| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Sean - Barking at the moon
Why does this Sean character still post in here? He doesn't care for
TIVO, thinks it's a product made by a company on it's last legs, doomed to fold in the not too distant future. That being so, why come here? How does Sean explain the problems with the SA DVRs? I had one. I had high hopes for it. The promise was great - dual tuners, lots of recording time (enough for me at least) and allowed me to consolidate my video subscriptions to one provider instead of two (cable for locals AND everything else instead of cable for locals and DISH) Sounded good, so I got the SA8000 through TWC. First I gotta say my first experience is with a TIVO. That's where I've learned what features make a DVR usable. Back to that SA8000. What utter garbage. Poor user interface, but could probably live with that if everything else would work and have the necessary features. But - no searching. no wish lists. "searching" if you could call it that, amounted to scrolling through endless lists of programming on a manual basis. That's bad, but even that could be lived with so long as I paid close attention to the TV guide and never forgot to record something I wanted to see. Oh, wait, isn't that supposed to be the job of DVR? Back to that SA8000. Now I'm recording some stuff. Well, trying to. Sometimes it wouldn't record. Sometimes it would record a couple of minutes. Most often it did record the whole show, but then it might only be willing to play back a couple of minutes then stop and ask if I was done with it. That error didn't happen everytime, but along with the first two problem, they did happen often enough that I wondered if anything I set it to recored would actually be there and then would I be able to watch it? Lest you think I didn't give them a fair shake, these problems manifested themselves with two SA8000s given me by TWC. Both were brand new units fresh out of the box. So, I'm ready to use a DVR that's not a genuine TIVO, but I do have high expectations - I expect it to work. And to work to the high standards set by my TIVO. Yes, it's a series one. It's old. It's working. It's been hacked by me only to the extent of putting in a larger drive. I ended up reverting my installation to the way it was. Cable for locals, DISH for everything else. Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. |
because he enjoys the attention he is paid. He is trolling.
Lazarus Long wrote: Why does this Sean character still post in here? He doesn't care for TIVO, thinks it's a product made by a company on it's last legs, doomed to fold in the not too distant future. That being so, why come here? How does Sean explain the problems with the SA DVRs? I had one. I had high hopes for it. The promise was great - dual tuners, lots of recording time (enough for me at least) and allowed me to consolidate my video subscriptions to one provider instead of two (cable for locals AND everything else instead of cable for locals and DISH) Sounded good, so I got the SA8000 through TWC. First I gotta say my first experience is with a TIVO. That's where I've learned what features make a DVR usable. Back to that SA8000. What utter garbage. Poor user interface, but could probably live with that if everything else would work and have the necessary features. But - no searching. no wish lists. "searching" if you could call it that, amounted to scrolling through endless lists of programming on a manual basis. That's bad, but even that could be lived with so long as I paid close attention to the TV guide and never forgot to record something I wanted to see. Oh, wait, isn't that supposed to be the job of DVR? Back to that SA8000. Now I'm recording some stuff. Well, trying to. Sometimes it wouldn't record. Sometimes it would record a couple of minutes. Most often it did record the whole show, but then it might only be willing to play back a couple of minutes then stop and ask if I was done with it. That error didn't happen everytime, but along with the first two problem, they did happen often enough that I wondered if anything I set it to recored would actually be there and then would I be able to watch it? Lest you think I didn't give them a fair shake, these problems manifested themselves with two SA8000s given me by TWC. Both were brand new units fresh out of the box. So, I'm ready to use a DVR that's not a genuine TIVO, but I do have high expectations - I expect it to work. And to work to the high standards set by my TIVO. Yes, it's a series one. It's old. It's working. It's been hacked by me only to the extent of putting in a larger drive. I ended up reverting my installation to the way it was. Cable for locals, DISH for everything else. Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. |
"Lazarus Long" wrote in message ... Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. I agree, it's amazing that after all these years the developers of Cable DVRs still don't have software that is on par with Tivo's. What good is great hardware if the software driving it is crap? |
I never see Sean's postings (ramblings) because they made a wonderful thing
called a kill file :) "Lazarus Long" wrote in message ... Why does this Sean character still post in here? He doesn't care for TIVO, thinks it's a product made by a company on it's last legs, doomed to fold in the not too distant future. That being so, why come here? How does Sean explain the problems with the SA DVRs? I had one. I had high hopes for it. The promise was great - dual tuners, lots of recording time (enough for me at least) and allowed me to consolidate my video subscriptions to one provider instead of two (cable for locals AND everything else instead of cable for locals and DISH) Sounded good, so I got the SA8000 through TWC. First I gotta say my first experience is with a TIVO. That's where I've learned what features make a DVR usable. Back to that SA8000. What utter garbage. Poor user interface, but could probably live with that if everything else would work and have the necessary features. But - no searching. no wish lists. "searching" if you could call it that, amounted to scrolling through endless lists of programming on a manual basis. That's bad, but even that could be lived with so long as I paid close attention to the TV guide and never forgot to record something I wanted to see. Oh, wait, isn't that supposed to be the job of DVR? Back to that SA8000. Now I'm recording some stuff. Well, trying to. Sometimes it wouldn't record. Sometimes it would record a couple of minutes. Most often it did record the whole show, but then it might only be willing to play back a couple of minutes then stop and ask if I was done with it. That error didn't happen everytime, but along with the first two problem, they did happen often enough that I wondered if anything I set it to recored would actually be there and then would I be able to watch it? Lest you think I didn't give them a fair shake, these problems manifested themselves with two SA8000s given me by TWC. Both were brand new units fresh out of the box. So, I'm ready to use a DVR that's not a genuine TIVO, but I do have high expectations - I expect it to work. And to work to the high standards set by my TIVO. Yes, it's a series one. It's old. It's working. It's been hacked by me only to the extent of putting in a larger drive. I ended up reverting my installation to the way it was. Cable for locals, DISH for everything else. Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. |
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 03:32:57 GMT, Michelle P wrote:
because he enjoys the attention he is paid. He is trolling. Of course, and he gets more attention everyone _starts a thread with his name in it_. Why do they give him what he wants? |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 In article , Lazarus Long wrote: Why does this Sean character still post in here? He doesn't care for TIVO, thinks it's a product made by a company on it's last legs, doomed to fold in the not too distant future. That being so, why come here? It keeps posting here because it is a troll. Trolls like nothing better than to stir up sh*t and watch the resulting fireworks fly. If more people would ignore Sean, it would eventually come to the realization that its posts aren't getting a rise out of anyone. It might then pick another newsgroup to crapflood...or maybe it'll just assume room temperature as a result of some STD it picked up in a bathroom stall at the last Village People concert and spare all of Usenet. _/_ / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail) (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting! \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Linux) iD8DBQFCBowFVgTKos01OwkRAjxQAKCcvNWueD1Rrxpk9Ewn+C +LW5lPhwCdF6pD eyF1C/u8ZT9KepdkUpLVLe4= =x/CB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
How does Sean explain the problems with the SA DVRs?
He doesn't explain - ever. He tries to convince others that these problems don't exist, likes to refer to Tivo users as "rumpswabs" (whatever the hell these are - perhaps something he uses), and often trashes Tivo's leadership and their business practices (I doubt he will ever be CEO of anything). Thing is, even if Tivo were to close their doors today they still have changed the way that people watch TV, almost single-handedly made the DVR the killer app it is today, and made tons of money doing so. Sean doesn't seem to get this despite the fact that his beloved Comca$t box wouldn't exist if not for the success of Tivo. The only viable argument I've ever read in any of his posts is that Tivo (standalone) hardware doesn't support HDTV yet. Sean (and the other Comcast fanatics) can keep their overpriced (and rising) service to watch and record a few HD programs on their "free" equipment...if Comcast can keep their equipment running and a signal to their homes. Some people just don't get that free equipment does no good if it doesn't work. It shouldn't be long before there are some more HD DVR's on the market and prices come down a bit. By then there should also be more programming available to make it all worthwhile. It's not hard to figure out why someone who regularly posts to a Tivo newsgroup to spew his dislike for the product. There are a few words people have used to describe such a being, which I won't repeat. I've simply learned to ignore his posts, as there's not been a single rant of his with any valuable information. |
Of course, and he gets more attention. Why do they give him what he wants? Because he has a point. Valid one. Why do you blindly cheerlead instead of acknowledging Tivo's faults? |
"Scott Alfter" wrote in message news:[email protected] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 In article , Lazarus Long wrote: Why does this Sean character still post in here? He doesn't care for TIVO, thinks it's a product made by a company on it's last legs, doomed to fold in the not too distant future. That being so, why come here? It keeps posting here because it is a troll. Trolls like nothing better than to stir up sh*t and watch the resulting fireworks fly. If more people would ignore Sean, it would eventually come to the realization that its posts aren't getting a rise out of anyone. It might then pick another newsgroup to crapflood...or maybe it'll just assume room temperature as a result of some STD it picked up in a bathroom stall at the last Village People concert and spare all of Usenet. _/_ / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail) (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting! \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden What's the most annoying thing on Usenet? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Linux) iD8DBQFCBowFVgTKos01OwkRAjxQAKCcvNWueD1Rrxpk9Ewn+C +LW5lPhwCdF6pD eyF1C/u8ZT9KepdkUpLVLe4= =x/CB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Gotta admit that's a pretty funny post. |
"eric" wrote in news:[email protected]:
"Lazarus Long" wrote in message ... Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. I agree, it's amazing that after all these years the developers of Cable DVRs still don't have software that is on par with Tivo's. What good is great hardware if the software driving it is crap? Well, if you've dropped low to mid five figures on a home theater, and you want to watch shows in HD, but not watch them when the network airs them, you can't really use a Tivo to do that (unless you have DirecTV). So, in that case (which I understand puts me in the minority of users, but soon *many* people will have HD), one has to put up with a ****ty user interface to be able to enjoy their investments. |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 20:32:04 -0500, "Golf God"
wrote: Of course, and he gets more attention. Why do they give him what he wants? Because he has a point. Valid one. Why do you blindly cheerlead instead of acknowledging Tivo's faults? TIVO may have faults, but it's a Rhodes Scholar compared to the totally brain dead offerings from Scientific Atlanta. They are most thoroughly incompetent bunch of idiots to ever foist a consumer electronic device on the public. Whatever they're being paid, it's too much. They should all be fired. They ought to use TIVOs software. Say what you will. It works, SAs doesn't. |
"Eric J. Holtman" wrote in message
0... "eric" wrote in news:[email protected]: "Lazarus Long" wrote in message ... Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. I agree, it's amazing that after all these years the developers of Cable DVRs still don't have software that is on par with Tivo's. What good is great hardware if the software driving it is crap? Well, if you've dropped low to mid five figures on a home theater, and you want to watch shows in HD, but not watch them when the network airs them, you can't really use a Tivo to do that (unless you have DirecTV). So, in that case (which I understand puts me in the minority of users, but soon *many* people will have HD), one has to put up with a ****ty user interface to be able to enjoy their investments. And I don't think anyone has disputed that attitude. If through the cable co is the only way to get what you want, then I really don't see how anyone can be criticized for that. Most of the arguing and Sean bashing going on is because of his delusion that everybody should dump TiVo in favor of their cable companies DVR offering. He refuse that acknowledge that most of the cable DVRs are crap. In your case, crap or not, it is the only one that will do the job you want, and for that it (hopefully) works "well enough" for you and I really do hope you enjoy it. |
And I don't think anyone has disputed that attitude. If through the cable co is the only way to get what you want, then I really don't see how anyone can be criticized for that. Most of the arguing and Sean bashing going on is because of his delusion that everybody should dump TiVo in favor of their cable companies DVR offering. He refuse that acknowledge that most of the cable DVRs are crap. In your case, crap or not, it is the only one that will do the job you want, and for that it (hopefully) works "well enough" for you and I really do hope you enjoy it. I totally agree w/ Seth here. There are things that Tivo won't do yet for non-DTV customers, namely dual tuners and HD. For those with high end setups where HD is crucial it makes sense to use an HD capable DVR, even if you have to make compromises. I think Eric's reasoning is very sensible and understandable. Hopefully sometime soon Tivo will offer an alternative choice capable of HD. The point is that HD is *not* crucial for most *yet*. The mistaken conclusion that some are stating is that because Tivo isn't offering SA HD Tivo's yet, NOBODY should use any Tivo's (even if they aren't using HD), which is an asinine assertion. Randy S. |
"Eric J. Holtman" wrote in message 0... "eric" wrote in news:[email protected]: Snip So, in that case (which I understand puts me in the minority of users, but soon *many* people will have HD), one has to put up with a ****ty user interface to be Why is there no HD in a SA Tivo unit. Blame the cable companies as they have monopolized the HD signals. Tivo could do a HD unit but it would only be able to do OTA and not cable signals. This will happen when they can put Cable Card slots in the units and when they have access to the digital signal and can translate it. That is were all the HD channels are on cable systems and they are there because it keeps companies like Tivo from producing a HD unit. Take a look at the Tuner cards you can purchase for your PC do you see one that will do digital channels, No. You will not until again the cable companies open up their systems to other companies. They are supposed to by FCC mandate but they are dragging their feet as long as they can. John |
"Seth" wrote in
: "Eric J. Holtman" wrote in message So, in that case (which I understand puts me in the minority of users, but soon *many* people will have HD), one has to put up with a ****ty user interface to be able to enjoy their investments. And I don't think anyone has disputed that attitude. If through the cable co is the only way to get what you want, then I really don't see how anyone can be criticized for that. Most of the arguing and Sean bashing going on is because of his delusion that everybody should dump TiVo in favor of their cable companies DVR offering. He refuse that acknowledge that most of the cable DVRs are crap. Well, there's a subtle difference between "crap", and "good enough". Many of the Tivangelists on this group (and I have been guilty of being one) preach a line similiar to this: "Cable Co DVRs are total crap, no one will want to use one". Now, this flies in the face of observable data. Apparently, there are in fact many many many people out there who are willing to pay $5 or $10/month, with no upfront fees, for a braindead VCR. I think part of the problem is the self-selecting nature of Tivo users in general, and this newsgroup in particular. A lot of people here have multiple Tivos, a network, many have added drives, hacked in TyTools, ripped MPEGs off a device before TivoToGo, etc, etc, etc. Of *course* those people will think CableCo DVR suck royal ass, and of *course* those people will never want to use one. On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. *THAT SIDE OF THE FENCE HAS THE MAJORITY OF USERS AND MONEY*. And Tivo, by spending a year dorking around with TivoToGo, has pretty much decided they don't care about that market segment. I think that's a huge mistake. In your case, crap or not, it is the only one that will do the job you want, and for that it (hopefully) works "well enough" for you and I really do hope you enjoy it. I can't say I "enjoy" it, as compared to my Tivos. But I do enjoy watcing time shifted HD programming. |
Well, there's a subtle difference between "crap", and "good enough".
Many of the Tivangelists on this group (and I have been guilty of being one) preach a line similiar to this: "Cable Co DVRs are total crap, no one will want to use one". Some posters do unfortunately say that, and reflexive "buy a Tivo because your Cable DVR is crap" posts to any non-Tivo DVR comparison or question is just (or nearly!) as bad as Sean's Tivo bashing. But most posters do not do this IMO. A disagreement based on reasoned arguments is usually very interesting to read as long as both parties are rational. But when one or both sides sound the same horn over and over again, completely ignoring (or refusing to admit their existance) any and all criticisms from the other side, the dialogue is of little interest. Now, this flies in the face of observable data. Apparently, there are in fact many many many people out there who are willing to pay $5 or $10/month, with no upfront fees, for a braindead VCR. I think it's been asserted here several times that the average customer, when presented with a default choice from their provider, would probably be perfectly happy with it, especially since they would likely not even know a better alternative might exist. I think part of the problem is the self-selecting nature of Tivo users in general, and this newsgroup in particular. A lot of people here have multiple Tivos, a network, many have added drives, hacked in TyTools, ripped MPEGs off a device before TivoToGo, etc, etc, etc. I don't think anyone would disagree with that. I would also assert that many folks here put a lot of value in UI and usability and find those undervalued in mainstream marketing. Numbers and features look great in print ads, but when you can't figure out how to make your DVR do something reliably, the value of those features drop dramatically. Of *course* those people will think CableCo DVR suck royal ass, and of *course* those people will never want to use one. On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. *THAT SIDE OF THE FENCE HAS THE MAJORITY OF USERS AND MONEY*. And Tivo, by spending a year dorking around with TivoToGo, has pretty much decided they don't care about that market segment. I think that's a huge mistake. Much of what you say is true here, however I *think* (since neither you nor I have inside info on TiVo operataions, there's no way to know for sure) you are making a flawed assumption. You say that Tivo has not come out with HD and cable card, dual tuners, etc. because they've been dorking around w/ Tivotogo. If that happens to be true, then I'd agree w/ you, HD and these other features are more important. However, I think it's more likely that Tivo has put off the release of updated hardware because it's waiting for Cable card 2.0 to shake out. Cable Card 2 is such a huge improvement over Cablecard 1, that it makes sense to wait, particularly since HD adoption, while accelerating, is still not wide spread. Unfortunately, since the cable industry wants to avoid the competition that Cablecard will allow, they are fighting it using any tactic they can think of. I will agree that Tivo can only wait so long before coming out w/ the updated box. Gut feeling tells me that they better come out w/ one before next year's Superbowl. In fact I see that as a killer release date, imagine the uptake if Tivo announced and released such a unit 1 or wks before the Superbowl. I know several people who wouldn't watch the game unless it was being DVR'ed. Randy S. |
Eric J. Holtman ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. I think the #1 "feature" missing from most HD cable DVRs is a hard drive that can store a reasonable amount of programming. An example: most people with HD cable DVRs could barely record the Super Bowl in HD, and could not record the whole HD spectacle of that day (about 7 hours). With even one HD show per day, go out of town for a week and you start having shows erased on a HD cable DVR. But, it seems that 30 hours will be the starting point for HD TiVos...that would easily handle 3 weeks at one show per day. And, despite the fact that only a small percentage of TiVo owners increase their drive space, the fact of the matter is that it is easy to do and relatively cheap. Cable companies will be having some real issues when they find out their hardware must be completely replaced to support more than 13 hours of HD recording (the Motorola boxes use a old IDE controller with support for only one drive and no LBA48). -- Jeff Rife | | http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/99/Apr/columbine.html |
newsgroup to crapflood...or maybe it'll just assume room temperature as a result of some STD it picked up in a bathroom stall at the last Village People concert and spare all of Usenet. Amen :) |
Randy S. ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
Unfortunately, since the cable industry wants to avoid the competition that Cablecard will allow, they are fighting it using any tactic they can think of. Strangely enough, it's not the competition that worries them...it's the money. The same rules that say "cable company follow specification X, Y, Z to allow CableCard to work" also say that the cable company-supplied equipment must also use CableCard. I think the cutoff date for the switch is sometime this year. The idea is that there would be no way for the cable company to get an unfair advantage over 3rd-party devices if the CC devices also used CableCard. That part is nice, but the expense for cable companies is huge. *Every* digital cable box and DVR will have to be swapped out. -- Jeff Rife | | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/BabyBlues/OnTheRemote.gif |
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 20:39:01 -0600, Lazarus Long
wrote: Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. Excactly. You are just like me. I have Comcast which has a great product. far superior to Tivo. I've heard others say good things about the lates SA product but I don't have first hand experience. Don't worry. Your cable company will get it right soon. It's not splitting the atom. Sean |
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 10:12:57 -0600, Lazarus Long
wrote: On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 20:32:04 -0500, "Golf God" wrote: Of course, and he gets more attention. Why do they give him what he wants? Because he has a point. Valid one. Why do you blindly cheerlead instead of acknowledging Tivo's faults? TIVO may have faults, but it's a Rhodes Scholar compared to the totally brain dead offerings from Scientific Atlanta. They are most thoroughly incompetent bunch of idiots to ever foist a consumer electronic device on the public. Whatever they're being paid, it's too much. They should all be fired. They ought to use TIVOs software. Say what you will. It works, SAs doesn't. No. Tivo doesn't "work". Cable HD doesnt work. Cable dual tuners doesn't work. Cable Dolby 5.1 doesn't work. Stop spreading lies about Tivo, you rumpswab. Sean |
On Mon, 07 Feb 2005 14:16:49 -0000, "Eric J. Holtman"
wrote: "eric" wrote in news:[email protected]: "Lazarus Long" wrote in message ... Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. I agree, it's amazing that after all these years the developers of Cable DVRs still don't have software that is on par with Tivo's. What good is great hardware if the software driving it is crap? Well, if you've dropped low to mid five figures on a home theater, and you want to watch shows in HD, but not watch them when the network airs them, you can't really use a Tivo to do that (unless you have DirecTV). So, in that case (which I understand puts me in the minority of users, but soon *many* people will have HD), one has to put up with a ****ty user interface to be able to enjoy their investments. I like the Comcast interface better than Tivo now that I'm used to it. Sean |
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:11:45 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:
Eric J. Holtman ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo: On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. I think the #1 "feature" missing from most HD cable DVRs is a hard drive that can store a reasonable amount of programming. An example: most people with HD cable DVRs could barely record the Super Bowl in HD, and could not record the whole HD spectacle of that day (about 7 hours). Wrong!!!! I can record 15 hours of HD on my Comcast box. That's plenty for me. With even one HD show per day, go out of town for a week and you start having shows erased on a HD cable DVR. But, it seems that 30 hours will be the starting point for HD TiVos...that would easily handle 3 weeks at one show per day. Wrong again. And, despite the fact that only a small percentage of TiVo owners increase their drive space, the fact of the matter is that it is easy to do and relatively cheap. Cable companies will be having some real issues when they find out their hardware must be completely replaced to support more than 13 hours of HD recording (the Motorola boxes use a old IDE controller with support for only one drive and no LBA48). Wrong Mr. know it all. And do I have to point out again that Comcast has already upgraded their hardware once in the first year of offering a dvr for no other reason than to upgrade it? Geeze. Stop posting bull****. Sean |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 14:47:52 -0700, "Poppa H."
wrote: almost single-handedly made the DVR the killer app it is today, and made tons of money doing so. Since it's inception. Tivo has lost over $600 million. Look it up. Will there be a press release when they go over the $1 billion mark? Sean doesn't seem to get this despite the fact that his beloved Comca$t box wouldn't exist if not for the success of Tivo. The only viable argument I've ever read in any of his posts is that Tivo (standalone) hardware doesn't support HDTV yet. Who cares why it exists. It does and it's better than Tivo's cable product. 2 tuners HD Dolby 5.1 Better guide interface No phone line required Integrated on demand Video help Cheaper than Tivo Free hardware upgrades Sean (and the other Comcast fanatics) can keep their overpriced (and rising) service to watch and record a few HD programs on their "free" equipment...if Comcast can keep their equipment running and a signal to their homes. Some people just don't get that free equipment does no good if it doesn't work. It shouldn't be long before there are some more HD DVR's on the market and prices come down a bit. By then there should also be more programming available to make it all worthwhile. Comcast service to my house is excellent. And the only prices that are coming down are the prices on the overpirced Tivo. Pretty soon they'll be paying people to get one. It's not hard to figure out why someone who regularly posts to a Tivo newsgroup to spew his dislike for the product. There are a few words people have used to describe such a being, which I won't repeat. I've simply learned to ignore his posts, as there's not been a single rant of his with any valuable information. Keep your head in the sand while I enjoy my ne HD home theater. Sean |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 18:10:14 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:
Poppa H. ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo: The only viable argument I've ever read in any of his posts is that Tivo (standalone) hardware doesn't support HDTV yet. It's still not a viable argument, because each Comcast HD DVR supports only *one* Comcast cable franchise...no OTA, no satellite, no other Comcast franchise, no other cable company, etc. That's exactly why they can't sell cable DVRs to customers...because they are useless anywhere else (sometimes even at a different address within the same cable franchise). Yet, as soon as the cable companies stop trying to get the CableCard rules pushed back indefinitely (or removed altogether), TiVo will make an HD DVR that works with *all* cable companies, and people will pay for those units *and* pay monthly fees to keep them working. That says a lot about just how good TiVo is compared to other DVRs. Heck, even ReplayTV can get people to pay for their boxes, yet cable companies have to give them away--and provide free hardware replacements for life--just to get people to take them. Check your meds. I think it's time to double up on the anti-delusional pill. Sean |
|
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 22:57:41 -0500, "M." wrote:
newsgroup to crapflood...or maybe it'll just assume room temperature as a result of some STD it picked up in a bathroom stall at the last Village People concert and spare all of Usenet. Amen :) A right wing religious homophobe check in. Sean |
(Sean none) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:11:45 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote: Eric J. Holtman ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo: On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. I think the #1 "feature" missing from most HD cable DVRs is a hard drive that can store a reasonable amount of programming. An example: most people with HD cable DVRs could barely record the Super Bowl in HD, and could not record the whole HD spectacle of that day (about 7 hours). Wrong!!!! *Most* HD DVRs that cable companies supply have 80GB hard drives. This is enough space for between 7 and 10 hours of recording. I can record 15 hours of HD on my Comcast box. Some boxes do have 120GB hard drives, but they are in the minority. That's plenty for me. We all know you require far less out of your DVR and HDTV than the rest of the world. With even one HD show per day, go out of town for a week and you start having shows erased on a HD cable DVR. But, it seems that 30 hours will be the starting point for HD TiVos...that would easily handle 3 weeks at one show per day. Wrong again. So, now Sean has failed 3rd grade math: 1 hour x 21 days = 21 hours. That's less than 30 hours (which the HD DirecTiVo has space for), and more than 15 hours (which is what the biggest HD cable DVR has). And, despite the fact that only a small percentage of TiVo owners increase their drive space, the fact of the matter is that it is easy to do and relatively cheap. Cable companies will be having some real issues when they find out their hardware must be completely replaced to support more than 13 hours of HD recording (the Motorola boxes use a old IDE controller with support for only one drive and no LBA48). Wrong Mr. know it all. Read sometime about the people that have tried to upgrade the disk in cable DVRs. Strange things happen with larger than 137GB drives, because the system goes ahead and formats it all, but can't use it correctly and corruption occurs. This is the standard sort of error you see with LBA48 drives and non-LBA48 controllers. Although putting a "bare" drive into the box causes it to be initialized, nobody has succeeded in getting a second drive initialized, so either the hardware doesn't support it (which seems likely given that the IDE controller is cheap and a 7-year-old design), or the software doesn't support it. For more info, see: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=496586 There are many other threads about the lack of success in upgrading hard drives in cable DVRs. -- Jeff Rife | | http://www.nabs.net/Cartoons/RhymesW.../Recycling.jpg |
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 16:46:38 -0500, Sean none wrote:
On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 20:39:01 -0600, Lazarus Long wrote: Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. Excactly. You are just like me. I have Comcast which has a great product. far superior to Tivo. I've heard others say good things about the lates SA product but I don't have first hand experience. Don't worry. Your cable company will get it right soon. It's not splitting the atom. Sean I'll try the DVR from my cable company again this summer. But I don't have high expectations. Getting it right means recording reliably. That's not something you've directly addressed. My experience, which you seem to want to ignore is that the SA8000 sometimes simply wouldn't record. And if it did, wouldn't play the recording through. And the SA8000 lacks the niceties I expect in a DVR. But this may have changed. I hope so, but as I said, I don't have high hopes. |
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 18:19:48 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote:
(Sean none) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo: On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 12:11:45 -0500, Jeff Rife wrote: Eric J. Holtman ) wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo: On the other side of the fence are the JoeSixpacks of the world, whose VCRs still flash 12:00, and who just want to record a few shows. My parents are in that group. They have an SA Box. They love it. They don't miss features they've never used. I think the #1 "feature" missing from most HD cable DVRs is a hard drive that can store a reasonable amount of programming. An example: most people with HD cable DVRs could barely record the Super Bowl in HD, and could not record the whole HD spectacle of that day (about 7 hours). Wrong!!!! *Most* HD DVRs that cable companies supply have 80GB hard drives. This is enough space for between 7 and 10 hours of recording. I can record 15 hours of HD on my Comcast box. Some boxes do have 120GB hard drives, but they are in the minority. Thanks for acknowledging that I was right. That's plenty for me. We all know you require far less out of your DVR and HDTV than the rest of the world. With even one HD show per day, go out of town for a week and you start having shows erased on a HD cable DVR. But, it seems that 30 hours will be the starting point for HD TiVos...that would easily handle 3 weeks at one show per day. Wrong again. So, now Sean has failed 3rd grade math: 1 hour x 21 days = 21 hours. That's less than 30 hours (which the HD DirecTiVo has space for), and more than 15 hours (which is what the biggest HD cable DVR has). Apparently this math is 4th grade, beyond Jeffie's comprehension. With even one HD show per day, go out of town for a week and you start having shows erased on a HD cable DVR. To which I replied... Wrong. 1 hour x 7 days = 7 hours. Well below my 15 hour HD capacity. Jeff, is your employer aware of your non-existant math skills? My guess is you work somewhere in academia. You kissed ass just long enough to make tenure and now no matter how stupid you prove to be you have a job for life. And, despite the fact that only a small percentage of TiVo owners increase their drive space, the fact of the matter is that it is easy to do and relatively cheap. Cable companies will be having some real issues when they find out their hardware must be completely replaced to support more than 13 hours of HD recording (the Motorola boxes use a old IDE controller with support for only one drive and no LBA48). Wrong Mr. know it all. Read sometime about the people that have tried to upgrade the disk in cable DVRs. Strange things happen with larger than 137GB drives, because the system goes ahead and formats it all, but can't use it correctly and corruption occurs. This is the standard sort of error you see with LBA48 drives and non-LBA48 controllers. Although putting a "bare" drive into the box causes it to be initialized, nobody has succeeded in getting a second drive initialized, so either the hardware doesn't support it (which seems likely given that the IDE controller is cheap and a 7-year-old design), or the software doesn't support it. For more info, see: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showt...hreadid=496586 There are many other threads about the lack of success in upgrading hard drives in cable DVRs. Who said anything about customers upgrading hardware??? The post was about Cable companies upgrading their hardware. Geeze what a dolt you are. It's been well established here (despite ignorant rants from the know-nothings) that cable companies have already upgraded their hardware (Both Motorola + SA) as part of improving their products. Did I mention what a Dolt you are? Sean |
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:54:10 -0600, Lazarus Long
wrote: On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 16:46:38 -0500, Sean none wrote: On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 20:39:01 -0600, Lazarus Long wrote: Honest to pete, this isn't splitting the atom, I'd use a SA DVR if they'd get the damn thing work right. Excactly. You are just like me. I have Comcast which has a great product. far superior to Tivo. I've heard others say good things about the lates SA product but I don't have first hand experience. Don't worry. Your cable company will get it right soon. It's not splitting the atom. Sean I'll try the DVR from my cable company again this summer. But I don't have high expectations. Getting it right means recording reliably. That's not something you've directly addressed. My experience, which you seem to want to ignore is that the SA8000 sometimes simply wouldn't record. And if it did, wouldn't play the recording through. And the SA8000 lacks the niceties I expect in a DVR. But this may have changed. I hope so, but as I said, I don't have high hopes. I'm going to be kind here. I have not addressed recording reliability because it's a non-issue for me. I'm now going on my 3rd month with the Comcast DVR. I have not lost 1 recording. Not a single one. One of the things I used to do with my Tivo was before leaving the house, check what was scheduled to be recorded and then switch to that channel before turning the TV off. That's because that friggin IR blaster was so unreliable. For shows I really wanted to make sure I didn't miss I'd schedule a 5 minute manual recording on the same channel just prior to the show. Believe it or not. It still missed a couple of recordings due to bogus channel changes. That's all behind me now that I have the cable DVR. 100% reliable channel changes and I get the bonus of being able to channel surf too. Check out other recent posts about the latest SA box. It sounds like a big improvement. Sean |
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 11:36:52 -0500, Sean none wrote:
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 08:54:10 -0600, Lazarus Long wrote: I'll try the DVR from my cable company again this summer. But I don't have high expectations. Getting it right means recording reliably. That's not something you've directly addressed. My experience, which you seem to want to ignore is that the SA8000 sometimes simply wouldn't record. And if it did, wouldn't play the recording through. But this may have changed. I hope so, but as I said, I don't have high hopes. I'm going to be kind here. I have not addressed recording reliability because it's a non-issue for me. Excellent. Sounds like that issue might be fixed. I'm now going on my 3rd month with the Comcast DVR. I have not lost 1 recording. Not a single one. One of the things I used to do with my Tivo was before leaving the house, check what was scheduled to be recorded and then switch to that channel before turning the TV off. That's because that friggin IR blaster was so unreliable. For shows I really wanted to make sure I didn't miss I'd schedule a 5 minute manual recording on the same channel just prior to the show. While my TIVO gets the channel change right 99% of the time, it does in fact screw it up once in while. I'm using the IR blaster. Fortunately, I can program my sat box to change channels. For those shows I absolutely don't want to miss, I'll program the sat box to change channels a few minutes ahead of the TIVO starting recording. Believe it or not. It still missed a couple of recordings due to bogus channel changes. That's all behind me now that I have the cable DVR. 100% reliable channel changes and I get the bonus of being able to channel surf too. I'll give it that. It was a reliable channel changer. At the two tuners is nice too. Check out other recent posts about the latest SA box. It sounds like a big improvement. Sean I hope so, we'll see. Depends if Time Warner has gotten any of the new equipment. |
Sean none shaped the electrons to say:
One of the things I used to do with my Tivo was before leaving the house, check what was scheduled to be recorded and then switch to that channel before turning the TV off. That's because that friggin IR blaster was so unreliable. For shows I really wanted to make sure I didn't miss I'd schedule a 5 minute manual recording on the same channel just prior to the show. I am completely convince you ****ed up installing you IR blasters. Because I have never seen anyone who did it *right* claim such a lousy performance. Errors on some boxes, especially Motorola, yes, no question. But no where near as bad as you keep reporting. I think I know why you have such a low opinion of TiVo - you couldn't manage to set it up, something completely non-technical people have no problem doing. In my current setup with two TiVos, since June 2002, 100% success. I'd never claim IR blasters are perfect for everyone, but you really have to do something wrong to make them THAT unreliable. And even when unreliable there are measures to improve performance (tent, stick on emitters) that work well. -MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762 -- URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me. "A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098 URL:http://www.megazone.org/ URL:http://www.eyrie-productions.com/ Eris |
|
Sean none shaped the electrons to say:
Yup. I had a Motorola box and yes I had anywhere from 5-15% failure rate. All it takes is 1 failure for a show you're dying to watch to That is a very high failure rate. I had Motorola boxes when I first got TiVo, before I moved to out of MediaOne/AT&T/Comcast territory and into Charter territory. I guess we had about 6 months there, and in that time (there were three of us in the house, one TiVo in the living room (Series1) and I had one in my room (Series2)) we had a couple of misses. I have a number of friends here in MA in Comcast turf, and they definitely don't have failure rates that high on their Mot boxes. Mostly spot in it would seem. We did have to run things on 'Slow' to be reliable with Motorola DCT boxes - but I use 00018 Fast on my SA boxes. -MZ, RHCE #806199299900541, ex-CISSP #3762 -- URL:mailto:megazoneatmegazone.org Gweep, Discordian, Author, Engineer, me. "A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men" 508-755-4098 URL:http://www.megazone.org/ URL:http://www.eyrie-productions.com/ Eris |
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:42:27 -0500, Sean none wrote:
Yup. I had a Motorola box and yes I had anywhere from 5-15% failure rate. All it takes is 1 failure for a show you're dying to watch to really **** you off. I had many many failures over the years I ran my Tivo. Sean You're right, that IS a horrible failure rate. I'd have moved on to something else too. My own failure rate might be around 0.1% I have to guess since a failure is a rare event for me. The failures that did anger me enough to do something was related to the frequent cable outages that caused me to join DISH a lot of years ago. I suppose they've (cable co.) improved since then. I hope so. |
* Sean Wrote in alt.video.ptv.tivo:
I like the Comcast interface better than Tivo now that I'm used to it. Some people chew on Aspirin too. -- David |
IR Blasters??? They STILL use that archaic mode of signal switching
equipment? I thought that stuff went the same way SONY Betamax VCR's did.IR blaster technology PREDATES WEBTV (which this poster still uses) and it ITSELF is basically OBSOLETE. |
SAC 441 wrote:
IR Blasters??? They STILL use that archaic mode of signal switching equipment? I thought that stuff went the same way SONY Betamax VCR's did.IR blaster technology PREDATES WEBTV (which this poster still uses) and it ITSELF is basically OBSOLETE. Unfortunately, until cablecard is widespread, IR blasters (and serial port on a few models) are the only way for one box to control another. It's definitely a subpar method, which is one of 2 main reasons cablecard exists (the other being to allow reception of digital and scrambled stations by standard hardware). Randy S. |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com