E* HDTV PVR Demo showed - Page 4 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #91 of 178 Old 01-22-2002, 07:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
I started this with the intent to state & post factual information of what I observed at CES on the HDTV PVR Demo as well as bullet points of my conversation with the rep from the company developing the PVR. Unfortunately, the thread has evolved with many what if possibilities even dooms day prediction and accusations of politics at play. This makes the understanding of what was showed at CES and what some people believe should be in the product two different subjects and most confusing.
It is important to always keep in mind the most important part of this announcement, that is, the fact that this device is actually being designed and built for us to have. Whether it has BNC connectors, 1394 for DV or MPEG2 or other, whether it has RGBHV or Y,Pr,Pb etc. is a secondary issue and, IMHO, of little concern at this time to me. I trust the developers are researching these issues and will offer the connectivity that is both desired and allowed by the industry.

Kei-

What was shown is in my picture. Unless someone else was granted a peak inside the RPTV cabinet or behind the scenes, I don't think the actual hardware/wiring was visible. The operation of this PVR was straight forward and I did operate it on 4 different HDTV DN channels. Like I said earlier, it is the idea that E* is actually doing this that is important. They recognize the public's desire to time shift and archive HDTV.
Don Landis is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #92 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 03:24 AM
Advanced Member
 
lalittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
Whether it has BNC connectors, 1394 for DV or MPEG2 or other, whether it has RGBHV or Y,Pr,Pb etc. is a secondary issue and, IMHO, of little concern at this time to me.
But there are people to whom this issue IS of great concern -- it is of primary concern to a lot of people who have been looking forward to this box, but happen to own TVs that may specifically limit it's functionality because their TVs do not support the DVI/HDCP interface. Different people will value different information in this thread. The very issue that's of "little concern" to you is of highest concern to me. If this information is indeed accurate (and I believe that it is based on several conversations reported here) then this presents "potential" problems for many people. I don't think this can fairly be categorized simply as "dooms day predictions." Rather, it's a discussion based upon some of the possible implications of what's been reported.

Everybody here, including myself, is certainly grateful to you for taking the time to report what you found out at CES -- this is the best way to get advance information about upcoming products from manufacturers that have not yet released information to the general public. However, I don't find it unreasonable to branch off of your initial "information" report with discussions about the potential issues surrounding this product, regardless of how "negative" some of the predictions may be. Personally, I want to know about worst case scenarios while they're still just theories, and a thread that reports the latest information about this type of product is, in my opinion, the perfect place to be having this discussion.

Quote:
I trust the developers are researching these issues and will offer the connectivity that is both desired and allowed by the industry.


I'm not sure that simply "trusting" them is a safe route to take. I think that being more vocal on this issue is an important step in attempting to create awareness of ALL the issues involved (including the theoretical or "potential" ones.) It's in this manner that better, more versatile products come about.

Larry
lalittle is offline  
post #93 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 05:22 AM
Advanced Member
 
ToddD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Satellite Beach, FL.
Posts: 896
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Larry wrote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Don Landis
Whether it has BNC connectors, 1394 for DV or MPEG2 or other, whether it has RGBHV or Y,Pr,Pb etc. is a secondary issue and, IMHO, of little concern at this time to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



But there are people to whom this issue IS of great concern -- it is of primary concern to a lot of people who have been looking forward to this box, but happen to own TVs that may specifically limit it's functionality because their TVs do not support the DVI/HDCP interface. Different people will value different information in this thread. The very issue that's of "little concern" to you is of highest concern to me. If this information is indeed accurate (and I believe that it is based on several conversations reported here) then this presents "potential" problems for many people. I don't think this can fairly be categorized simply as "dooms day predictions." Rather, it's a discussion based upon some of the possible implications of what's been reported.

Everybody here, including myself, is certainly grateful to you for taking the time to report what you found out at CES -- this is the best way to get advance information about upcoming products from manufacturers that have not yet released information to the general public. However, I don't find it unreasonable to branch off of your initial "information" report with discussions about the potential issues surrounding this product, regardless of how "negative" some of the predictions may be. Personally, I want to know about worst case scenarios while they're still just theories, and a thread that reports the latest information about this type of product is, in my opinion, the perfect place to be having this discussion.


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I trust the developers are researching these issues and will offer the connectivity that is both desired and allowed by the industry.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm not sure that simply "trusting" them is a safe route to take. I think that being more vocal on this issue is an important step in attempting to create awareness of ALL the issues involved (including the theoretical or "potential" ones.) It's in this manner that better, more versatile products come about.

Larry



Larry: First I want to thank Don for his effort in providing this report to us. He is of course free to decide what HE thinks is important in it. We do not have to agree. I do see that the output design is an important detail and am sure that it will receive much conversation.

Like you I am very concerned about the direction that the industry's is taking. But I feel that it has become clear to them that if this HD thing is ever going to get going they are going to have to "submit" to the requirements of the program providers. That is why I believe that now all of the TV makers (except Mits)have agreed to do the DVI/HDCP thing....even Sony if reports are true. (You asked for my source for this info ..it is the Feb/March Issue of Sound and Vision Page 92) Dish is only doing what every one else is doing....trying to get this thing going. I do not see the political movement that you seem to see. I only see that people have decided to be practical even if we don't like the implications.

As for the often stated 2+million HDTV's that would be obsolete...I know that is not a good thing,and in fact should not need to happen but it will and there is nothing that we can do about it. We all need to remember before we get all puffed up over that that WE don't have any problem obsoleting the 105+ million NTSC sets!! Most of the people that I know are much more upset over them than if we EVER get any HD. So "progress" requires that some be left behind. It is not good when it brings a cost of several thousand dollars but that is sometimes the case. I am sure that there will be efforts made to provide SOME relief and I see Dish's statements as such. You have stated you see them as non-marketing driven and political pay-back. I tend to see them just the opposite. They have said they will provide SOMETHING to the Mits owners when others are going to say sorry. That is seeing the market and taking advantage of it and trying to be non political.
ToddD is offline  
post #94 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 04:58 PM
Advanced Member
 
lalittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by ToddD
I want to thank Don for his effort in providing this report to us. He is of course free to decide what HE thinks is important in it. We do not have to agree. I do see that the output design is an important detail and am sure that it will receive much conversation.


That is exactly what I was saying -- that some people might not agree. The value of this thread will be different for different people, and while some people aren't concerned with the output configuration of this unit, others consider this of high importance.

Quote:
I do not see the political movement that you seem to see. I only see that people have decided to be practical even if we don't like the implications.


From what I've read so far, it seems like the only real benefactors of DVI/HDCP are be the content providers that want the tightest control over copy protection. The differences between firewire and DVI in terms of graphics capabilities, cost, etc. seem to be basically negligible. The one big difference between the actual use of the two protocols is the fact that you cannot record a DVI signal -- other than this, I'm still unclear what truly "usable" advantages it offers (I'm completely open to clarification on this point.) DVI is often touted as having higher bandwidth, but this becomes a moot point when you consider that it doesn't equate to less compression of the actual image, which is being received already compressed. In other words, both protocols deliver an identical final image to the screen.

I'm not claiming to "know" what these companies are thinking. However, when you consider the pressure from organizations like the MPAA on this issue, as well as past incidents like Panasonic actually pulling it's component input HDTV recorder off the market, it seems like politics are perhaps playing a much larger role than many people might think.

Quote:
We all need to remember before we get all puffed up over that that WE don't have any problem obsoleting the 105+ million NTSC sets!!


There is no reason for this to happen. HDTV to NTSC converters can be made available. According to some of the press I've read, this is exactly what is being planned. As I understand it, neither of the copy protection alternatives prohibit converting the HDTV signal to a comparatively low res NTSC image. The concern is only in preventing actual High Def copies of HD material. People with NTSC sets should be able to continue to watch any programming with either a new box (in the case of Sat or cable) or an additional box. The quality of the image will be at least equal to if not better than the image they'd been seeing up to then.

In other words, the people with older sets will only be "left behind" in the sense that they won't be able to utilize the benefits of the new standard. They will not, however, simply be left without TV programming, and while they may have to buy a new STB, they will not be forced to buy a whole new TV. The important distinction here is that HDTV owners without DVI may be forced to view material at a lower resolution than their expensive sets are capable of -- the NTSC TV owners will continue to utilize the full capability of their sets.

Quote:
I am sure that there will be efforts made to provide SOME relief and I see Dish's statements as such. You have stated you see them as non-marketing driven and political pay-back. I tend to see them just the opposite. They have said they will provide SOMETHING to the Mits owners when others are going to say sorry. That is seeing the market and taking advantage of it and trying to be non political.
I never said "pay-back." I said I believe that these decisions seem to be more politically motivated than technically motivated -- that the multi billion dollar players in this game, combined with the involvement of the FCC, creates the perfect arena for political pressures to decide the outcome of these issues. This isn't about getting "something" -- nobody is denying that everybody will continue to get "something." This is about the actual "who's" and "why's" behind these decisions, and the potential effects of these decisions on consumers.

Larry
lalittle is offline  
post #95 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 06:53 PM
Member
 
JeffGoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego
Posts: 154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
My 2 cents, I'll keep it short.

I'm pretty much with you on this whole subject Larry (you too Mike S.). Don, we all very much appreciate your enlightening us on the future products coming from Dish. And, from what you stated, it sounds like E*'s heart is in the right place. But...

While you might not care too much about the type of connections on this box, I sure as hell do. I'm one of those people with a 1394 set who are about to get screwed. Me, others with a Sony XBR2 series, and many Mit's owners are all in the same boat. Our early adoption of HDTV is facing either VERY early obsolescence, down-rezing, or inferior STBs.

I've got a E* 6000 STB and am not at all impressed with it. If this secondary product for us 1394 folks (not the 921) is really based on the 6000 it's going to be a real fricking DOG. A very S-L-O-W menu system with a look and feel as though it's straight out of the 1980's. Not enough memory to store enough favorites for more than one person. A zoom function that is very grainy and to be avoided. If this is what they will be offering us 1394 people then I'm not interested. I don't know what my options will be at that time. I'm really hoping what is being prophesied by the industry in general and Dish in particular does not come true.
JeffGoos is offline  
post #96 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 07:05 PM
Advanced Member
 
ToddD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Satellite Beach, FL.
Posts: 896
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Quote:
Originally posted by lalittle


I never said "pay-back." I said I believe that these decisions seem to be more politically motivated than technically motivated -- that the multi billion dollar players in this game, combined with the involvement of the FCC, creates the perfect arena for political pressures to decide the outcome of these issues. This isn't about getting "something" -- nobody is denying that everybody will continue to get "something." This is about the actual "who's" and "why's" behind these decisions, and the potential effects of these decisions on consumers.

Larry
Larry: In this way they are political as you are defining it. They are not Technical as much as they are to make the "holders of the keys" happy. Both Mits and Sony looked at this from a Technical prospective and decided on IEEE1394. But the "gatekeppers" want DVI/HDCP. So I believe that is what we will have to give them to get what WE want. That is HDTV.
I should note though that the MPAA does not give a damn about you as a consumer and if their actions cause you to have a multi- thousand dollar product that does not do what you bought it to do. This is about protecting THEIR interests.
ToddD is offline  
post #97 of 178 Old 01-23-2002, 11:42 PM
Advanced Member
 
lalittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Larry: In this way they are political as you are defining it.


I agree -- I just wanted to clarify that I never used the term "pay-back," which carries the wrong connotation. There is a difference between "pay-back" and "pressure."


Quote:
But the "gatekeppers" want DVI/HDCP. So I believe that is what we will have to give them to get what WE want. That is HDTV.


I still hope that firewire ultimately wins out over DVI, but I would have to agree that it looks as though DVI may be taking a substantial lead.

Quote:
I should note though that the MPAA does not give a damn about you as a consumer and if their actions cause you to have a multi- thousand dollar product that does not do what you bought it to do. This is about protecting THEIR interests.
I once again agree. This is related to why I don't like some aspects of DVI -- in my opinion it gives the content providers too much power over controlling the content, and could lead to the very issues that made Divx so disagreeable. I'm not saying it necessarily "would" lead to this -- I'm just saying that it would open the door to issues that would not apply to firewire/5C.

Larry
lalittle is offline  
post #98 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 01:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Kei Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Huntington Beach, CA, US
Posts: 4,416
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Don,

I saw the picture you posted, I believe unit was facing right towards the Faroudja booth? The reason I asked was that I saw several computers being connected to this demo set, looked like PC's running Linux although I can't be sure because I'm not familiar with Linux. I can't confirm that they were installed under the set during the show, however.

Kei Clark
Digital Connection
Kei Clark is offline  
post #99 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 12:07 PM
Member
 
MichaelH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by ericlhyman
Will the E* PVR allow time-shifting of local HD channels coming in through an antenna?
Well, at the risk of mundanely responding to something that isn't in the realm of the DVI vs. 1394 war, let me say that I too saw the demo, talked with the "English" woman and also talked with the people over at JVC about their prototype.... Yes, the E* will have a built-in OTA 8VSB tuner and 2 ATSC tuners. You can record from ANY 1 of them and watch ANY other 1 of them at the same time. Like the TiVo, you should also be able to "live-pause" 1 tuner while recording from another. In contrast, the JVC will have 2 ATSC tuners, no built-in OTA, and the prototype didn't show a slot for an optional one. It's just a prototype though, and that is probably the most important thing to remember about anything in this 5 page thread! ;)
MichaelH is offline  
post #100 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 04:06 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Michael-

Not mundane at all. Your post has offered more facts and information about what is intended for this PVR. Thanks much for more info.

_____________
After 5 pages of mostly paranoia and debates in this thread-
I find it quite fascinating and amusing that no one here has yet asked if there was a planned price point for the PVR and what that was. Considering all the brouhaha over the DVI vs. mitsubishi1394 I have been amused over this lack of interest in what this PVR will sell for. No one even asked yet. Those that were there asking most likely understood that this was a piece in development and too early to be concerned. Anyway, I decided to mention it when we hit page 5 as a "wakeup call" as to where the priorities were on this. Think of the message this sends to E* as to how important price is on something like this. ie. Nobody cares! Normally, this is one of the most leading questions people have. I'm glad I did not post this because it was an interesting psychological observation.
Don Landis is offline  
post #101 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 04:23 PM
Member
 
JeffGoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego
Posts: 154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It's not just Mitsubishi with 1394. It's Mitsubishi and Sony. This is not an insignificant crowd.

Don, don't take this the wrong way, but I suspect you don't own any of the equipment that is about to get effectively obsoleted. That is the only reason I can think of for your lack of interest in this portion of the topic. Correct me if I'm wrong...
JeffGoos is offline  
post #102 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 04:41 PM
Member
 
MichaelH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Pleasant Hill, CA
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
Michael-

Not mundane at all. Your post has offered more facts and information about what is intended for this PVR. Thanks much for more info.

_____________
After 5 pages of mostly paranoia and debates in this thread-
I find it quite fascinating and amusing that no one here has yet asked if there was a planned price point for the PVR and what that was. Considering all the brouhaha over the DVI vs. mitsubishi1394 I have been amused over this lack of interest in what this PVR will sell for. No one even asked yet. Those that were there asking most likely understood that this was a piece in development and too early to be concerned. Anyway, I decided to mention it when we hit page 5 as a "wakeup call" as to where the priorities were on this. Think of the message this sends to E* as to how important price is on something like this. ie. Nobody cares! Normally, this is one of the most leading questions people have. I'm glad I did not post this because it was an interesting psychological observation.
Well, I'll bite. Let me say that I talked price with JVC and the Dish rep, and while both should be couched as purely speculative conversation, I was encouraged. I believe the E* box will come in at about $1,000. Maybe $899 MSRP if we are lucky! The guys at JVC danced around the fact that they had heard internal rumblings indicating a $900 number. When I threw that at the Dish rep., the response was sort of a "hmm, ours would be better with an OTA tuner built in." Now, I took that to mean that they were shooting for the same price range, and while I would like it to be $199; $1,000 is not bad. The current model 6000 is something like $650, OTA is $150, and a good TiVo is like $400. You get the rationale... Anyway, what I would like to see is some kind of trade up program for 6000 owners providing a reasonable discount. Maybe even a trade up/across program for DTC-100 owners.

My $0.02...
MichaelH is offline  
post #103 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 05:59 PM
Senior Member
 
Bytre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 260
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Although early, I assume the price will be "expensive", but for a certain segment of the market, the functionality is the prime interest.

I paid $350 for my dish 6000 plus $99 for the 8vsb, with a $200 rebate for defecting to Dish. I loved that price, but honestly would expect to pay as much as $600 for a feature set as discussed on the prototype.

Of course, being a Mitsubishi 55857 owner, I'd want some solution that would work with my set.
Bytre is offline  
post #104 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 08:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Pocatello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Idaho Falls, Idaho USA
Posts: 1,183
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
So, how much will it be?

$1,000 is too much for me! I will wait another year or too at such a high price!

Won't they sell gazillions more of these boxes if the price is right?

Just my thoughts...

Pocatello
Pocatello is offline  
post #105 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 09:29 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
rudolpht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Boxborough, MA, USA
Posts: 7,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
As regards to price, the PVR will represent a small segment of a small (HD) market, in comparison to overall satellite. It is hard to have them flying off the shelfs if corresponding sets are not doing the same. This is the part to celebrate, companies going forward with next-gen products with a relatively small target audience. I think few folks will go HD because of HD PVR, unless nobody bought standard def before Replay & Tivo.

Don's psychology test is a good one and should be instructive to corporations (that consider higher profits given lower volumes). HD folks typically will pay more for "flagship" products, even when their average means are not commensurate with all our desires.

I know I would pay double the price as many "bleeding edgers" would (and I know the Echostar conspiracy will do anything not to sell Larry one, the tech support and badgering would make the sale unprofitable).


Tim

Tim
Selling Anthem PVA7.
STABILITY + Superior audio (SC09-TX) + Incredible picture (VPL-VW200) + good integration.
rudolpht is offline  
post #106 of 178 Old 01-24-2002, 09:32 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
That is the only reason I can think of for your lack of interest in this portion of the topic. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Jeff-
OK, you stand corrected. You must understand that my thinking doesn't work that way. ie. My life doesn't revolve around my latest purchase in a TV set that may get left out because a particular product in development is feared by some forum posters not to work with it. Here's how my thinking works: I feel that if my present day equipment is left out and I won't be able to connect, I may just need to find a way around this, get with the program with equipment that does work, or simply live without the technology. It is just a choice I will make. And, as a matter of fact, I don't see myself using this product anyway without some changes, even maybe a new projector with the correct inputs and when the time comes I will evaluate those changes in relation to the benefits of the pVR and make a decision. At any rate, whatever the choice, I don't find it productive to worry myself sick, now, over what future product in development will do that I may not be ready for when it is released.

Michael- Good show, but the thread is clear, nobody was even interested here about a product price point until I mentioned it. Those of us who did see the product at the show probably all asked but, nobody posted and nobody even seemed interested in what usually is the second thing people ask.
Normally, you would announce E* is going to do an HD PVR and people will ask when will it be available and how much? In this case I reported when it will be out, withheld the price information I heard but the thread went in the direction of - I guess it won't work with MY TV set and therefore lets debate the politics behind what I fear. Fascinating!
Anyway, Michael, your report was more detailed on the price guestimate than I had. Once again, thanks for bringing more facts to the thread.
With such a lively interest in this product, I can see that E* will have an HDTV accessory that should be quite a hit.
Don Landis is offline  
post #107 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 12:26 AM
Member
 
JeffGoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego
Posts: 154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Don, my disposable income for items like this must be considerably less than yours. I admire your financial fortitude.

Did E* indicate the cost of the 6000 based box with 1394?
JeffGoos is offline  
post #108 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 05:54 AM
DP1
AVS Special Member
 
DP1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
And let us not forget that theres always the chance that this product wont ever actually be released to the public anyway for various reasons (technology, merger considerations etc).

Like the Dish 5400 DVD/Sat receiver combo unit they were touting/demoing a year and a half ago on the Tech Chats. Somebody wised up and decided actually selling that unit would be a mistake. It dawned on them I presume that most people that bought one would probably end up calling in and claiming it was defective because every time they switched from a DVD to satellite, the picture looked so much "worse".

We shall see.

Dan

Don't confuse me with facts...
My mind is made up.
;-)
DP1 is offline  
post #109 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 08:20 AM
Senior Member
 
Jamie E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 454
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally posted by rudolpht
As regards to price, the PVR will represent a small segment of a small (HD) market, in comparison to overall satellite. It is hard to have them flying off the shelfs if corresponding sets are not doing the same. This is the part to celebrate, companies going forward with next-gen products with a relatively small target audience. I think few folks will go HD because of HD PVR, unless nobody bought standard def before Replay & Tivo.
Actually, I've been waiting for exactly this product before investing in HD hardware. I haven't watched "live" TV for years. I first time shifted NTSC using a VCR, and later a ReplayTV. Needless to say, the consumer electronics manufacturers are going to have to accomodate my viewing habits, not the other way around. Without time shifting capability, HD is effectively useless to me.

I've been watching this 921 discussion with a reaction ranging from amusement to concern. Paranoia is definitely high, and with good reason. It's always amazed me how the Hollywood content providers have to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into each new advance in home viewing technology. After all the posturing and blustering and lawsuits claiming each new product will be the death of their industry, it instead turns out to be a new cash cow for them to milk. The difference in this case (being an early adopter in the HD arena) is that the draconian copy protection measures proposed for digital signals have the capability to effectively make obsolete a very large, very expensive, group of televisions. Will the studios resist the urge to exercise this capability? It doesn't look good when they consider any pirated copy of a program the loss of a sale. We all know the reality, that the majority of those who pirate programming won't pay for it anyway, so much less revenue is lost than the studios would have everyone believe. I just hope that all standards can be worked out, and legitimate consumers like us won't be overly inconvenienced.

If Dish network is paying attention, I for one will buy the 921, and an HD monitor (with DVI inputs, it seems) whenever it becomes available.

Movies look their best when they look like movies. More Patton-esque remasters!

Jamie E is offline  
post #110 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 09:00 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 17,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 784 Post(s)
Liked: 708
Quote:
Originally posted by Jamie E
We all know the reality, that the majority of those who pirate programming won't pay for it anyway, so much less revenue is lost than the studios would have everyone believe.
I don't know that that's true. I've known a few people who were "turned to the dark side" of DBS theft by a small group of friends or co-workers who were doing it, when they'd been paying for it for years. Seeing people that they knew not pay for it and get away with it made them feel foolish. In at least one case, the person was a highly religious, regular church-goer whom I would never have thought would steal anything, ever.

I think that there are a few people who won't steal when they can get away with it on principle. I'm one of them, or at least I think I am--I've never been tempted to it yet. But within a couple of years there will be 35-50 Mbps connections to the home to enable legitimate trade in large multi-media files. At that point, downloading a 15GB (two hours with no ATSC chaff) HD movie becomes quite feasible. How many people will buy or rent a film if bit-perfect copies of it turn up on the net for free download the day after it's released (or before it's released, sometimes)?

I think that the studios ask for too much--they'd like to find ways to restrict the recording of OTA television, which we would seem to have been granted free right to by a 1984 Supreme Court decision. They don't like 1394/DTCP because it didn't give them sufficient control of recording--they wanted to be able to control the amount of time that people could retain a copy of a recording. That SC decision explicitly skirted the issue of whether we have a right to archive recordings of OTA television--it wasn't technologically possible at the time to allow timeshifting, which the court saw as a boon to society, and disallow archiving, so the point was moot. It's possible now.

We go round and round on this topic. I don't mean to reopen the can of worms.

-- Mike Scott

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #111 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 04:18 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Quote:
Don, my disposable income for items like this must be considerably less than yours
Since you wish to inquire about my income, I can assure you I have absolutely no income I am free to dispose of. In life you will learn as you become more mature, that we all are in the same situation if we work for a living. I don't care if you're a sanitation engineer or a biomedical research engineer with a phd. What this has to do with worrying over whether a product in development will operate with our current TV sets, I have no idea.
Don Landis is offline  
post #112 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 04:45 PM
Member
 
JeffGoos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego
Posts: 154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
You'll note I did not ask your income. Can we please leave the personal attacks out of this? I'm not trying to be nasty or flippant :) Really. Nor do I think was anyone else that was making statements on this thread that you seemed to take umbrage to. We all appreciate your information on these new products from E*.

Let's start over, okay?

So I'll ask my question again. Did E* indicate the cost of the 6000 based box with 1394?
JeffGoos is offline  
post #113 of 178 Old 01-25-2002, 08:40 PM
Advanced Member
 
ericlhyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Silver Spring, MD USA
Posts: 840
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
E* had announced a preliminary price of $499 for this PVR. What I would like to know is if it is fully functional for non-E* customers who only want to use it to timeshift OTA HD.

ericlhyman
ericlhyman is offline  
post #114 of 178 Old 01-26-2002, 12:43 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
Jeffgoos-

Thank you for suggesting that we not get personal, after you got personal. Recall, I did not broach the topic of my disposable income level versus yours. My income level (ie disposable income) has nothing to do with the PVR specs which is what this thread is about but you were the one who decided to make that an issue in your post. So, I agree with you to drop it, NOW... And just for the record, in case others want to go down this path, while my skin is pretty thick, I do take offense at anyone who attempts to publically analyze my or anyone elses income and spending habits on this or any other forum. It is out of line!

The reason I didn't address the question of a "6000 model IRD with a 1394 port" is because I really didn't know what you were talking about. The thread was about an HDTV PVR in development by a company contracted by E*. I don't mind, at this point in the game discussing another E* product like an "IRD 6000 with 1394 port" but someone else will have to answer that because I didn't see one and never heard of one being developed. If you were mistaken on the model number and were really referring to the PVR in subject, then I think michaelH already offered the price points pretty accurately.
Don Landis is offline  
post #115 of 178 Old 01-26-2002, 08:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jerndl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by Don Landis
I don't mind, at this point in the game discussing another E* product like an "IRD 6000 with 1394 port" but someone else will have to answer that because I didn't see one and never heard of one being developed. If you were mistaken on the model number and were really referring to the PVR in subject, then I think michaelH already offered the price points pretty accurately.
I think Jeff was referring to a post by peterd on the first page of this thread
Quote:
BTW - one more tidbit... Owners of Mitsubishi HDTV sets with only 1394 inputs (Mitsubishi is anti-DVI) will not be able to use the 921. For them, Dish will introduce a basic box with no PVR functions, no interactive applications, no OpenTV, no 7 day guide. In other words, a 6000-level product (my guess is no OTA tuner, though, since I think the Mits would provide that) with only a 5C/HAVI 1394 output which would only talk to the Mitsubishi sets.
Jay
jerndl is offline  
post #116 of 178 Old 01-26-2002, 08:54 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Club Gold
 
Don Landis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 11,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Liked: 145
I guess peterd will need to expand on that. I did not discuss any such product with anyone at E*. However, I would be interested in learning more about a 6000 with 1394 port. That is an intriguing idea as it answers a major complaint we all had about the 6000 when it was first introduced. The fact that the only DVHS VCR that could record HDTV from 1394 was removed from the market at that time gave E* no incentive to consider this further. Today with the JVC, Mits and the 1394 TV connectivity, this should be a re-consideration.
Don Landis is offline  
post #117 of 178 Old 01-26-2002, 12:59 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
rudolpht's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Boxborough, MA, USA
Posts: 7,566
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
In the seperate topic which preceded this one, I had stated in talks with the "English woman" there were no plans to produce a 1394 board for the 6000.

Tim

Tim
Selling Anthem PVA7.
STABILITY + Superior audio (SC09-TX) + Incredible picture (VPL-VW200) + good integration.
rudolpht is offline  
post #118 of 178 Old 01-26-2002, 04:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
lalittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by rudolpht
In the seperate topic which preceded this one, I had stated in talks with the "English woman" there were no plans to produce a 1394 board for the 6000.
I can't be sure at this point, but I believe I remember reading this reported elsewhere as well. However, even if E* DID create this add on for the 6000, or even if they did create a new "6000-level product" as Peter reported earlier, it still wouldn't solve the very basic problem of what will happen if the content providers decide to utilize the copy protection offered by DVI/HDCP (which is the primary reason for using the protocol in the first place.) These boxes would only allow downres'd viewing of such programs, which is the basis of my concerns here.

As far as the observations on the lack of price inquiries go, the simple truth is that to me, cost is secondary to whether or not I'll even be able to use the box.

Larry
lalittle is offline  
post #119 of 178 Old 01-27-2002, 03:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 17,417
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 784 Post(s)
Liked: 708
Any Echostar product that could be used directly as a DISH Network tuner by Mitsubishi's sets through FireWire (if it did it in the fashion intended by the designers of the protocols) could also be used by an outboard PVR, which Mitsubishi or some other pro-1394/DTCP manufacturer could make, presenting whatever interface to a display through HAVi or as an AV/C Panel Subunit that it chose to. Maybe Mitsubishi owners need not care whether they can use the 921 or not.

The sole question is whether Echostar or any other DBS or cable company will be allowed by the content providers to deploy STBs to provide copy-protected content to displays through 1394/DTCP (offering an AV/C Tuner Subunit service to the network). This has not been decided as yet.

It is possible (and you knew that I had to throw in a negative speculation :)), for an ill-designed STB not to offer any services to its peers on the FireWire network, but to simply use them: you turn on the STB with its remote, it find the TV and turns it on, making the TV display its interface. You give it commands with its remote, it shows some response with a GUI that it draws on the TV. You select a program that you want to watch, it tunes it and streams it to the television, which is playing the video stream in a fashion analogous to playing an analog line input, which is the way we usually use a STB now. Like I said, not the intent of the 1394 A/V comm design--all devices on the network are supposed to offer their capabilities to all other devices. But it could be done that way, and that wouldn't allow a networked PVR to be added in.

-- Mike Scott

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #120 of 178 Old 01-27-2002, 04:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
lalittle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 729
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally posted by michaeltscott
Any Echostar product that could be used directly as a DISH Network tuner by Mitsubishi's sets through FireWire (if it did it in the fashion intended by the designers of the protocols) could also be used by an outboard PVR, which Mitsubishi or some other pro-1394/DTCP manufacturer could make, presenting whatever interface to a display through HAVi or as an AV/C Panel Subunit that it chose to. Maybe Mitsubishi owners need not care whether they can use the 921 or not.


Unfortunately, this wouldn't be a solution if the content providers were utilizing HDCP for copy protection -- i.e. you'd still need DVI/HDCP to watch this programming. We end up with compatibility issues if HDCP is used exclusively.

Quote:
The sole question is whether Echostar or any other DBS or cable company will be allowed by the content providers to deploy STBs to provide copy-protected content to displays through 1394/DTCP


Exactly -- this is the critical decision. If the content providers allow their content to be broadcast using firewire/5C as well as DVI/HDCP, it could resolve this issue as long as STB's had "fully functioning" firewire ports. The hope is that enough "firewire only" systems are in the market such that the nobody decides to provide content exclusively for DVI/HDCP systems. This would be best for consumers overall, since it wouldn't interfere with the whole "fair recording rights" issue.

Larry
lalittle is offline  
Closed Thread HDTV Recorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off