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
- - - - -

Hr !!


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   dobok

dobok

    Mentor

  • Registered
  • 56 posts
Joined: Feb 06, 2010

Posted 02 July 2013 - 06:28 AM

Just wondering out loud ---What is the next (NEW) Dvr that D is working on or is starting to work on. Just wondering!!!  Whats next for US !!!!



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

#2 OFFLINE   jimmie57

jimmie57

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 3,420 posts
  • LocationTexas City, TX
Joined: Jun 26, 2010

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:07 AM

This is strictly a guess.

In the game of one upmanship that businesses play I would think that the next one would have 8 tuners.

Why, well, the fact that the SWM LNB handles 8 tuners, why wouldn't the receiver ?

Along with that, possibly wireless transmission to the sets connected to it.


DirecTV customer since 1996 - Current :Slimline 3 SWM,   HR24-100 HDMI to 32" Sharp LED,
HR24-100 Component cables to 46" Samsung LCD & Optical Cable to Yamaha AVR, H21-200 HDMI to Yamaha AVR & HDMI to 52" Mitsubishi LCD


#3 OFFLINE   CCarncross

CCarncross

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 7,058 posts
  • LocationJackson
Joined: Jul 19, 2005

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:17 AM

Just wondering out loud ---What is the next (NEW) Dvr that D is working on or is starting to work on. Just wondering!!!  Whats next for US !!!!

Is the HR44 not enough for the next few months?  Its just becoming available nationally, so it is brand spankin new for most.



#4 OFFLINE   rmmccann

rmmccann

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 163 posts
  • LocationND, USA
Joined: Apr 16, 2012

Posted 02 July 2013 - 08:35 AM

An 8 tuner DVR sounds nice, but the thing that would shy me away from it would be the single point of failure for my TV services. Assuming you have an 8 tuner DVR and all "clients" you'd be DOA if the main box failed.


If you judge a fish on its ability to climb a tree, you will live your whole life believing it is stupid.

#5 OFFLINE   Laxguy

Laxguy

    Fortuna! Fameux des Halles

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 11,967 posts
  • LocationWinters, California
Joined: Dec 02, 2010

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:05 AM

Just wondering out loud ---What is the next (NEW) Dvr that D is working on or is starting to work on. Just wondering!!!  Whats next for US !!!!

 

Probably some new software that'll allow existing STBs to do more, hopefully faster. And possibly even smaller STB's, wireless, though that is to me a marketing gimmick, necessary to offset others touting their stuff. 

 

If you're holding off committing due to the "next great thing" as so many do with computers, don't wait. This is a good time to get a Genie!


"Laxguy" means a guy who loves lacrosse.

#6 OFFLINE   TomCat

TomCat

    Broadcast Engineer

  • Registered
  • 3,548 posts
Joined: Aug 31, 2002

Posted 02 July 2013 - 06:48 PM

An 8 tuner DVR sounds nice, but the thing that would shy me away from it would be the single point of failure for my TV services. Assuming you have an 8 tuner DVR and all "clients" you'd be DOA if the main box failed.


Who can disagree with that?

Distributed failure potential is the hallmark of good security. This is why I see the whole house DVR as a sham; it trades the false front of potential convenience for unneeded added complexity and added problems as well as a single potential point of failure.

 

And if you think DBS companies are bringing us this because it is what customers want and is somehow better, think again, sheeple. They are doing it for the exact same reason they went to SWM (another questionable technology we didn't need) which is to decrease the infrastructure and to        save         them         money,      as they simultaneously raise our rates with the other hand. It always will come down to cash when dealing with conglomerate overlords, and never the altruism of providing us with whiz-bang new toys out of the goodness of their hearts. Wake-y, wake-y.

If you asked me if I would rather have an 8 TB array connected to a 8-tuner server that has to distribute video over a home network or would I rather have four 2 TB DVRs I don't have to think twice about the answer. As a matter of fact that is exactly what I have. I can accept the inconvenience of double-recording everything that is important to me and not having an integrated playlist very easily over the horrors I see reported on these forums. It also means I have four separate independent microprocessors working on recording, indexing, and playing back my content, rather than one.

I've lost 4 media HDDs and/or DVRs in about 4 years, which is probably (unfortunately for me) well over the average, yet I've never lost or missed a program. There is a term for that: a proven system that works.


Edited by TomCat, 02 July 2013 - 07:09 PM.

It's usually safe to talk honestly and openly with people because they typically are not really listening anyway.

#7 OFFLINE   peds48

peds48

    🙈🙉🙊📡

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 10,330 posts
  • LocationLong Island, NY
Joined: Jan 10, 2008

Posted 02 July 2013 - 09:25 PM

 They are doing it for the exact same reason they went to SWM (another questionable technology we didn't need) which is to decrease the infrastructure and to        save         them         money,     

 

And I always thought they changed to SWM to make our jobs (installers) easier  :rotfl:


Here’s to the crazy ones.
The misfits. The rebels.
The the troublemakers.
The round pegs in the square holes.

The ones who see things different.
They’re not fond of rules, and they have no respect for the status quo.


Think Differently 

#8 OFFLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 12,751 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 03 July 2013 - 09:28 AM

And customers likely wouldn't want to have 5 coax inputs on a Genie.



#9 OFFLINE   mrdobolina

mrdobolina

    AllStar

  • Registered
  • 302 posts
  • LocationA Mile High
Joined: Aug 28, 2006

Posted 03 July 2013 - 11:12 AM

I'm thinking that DirecTV will develop a solution to the "single point of failure" prior to releasing an 8 tuner DVR.  SSD?  Some sort of Cloud backup/storage?  Swappable EHD tied to account?  Now, I don't think even DTV's definition of "soon" applies here, but perhaps this is the next "service/feature" that will be released prior to a next gen DVR. 


DirecTV Customer Since 1997

#10 OFFLINE   Bill Broderick

Bill Broderick

    Icon

  • Registered
  • 1,445 posts
  • LocationLong Island
Joined: Aug 25, 2006

Posted 03 July 2013 - 11:19 AM

They are doing it for the exact same reason they went to SWM (another questionable technology we didn't need) which is to decrease the infrastructure and to        save         them         money,

I think that the big advantage of SWM for DirecTV was that it opened their market to people who's homes were already pre-wired for cable, with a single coax to each TV location.  These people already had DVR's from the cable company (using he single coax).  They weren't about to convert to DirecTV and lose the two tuner DVR capability that they already had.



#11 OFFLINE   unixguru

unixguru

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 570 posts
Joined: Jul 09, 2007

Posted 03 July 2013 - 11:35 AM

They need to slow down hardware releases further.  I can see an HR24 replacement that will have an external power supply (since disk and power supply are primary failure modes).  Then what?  What major hardware improvements are really needed (before, ugh, 4K!)?  A two-disk RAID1 external disk enclosure would be nice - although unnecessary if they just made software able to mirror series and recordings across multiple DVRs.

 

In my opinion, they should put less money into hardware going forward and more money into software.  There are so many things that they could do better - to greatly improve the hardware we already have.

 



#12 OFFLINE   jdspencer

jdspencer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 6,565 posts
Joined: Nov 07, 2003

Posted 05 July 2013 - 07:58 AM

They need to slow down hardware releases further.  I can see an HR24 replacement that will have an external power supply (since disk and power supply are primary failure modes).  Then what?  What major hardware improvements are really needed (before, ugh, 4K!)?  A two-disk RAID1 external disk enclosure would be nice - although unnecessary if they just made software able to mirror series and recordings across multiple DVRs.

 

In my opinion, they should put less money into hardware going forward and more money into software.  There are so many things that they could do better - to greatly improve the hardware we already have.

I couldn't agree more!  I have two HR2x units connected to a legacy 5LNB and also to my network using ethernet.

I have had no problems with this setup and don't expect to change anything until I'm forced to.

What would be nice is to have the capability to schedule programs from either HR to the other one.


DirecTV since '96, Waivers for ABC, CBS, NBC, & Fox, HR23-700 & HR24-500/AM21, using ethernet based MRV.

#13 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,474 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 05 July 2013 - 10:38 AM

Who can disagree with that?

Distributed failure potential is the hallmark of good security. This is why I see the whole house DVR as a sham; it trades the false front of potential convenience for unneeded added complexity and added problems as well as a single potential point of failure.

 

And if you think DBS companies are bringing us this because it is what customers want and is somehow better, think again, sheeple. They are doing it for the exact same reason they went to SWM (another questionable technology we didn't need) which is to decrease the infrastructure and to        save         them         money,      as they simultaneously raise our rates with the other hand. It always will come down to cash when dealing with conglomerate overlords, and never the altruism of providing us with whiz-bang new toys out of the goodness of their hearts. Wake-y, wake-y.

If you asked me if I would rather have an 8 TB array connected to a 8-tuner server that has to distribute video over a home network or would I rather have four 2 TB DVRs I don't have to think twice about the answer. As a matter of fact that is exactly what I have. I can accept the inconvenience of double-recording everything that is important to me and not having an integrated playlist very easily over the horrors I see reported on these forums. It also means I have four separate independent microprocessors working on recording, indexing, and playing back my content, rather than one.

I've lost 4 media HDDs and/or DVRs in about 4 years, which is probably (unfortunately for me) well over the average, yet I've never lost or missed a program. There is a term for that: a proven system that works.

 

And yet, you've called my system "clunky".  Change your mind?  You seem to be agreeing with me now.  Aside from that, a very good, realistic post.   

 

Rich



#14 OFFLINE   Drucifer

Drucifer

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 7,860 posts
  • LocationNY Hudson Valley
Joined: Feb 12, 2009

Posted 05 July 2013 - 12:24 PM

The weak link in current HRs are their HDDs. So look for another storage method.


Edited by Drucifer, 05 July 2013 - 01:49 PM.

DREW

Do it Right, Do it Once
LR: HR34-7, Den: HR24-1, MB: HR24-5, Bsm: HR21-2, Kit: H25-5
PrimeStar '95, DirecTV  '00


#15 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,474 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 05 July 2013 - 01:26 PM

The weak link in current HRs are their HHDs. So look for another storage method.

 

True, in a box using only the internal drive.  Add an external HDD and the device holding the external HDD becomes the weak link.

 

Rich



#16 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,968 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 05 July 2013 - 02:46 PM

And yet, you've called my system "clunky".  Change your mind?  You seem to be agreeing with me now.  Aside from that, a very good, realistic post.   

 

Rich

Agree with most of TomCat's post here as well;

 

Except for his criticism of SWiM technology which I really feel worked out way better for both DIRECTV and customers over legacy.

 

No way do I miss having to run two lines to each DVR with BBCs on their ends, not to mention making the development of DECA (MoCA) impossible and have to rely on hit, miss, or so-so performance of home ethernet networking for MRV service.  


DIRECTV sub. since Sep. of '95


#17 OFFLINE   ticmxman

ticmxman

    Legend

  • Registered
  • 282 posts
Joined: Aug 27, 2007

Posted 05 July 2013 - 02:55 PM

Yep TomCat is 100% correct, there is no way I would have only one dvr such as the genie and clients. Genie fails and your viewing and recordings are gone.
T

#18 OFFLINE   Rich

Rich

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 20,474 posts
  • LocationPiscataway, NJ
Joined: Feb 22, 2007

Posted 06 July 2013 - 10:21 AM

Agree with most of TomCat's post here as well;

 

Except for his criticism of SWiM technology which I really feel worked out way better for both DIRECTV and customers over legacy.

 

No way do I miss having to run two lines to each DVR with BBCs on their ends, not to mention making the development of DECA (MoCA) impossible and have to rely on hit, miss, or so-so performance of home ethernet networking for MRV service.  

 

I had ten HRs on Ethernet before the DECA was available and I couldn't hold that many for very long.  DECA didn't completely solve that problem, I still have issues, but it's simply much better than Ethernet.  One of these days I have to have some techs out to parallel my DECA system, right now it is cascaded.  I'm having a new roof installed the end of July and that would be a good time to have the system paralleled.  

 

Rich



#19 OFFLINE   dennisj00

dennisj00

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 8,398 posts
  • LocationLake Norman, NC
Joined: Sep 27, 2007

Posted 06 July 2013 - 10:45 AM

Rich, check out 'When one Swim isn't enough. . .  http://www.dbstalk.c...im-isnt-enough/

 

I ordered the splitters from SolidSignal  and a bunch of 18" RG-6 jumpers from Monoprice.  Very easy install.  Just be sure of the splitter orientation on the load side the swims. (NAS 9501 diplexers) . . http://www.dbstalk.c...im-isnt-enough/

 

I don't let installers touch my stuff.  They can do the roof/dish stuff.



Spending to stimulate the economy as fast as the credit cards will allow!

My Setup / Weather at Lake Norman!/ Boathouse BEES
DLB, MRV, nomad, HDGUI are HERE! . . . We're DONE!


#20 OFFLINE   HoTat2

HoTat2

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 4,968 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles, CA.
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 06 July 2013 - 11:18 AM

I had ten HRs on Ethernet before the DECA was available and I couldn't hold that many for very long.  DECA didn't completely solve that problem, I still have issues, but it's simply much better than Ethernet.  One of these days I have to have some techs out to parallel my DECA system, right now it is cascaded.  I'm having a new roof installed the end of July and that would be a good time to have the system paralleled.  

 

Rich

Understood;

 

Perhaps I should somewhat reword my earlier statement of what i was trying to say as ....

 

... No way do I miss having to run two lines to each DVR with BBCs on their ends, not to mention making an easy convenient path for a DECA (MoCA) signal to traverse near impossible. Thus having to rely on the myriad of home ethernet networking configurations for MRV, resulting in a "total hit," "total miss," or somewhere in between the two connectivity performance for WH service. 

 

 


DIRECTV sub. since Sep. of '95





spam firewall