Could the versions you're upgrading from be an issue?

741 Views 7 Replies 5 Participants Last post by veryoldschool, Jan 10, 2007

edmartin

Discussion Starter · Jan 10, 2007

I'm a little like veryoldschool in that I keep thinking about things long after I shouldn't care about fixing them any more. I guess I've been around QA too long, too.

Just a random thought but I'm wondering if some of the issues people are having could be caused by either the "base" software version of their HR20 or the path of updates.

2 scenarios...

My HR20 says that my original software version is/was 0xbe. When I installed, 0x10b was national to the unit updated to that out of the gate. Other than some fuzzy picture images that I've discussed in other threads, I've had none of the big issues that people are taking about here. I'm wondering if that base software version could be a factor.

Second scenario. As above, my box auto-updated to 0x10b just after install. Last night, I pulled the trigger and downloaded 0x115. Installed fine. Works fine. But I'm not seeing any of the "enhancements" that others are talking about - in particular, no speed increase in the guide for me. No big deal but it just sticks in my mind that if others are seeing a speed increase, it must mean that their guide was slower than mine as of the day before yesterday. [I guess it could also mean that Elvis doesn't work as well on my box as it does on everyone else's but let's discount that remote possibility for sake of argument.]

What's my point? Let me use an analogy to better explain. Imagine you bought a computer in 1995. It came with Windows 95 on it. When Win98 came out, you bought the upgrade version. Then WinME came out and you bought that upgrade. Whoa, WinXP is out and you gotta upgrade to that, right? And now it's 2007 and you've upgraded again to Vista. [Let's ignore the fact that a 1995-era PC couldn't possibly have the horsepower to run pretty much anything from XP on up.] Upgrade after upgrade after upgrade and with multiple Microsoft patches downloaded and applied along the way, that PC is probably going to run like a dog. But if you wiped it out totally and installed Vista fresh, it would almost certainly run faster (and less buggy). Or, if you started with XP instead of Win95 (and then the ensuing run of updates as above), I bet the machine that started with XP would run faster than the Wn95 system.

I know HR20's aren't PC's and the software isn't like Windows... and I know I'm using an extreme analogy to make a point. But I wonder if the HR20's and patches could be impacted by that same "upgrade pile-on" issue?

I haven't been an HR20 owner long enough to know but do others have an original software version other than 0xbe? Could there be a pattern there?

Whether you started with 0xbe or not, could there be some pattern in the number of patches applied and the big bugs?

Just an idea...

See less See more

Save

Status: Not open for further replies.

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

LameLefty

· #2 · Jan 10, 2007

I don't know if the starting version matters or not but there might be something to the idea of patching existing systems one on top of the other - especially several versions ago, it seems that LOTS of people would have huge new issues after each patch until the complete reformat option started to be recommended. Wiping the drive and starting over with a clean slate seems to help many people who have recurrent problems.

I'm also convinced beyond much doubt that those who have the worst problems, version after version, have marginal hardware: their HR20's have tuners or internal components that are only marginally in-spec, they have mechanical multiswitches that are borderline-glitchy, etc., that all add up to a crappy experience day after day. 'Cause we've had ours since October 21 and have had only a handful of lockups (about one every three weeks) and a few black screen/keep-or-delete recordings over one 24 hour period starting on Thanksgiving day, fixed by a reset. Overall, we'd give our experience a solid B+.

See less See more

Save

veryoldschool

· #3 · Jan 10, 2007

Elvis & hardware
I agree, reformatting would be one step, Reset "everything" from the setup menu, should be even better as it will clear some of what stored in the ICs [chips] that isn't on the drive.
This would be as close to a "fresh install" as you can get. Next would be installing on another box [there's that hardware thing again].

Save

Stuart Sweet

· #4 · Jan 10, 2007

Quick chime in here - My first box was the 0xa? build (don't remember the last digit), and my replacement was 0xbe. Prior to its unfortunate demise, box #1 was "golden", meaning that it had very few of the reported bugs. The new one is a more susceptible to the more common bugs, despite having been upgraded only once.

I do think you have a point, I'm only saying that in some cases the original build wasn't an issue.

Save

veryoldschool

· #5 · Jan 10, 2007

lamontcranston said:
Quick chime in here - My first box was the 0xa? build (don't remember the last digit), and my replacement was 0xbe. Prior to its unfortunate demise, box #1 was "golden", meaning that it had very few of the reported bugs. The new one is a more susceptible to the more common bugs, despite having been upgraded only once.
I do think you have a point, I'm only saying that in some cases the original build wasn't an issue.

At this point nobody knows, so FWIW, your second box is different "hardware" so it might be the reason.

Save

Stuart Sweet

· #6 · Jan 10, 2007

veryoldschool said:
At this point nobody knows, so FWIW, your second box is different "hardware" so it might be the reason.

Agreed that it was built at a different time, and IMO seems to be a little more solidly assembled, but I've seen nothing to indicate that any of the components changed between the initial manufacturing run and later runs.

Save

Earl Bonovich

· #7 · Jan 10, 2007

FYI... the software updates are not "patches".
They are full images, that replace the current version.

Yes, as with any "bug" there is a possibility that things could get messed up on the Hard Drive data... which a re-format could erase, but more hopefully new code can handle...

As for "hardware" being different.
On some level... every single system is just "a hair" different then the next. Just the nature of the assembly process.

At it's core, they all have the same hardware... they are all assembled the same way... there has been no different "versions" of the hardware yet.

These are all the same.

There are so many factors on why people have different results.
Could be as simple as the connector on a cable... or as complex as the multisiwtch/dish combination that is being used.

See less See more

Save

veryoldschool

· #8 · Jan 10, 2007

lamontcranston said:
Agreed that it was built at a different time, and IMO seems to be a little more solidly assembled, but I've seen nothing to indicate that any of the components changed between the initial manufacturing run and later runs.

I've just spent too much time in production. Processes can change [between operators] assemblers can be poorly trained, rushed too much, etc. Production date is one thing [true], but even within a production "run" anything can happen [vary].
I would love to ring-out what is sent back as returns. This is where D* could really "do some homework" to find where their problems are.
I'm "old school" and still think it's worth "looking at the mistakes" to improve a product.
Spreadsheets have removed this step for the most part. Built it, sell it, replace it, no need to waste money on testing or inspecting.

Save

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

Status: Not open for further replies.

Top Contributors this Month