AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Los Angeles, CA - TWC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Los Angeles, CA - TWC - Page 272

post #8131 of 8619
I know long ago, they used to have 1 trap for each premium movie channel. Thus on each line, there were 4 filters (HBO, Cinemax, Showtime, and Movie Channel). After TW stopped using that method, the service guy over here dumped all the filters in a wastebasket that was next to the building's box.

Anyway, I was just curious to see what you can get via QAM with Internet-only and with Broadcast Basic. In other words, do you get anything "extra"?
post #8132 of 8619
Is it true that TWC's HD picture quality is worse than satellite services' (Dish and DirecTV)? Obviously, OTA beats all of them. Thank you in advance. FYI, I will be in La Habra Heights, CA 90631. Most of the new neighbors seem to have satellite dishes. :/
post #8133 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Is it true that TWC's HD picture quality is worse than satellite services' (Dish and DirecTV)? Obviously, OTA beats all of them. Thank you in advance. FYI, I will be in La Habra Heights, CA 90631. Most of the new neighbors seem to have satellite dishes. :/

TWC's picture quality/signal quality varies greatly around Southern California. Here in El Segundo (and Torrance) our TWC PQ is better than the TWC in other areas that i've set up TVs in (Orange County, West L.A., SF Valley etc) where their picture quality ranges from a little worse than mine to downright horrible and unacceptable (all viewed on very familiar plasma TVs).

I haven't seen Dish Network on a Plasma TV so i can't comment on their PQ, but i would rank Verizon FIOS TV as the best PQ of any provider, followed closely by DirecTV, with most cable divisions being a distant 3rd.

I always bring an antenna with me on my installs to demonstrate the difference in their provider's PQ compared to OTA if their new TV looks like crap. If you can get FIOS TV in your area i'd choose that over cable any day. AT&T U-Verse has horrible HD PQ so i never ever recommend them.
post #8134 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandyWalters View Post

TWC's picture quality/signal quality varies greatly around Southern California. Here in El Segundo (and Torrance) our TWC PQ is better than the TWC in other areas that i've set up TVs in (Orange County, West L.A., SF Valley etc) where their picture quality ranges from a little worse than mine to downright horrible and unacceptable (all viewed on very familiar plasma TVs).

I haven't seen Dish Network on a Plasma TV so i can't comment on their PQ, but i would rank Verizon FIOS TV as the best PQ of any provider, followed closely by DirecTV, with most cable divisions being a distant 3rd.

I always bring an antenna with me on my installs to demonstrate the difference in their provider's PQ compared to OTA if their new TV looks like crap. If you can get FIOS TV in your area i'd choose that over cable any day. AT&T U-Verse has horrible HD PQ so i never ever recommend them.

Ahh, darn. I wished I could compare cable TV's HD quality with satellites in my area. As for Verzion, no DSL and FIOS in this area. It did offer DirecTV bundle though. :P
post #8135 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Is it true that TWC's HD picture quality is worse than satellite services' (Dish and DirecTV)? Obviously, OTA beats all of them. Thank you in advance. FYI, I will be in La Habra Heights, CA 90631. Most of the new neighbors seem to have satellite dishes. :/

Do some Google searching using the terms "HD compression" and the like along with cable, TWC, satellit, DISH, etc. A couple year's ago on one of the AVS Forums, a few with computer receivers were checking it out. They got a mbps reading on the individual channels. Some vastly different than others with OTA running 19 mbps minimum (my recollection) to 25 mbps. Satellite 12, TWC 14-5 (again if I remember). When satellite added all the HD channels I seem to remember they dropped a little more worse (more compressed) than cable which was already compressed but did not have to compress more because broader 1 GHz systems and SDV came in. But, satellite is MP4 and TWC MP2 which needs less bandwidth for the equivalent signal [EDIT: poorly written, I did mean the new MP4 is better compression and needs less bandwidth for comparable picture]. I am barely a novice in what I am talking about, just adding with some recollection. /Dan
post #8136 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by danki6x View Post

Do some Google searching using the terms "HD compression" and the like along with cable, TWC, satellit, DISH, etc. A couple year's ago on one of the AVS Forums, a few with computer receivers were checking it out. They got a mbps reading on the individual channels.

You might be thinking of my posts, back in December 2010. I had just replaced my TWC/LA DVR with an HTPC using a Ceton 4-tuner cablecard-enabled card along with an ATI TV Wonder 650 PCI OTA/ATSC tuner card, and was initially a non-believer that TWC/LA was recompressing the local OTA networks.

So I did do some research:

(a) Sample local OTA network comparison vs. TWC/LA version from one particular night:

(1) NBC - "SNL - A Very Gilly Christmas"

4.1 - 12.454GB, 13.184 Mbps bitrate
404 - 10.746GB, 11.380 Mbps bitrate

(2) ABC - "Skating With The Stars"

7.1 - 5.962GB, 12.534 Mbps bitrate
407 - 5.291GB, 11.300 Mbps bitrate

(3) CBS - "Late Show With David Letterman"

2.1 - 7.477GB, 15.211 Mbps bitrate
402 - 4.77GB, 9.705 Mbps bitrate


(b) the local networks were not entirely blameless either, with all but CBS doing multi-channel

2.1 KCBS-DT - 16.4Mbps

4.1 KNBC-4LA - 11.9Mbps
4.2 WX+NR - 1.4Mbps
4.4 USN - 3.0Mbps

7.1 KABC-DT - 9.8Mbps
7.2 LivWell - 7.5Mbps
7.3 KABC-WN - .85Mbps


Quote:


Some vastly different than others with OTA running 19 mbps minimum (my recollection) to 25 mbps. Satellite 12, TWC 14-5 (again if I remember).

I believe 19Mbps is the standard allocation for a network, based on what I've seen. Nothing higher. They can then choose to multi-channel within that or not.

With multi-channel splits, the actual bitrate used by a sub-channel at any moment is not a constant, as it's handled by statistical multiplexors. But it is probably within certain boundary constraints.


Quote:


When satellite added all the HD channels I seem to remember they dropped a little more worse (more compressed) than cable which was already compressed but did not have to compress more because broader 1 GHz systems and SDV came in. But, satellite is MP4 and TWC MP2 which needs less bandwidth for the equivalent signal.

I may be misinterpreting that last sentence of yours, but MPEG-4 is the new compression which uses less bandwidth than MPEG-2 for "equivalent or better quality".

In other words, MPEG-4 is a better compression method than MPEG-2 in that it produces smaller file sizes (and thus can be transmitted at lower bitrates) with no discernible image degradation from the MPEG-2 version. That's the theory.
post #8137 of 8619
Does startover work on iGuide boxes yet in Socal? Still waiting on it in North Texas was told sometime this year. I remember that it popped up in the quick menu in socal did it ever become active?
post #8138 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by WackyPacks View Post

Anyway, I was just curious to see what you can get via QAM with Internet-only and with Broadcast Basic. In other words, do you get anything "extra"?

It depends if they put in a physical trap in your drop that filters out all but the frequencies used for HSD. If they don't any proper receiver can pick up analogue and clear QAM channels. So YMMV depending on the trapping situation.

Here's what one customer reported via CNet.com

Quote:


"I only get (basic) cable. I don't subscribe; it just comes to my house along with the cable modem signal," said Noah, who wished to keep his last name anonymous. He saves roughly $40 a month on cable but spends about $42 a month on Internet access.

"Lots of people do this if all you want is analog cable," he said. "All cable services are run through the same line; they can't just cut power to analog cable and still give you a cable modem."

Scouring the systems
Steve Effros, an attorney and analyst for the cable industry at Effros Communications, based in Fairfax, Va., said relatively few people subscribe only to high-speed Internet access and not cable TV. Those who do are a highly identifiable group to the cable operators, he said, making it easy to install a trap that allows only the amount of bandwidth necessary to provide high-speed Internet data.
"If it becomes an issue at all, it's very easy to stop it; they just install traps on the lines," he said. "No thief ought to rely on this one."
CNet.com | Broadband users cut into cable
post #8139 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by SPDICKEY View Post

It depends if they put in a physical trap in your drop that filters out all but the frequencies used for HSD. If they don't any proper receiver can pick up analogue and clear QAM channels. So YMMV depending on the trapping situation.

Here's what one customer reported via CNet.com

Yeah, but that was from 2002 according to your link. I think my new home area is all digital now. :O
post #8140 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Yeah, but that was from 2002 according to your link. I think my new home area is all digital now. :O

Physical traps are still physical traps. And bandwidth is still bandwidth. It still requires a physical trap to keep non-scrambled, non-encrypted content from the home. If they don't but them in, then the home could watch any non-scrambled analog channel and clear QAM digital signal coming into the home. Cable operators MUST provide clear QAM signals to homes for non-premium content like local stations and PEG. And also most cable operators are still transmitting analog signals for households without digital set-top devices.
post #8141 of 8619
In other forums, a few Comcast users who only get internet will always mention that they get some channels. Not everyone of course. That is why I asked about TW. I am sure someone here has only internet or Broadcast Basic and have tried scanning for unencrypted digital channels. Maybe they are trying keep the results hush-hush as it would have been easy just to say that they get nothing extra.
post #8142 of 8619
Any one else experiencing issues with Fox Sports Prime Ticket? I'm in the West Valley. When I tune to Prime Ticket HD I receive a message saying "Not available on this cable system". When I go to Prime Ticket SD, the picture appears letterboxed....
post #8143 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzoengineer View Post

Any one else experiencing issues with Fox Sports Prime Ticket? I'm in the West Valley. When I tune to Prime Ticket HD I receive a message saying "Not available on this cable system". When I go to Prime Ticket SD, the picture appears letterboxed....

I can't reply on the message displaying "not avaialable on this cable system" part, but I can speak as to why Prime Ticket SD is in letterbox which has to do with the fact that RSNs owned by Fox present sporting events in 16:9/letterbox format. This was done so that they could frame the sporting event for 16:9 HDTVs and not have to sacrifice squeezing everything into the 4:3 safe zone. This also includes sporting events nationally televised on your local Fox station.
post #8144 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Wellman View Post

but I can speak as to why Prime Ticket SD is in letterbox which has to do with the fact that RSNs owned by Fox present sporting events in 16:9/letterbox format. This was done so that they could frame the sporting event for 16:9 HDTVs and not have to sacrifice squeezing everything into the 4:3 safe zone. This also includes sporting events nationally televised on your local Fox station.

You are right. I checked out a few other shows on Prime Ticket SD last night and they were occupying the entire 4:3.

Still having issues with Prime Ticket HD. Hopefully it's resolved in time for the Dodgers season opener this Thursday.
post #8145 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzoengineer View Post

You are right. I checked out a few other shows on Prime Ticket SD last night and they were occupying the entire 4:3.

Still having issues with Prime Ticket HD. Hopefully it's resolved in time for the Dodgers season opener this Thursday.

Call it in or try the over-the-phone "reauthorize" (with box reboot). Something is not right. No FSPT problems in city of Orange I have seen. /Dan
post #8146 of 8619
Two quick questions
1- No center channel on Fox Sports HD -I am using a TWC Moto DCH 3416: watched the Angels opener last night - no center channel. on researching through the forum prior post suggest that some channels dont broadcast true 5.1 . So I can't fix this, correct?

2- There is a newer Motorola DVR what allows programing remotely over the network. Any experience with this box?
Thanks
post #8147 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldk988 View Post

Two quick questions
1- No center channel on Fox Sports HD -I am using a TWC Moto DCH 3416: watched the Angels opener last night - no center channel. on researching through the forum prior post suggest that some channels dont broadcast true 5.1 . So I can't fix this, correct?

I remember watching a clippers game...my receiver had the 5.1 icon lit, but no center channel.

Thought that was so inane and annoying on a sports channel.
post #8148 of 8619
has anyone with a : DCT6412, DCT6416, DCT3416, DCH3416, DCX3400, DCT6200, DCT3200, DCH3200 , DCX3200 been able to get Startover/Lookback to work on their DVR/HD boxes yet or did that disappear shortly after it popped up on the STBs?
post #8149 of 8619
Anyone have the program instructions to add the 30 skip forward to the Black remote? I have the DCX3400 and none of the instructions I've found online work (i.e. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/How_to_...30-Second_Skip). Google wasn't helping either

When I had the DCT box I programmed the skip fw (forgot what instructions, it was years ago), then I got the Universal remote URC-R50 and copied that skip into it (via IR). When I turned the DCT box and remote in for the DCX3400, got a new TWC remote with it, but can't program the 30 skip forward into it for some reason.

My URC-R50 skip button is starting to become less sensitive so I wanna use my TWC remote for daily TV watching, but I need to program the 30 skip forward!

Help!
post #8150 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

Anyone have the program instructions to add the 30 skip forward to the Black remote? I have the DCX3400 and none of the instructions I've found online work (i.e. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/How_to_...30-Second_Skip). Google wasn't helping either

Can you please provide the remote manufacturer and model number of this "black" remote? Should be on the back, or maybe inside the battery compartment.

The Wiki instructions are certainly usable on most remotes, including both (a) the original Comcast "silver" remote from my original DCT equpment that I kept after the TWC takeover, and (b) the Universal Electronics 1056B01 ("big black remote" as I used to call it) which I got when I went to the DCH3416 and kept when I subsequently upgraded to DCX3400, although I haven't had TWC hardware for a while now so I don't know what they're giving out now.

Some of the newer remotes are simply not programmable. For sure if they don't have a SETUP button you're probably doomed.
post #8151 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSperber View Post

and (b) the Universal Electronics 1056B01 ("big black remote" as I used to call it) which I got when I went to the DCH3416 and kept when I subsequently upgraded to DCX3400, although I haven't had TWC hardware for a while now so I don't know what they're giving out now.

Some of the newer remotes are simply not programmable. For sure if they don't have a SETUP button you're probably doomed.

It's the black one, URC 1056B03, it has the set up button but no 'AUX' button. It's what came with the DCX3400. The older black one I turned in (with the DCH3416 I think?) looked the same.

I had no problem programming the 30 skip forward on the previous black remote, but this one won't take the program directions from the wiki info page. for some reason. I think there I just have to find the right programing instructions?
post #8152 of 8619
I googled my 1056B03 remote and it appears they don't respond to the 994 code anymore , The older black remote I had was probably a 1056B01 like you had, which responded to that programming.

This blows.
post #8153 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by fleaman View Post

I googled my 1056B03 remote and it appears they don't respond to the 994 code anymore , The older black remote I had was probably a 1056B01 like you had, which responded to that programming.

This blows.

Buy yourself a 1056B01 for $15.

Slightly cheaper on eBay.
post #8154 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSperber View Post

Buy yourself a 1056B01 for $15.

Slightly cheaper on eBay.

That might be the most likely solution, Thanks much for your help DSperber!
post #8155 of 8619
And I just wanted to state that it blows that TWC is making it harder for it's customers to use any kind of skip fw'd feature (to avoid commercials). It's bad enough that it's not automatically on their remotes, but now their (newer) remotes don't even allow a programming hack for it

Talk about giving customers more reasons to move onto another provider
post #8156 of 8619
Is it possible to share the same coax cable to use both OTA (for some channels that are possible to get that cable TV doesn't have) with cable TV (TWC)?

Thank you in advance.
post #8157 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

Is it possible to share the same coax cable to use both OTA (for some channels that are possible to get that cable TV doesn't have) with cable TV (TWC)?

Not clear.

How can you have just one coax cable, if you obviously have a roof antenna (feeding one coax to... something?) and a TWC coax cable (going to... DVR? STB?)?

What exactly do you want to do? Please describe your setup... HDTV fed from BOTH (a) roof antenna and (b) DVR using two of its inputs?

Or do you want to somehow "combine" two coax cables (one from your roof antenna and the other from TWC) into the single coax connector on the back of the DVR?

Why not just feed your roof antenna's coax to the RF ATSC coax connector on your HDTV (assuming it has such an input) and switch to that "antenna" input when you want to watch something only available OTA to you? Then switch back to your HDMI input on the HDTV when you want to watch something from TWC, fed by the TWC coax to the DVR.

Please clarify.
post #8158 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSperber View Post

Not clear.

How can you have just one coax cable, if you obviously have a roof antenna (feeding one coax to... something?) and a TWC coax cable (going to... DVR? STB?)?

What exactly do you want to do? Please describe your setup... HDTV fed from BOTH (a) roof antenna and (b) DVR using two of its inputs?

Or do you want to somehow "combine" two coax cables (one from your roof antenna and the other from TWC) into the single coax connector on the back of the DVR?

Why not just feed your roof antenna's coax to the RF ATSC coax connector on your HDTV (assuming it has such an input) and switch to that "antenna" input when you want to watch something only available OTA to you? Then switch back to your HDMI input on the HDTV when you want to watch something from TWC, fed by the TWC coax to the DVR.

Please clarify.

We don't have cable TV yet since we haven't moved in yet and remodelling the house, but we're planning to since OTA will not get all the channels because of a giant hill/small mountain blocking the Mt. Wilson transmitters. We used a portable DTV to test the OTA stuff. The previous house owners had Dish service so we used that coax cable for a huge attic antenna to a portable DTV downstair. We were wondering how we can use it with TWC setup. TWC doesn't carry some OTA channels like 31.x.
post #8159 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by phildaant View Post

We don't have cable TV yet since we haven't moved in yet and remodelling the house, but we're planning to since OTA will not get all the channels because of a giant hill/small mountain blocking the Mt. Wilson transmitters. We used a portable DTV to test the OTA stuff. The previous house owners had Dish service so we used that coax cable for a huge attic antenna to a portable DTV downstair. We were wondering how we can use it with TWC setup. TWC doesn't carry some OTA channels like 31.x.

Well the coax from your attic antenna is now your OTA/ATSC antenna feed, providing OTA/ATSC capability to any location in your house you run the coax to. Splitting it once up in the attic should provide two reliable coax runs to two locations in the house without needing any other amplifier or booster. You might even get away with three if you need it.

But all it takes is a "cable runner" guy to run the coax through your ceilings and walls down to the [two] locations [family room and master bedroom?] you wish to make OTA/ATSC available, and terminate it with a standard 75ohm coax connector wall plate. Standard stuff. More runs may require an amplifier/splitter to feed all those legs, but again standard stuff. RG6 quad-shielded cable is the standard to use.

At the same time, you figure out where you're going to get your TWC coax coming into your house ("network room"), and have your cable runner guy run coax legs from there also to all of the rooms in your house where you have TV viewing locations planned. This will allow whole-house DVR setup putting the "server" in that "network room" and "satellite STBs" at each of the viewing locations, communicating through the coax runs. You can have your cable runner guy terminate the TWC coax legs in the same wall plate that you had your roof antenna coax legs terminated in (i.e. a 2-connector wall plate).

While you're running cables, you should think about running CAT6 ethernet cable from that same "network room" to all of your likely TV/hard-wired computer locations. It may be that "wireless" could work throughout your house for visitor laptops, but there's no question a wired ethernet CAT6 connection (to a router in the "network" room connected to the cable modem there) will give you absolutely the best Internet performance as well as PC-to-PC performance on your home LAN if you have multiple machines.

Note that running ethernet cable to the HDTV locations also provides support for streaming capability from the Internet, either to streaming-capable BluRay players or ethernet-capable HDTV's or similar services. Can't be wrong to have an Internet connection available at each HDTV (or in every room of your house), and wired is absolutely your best choice given this unique remodeling opportunity.

Also, some older homes have strange metal "shielding material" (or the functional equivalent) built into walls. So although you'd think wireless ethernet should work fine given the distances involved, it turns out there's just too much "interference" from the building materials used in the home. Again, wired ethernet is absolutely the 100% problem-free solution, if you have the opportunity. You will totally avoid any surprises or problems that are bound to occur when trying to use wireless to achieve reliable high-bitrate HDTV or Internet streaming.

Your cable runner guy can add an ethernet jack to that same wall plate in each TV room, or for other locations just have an ethernet jack wall plate.


Bottom line: when you're re-modeling your house that's the time to do future-proof wiring, even if you have no immediate plans to make use of it. The next owner might, and having this done is therefore to everyone's advantage.

(a) run roof antenna coax to every room from your attic. You can leave ends up there disconnected from a splitter until you need them, and you can always add a splitter/amplifier if necessary. But at least the OTA/ATSC antenna coax feeds to each of your possible TV viewing location rooms will allow you to connect any HDTV in that room to your roof antenna to get OTA/ATSC channels not provided by cable.

P.S. - TWC recompresses their channel content, so you'll find picture quality superior OTA/ATSC for local networks than the comparable channel carried by TWC. But of course, if you want to use a DVR you need to go with TWC's feed.

(b) run TWC coax legs from the "network room" to every room in your house. You'll eventually figure out the patch panel connections you need, and having everything in one place (coax entry, cable modem, gigabit router) will make it all possible to upgrade or modify without too terribly much inconvenience).

Note that having TWC coax legs going to each room also supports another TWC implementation option if you don't want to go whole-home (although I don't know why you wouldn't choose this clearly superior option). You can simply have a standalone TWC DVR in that particular TV location, fed by coax to that room from the "network room" patch panel where it is just a pure "split" off of the main incoming coax, having nothing to do with the whole-home DVR/server that is fed from the other side of the "split" which feeds satellite STB boxes around the house through TWC coax legs to those other rooms.

Having total TWC coax wiring to each room from the "network room" gives you all your configuration options and flexibility at each TV location.

(c) run CAT6 ethernet cable to every room in your house, from the "network room" where you plan to have the TWC coax arrive. CAT6 will support gigabit LAN, which is what you want for absolute best modern performance of a home LAN. The cable modem and whole-house DVR/server and gigabit router will live in this "network room", and you can plug in any computer (desktop or laptop) into the wall ethernet jack you will be installing on a wallplate in every room (looks good when the same single wallplate is used to hold the roof antenna coax and TWC coax connectors).

Don't forget to have your cable runner guy NUMBER each and every wall plate outlet and have matching numbers on the cable terminations down in the "network room" so you know what goes where in this "patch panel" environment involving many many coax and ethernet cable legs all terminating in that "network room". In fact, if possible I'd request DIFFERENT COLOR COAX CABLES to be used for the (a) attic antenna OTA/ATSC coax legs, and (b) TWC cable coax legs. Color-coding makes things easier to deal with, along with proper numbering tags at each end of each coax and ethernet leg and also on the wallplates themselves for complete organization and so that you can create your own "home wiring diagram" for reference.


It can never be wrong to wire your house properly (in advance) while you have that opportunity. You're very likely not ever going to do it again, and certainly will very likely not tear open wallpapered walls to add a cable run (WAF and all that). Might as well do it right the first (and hopefully only) time you do it. Just takes a little planning and thought.

Anyway, once your house is wired properly, you can do anything you want. You can put computers anywhere, HDTV's anywhere fed either by (a) TWC from whole-house DVR with a satellite STB at the TV location fed by TWC coax leg to that room, or (b) OTA/ATSC roof antenna feed for local channels not available from TWC but available OTA/ATSC. You'll simply feed the HDMI output from that room's DVR (or whole-home satellite STB) to your HDTV's HDMI input for TWC, and you'll feed the roof antenna OTA/ATSC coax from the connector in that room to the antenna input of your HDTV, and you'll switch inputs on your HDTV as you desire to allow you to watch either OTA/ATSC or TWC.

One other point... if you do have a 3-way split on the TWC coax coming into your house, with -3.5db loss on one output and -7db loss on each of the other two, be sure and send the lower-loss (-3.5db) output to the cable modem and the higher-loss (-7db) outputs to the DVRs (which are better able to deal with the lower signal strength). More splits may require TWC to install amplifier/boosters, but a simple system with just 2-splits (both feeding -3.5db outputs) for cable modem and one whole-home DVR should be no problem at all.



Of course that's just me. That's what I'd do if I were remodeling and had the opportunity to run cable throughout my house.

I'd plan for a "network room" as my home LAN/HDTV "hub", with patch panel and many coax and ethernet CAT6 runs to all rooms (even the kitchen!!), even if not yet currently implemented with hardware at the other end.

NOTE: if the "network room" is maybe in the basement or otherwise far away from some remote distant location in the house, having a wired ethernet run from the router in that "network room" to the remote location room provides yet another Internet option: "WI-FI access point" (i.e. a "wireless hot spot" in your home) just by connecting an inexpensive WI-FI broadcast access point device (say from Netgear or Linksys) to the wired ethernet connection available on the wallplate in that room. Now that far distant remote room has just become WI-FI-enabled (i.e. "hot spot") for wireless use by visitors or anyone or any device (e.g. Kindle, tablet, iPad, etc.), where it never really would have been usable that way since the real wired/wireless router is far away down in the "network room" dungeon at the other end of the house.
post #8160 of 8619
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevin120 View Post

has anyone with a : DCT6412, DCT6416, DCT3416, DCH3416, DCX3400, DCT6200, DCT3200, DCH3200 , DCX3200 been able to get Startover/Lookback to work on their DVR/HD boxes yet or did that disappear shortly after it popped up on the STBs?

I have a DCX3200-M which is relatively new (2-3 mos) and just noticed I have this feature. It appears to be only on local stations plus CNN. It works but I'm not sure the point at which it "starts over." Is it the beginning of the scheduled block or a matter of minutes? I see a progress bar that goes from 0:00 to 2:00, but as I flip stations it always seems to be at the same point, so I guess it's not station-dependent?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Local HDTV Info and Reception
AVS › AVS Forum › HDTV › Local HDTV Info and Reception › Los Angeles, CA - TWC