Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Rich, Sep 30, 2012.
it sort of total offtopic (yes, the drive is bad - you'll need another one )
That is the main reason for the need for large hard drives. I get the time to watch maybe an hour of TV per day. So if I want to be able to watch my shows, then I need to be able to store it for when I can watch it. If networks didn't take breaks in the middle of the season, I don't think I would ever catch up.
It saves and make them money. It isn't hard to imagine that if recordings on an eSATA from an HR21 could be moved to an HR24, that there would be a higher than normal failure rate on HR21's. And it make them money because as noted, I have my old HR20-700 doing nothing but serving up recordings.
Well written post. What I'd REALLY like is the ability to use a NAS on my network to backup/store stuff on the HR34.
The majority don't record EVERYTHING, just what they know they'll watch later. I think it's called, "having a life outside of TV", which I'm not familiar with. My parents never have more than 4 shows in their playlist. They record, watch it later that day or the next, then delete it. They just have 5 or 6 series links. They love their DVR, and it's from TWC (no accounting for taste)!
If you think about it, if some people only have an hour or two each day to watch TV, why do they record at a rate more than that? That'll produce a backlog of recorded shows that will never be watched. It's kind of like an electronic version of hoarding. If you wait longer than 6 months to watch it, the DVD for it will be out anyway. Just delete the unwatched show and let it go.
I'm somewhere in between. My main 500 GB drive is never more than 80% full with four people using it. We do have shows from the last month or two but that's about it. The only exception is recordings of movies during the premium channels' free preview weekends. I don't know why we record them -- we never watch those movies and end up deleting them a year later still unwatched.
That's the answer I've been getting for years. I believe it. I think it's typical of the Great American Herd to ignore the good things technology can provide. Or just not understand it. I don't think the eSATA function is a "good" thing, I think (hell, I know) it's a "great" thing.
But, I do believe you're correct in your assumptions.
Other way around. BSD is a variant of AT&T Unix and Linux came later as a way to get a PD form that was very similar.
Over the years they have gone slightly different ways but I am willing to bet that C source code for Linux programs would compile under OS X without too much trouble if it ran in a terminal window. There might be issues with libraries, but that might only be an issue for programs specifically needing Linux capabilities not present in BSD.
As an example, I had source from the old Unix ToolChest (System III) that I was able to compile with no problem under OS X. However, much of that has been replaced by GNU programs which I guess is the Unix variant of Linux.
I've been using eSATA setups on my HR2x's since 2006, in all that time I've only lost 2 HDD's between my 3 DVR's....but several had been upgraded multiple times as larger capacity hdd's hit that pricepoint...like going from 1TB drives a few years ago, to 1.5TB, and finally 2TB's where I sit until they increase the allowable size on the HR2x line.
That's what I did too. Spent a lot of money doing it. With multiple HRs, I don't think I really need an HDD larger than 2TBs. Very rarely do I ever approach 20% Available on any of my HRs.
For several years HP sold a PC with a drive bay where users could plug in a USB drive and swap it out at will. It looked great and worked well, but HP stopped doing it because the plug-in drives were of course proprietary, undersized and expensive.
I love your idea of extending this to the HMC, and either allowing users to swap drives or if nothing else, giving techs spare drives to plug in during a service call. It's plug-and-play at its simplest.
This would require a much larger chassis, though, and likely will raise the cost of the devices, so unfortunately I don't see it happening. Would be really nice though ...
I spent a lot of money buying Owned DVRs so I could Upgrade the Internal Hard Drives with 2 TB Hard Drives and now I am happy to have 7 DVRs with 14 Terabytes of Hard Drive Capacity.
3 of my 7 DVRs Backup the other 4 DVRs and that is their Sole Purpose.
And I just Love my WHDVR Service.
I do kind of agree on the hoarding comment.
We over-record, but we do so for the times where are no new network shows on. Take the week before Thanksgiving. There will be no new shows on, so nothing will be recording. We will use this time to check out new series. For example, we are recording Vegas. We watched the Pilot and liked it, but not enough yet to have it bump 5-0 or Castle or Person of Interest. So episodes will pile up and we will get to it when nothing new is available. The network season is getting shorter and shorter, so we just make sure we always have something new.
Only the HR34 will ever support more that a 2.2 TB hard drive. There is a universal barrier at play here. Older PCs using BIOS also can't ever support more than 2.2 TB. The fix for the older receivers involves a significant firmware change and either playing games with the partition table (always dangerous) or formatting the hard drive, which would tick off just about everybody. It may even be a chipset limitation which would make it physically impossible.
In fact, I think the HR34 is the only DVR on this planet today that supports more than 2.2 TB hard drives.
I disagree. In the case of the DIRECTV implementation, there are a number of impediments:
users can't bring themselves to "waste" the internal drive
little to no marketing of the feature
weak official documentation of the feature
uncertainty of what hardware will get you what you want
significantly more hardware combinations don't work 100% than do
having to reprogram recording preferences with each drive
all of your eggs in a bigger basket that cannot survive a DVR failure
Most cable DVRs don't need a whole lot of space because so much of the content is instantly available via VOD. Some cable setups don't even require a DVR for VOD. DIRECTV can't provide that kind of VOD accessibility so their customers need to store it locally.
You have to go back to Y2K's demon child, Windows Me, to find an operating system that relies on the motherboard BIOS for its low level hard drive functions.
Where is a 'magic' number 2.2 came from ?
No one did post partitioning of the HR34 with 3 TB drive. I would say it's using 2 TB of total space these 3/4 TB drives.
Dish is supporting 3 TB for EHD.
No need to do "a significant firmware change" (why you exaggerating ?), just a few changes related to buffer size (512->4096) and corresponding use of it.
And you would be wrong... I'm pretty sure I posted the partition information and it is using all 3TB of a 3TB drive, all 4TB of a 4TB JBOD, all 6TB of a 6TB JBOD and all 12TB of a 12TB JBOD. My 9TB RAID 5 Array is using all 9TB.
Don't understand that. I know what a JBOD is but I don't understand what you're doing with all of the setups. In short, I'm lost. Whoosh.
I'm lost as well, please explain.
I'm relatively certain that this is a false statement.
The MBR can only support 2^32 unique LBAs, because it only supports 32-bit values for them.
2^32 * 512 bytes/sector = 2.2 TB. No partition can go past the 2.2 TB point on the hard drive when using MBR.
You need to replace the MBR with a GPT, update all the built-in disk tools (ex. gdisk not fdisk) accordingly, and whatever little misc. things the software and/or firmware might need to get it to work. It's not trivial, especially when trying to do it remotely for millions of customers with existing boxes full of recordings they'd like to keep.
It's a lot easier to do what D* did -- create a new branch of software for a new device and have that device support it from its initial release.
It was thought that advanced format drives would set this limitation to 17.6 TB, but to make them backward compatible they emulated 512 bytes/sector. Each one of those emulated sectors needs a unique LBA entry, and you have the same exact problem.
The THR22-100 (and all Tivos) have the same problem, as the Apple Partition Manager is also limited to 32-bit LBA entries.