Channel Master DVR+ Owners Thread - Page 151 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 598Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #4501 of 6642 Old 08-19-2014, 05:54 PM
AVS Special Member
 
JoeKustra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Ashland, PA 17921
Posts: 6,783
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamez68 View Post
I doubt anyone from Channel Master is following this thread because if they were they would have realized by now all they need to do is update the PAL DVR/CM7000 with internet to provide guide service and they would have a hot seller!
I guess the only constant between the CM7000 and DVR+ is Rovi. That kinda sucks.
JoeKustra is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4502 of 6642 Old 08-19-2014, 10:24 PM
Newbie
 
jmup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Hello, all.

First, I wish to thank you all for contributing to this thread and its ancestor, the DTVpal thread. Both threads have provided me over the years with a wealth of information as well as a way of fixing one of my DTVpals (thank you, P Smith, wherever you are!)

I own two DTVpals and one CM7000PAL (two in use and one spare) and have been using "mine" for several years (the other belongs to my SO and is used for the usual OTA reality shows and soaps). I have accumulated several terabytes of PBS shows (I installed a removable drive sled on it) but have been looking at this thread for a while.

With the resuscitation of my dead DTVpal (overheating, due to too much lint on the fan; yep, that was a stupid thing to allow), I started to seriously consider exploring the possibility of switching over to the next iteration.

I don't recall the post number but someone reported that Crutchfield had the DVR+ in stock. When I visited, it wasn't but I asked to be notified when they were in. They recently emailed me and I bought the model with the 1TB drive built in as well as the WiFi dongle. (There has been some discussion about what a rip-off this seems, but I figured my time was more valuable than chasing a cheaper solution, which I did in another context, but I digress.)

I received it last week and installed it this past Saturday. Everything is as advertised: it works with a minimum amount of fuss. Of course, it has its idiosynchracies and differences from the DTVpal, but those have been discussed extensively by you all.

Yesterday I purchased a Western Digital My Passport 0820 Media at Costco, 2 TB capacity (but 1.8 TB by the "other" count) for $119. It was originally NTFS formatted.

After connection to DVR+, the drive was detected. I gave it the go-ahead to reformat and, after a reboot, the DVR+ accepted and recognized the drive, complete with name, size and serial number.

As recently reported by Pachinko, the DVR+ defaulted to the external disk and did not report the existence of an internal drive.

I recorded part of a PSB pledge week show ("Elvis: Aloha from Hawaii") and this morning I removed the WD from the DVR+ (while it was turned off as the drive appeared to be on standby). Upon turning the DVR+ back on, it informed me that its "upgrade" had been removed and that it would continue with its internal drive. It then rebooted. After it came back, I confirmed that the storage now in use is the internal drive.

In preparation, I had installed MacFUSE 2.0.3,2 and fuse-ext2-0.0.07 onto my 10-y-o Mac (PPC G5, 10.5.8; it still works but soon the Gods of the InterTubes are going to force me to upgrade as they are already punishing me by showing me the PBS schedule line up for only one day). Connecting the drive to it resulted on it being recognized as two drives, disk2s1 and disk2s2.

The Mac's Disk Utility reports that the drive has a "Master Boot Record" partition map scheme. disk2s1 is reported to be formatted as fuse-ext2 and its capacity is set at 976.5 MB, while disk2s2 is reported to be 1.8 TB also as fuse-ext2. At this point, those capacities seem strange as they add up to more than the 1.8 TB reported for the drive.

The trick is that the total number of bytes in this drive is 2,000,365,289,472 and for the disks are 1,023,975,424 for disk2s1 and 1,999,341,281,280 bytes for disk2s2. Those numbers do add up to nearly the total capacity and the apparent differences are due to "rounding" errors.

The Mac's Finder reports one file (Strm002.ts) and one folder (lost+found) in disk2s2. After exploring the files in disk2s1 with VLC (0.9.10), another file showed up in disk2s2 (Strm0003.ts) but it has zero length. Interestingly, the Finder does not display "reasonable" dates of "modification" for any files. For example, all files report a date of either Jan 1, 1970, or Dec 31, 1969. The "new" file's date is even wackier: Dec 31, 1903. This is no doubt due to the different ways in which dates are displayed in the Linux flavor of UNIX vs Mac OS. Using "Terminal" to check things out, returns "Input/output error" when "ls" attempts to give a listing of the folder. Doing "ls -la" does not show the "new" file. I am sure that all this has an explanation, but I won't pursue it. For now.

The encouraging fact is that the files are accessible if not initially playable by the VLC in this Mac. MPlayer OS X 2 (2.0b6) (SMPlayer's Mac analog) does not "see" any of the files (they are all grayed out). (OTOH, something is weird with the MPlayer installation as it does not show the video and only plays the audio of any other files. Testig with other files shows that MPlayer has a problem since VLC can play any other of my video files.)

I fixed the file in two ways: 1) using ffmpeg as suggested by JHBrabdt and DD24 (post 1106, most notably) and 2) using Handbrake (0.9.4 for ppc). ffmpeg took less than 5 minutes to chew over the slightly-more-than 35-minute, 2.93 GB file. Handbrake was able to create an mp4 file without me fiddling with its controls. The drawback is that it took nearly 7 hours. Handbrake uses ffmpeg but it does compress/mux the file to get it into mp4. The resulting mp4 is 1.27 GB while the "clean" TS file is 3.1 GB. But this is not surprising since ffmpeg is simply copying and "fixing" the mistakes it found.

The bottom line: 1) connecting an external drive to the DVR+ makes it the default storing destination, 2) the drive can be mounted in Macs (and PCs as shown by others), and 3) the files in the DVR+ can be archived, transferred to other computers, and can be made more portable by translating them to other formats.

Now, if I could figure out how to do the same to the files in my DTVpal, I would be a happy camper. Going off topic but bear with me: I can put a Mac formatted drive in a DTVpal and then put it back in the Mac and the Mac still thinks it is a Mac drive, with nary a trace of the files the DTVpal put there. PM me if you have any suggestions on what is going on and how to mount a DTVpal drive as so far I am stumped. (And, no, I am not going to talk to E* about it.)
pachinko and LloydSoCal like this.
jmup is offline  
post #4503 of 6642 Old 08-19-2014, 10:41 PM
Newbie
 
jmup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by P Smith View Post
I did the DVR+ int/ext HDDs tests and posted the result (is it just some sort of conspiracy - Enton's CM-7400 behave same way)
Is this what you are referring to Sr. Smith?

Quote:
- second USB drive doesn't using/discovering/seen by the DVR (the test was to connect 100 GB HDD what was previously used while other 500 GB has been connected to the DVR);
It comes from post #1055. I interpreted that to mean that you were connecting a drive to each of the USB ports. You did not, at the time, had a DVR+ with an internal drive, I think.

Anyway, the date on that post is 01-10-2014 so I had hoped that more than seven months later the revisions of the FW would have addressed the possibility of choosing one drive or the other for recording. Also, I had hoped that CM would have made it possible to access the recordings on both drives by, say, choosing a "source" drive. Alas, no, that's not the case. Or at least I could not find it in the menus.

But Pachinko confirmed these observations by talking to CM. Oh, well, let's hope they take this suggestion and act on it. Or do we have to contact them directly to request that?
jmup is offline  
post #4504 of 6642 Old 08-19-2014, 11:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Aleron Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 450
You cannot do anything with the drive from a DTVPal other than use it to record and watch shows with a DTVPal. It uses a proprietary filesystem that nobody is willing to demystify, due to DMCA restrictions.
Aleron Ives is offline  
post #4505 of 6642 Old 08-19-2014, 11:25 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by OTAhead View Post
OK, it's good to hear that you've already done your homework on that matter. Have you decided w if you are going to replace your old TV or not? I think you will enjoy the experience a lot more if you do...
Oh I'd definetly replace the existing television with a new flat screen. And I'd take the advice that was also offered by someone here to make sure to get one with more jacks than you think you'll need so it's expandable with future devices.

The problem I have now is that I was doing some additional research on the boards of the Roku site and one of the sites that's a deal breaker for me is limited to folks with cable subscriptions. I was willing to cut the cord so long as my family could get ABCFamily through their site. But they've closed it to only folks with a cable subscription that can be verified which is so insanely stupid. To add insult to injury they don't even service Time Warner customers, one of the biggest cable providers in the country, which serves my area. So I need to think about it some more and/or possibly find someone who's willing to lend out their login/id from their provider. It's the stupidest thing I've ever seen a website do and I was so looking forward to telling the cable company to kiss my posteirer...

KB
Kevin Blanco is offline  
post #4506 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 12:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
P Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mediterranean Sea
Posts: 2,080
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmup View Post
Is this what you are referring to Sr. Smith?

It comes from post #1055. I interpreted that to mean that you were connecting a drive to each of the USB ports. You did not, at the time, had a DVR+ with an internal drive, I think.

Anyway, the date on that post is 01-10-2014 so I had hoped that more than seven months later the revisions of the FW would have addressed the possibility of choosing one drive or the other for recording. Also, I had hoped that CM would have made it possible to access the recordings on both drives by, say, choosing a "source" drive. Alas, no, that's not the case. Or at least I could not find it in the menus.

But Pachinko confirmed these observations by talking to CM. Oh, well, let's hope they take this suggestion and act on it. Or do we have to contact them directly to request that?
I noted that CM-7400 (Enton) and new CM-7500 [DVR+] (echo*) are both utilize only one drive and behave same way when connecting second drive.
Yes, I did many tests include two USB drives and later did test combinations of int SATA and ext USB ...

Unfortunately for us, customers the two company made decision not in our favor: allow to use ONE drive regardless FW version.
P Smith is offline  
post #4507 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 05:13 AM
Advanced Member
 
SEMIJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: S.E. Michgan
Posts: 617
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Blanco View Post
The problem I have now is that I was doing some additional research on the boards of the Roku site and one of the sites that's a deal breaker for me is limited to folks with cable subscriptions. I was willing to cut the cord so long as my family could get ABCFamily through their site. But they've closed it to only folks with a cable subscription that can be verified which is so insanely stupid.
Would you be willing to pay $5, $8 or more per month just for ABCFamily? The "premium" movie channels would cost even more. (Just look at Amazon Prime or Vudu rates for an idea.) Now multiply that by the number of special-interest subscription TV channels. What would happen is two things: Many people would end up paying the same as they do for subscription TV, only with less channels, and many channels would simply disappear for lack of sufficient interest. The sports channels, in particular, would be in real trouble. They would cost many times what they do as part of a package, and there's some doubt even sports addicts would be willing to pay for them in sufficient numbers.

Channels like ABCFamily know this. The subscription TV (cable/satellite) providers know this. So the content providers sign deals with the subscription TV companies and each agrees to maintain the status quo.

Nonetheless: The end may be neigh. See Cord Cutters Grew 44% Last Four Years and Broadband Users Now Outnumber Cable Users at Top Cable Companies

Jim

Last edited by SEMIJim; 08-20-2014 at 11:47 AM. Reason: Eliminated a redundancy
SEMIJim is offline  
post #4508 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 06:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,529
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Blanco View Post
It's the stupidest thing I've ever seen a website do and I was so looking forward to telling the cable company to kiss my posteirer...
Sounds like they are telling you to kiss theirs . . .

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #4509 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 08:15 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Kelson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Delaware - The First State (USA)
Posts: 10,529
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 575 Post(s)
Liked: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamcma View Post
Well, they say people from Channel Master read this, so: these features were standard issue on DVRs years and years ago, so we would all appreciate it if they were fast-tracked on the DVR+.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmup View Post
Oh, well, let's hope they take this suggestion and act on it. Or do we have to contact them directly to request that?
I doubt you will see any substantial DVR-related features added to the DVR+ and should consider it feature-complete as it stands. I suspect future additions will be primarily directed at adding Internet streaming channels - just what everyone wants.

- kelson h

The bitterness of poor quality lasts long after the sweetness of the low price is forgotten . . . life is too short to drink bad wine

Kelson is offline  
post #4510 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 10:51 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Internal or External HDD

I am trying to decide which model of CM to buy, the one with the internal 1 tb hdd (7500tb1) or the older one without the internal drive and use an external drive with it. It appears in various reviews that the two models are identical (other than the internal hdd inclusion). Has anyone had experience with both of these models and their responsiveness. Would an external hdd (usb) be slower than the internal drive?


1 TB is more than enough for me, so the option of using bigger drives is not really a consideration for me. I am just trying to decide if I would want a (less clunky) model with the drive already inside or a (more clunky) solution with a separate drive. Any comments or thoughts highly appreciated.
ms801 is offline  
post #4511 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 11:37 AM
Member
 
Arenal04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by ms801 View Post
I am trying to decide which model of CM to buy, the one with the internal 1 tb hdd (7500tb1) or the older one without the internal drive and use an external drive with it. It appears in various reviews that the two models are identical (other than the internal hdd inclusion). Has anyone had experience with both of these models and their responsiveness. Would an external hdd (usb) be slower than the internal drive?


1 TB is more than enough for me, so the option of using bigger drives is not really a consideration for me. I am just trying to decide if I would want a (less clunky) model with the drive already inside or a (more clunky) solution with a separate drive. Any comments or thoughts highly appreciated.
Personally, I would go with the model that does not have the internal drive. For the price difference, you can easily purchase a 1TB external drive and still have some nice money left. Additionally, if the external hard drive does die on you, it's extremely easy to replace it. To replace the internal drive, you'll either have to send the unit back for repair or open the unit up yourself.

Additionally, if you're somewhat computer-savvy, with the external drive, you can copy the video files to your PC. (This has been discussed previously on this forum and involves some technical know-how.) Thus, if you think the hard drive is going flaky, you'll be able to back up your videos before the drive totally craps out. Fair warning, the filenames will have no correlation to the name of the show. So you'll have randomly-named files. OR, you could buy another drive, record to it, but use the original drive only for playing previously recorded shows, before the drive totally dies. FYI, the DVR+ can utilize only one hard drive at a time, so you'll need to plug and unplug whichever drive you want to use at that time.

The only upside I can see to the model with the internal drive is that it takes up less space on the shelf and you don't have an another cable laying getting in the way.

Just my 2 cents.
SEMIJim and pachinko like this.
Arenal04 is offline  
post #4512 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 03:29 PM
Member
 
jamez68's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Marrero LA.
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by SEMIJim View Post
Would you be willing to pay $5, $8 or more per month just for ABCFamily? The "premium" movie channels would cost even more. (Just look at Amazon Prime or Vudu rates for an idea.) Now multiply that by the number of special-interest subscription TV channels. What would happen is two things: Many people would end up paying the same as they do for subscription TV, only with less channels, and many channels would simply disappear for lack of sufficient interest. The sports channels, in particular, would be in real trouble. They would cost many times what they do as part of a package, and there's some doubt even sports addicts would be willing to pay for them in sufficient numbers.

Channels like ABCFamily know this. The subscription TV (cable/satellite) providers know this. So the content providers sign deals with the subscription TV companies and each agrees to maintain the status quo.

Nonetheless: The end may be neigh. See Cord Cutters Grew 44% Last Four Years and Broadband Users Now Outnumber Cable Users at Top Cable Companies

Jim
But isnt it because of cable and satellite we have ABC and ABCFamily, FOX and FX and now FXX? There are many other media conglomerates that have multiple channels, these are only the most obvious. I would rather pay for a few channels of my choosing than 200+ a provider feels I should have. I only have basic cable so that I can watch a few programs on 10 channels and watch/record the broadcast stations OTA, so Im paying $7 per channel now.

My best friend is my PAL
jamez68 is offline  
post #4513 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 03:42 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamez68 View Post
But isnt it because of cable and satellite we have ABC and ABCFamily, FOX and FX and now FXX? There are many other media conglomerates that have multiple channels, these are only the most obvious. I would rather pay for a few channels of my choosing than 200+ a provider feels I should have. I only have basic cable so that I can watch a few programs on 10 channels and watch/record the broadcast stations OTA, so Im paying $7 per channel now.
There is a frequent "crawl" across the screen when watching local channels about the proposed legislation in congress to eliminate free OTA tv. Is there any discussion about that here? I thought there would be but I am obviously not using the proper search terms. I'd like to get more informed about this and, as I said, I thought there would be discussion somewhere here. Link?

Chubby, old guy in Omaha, Nebraska
matonanjin is offline  
post #4514 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 05:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Aleron Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 450
Quote:
Originally Posted by matonanjin View Post
There is a frequent "crawl" across the screen when watching local channels about the proposed legislation in congress to eliminate free OTA tv.
What legislation is this? There have been many spectrum auctions, but I've never heard of an initiative to abolish OTA completely.
Aleron Ives is offline  
post #4515 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 06:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Well that's my question. What legislation. As I interpret the messages it is not " to abolish OTA completely.". But rather it is to eliminate it being available for free. Somehow to be available only through the cable companies. I realize I am being nebulous about this but that just reflects my ignorance about the subject.

There has to be a discussion about this somewhere.

Edited to add:
I did find this:

Pay TV’s mission is to kill free broadcast TV

Chubby, old guy in Omaha, Nebraska

Last edited by matonanjin; 08-20-2014 at 06:28 PM. Reason: Addition
matonanjin is offline  
post #4516 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 06:53 PM
Senior Member
 
jmanthey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 365
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Here is the "activist" website: http://www.keepmytv.org/

Joe
jmanthey is offline  
post #4517 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 10:27 PM
Senior Member
 
L David Matheny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 436
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by matonanjin View Post
Well that's my question. What legislation. As I interpret the messages it is not " to abolish OTA completely.". But rather it is to eliminate it being available for free. Somehow to be available only through the cable companies. I realize I am being nebulous about this but that just reflects my ignorance about the subject.

There has to be a discussion about this somewhere.

Edited to add:
I did find this:

Pay TV’s mission is to kill free broadcast TV
I wasn't familiar with the legislation in question, but that article helps. If (what is now) OTA TV is made available only through the cable companies, or if cable companies are allowed to take over the advertising revenue, then free OTA TV has been effectively abolished. The programming that broadcasters transmit isn't owned by the broadcasters or by the cable companies; it's owned by the content creators and paid for by embedded advertising. Broadcasting is just a delivery system that competes with cable and Internet. Everything else is going wireless these days, which makes sense because wireless technology eliminates much costly infrastructure, so why would we want to eliminate the oldest wireless technology we have? Part of the current push is just a spectrum grab, and the rest is just cable companies trying to eliminate their competition. If broadcasters give up their licenses or have their licenses or their ad revenue stripped away somehow, they'll be left with nothing of real value.
L David Matheny is offline  
post #4518 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 11:24 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelson View Post
Sounds like they are telling you to kiss theirs . . .
Yeah I guess they are telling me that Kelson... Didn't even think about it at the time I was writing my post, I was just so annoyed...
Kevin Blanco is offline  
post #4519 of 6642 Old 08-20-2014, 11:43 PM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by matonanjin View Post
There is a frequent "crawl" across the screen when watching local channels about the proposed legislation in congress to eliminate free OTA tv. Is there any discussion about that here? I thought there would be but I am obviously not using the proper search terms. I'd like to get more informed about this and, as I said, I thought there would be discussion somewhere here. Link?
First I'd love to see cable go ala-cart. There's so many channels now and seemingly less than ever that's worth watching. I live in the Dallas area and I can remember years ago when I lived in actual Dallas proper, the cable company actually would let you build your own package with channels you could select and those you could decline. Gosh I miss those days...

I think if consumers demanded ala-cart and the cable/satelite providers actually followed through (which I don't think they ever will...), then we'd find out very quickly which channels are really important enough to remain on and which are just showing crap and would fall by the wayside.

As far as this elimination of OTA channels, I'm sure the cable, satelite providers and contect creators would love to see this happen and if it's serious then they're probably behind it. Personally I doubt OTA will ever go away, but if cutting the cord seriously finds traction, I've heard about this jump of 44% as of late, then it'll lead to a vicious circle. Providers will both loose revenues and find it harder to negotiate with content creators. They'll inevitiably pass along the costs and more folks will just cut the cord only moving the circle further along. Content creators would concievably have to settle less cable companies drop them instantly limiting their reach.

Now I've heard for years and years that they'd like the consumer to go pay-per-view for their programming. Years ago it was through a set top box / descrambler but now I guess it could just be through your smart television that would descramble the signal. But you'd literally pay per episode of whatever program you wanted to watch similiar to how you rent something from Amazon or Itunes. Now that's something I cringe at when thinking about it.
Kevin Blanco is offline  
post #4520 of 6642 Old 08-21-2014, 02:20 AM
Super Moderator
 
DrDon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 12,869
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
Liked: 312
None of this has anything to do with the box. Let's stick to the topic, please.
Kelson, kwg, steve771 and 1 others like this.

Walking the fine line between jaw-dropping and a plain ol' yawn.
DrDon is offline  
post #4521 of 6642 Old 08-21-2014, 07:14 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Sorry

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDon View Post
None of this has anything to do with the box. Let's stick to the topic, please.
You're absolutely correct and I apologize for taking taking it off track. I just wanted to sneak in a post to find out if there might be a discussion of my topic somewhere.

Sorry.

Chubby, old guy in Omaha, Nebraska
matonanjin is offline  
post #4522 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 03:27 PM
Member
 
steve771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording? I'm seeing a few issues, but no one is really bashing this.

I ask because after having a Tivo on monthly (and cancelling) and trying a Tablo (neat idea, buggy as all get out, not ready for prime time imho), followed by WMC (it's windows, so I have all those computer issues), I've reverted back to Tivo temporarily. I say temporarily not because I don't like Tivo, but because of the cost, and feeling like they were trapping me. When I cancelled, they offered a reduction in the monthly or a lifetime for $200. I said no at the time and the rep told me I could always reactivate at those prices. When I just reactivated, they offered the stock monthly ($15) and the lifetime was now $400! Complaining went nowhere. For that, I can get the DVR+ and pocket a few bucks (already have a portable hard drive).

Thanks for any insights on this.
steve771 is offline  
post #4523 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 03:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,333
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve771 View Post
I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording?
I don't know the general consensus however my take is if you are willing to give up a lot of features (of the DVRs you kicked to the curb) you can save a few bucks. As to those features it's more related to which are important to you... they are documented through-out the thread. As it comes across as bashing if one brings them up.
Charles R is offline  
post #4524 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 03:58 PM
Member
 
Arenal04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Liked: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by steve771 View Post
I've read a lot of pages on this thread, but is the general consensus that the DVR+ is a good fit for OTA recording? I'm seeing a few issues, but no one is really bashing this.

I ask because after having a Tivo on monthly (and cancelling) and trying a Tablo (neat idea, buggy as all get out, not ready for prime time imho), followed by WMC (it's windows, so I have all those computer issues), I've reverted back to Tivo temporarily. I say temporarily not because I don't like Tivo, but because of the cost, and feeling like they were trapping me. When I cancelled, they offered a reduction in the monthly or a lifetime for $200. I said no at the time and the rep told me I could always reactivate at those prices. When I just reactivated, they offered the stock monthly ($15) and the lifetime was now $400! Complaining went nowhere. For that, I can get the DVR+ and pocket a few bucks (already have a portable hard drive).

Thanks for any insights on this.
It's an excellent fit for OTA recording. Which is exactly what it was made for. There were some early glitches and issues. Many of those have cleared up with firmware updates. The latest firmware has been out for a while and seems to be pretty stable. Yeah, there's little things here and there that many of us wish it did better or differently. But those are pretty minor.

If you decide to buy a DVR+ and have any issues with it, contact tech support immediately. They are usually pretty good. While their 30-day return policy may be a bit shorter than ideal, from what people have reported, they don't give you a hard time at all about returns.

As to which hard drive to get, there's been reports of problems using Seagate 2TB drives. Stick with the 1TB or 3TB versions. Alternatively, a number of people have reported success with Western Digital drives. Passport Ultra drives, specifically, if memory serves me correct. Scan thru this forum for confirmation. If you already have a portable drive, you can try it and see what happens. The only gotcha is that the DVR+ will format your drive for Linux. If you want to use the hard drive on a Windows system afterwards, you'll need to re-format it, for Windows.

Another thing to think about is, from what I've read, that Tivo "lifetime" subscription is for the lifetime of the unit for which you bought it. NOT your lifetime. Pretty sucky if you ask me.

Bottom line, I would definitely recommend the DVR+.
Arenal04 is offline  
post #4525 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 04:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Theducksfan2010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Newman, Ca.
Posts: 420
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 57
I have both Tivo. (feature packed) and the DVR+. The DVR+ is light on features and the "sexiness" that the Tivo has, BUT, by and large is a solid machine that will serve you well, at a much cheaper price. (wife prefers it over the Tivo).
Theducksfan2010 is offline  
post #4526 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 07:19 PM
Member
 
steve771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Thanks guys. Yeah, the Tivo lifetime is for the lifetime of the unit itself only, which I agree, is a bit of a ripoff. Tivo itself is fine, although the features it provides are definitely overkill for OTA, at least for me. I'm just looking for something that will reliably record OTA and not require a lot of maintenance for a reasonable cost.

I did notice that a fair number of people were complaining about audio/video dropouts of several seconds throughout shows. Is this a known issue, or did they just get a drive that DVR+ doesn't like?

Last edited by steve771; 08-22-2014 at 07:55 PM.
steve771 is offline  
post #4527 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 10:01 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Aleron Ives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,129
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 519 Post(s)
Liked: 450
Anything that isn't a TiVo will probably require quite a bit of maintenance, because only TiVo offers name-based recording with the ability to only record new episodes. The DVR+ can record shows by name, but it will record repeats, too, so you'll potentially have to sift through a bunch of recordings to find the new episodes. By not spending the money on a TiVo, you're agreeing to manage your recording schedule yourself and adjust your timers as needed to deal with rescheduled shows, weeks without new episodes, and other scheduling irregularities. Regular DVR "maintenance" is part of the deal with time-based recording, regardless of which unit you buy.
Aleron Ives is offline  
post #4528 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 10:25 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Charles R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 10,333
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleron Ives View Post
Anything that isn't a TiVo will probably require quite a bit of maintenance, because only TiVo offers name-based recording with the ability to only record new episodes.
That's funny as WMC has been doing it for two years for me... unless I misunderstand.

Potentially more important than having to dig through repeats is the fact many new programs may not be recorded because it's recording repeats instead. Especially with only two tuners. Capturing the image I didn't know the show was going to be broadcast two nights next week.... another episode I would have missed.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Untitled.png
Views:	67
Size:	829.3 KB
ID:	225209  

Last edited by Charles R; 08-22-2014 at 10:55 PM.
Charles R is offline  
post #4529 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 10:55 PM
Member
 
steve771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 184
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R View Post
That's funny as WMC has been doing it for two years for me... unless I misunderstand.

Potentially more important than having to dig through repeats is the fact many new programs may not be recorded because it's recording repeats instead. Especially with only two tuners.
Yeah, WMC does it, he was probably referring to dedicated PVR's. As far a maintenance, I'm ok with the repeat/delete thing, although not recording some new stuff might be an issue. What I was referring to was WMC being Windows based, there are updates to deal with, flaky behavior, sometimes crashing, just microsucks stuff in general, like all windows machines. Before someone chimes in about how wonderful WMC is, I've had it on a couple different computers/configurations with similar issues on all. But if it works for anyone, great, it's an option.
steve771 is offline  
post #4530 of 6642 Old 08-22-2014, 11:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
qz3fwd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Liked: 52
can you connect to the dvr's drive over the network as a share and offload/load/edit recordings yet?
qz3fwd is offline  
Reply HDTV Recorders

Tags
Channel Master , dvr+ , maintanance restart

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