Originally Posted by Greasemonkey
In that case I think that I have been running a similar test since the day I bought my DVR+. It has never been connected to the Internet, and is running 132R (0.5) since it was released and I installed it. I don't know if the bootloader and downloader versions have ever been updated, but they are 105S and 104B-104B, respectively. If I remember correctly, I've only updated my DVR+ twice since I've had it--124R in September 2015 and 132R in January 2016. The only other FW I have is a copy of 108R that I recently downloaded in case I want to revert to a version that supposedly collects PSIP data than later versions. So A) OTA FW checks/updates aren't happening at all, or B) they are not happening in the Dallas/Fort Worth market, which is one of the top 5 markets in the country. On the one hand, if OTA checks or updates were taking place one could argue that they would be tested in a smaller market. But on the other hand, one could argue that they would be tested in a larger market that would reach more units for a valid test. But if I had a third hand, I might scratch my head and wonder how they could ever know that any unit not connected to the Internet has been updated.
Thanks for the input for your area!
I've reverted to 132R for my testing because that's the version that SirCrow is running, and is what instigated this adventure (see SirCrow's update nag
and the speculation of OTA DVR+ updates by P Smith
If you check the rabbitears UdateTV page
, which is the best source that anyone has come up with (thanks JHBrantd), Dallas/FW does NOT show the UpdateTV icon when the list was last updated on 02/26/2014. Whether that means they never tested UpdateTV in Dallas/FW, or it was a failure, we can't know.
I doubt that a company could know for certain that all units were updated, but if the device was able to received a PBS channel, it likely would update, at least I assume that was the concept. Of course, there could reception issues on PBS, or PBS might be on VHF and the DVR+ is connected only to a UHF antenna, and likely other issues like getting all PBS stations to participate. If the developers, or CM, or whomever wanted to force DVR+ updates, there are other ways to do it, and they wouldn't have to pay for an outside service. Fortunately, thus far, it doesn't appear that they want to force updates upon us. Even though my area also lacks the UpdateTV icon, I plan to continue testing for about another 9 days, for a total of 28 days of testing (in my area)!
Originally Posted by P Smith
OTA or sat path of FW updates always been used in e*/dish devices; essentially it wouldn't use third party company's service, it just require to add to a station's mux just one PID with predetermined number. The STB checking presence of the PID on regular basis, if spooling version is higher then current, it will download it and do normal FW upgrade same way as from USB storage or Internet. In case of recovery, selection of the OTA PID, USB or Internet defined by FW setting and/or a jumper.
Of course, discussions not related to the DVR+ is a bit OT. That said, SAT is one thing because it reaches almost everywhere from few sources, but OTA TV is another animal. If e*/dish is doing this using OTA TV broadcasts, the stations that broadcasts the data are the 3rd party, and I suspect they would want to be paid, and how do they get every/most geographic areas covered unless at least one station in all areas participates (refer to UpdateTV's
pitiful showing with PBS)? Again, I don't doubt it can be done, or has been done, but it seems full of problems to me, especially for devices with Internet capabilities. And don't forget, thus far we have no reports that an update to a DVR+ via OTA has occurred.