Is it me or....

Hi all

Been reading others posts on the Humax 9200 box which was recommended in
reponse to my "Freeview Box Recommendations" post.
A number of posters spoke very highly of the 9200, but then I see posts
regarding population of EPG times and other fairly serious niggles.

So, is it me, or are these Freeview boxes and services installed on them
generally unreliable/flakey like emerging technology?
I would have thought that this kit (or similar Sky stuff) has been around
long enough for the devices to be reasonably mature and stable by now.


Phil

....snip...

$ky marketing model

- All but give the boxes away
- Make long term income from subscriptions
- Protocols etc. are closed
- Competition is non existent.
- 1000s of each model "sold" resulting in lots of customer feedback

Freeview model

- Sell boxes
- NO long term income
- Protocols are open
- Very competitive.
- Samll numbers (compared to $ky) resulting in less customer feedback

So $ky have a huge advantage compared to similar Freeview boxes. However it
is also true that squabbling between the various Freeview partners doesn't
help and Freeview boxes could be far easier to use than they are. I hear
nothing but praise for the $ky approach of aiming for the dumb user who
wouldn't know a hard-drive from a tarmac-drive; and why should they?

Paul DS

"TheScullster" wrote in message
...
Hi all

Been reading others posts on the Humax 9200 box which was recommended in
reponse to my "Freeview Box Recommendations" post.
A number of posters spoke very highly of the 9200, but then I see posts
regarding population of EPG times and other fairly serious niggles.

So, is it me, or are these Freeview boxes and services installed on them
generally unreliable/flakey like emerging technology?
I would have thought that this kit (or similar Sky stuff) has been around
long enough for the devices to be reasonably mature and stable by now.



I wouldn't describe the 9200T as unreliable or flakey - in fact it's been
anything but. It has it's software issues with the most annoying being the
long EPG population. Actually, that's the only one that bothers me. It's
the best piece of kit I've bought in years and I don't know how I watched
tele without one. Being able to pause and make a cup of tea or go to the
bog is fabulous. Starting watching a programme half way through and
skipping the adverts is similarly fabulous. Buy one, I seriously doubt
you'll regret it.
Phil

WCZ wrote:
"TheScullster" wrote in message
...
Hi all

Been reading others posts on the Humax 9200 box which was recommended in
reponse to my "Freeview Box Recommendations" post.
A number of posters spoke very highly of the 9200, but then I see posts
regarding population of EPG times and other fairly serious niggles.

So, is it me, or are these Freeview boxes and services installed on them
generally unreliable/flakey like emerging technology?
I would have thought that this kit (or similar Sky stuff) has been around
long enough for the devices to be reasonably mature and stable by now.



I wouldn't describe the 9200T as unreliable or flakey - in fact it's been
anything but. It has it's software issues with the most annoying being the
long EPG population. Actually, that's the only one that bothers me. It's
the best piece of kit I've bought in years and I don't know how I watched
tele without one. Being able to pause and make a cup of tea or go to the
bog is fabulous. Starting watching a programme half way through and
skipping the adverts is similarly fabulous. Buy one, I seriously doubt
you'll regret it.
Phil


I agree - I've had one for about 2 years. The EPG is a minor pain, but I
just wait 5 minutes before I check what's on, and it's generally done
the business by that time. I even like the remote. And the clock/display.

It's one of the few gadgets I've got that I don't think about. It works
without fuss.

Rob

A number of posters spoke very highly of the 9200, but then I see posts
regarding population of EPG times and other fairly serious niggles.

It's the same with any product. The tiny minority who are dissatisfied are
invariably far more vocal than the contented majority.

I've had three PVRs, and every one of them had its niggles and shortcomings.
The Humax isn't perfect, but it's by far the best.

What really annoys me is that so many of these niggles (regardless of
manufacturer) are so basic they could and should easily be fixed. Indeed,
they should never have made it through testing. The pressure to reduce
costs to the absolute minimum is having a bad effect on software quality.

Have you tried the £400 Sony PVR-with-DVD-recorder box? I bought one and
was utterly horrified - it won't pause live TV until several seconds after
pressing the pause button, and then it insists on a minimum pause period of
just over a minute! It's a perfectly competent DVD recorder but the PVR
functionality is a bad joke.

I took it back and bought a Panny of similar spec for 50 quid less. That
won't even let you pause live TV at all! Pathetic. It's a good job I've
got the Humax to do all my day-to-day viewing.

I'm so disappointed with the consumer junk we get foisted with I'm seriously
thinking of building my own all-singing-all-dancing box based on a PC and
Windows Media Center (or similar).

It'll have two Freeview tuners, two satellite tuners, two DVD recorder
drives and a whopping hard disk. What a shame you can't buy anything like
that in the shops.

Steve

What interests me, although I am a great fan of the PVR9200, is that
the Humax PVR8000T older single tuner PVR that I have in another room
( and I have sold a fair few of them as well) has absolutely no
problems with EPG population. You switch it on and it is all there
immediately. I am fairly sure it stays populated when it is in
standby. Why would it be so difficult for the 9200 to do this as well?
Actually, I have said before, that for basic recording and playback, I
prefer this one especially as the remote is a universal one which can
also work the TV. This is a great advantage to many people.
The single tuner is no great problem if you have a TV with freeview as
its only like a traditional VCR. It records whilst you watch the TV.
Enough for many people with simple needs. I think it's a great shame
that it wasnt continued alongside the 9200.

"widgitt" wrote in message
oups.com...
What interests me, although I am a great fan of the PVR9200, is that
the Humax PVR8000T older single tuner PVR that I have in another room
( and I have sold a fair few of them as well) has absolutely no
problems with EPG population. You switch it on and it is all there
immediately. I am fairly sure it stays populated when it is in
standby.

It's rumoured that the 8000T had corruption problems with the stored EPG, so
the new model dropped it. Bad move.

--
Max Demian

On 6 Jul, 23:21, "Max Demian" wrote:
"widgitt" wrote in message

oups.com...

What interests me, although I am a great fan of the PVR9200, is that
the Humax PVR8000T older single tuner PVR that I have in another room
( and I have sold a fair few of them as well) has absolutely no
problems with EPG population. You switch it on and it is all there
immediately. I am fairly sure it stays populated when it is in
standby.

It's rumoured that the 8000T had corruption problems with the stored EPG, so
the new model dropped it. Bad move.

--
Max Demian

Interesting. I haven't really noticed any but, then, I dont record
that much. I mainly use that one for recording radio.

Both of my previous PVRs stored the EPG to disk, so it was available
instantly at switch-on. Of course, it could be wrong in parts due to
last-minute schedule changes, but these aren't THAT common, and in any case
they get updated after a few minutes.

I think the 9200 ought to store the EPG to disk.

Steve

"Mike Henry" wrote in message
...
In , "Paul D.Smith"
wrote:

I hear
nothing but praise for the $ky approach of aiming for the dumb user who
wouldn't know a hard-drive from a tarmac-drive;

Then I would venture to suggest that you're just not listening hard
enough. By all means cater for the dumb user, but it's perfectly simple
to ALSO cater for the advanced user. Don't aim squarely at dumb users
turning everyone else away in the process.


I can only tell you that I work for a computer company. Most of us here
could strip your PC down to bare components (replacing the motherboard
capacitors is surprisingly common!) and then rebuild and reinstall the O/S.
In short, we're as tech-headed as you can expect to ever meet. But those
who have $ky/$ky+ are very happy with it because "it just works".

I imagine you have an "advanced user" task that you want to do, but the vast
majority of people don't. The more diverse the interface, the more testing
is required and the more chance of bugs getting in there. Make something
that does what people want (play, record, save) in a clear, logical manner
and you're onto a winner. And of course you MUST have a simple interface
because most people just want it to work and they don't care how it does it.

Of course that doesn't mean that as a tech-head I don't like to know what's
going on, or be able to tweak things (Topfield anyone?) but the OP's
question was aimed squarely at "$ky boxes just work and work well, why don't
many Freeview boxes", not at tech-heads particularly.

Paul DS.