select the program you want and it downloads to local storage. Watch at any time after a sufficient amount of the program is downloaded. It's not a technology limitation that you have to manually tell it specifically what program to download.

Consider a Series list that pulls new episodes over the internet as they become available. Configurable for when and how much bandwidth it tries to use (for example, 90% bandwidth from midnight to 6am and then 10% rest of the time). (This will go away as the internet evolves.) Configurable for how many episodes to cache. Watch and delete one episode and the next available one is queued for retrieval at a later time (when next in line and bandwidth config allows). It doesn't need to grab it immediately because you've already got some number of unwatched episodes already downloaded. There should be 1 box in each household for this - like HMC - with RVU clients.

Nice side benefit: if your box dies the content was remembered in the cloud. The replacement box just re-caches.

If live program is absolutely needed - just "stream" it.

The installation/maintenance is done entirely by the user. (Or Geek Squad or similar.) No more difficult than plugging in a router.

For locations where internet service is not sufficient use satellite to deliver internet bandwidth. Imagine the bandwidth available if all D* sats used spot-beam for internet. Internet protocols also have routing features that could be used to deliver episodes with high consumption via a single nation-wide stream (like broadcast of new episodes).

What is stopping this at the moment is that a lot of programming is owned by distribution companies. They keep their distribution monopoly by limiting the availability of the content.

#26 OFFLINE   veryoldschool

veryoldschool

    Lifetime Achiever

  • Moderators
  • 41,723 posts
Joined: Dec 09, 2006

Posted 31 July 2012 - 09:15 AM

First of all, I'm not suggesting that "internet streaming" is a solution. The internet is not - yet - able to provide consistent high-bandwidth.

So when all the homes have fiber, this will be a viable method.
Before we have that type of bandwidth, it's too limited to replace the current systems providing entertainment.

And now: What the hell does this have to do with a $3 charge for MRV? :confused:

Might I suggest this forum would be a better place for your topic: http://www.iptvconnection.com/

Edited by veryoldschool, 31 July 2012 - 09:26 AM.

A.K.A VOS

#27 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 570 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 02 August 2012 - 06:34 AM

So when all the homes have fiber, this will be a viable method.
Before we have that type of bandwidth, it's too limited to replace the current systems providing entertainment.

And now: What the hell does this have to do with a $3 charge for MRV? :confused:

Might I suggest this forum would be a better place for your topic: http://www.iptvconnection.com/


There is lots of bandwidth available now when people are at work and sleeping. The whole point of what I described - time-shift the downloads.

As others have said, MRV charge because they can. That's what near-monopoly does. Internet breaks distribution monopoly. With real competition we wouldn't have charges like MRV and HD.

#28 OFFLINE   HiDefGator

HiDefGator

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 187 posts
Joined: Nov 19, 2005

Posted 02 August 2012 - 11:04 AM

This sounds very strange, as far as I knew they were not sending out H20s anymore to anyone.


The last time I asked they said they always try to send out the same model of DVR being returned because it reduces installation issues.

#29 OFFLINE   wahooq

wahooq

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 922 posts
Joined: Oct 19, 2011

Posted 02 August 2012 - 04:50 PM

HR/H20's are being taken out of circulation
My comments and opinions are my own and not necessarily those of DirecTV.




spam firewall