1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DIRECTV Re: OTA: "We Will Have a Dual Tuner Solution"

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Tom Robertson, Oct 28, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Oct 29, 2007 #241 of 1344
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    I think you missed the whole point of this thread .. there WILL be a solution for OTA. We just don't know what that is. And BTW, I'm just as in the dark as you as to what that solution is going to be.
     
  2. Oct 29, 2007 #242 of 1344
    mhayes70

    mhayes70 New Member

    4,224
    3
    Mar 21, 2006
    Ken S:

    Good information. Thanks for posting!
     
  3. Oct 29, 2007 #243 of 1344
    Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    That explains where some of the cost is and that doesn't even include the material and assembly charges.
     
  4. Oct 29, 2007 #244 of 1344
    Racer88

    Racer88 Icon

    802
    1
    Sep 12, 2006
    Is it anywhere within the realm of possibility that the future OTA solution could be a self contained module, not entirely unlike a SWM or other multiswitch, whose output could be transposed onto the normal data stream of the coax running to the sat port(s) and properly interpreted and displayed by the IRD for what it is?

    Possibly using the flex port technology?

    Talk of migrating users from 72.5.....

    Hmmmm?

    EDITED: I'll save a link to this post to refer back to when the solution is revealed to see how close I was since obviously this post will be lost in all the pointless arguing about what it costs to build a DVR......sigh
     
  5. Oct 29, 2007 #245 of 1344
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Enough with the cost estimates...

    They are all speculations.... so unless you can pull up an order form, and prove any of the components costs....

    None of us have the exact figures and estimates for each and every component....

    :backtotop
     
  6. Oct 29, 2007 #246 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    We've split the cost estimates into its own thread. If you wish to participate, please review the first post and the ground rules. OT Posts have been and will be deleted. :)

    The thread is here: http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=107188

    And as Earl said, let us keep this thread back on topic of what an OTA solution will look like. Thanks!

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  7. Oct 29, 2007 #247 of 1344
    flipptyfloppity

    flipptyfloppity New Member

    1,073
    0
    Aug 20, 2007
    I hope this doesn't qualify as a rant.

    I just say OTA matters to me and some others. I think D* would do well to keep these people as customers because they represent revenue, and they are some of the most rabid customers who represent some of the most revenue per-subscriber.

    I think trying to over-monetize these people is bad too. Obviously D* has to figure out how to recoup their extra costs to service these customers, but they shouldn't overdo it.

    D* has to balance all this, to get costs down so they can give away more free PVR receivers (esp. with E* putting the heat on, now cable and E* PVRs are free), but also to not drive these customers away.

    I figure they're smart enough to do it, I just hope they're not dumb enough to think they don't need to bother.

    This is not an unheard of situation, I question D*'s market research. Did they really ask the right questions. It isn't a question of how many people use OTA (a figure you can get easily by programming your boxes to send the info over the phone to you), but more how many people subscribed citing OTA as an issue.

    Ask any company that tried to make a PC with few or no slots. Yes, no one ever uses them. But yet many people will not buy a PC without them. They think they need them, and since the point is to sell as many units as possible, you have to pay attention to what the customer uses as a buying criterion, even if it diverges from what they actually need.

    I'm saddened that the situation (with D* and on this board) has become as it has. I like my service, but I have difficulty recommending it to others, since I don't know what service D* will really offer to my friends if they try to sign up.

    As someone else said, we're back to the Turkish Bazaar again. When I upgraded to MPEG4, I tried to figure out what the service packages were and how much it would cost me per month. It took effort to find all the fees (HD access, PVR fee, leasing, etc.) and come up with a figure, and I was still wrong.

    D* should have am more menu-like pricing scheme. You can see what you can get and how much it would cost. If I can option and price a car on the web, there's no reason I can't click a few boxes and figure out what service will cost me per month. They could even calculate up front fees and taxes if they wish to do so (I doubt they do, they'd rather hide them, as their competitors do also).

    Okay, end story. I don't want to start another battle, I just want D* to know (if they read this) that I want OTA, I don't want to pay per month for it (that's kind of the point), but I'll pay up front a bit more to get a receiver that can do it. And please, for your own good, figure out your pricing and make a web page that can explain it properly.
     
  8. Oct 29, 2007 #248 of 1344
    Tom Robertson

    Tom Robertson Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    21,331
    247
    Nov 15, 2005
    flippityfloppity, well said. Does not qualify as rant. (bonus score!) :)

    Menu pricing for OTA features would not be a bad thing, especially if they can do it by reducing the price of the HR21 rather than increasing the price of the HR20.

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  9. Oct 29, 2007 #249 of 1344
    dbmaven

    dbmaven Icon

    810
    0
    May 29, 2004
    I would think that a 'modular' solution would make sense.

    Build the 'next generation' HD-DVR with a slot in the back that you could slide in an OTA tuner card.

    Here are the benefits I see:
    1 - a common platform, OS and application software. Reduction in manufacturing costs from standardization.
    2 - No "stranded customers". If you know, or find out, that you need OTA capability, call up D* and they'll ship you the add-on card for a minimal fee - (D* cost + $5.00 + S&H). Slide it in, connect your OTA cable, and you're in business. Nothing too complex - if you can put a DVD or CD in a player, or a VHS tape in a deck, you can plug in the card. *Poof* instant OTA.
    3 - Inventory flexibility. No decisions on how to carry enough HR20s vs. HR21. One box reduces inventory carrying costs at all levels - Distribution Centers, Installation company warehouses, and the installer's vehicles.
    4 - Installers deal with one box. OTA not included. If you need OTA, call D* and get the card.

    While the initial cost might be a bit higher to allow for this "plug-n-play" OTA card, it solves many problems (real or perceived).
     
  10. Oct 30, 2007 #250 of 1344
    hasan

    hasan Well-Known Member

    5,957
    54
    Sep 22, 2006
    Ogden, IA
    The slot is already there...it's called a USB port. It could be a pretty simple add-on dongle with some internal code in the HR series to make use of it. This solution has all the advantages you list and none of the drawbacks. No need to completely reinvent the wheel.:) (and units that will do the job already exist and should be able to be back-fitted.)

    ....and I don't think it should be free, by any stretch. There could be circumstances where it might be provided as compensation for delivery of the wrong receiver, but I'm not going to open that can of worms now.

    It's really simple: at order time, you are asked, "Do you want/need OTA. If so, the add-on module for the HR?? is $xx" If you want it, you pay for it. If you don't, you don't. I don't feel D* "owes" us free hardware that only some people want. I want it. I'll pay for it. (and I'm being serious, I do want it). Now...it musn't be absurdly priced, but that's fodder for another thread.
     
  11. Oct 30, 2007 #251 of 1344
    gcisko

    gcisko I am Iron Man!

    1,672
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    Want to give this another go? It does not make sense. Sorry.
     
  12. Oct 30, 2007 #252 of 1344
    gcisko

    gcisko I am Iron Man!

    1,672
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    For the gazzilionth time will someone please explain this? I have OTA now via the HR20. Rumor is that the HR20 will still live on. So what exactly do you mean that "there WILL be a solution for OTA. We just don't know what that is"?
     
  13. Oct 30, 2007 #253 of 1344
    gully_foyle

    gully_foyle Hall Of Fame

    1,301
    5
    Jan 18, 2007
    Los Angeles
    I really value my OTA. I've had OTA + D* for over a decade and I don't want to change that. BUT....

    I agree with Earl (and others) that very few of us actually care about OTA once there is adequate coverage of HD LiL. Since the D10 spots didn't pan out as expected, I imagine that D*'s timing on the HR21 is a bit off. But they'll get there, and most everyone who wants HD LiL will have them. And they'll get D*'s attention because they ARE the majority.

    For freaks like me, who still want OTA fed into my DVR (without having to pay TiVo $20/month) even though we have every last shopping channel via HD LiL, I have several options.

    1) HR10-250. What with InstantCake and all, I can keep that playing for years.
    2) HR20-700. Hopefully it won't die anytime soon, and once I can get a 2TB disk for $100, I'll be set there, too.
    3) In time, a USB dongle or something similar will come along and I can buy one for $50 or $100 if I need it that badly. Hopefully there won't be a monthly OTA access charge....

    But Earl is right: why SHOULD D* tack $20 cost to each and every unit if a year from now only 2% of us will be using it. If it was 20%, I'd have a different answer, but I kinda doubt that. I know when I had cable I didn't have OTA as well....

    I do think that D* could have done this better, like waiting to have significant HD LiL before canning the HR20, but not every plan works out.

    I think I'm done with this subject.
     
  14. Oct 30, 2007 #254 of 1344
    gully_foyle

    gully_foyle Hall Of Fame

    1,301
    5
    Jan 18, 2007
    Los Angeles
    It means that D* is going to drop default support for OTA, but allow it as an add-on option. Benefits are reduced cost per standard box. Downside is increased cost for those that demand it. In theory, once HD LiL is widespread, the demand should be minimal.

    This all blew up because the HR21 drops that support, and the D10 sat didn't add a lot of HD LiL. Add to that reports that HR20's are hard to come by and it's rant time. I did my share, too. This thread is about how to provide OTA as an add-on, and what might be acceptable.
     
  15. Oct 30, 2007 #255 of 1344
    Fire407

    Fire407 Cool Member

    17
    0
    Jul 26, 2007
    When I first heard that the HR21 did not have OTA capabilities I immediately thought that DirecTV was trying to keep us from comparing the OTA MPEG 2 to the the MPEG 4 picture quality. While MPEG 4 looks OK now, it still doesn't quite match the quality of the OTA stations, at least here in LA. Having OTA available for comparison might help insure that DirecTV won't gradually dial down the quality of the MPEG 4 signal.
    After reading through this thread I am pretty much satisfied that the motives for DirecTV are more economic and not because they want to keep us in the dark. I like having OTA on the HR20. I think a lot of people would like to have it as an option if they were educated about over the air HDTV. Most of the people I talk to don't even know that you can get HDTV with an antenna.
     
  16. Oct 30, 2007 #256 of 1344
    gio12

    gio12 Icon

    940
    11
    Jul 31, 2006
    I had a feelign this was coming. IMO it started when users recived a HR10 or Hr20 and did not wnat locals from D* anymore and gettign them via OTA. I am almost did this myself at the time, but I left the package alone.

    Think about it, why would D* pay for you to get TV from another source?

    BUT, I also think the elimination of OTA should be gradual and a date given to all D* consumers. I have it, wnat it and need it. But in reality, how many of D* base needs them?

    Funny when I tell people I get OTA HD stuff with an antenna they laugh? "You still have that thing on top of your house?" Well mine is in the attic. See MOST people have not a clue that HD can and is FREE OTA. We have been so use to cable and SAT over the yeras providing locals to most people most don't care or KNOW about OTA.

    I did not know until I bought my HR10 from a HT junkie friend.

    Now I live in a amjor market so I get locals via SAT and a TON via OTA. I only watch 1 sub-channels; Weather Plus. BUT I watch ALL my locals via OTA. Why RAIN FADE Baby!!

    I have missed way too many plays and big moments during Fottball and other sporting events with SAT. So I wnat need OTA with DVR functions.
    Now if D* completey pulls OTA I will be PISSED but won't leave as Comcrap in not an option. BUT I would be willing to pay a samll on time harware fee for a box.

    Say the NON-OTA box is $199. I would willing to pay another $100 or less for an INTERGRATED SAT box with OTA. Unless it's a small USB device I don't want it. I don't wnat a large external solution. No fees either.

    Look in the big picture with D* they can pull OTA, keep MOST the customers and gain more with adding everyone locals and sub-chan. That'
    s smart business INO IF they make a lot more money.

    But bascially pulling it without lettign anyone know sucks! I guess I beter get my second HR20 while I can now!
     
  17. Oct 30, 2007 #257 of 1344
    gio12

    gio12 Icon

    940
    11
    Jul 31, 2006
    Oh, I also think that OTA customers should be granfathered in. But D* needs to collect that info now. I sgned my contract knowing OTA was availabe. But then again it should be around by next year I am sure!
     
  18. Oct 30, 2007 #258 of 1344
    gio12

    gio12 Icon

    940
    11
    Jul 31, 2006
     
  19. Oct 30, 2007 #259 of 1344
    gcisko

    gcisko I am Iron Man!

    1,672
    0
    Sep 27, 2006
    Well this is not what they have been saying. And I guess this is why I am on their case, cause I believe what you write here. On one hand everything is cool, on the other your above scenerio. So I see people trying to talk out of both sides of their mouth and that tends to attract my attention :)

    Just tell me what is really happening without all the smoke and mirrors and you will be much better off. Beat around the bush and we are gonna have a "go" :D

    Cheers :grin: :nono: :eek2: :lol: :) :D :( ;) :hurah:
     
  20. Oct 30, 2007 #260 of 1344
    mhayes70

    mhayes70 New Member

    4,224
    3
    Mar 21, 2006
    That makes perfect sense to me. I would be willing to pay a minimal fee for an OTA tuner to put on my receiver.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page