# ESATA vs. USB



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

Just wondering why Dish went with a USB port and DirecTV went with an ESATA port. Like who was first and I reckon they know that if you hook up a external hard drive with one company you can't hook it up with the other if you want to switch providers. Smart marketing but as usual, screw the customer.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

doesn't matter: DTV using Linux EXT3 partitions and dish - own proprietary file system, not counting own encryption


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

If Im not mistaken, dish just stores the files on its external drive, so speed isnt an issue. DirecTv actually uses the external drive as its recording/playback drive, so eSATA makes more sense.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

Dish uses EXT3 as well, just an encrypted file format.

Also, Dish's external hard drives are additional space, the Direct DVRs external SATA ports override the internal (IIRC)


----------



## DustoMan (Jul 16, 2005)

Davenlr said:


> If Im not mistaken, dish just stores the files on its external drive, so speed isnt an issue. DirecTv actually uses the external drive as its recording/playback drive, so eSATA makes more sense.


Yea, DirecTV for some reason decided to totally shut off the internal drive when an external drive is plugged in. Kinda annoying if you ask me.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

RasputinAXP said:


> Also, Dish's external hard drives are additional space, the Direct DVRs external SATA ports override the internal (IIRC)


You can use both, but it's a pain....power down, unplug both, reboot, rinse, repeat. :lol:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The simplest answer is that to support eSATA you have to have an eSATA port.

If you want to support USB then you have to have a USB port... So if you decide just to support USB 2.0 drives and not eSATA, then it saves you a port plus a whole section of coding to support that port.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

You ought to thank Dish for using USB vice eSATA drives. eSATA can be very persnickety to get right. Just read the threads talking about which eSATA works for some eye opening. Lots of issues, many eSATA drives won't work and even those that do oft times just get hinky.

USB is plug 'n go for almost any drive you want to use.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

lparsons21 said:


> You ought to thank Dish for using USB vice eSATA drives. eSATA can be very persnickety to get right. Just read the threads talking about which eSATA works for some eye opening. Lots of issues, many eSATA drives won't work and even those that do oft times just get hinky.
> 
> USB is plug 'n go for almost any drive you want to use.


I wouldn't say so:
- dish had a lot of USB drives problems was when it goes to sleep
- DTV select high throughput variant eSATA as best choice for DVR functioning and those issues related to chipset in enclosures ( IMO, those boxes should be without a chip if you use it for DVR via eSATA).


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

lparsons21 said:


> You ought to thank Dish for using USB vice eSATA drives. eSATA can be very persnickety to get right. Just read the threads talking about which eSATA works for some eye opening. Lots of issues, many eSATA drives won't work and even those that do oft times just get hinky.
> 
> USB is plug 'n go for almost any drive you want to use.


I am not so sure about thanking them for USB or not. eSATA drives would be nice to have as well, as it would speed up archiving.
What I will thank Dish for though, is for not disabling the internal drive, when I have an external drive connect. Creating a HOME network key that allows me to move the any of my external drives from one DVR to another. Just upgraded my 722, to a 722k, with OTA, rehit on the new replacement 722k, and all 4 harddrives work on the new reciever. For those that know how to back up the DishARC folder, this is also another great feature that Dish gives us. None of this can be done with any other provider at the moment. Now with eSATA, it would make some features FASTER.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

P Smith said:


> I wouldn't say so:
> - dish had a lot of USB drives problems was when it goes to sleep
> - DTV select high throughput variant eSATA as best choice for DVR functioning and those issues related to chipset in enclosures ( IMO, those boxes should be without a chip if you use it for DVR via eSATA).


I never saw those issues with USB drives on dish DVRs, so I can't comment. But when I had D I never got either of my esata drives to work. Major PITA!


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

You're here for 3 years and didn't read those threads and hundred posts about issue with FAP, etc ? Well, you're in minority then.


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

I was with D then, wasn't really reading much in the E sections.


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

I would have considered buying a VIP 922 if it used ESATA instead of old slow USB 2.0. In my opinion Directv got it right using ESATA, but disabling the internal drive while the external is connected is annoying.


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

joenhre said:


> I would have considered buying a VIP 922 if it used ESATA instead of old slow USB 2.0. In my opinion Directv got it right using ESATA, but disabling the internal drive while the external is connected is annoying.


That's silly. The purpose of an EHD is not the same for the 2 companies. Dish's use of USB is perfectly adequate for maintaining and playing from an archive. I have 3 drives connected to my 722 and can easily switch between the with a switch and I have room for more. DTV's ESATA is a replacement for the internal drive and therefore must have a faster interface and is more awkward to use as an archive system.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

patmurphey said:


> That's silly. The purpose of an EHD is not the same for the 2 companies. Dish's use of USB is perfectly adequate for maintaining and playing from an archive. I have 3 drives connected to my 722 and can easily switch between the with a switch and I have room for more. DTV's ESATA is a replacement for the internal drive and therefore must have a faster interface and is more awkward to use as an archive system.


Thats a very good point, Dish's way of doing things is an archive option, thats an extension of the internal drive instead of a replacement, that allows you to watch from the Archive drive and makes it easy to have mulitple drives connected. 
Even a bigger plus for Dish is the home network key that allows you to move, a EHD from one ViP DVR to another. Upgrade, replace a unit, or add a DVR, reauthorize your account, and now you can use the EHD on a new Unit. Direct, the EHD is a fixed device, on reciever and one reciever only, if anything happens to the DVR its attached to or if you want to upgrade that DVR, your are screwed, as all recordings will be gone when the new unit comes, as it will autoformat the EHD without even asking.


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

patmurphey said:


> That's silly. The purpose of an EHD is not the same for the 2 companies. Dish's use of USB is perfectly adequate for maintaining and playing from an archive. I have 3 drives connected to my 722 and can easily switch between the with a switch and I have room for more. DTV's ESATA is a replacement for the internal drive and therefore must have a faster interface and is more awkward to use as an archive system.


Really ,then what data is stored on the EHD? There is data stored on it and the Dish receiver needs to read/write to the drive. Has any one filled up their EHD with over 1TB worth of programming? Anyone have a diagram showing exactly how dish's archiving system works and what data gets stored on each drive?
Still think the USB interface is an inherent weakness and will become a bottleneck at some point. The internal drive is SATA, I just don't understand why Dish did not just go with the faster interface in ESATA especially on the 922.


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

Another question I have, sorry if I'm getting off topic. Has anyone successfully upgraded the internal Drive in their VIP 922 to a 2TB drive?


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

joenhre said:


> Really ,then what data is stored on the EHD? There is data stored on it and the Dish receiver needs to read/write to the drive. Has any one filled up their EHD with over 1TB worth of programming? Anyone have a diagram showing exactly how dish's archiving system works and what data gets stored on each drive?
> Still think the USB interface is an inherent weakness and will become a bottleneck at some point. The internal drive is SATA, I just don't understand why Dish did not just go with the faster interface in ESATA especially on the 922.


Bottleneck does exist, and Esata "would" be nice, and I have no idea if its a cost factor that has kept both Dish and Direct from being able to have two controllers, to allow for this. Since Direct just disables the internal drive, I am leaning towards pricing and if its cost effective(read cheaper) to use USB than so be it, to allow me to have the best of both worlds, internal and external.

Bottleneck does happen, but only when you archive from your internal drive to the external drive, or back from the external drive to the internal Drive. When you are watching from the external drive there isn't a performance problem, that you would be aware of. Have has anybody filled up a 1TB drive? Myself not yet, but my daughter is getting really, really, really close to it. We have 4 External drives in the house, 1 for each family member and one for traveling with when we go on the road, with the 612, and move easily between the 2 722's in the house.

As for the folder system, there is just one folder DISHARC, on the EHD, you see a bunch of files with long encrypted names, each encrypted files is a seperate show, and you would have no idea what show is what. You can back up the DISHARC folder and then restore it to a new EHD if you want, or need to as well. Reasoning for keeping the USB vs Esata is simple, this is basicly a 722k with sling built in, and all your current EHD's aren't dead wieghts, with useless shows on them, you can move the EHD(sure hope they fix some of the issue I have heard about)already in use on your account to the 922.

Home network key is a huge advantage as well. I just replaced a 622 with a 722k on my account. Had them reauthorize my account, and now all 4 EHD's work with the new 722k, took all of 5 min's. If this was a Direct system and I upgraded, I would have lost all shows, across all drives.

Would it be NICE to have Esata, YES. Would I rather disable my internal drive, to stream to my external that was married to a single unit in the house, NO. The NO is much bigger than the Yes here.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Fresh meat ... hehe 

Dish DVR use only approved drives. 
Perhaps you came from other side - DTV, hence the SATA vs USB useless debates.

BTW, it is *eSATA*. Not ESATA.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'll repeat my earlier answer... Dish has to put a USB 2.0 port on the box period. This is because they want to support thumb drives/cameras for people who want to view pictures.

IF they also added eSATA, then that's something else to code for and maintain just for the external drives. Agreed eSATA is faster in some scenarios... but if they don't need that speed to do what they do with the external drive, there's no point in investing in another port that will only be used for EHD, when the USB 2.0 will serve them just fine in that regard.

Not saying I necessarily *like* it... but I certainly understand.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

Stewart Vernon said:


> Not saying I necessarily *like* it... but I certainly understand.


*+1*


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

Thanks to everyone who answered. I guess I can understand dish wanting to keep costs down when designing their receivers. However I find it funny that there are 5 year old motorola HD DVRs out there that have both USB and eSATA (there lower case e). Also, as already stated, Directv included both USB and eSATA ports (however, as GrumpyBear pointed out, they only have one SATA controller and no port multiplier which is the problem with their boxes) on their HD DVRs.TIVO also includes both USB and eSATA.

I have both Directv and Dish (1 VIP 722 with no EHD attached because of my dislike of USB connected drives and 2 HR 21-200 which I'm happy have the eSATA ports but am unhappy that they have to disable the internal drives when the EHDs are connected)
So basically I don't like how either Dish or Directv implements their EHDs.

I was hoping with the release of the VIP 922 that Dish would have both USB 2.0 and eSATA (connected to the same controller as the internal drive using a port multiplier) ports, but to my disappointment they did not add eSATA.

As for P Smith's comment that Dish only uses approved drives, is that for EHDs or the internal drives. The only way I would ever consider purchasing a VIP 922 is if I could easily replace the 1TB internal drive with a 2TB. I don't think there is anything special about the "brand" of drives they use in their receivers. Do they use some type of coding to prevent someone from replacing the internal drive?


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

joenhre said:


> ...I have both Directv and Dish (1 VIP 722 with no EHD attached because of my dislike of USB connected drives...


So, you don't use Dish's archive feature, which does work adequately, because you don't "like" USB? Interesting, but it is your loss.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Some mistakes taken:
_"they only have one SATA controller"_ - DTV use *two *SATA channels(as a part of special CPU - BCM7038/7401);
_"the EHDs are connected"_ - in context of the thread *EHD* term used as archiving element by dish; so DTV external drive/enclosure is a *system *disk, like for ViP211;
- dish using same CPUs but did not provision second SATA port physically ( no traces on PCB, no connectors).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

USB drives are typically cheaper than eSATA configurations. The most popular eSATA enclosure has a retail price of around $50 without the drive.

USB 2.0 is fast enough. If the transfers go on in the background and playback works without interruption, does it really matter that it support speeds up to three times faster?

If there isn't a cost or functionality advantage to eSATA, there's no point in paying a premium for it.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> Dish DVR use only approved drives.


This has not been my experience. My ViP622 has liked anything I've hooked up to it. I've used several different enclosures (as well as some open-air solutions) with mechanisms from WD, Maxtor and Seagate and all have worked just fine (including two FAPs).


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

He did ask for *internal *drive replacement - please pay attention to the discussion.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

P Smith said:


> He did ask for *internal *drive replacement - please pay attention to the discussion.


I was paying attention to the discussion. The problem is that you didn't quote the hijacker that you were apparently responding to.

The answer to that question is no, you cannot swap in a 2TB drive into the ViP922. It isn't so much an issue of whether or not the drive is "approved" but whether it is supported explicitly in the firmware.


----------



## joenhre (Nov 8, 2008)

harsh said:


> USB drives are typically cheaper than eSATA configurations. The most popular eSATA enclosure has a retail price of around $50 without the drive.
> 
> USB 2.0 is fast enough. If the transfers go on in the background and playback works without interruption, does it really matter that it support speeds up to three times faster?
> 
> If there isn't a cost or functionality advantage to eSATA, there's no point in paying a premium for it.


Well personally I disagree that USB 2.0 will always be fast enough. It may work ok now for what dish is using it for, but I could see a time in the future when their choice of the slower interface might become a bigger issue. I'd rather pay the "premium" to add support for the faster and IMHO superior protocol. Hey but that's just me. Sorry for "hijacking" the thread. Thanks to P. Smith, Grumpybear, Stewart and everyone else who responded.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

harsh said:


> I was paying attention to the discussion. The problem is that you didn't quote the hijacker that you were apparently responding to.
> 
> The answer to that question is no, you cannot swap in a 2TB drive into the ViP922.  It isn't so much an issue of whether or not the drive is "approved" but whether it is supported explicitly in the firmware.


You are experienced person in twisting words, I would say.
1st - you just repeat same answer what I did
2nd - FW keep a list of "APPROVED" drives exactly, that how it is LITERALLY WRITTEN inside of FW - any drive what is not in the APPROVED list will be named in system message log as "not approved", from the list - "approved"; so your semantics it's just semantics - no one bit additional info.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

I'm not twisting words, I'm just using an arguably better combination with respect to American language syntax.

"Approved" doesn't mean much, if anything, to those who don't have access to the code. Typically, the term "approved" applies to processes or mechanisms that have been rigorously tested and are verified to work while non-approved processes or mechanisms _may_ work. In this instance, unsupported drives will not work regardless of their specifications.

IIRC, this goes beyond installing a supported mechanism. You must also image some data on the drive before using it that is specific to the drive model number and revision.

Then again, it is possible that DISH will some day (or maybe already has) do away with supporting specific drives, but I don't think that day has come yet.


----------



## inazsully (Oct 3, 2006)

inazsully said:


> Just wondering why Dish went with a USB port and DirecTV went with an ESATA port. Like who was first and I reckon they know that if you hook up a external hard drive with one company you can't hook it up with the other if you want to switch providers. Smart marketing but as usual, screw the customer.


As my original post asks. Who was first and did the other choose a different method for competitive reasons? Perhaps that answer is beyond our pay grade but lets face it. If you want to switch providers your current EHD is worthless. That to me is a very compelling reason not to switch. hence, good marketing.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Just inn case if some owner will go this route - replace died internal drive - the latest APPROVED list posted in Internet and perhaps re-posted here.


----------



## bnborg (Jun 3, 2005)

inazsully said:


> . . . If you want to switch providers your current EHD is worthless. That to me is a very compelling reason not to switch. hence, good marketing.


There are EHDs that support both USB and eSATA, not to mention Firewire.

I don't know whether they work on either or both systems.

For example, I have an EHD that supports both USB and IEEE Firewire. When plugged in by USB, Windows sees it as a USB to IEEE bridge, plus the IEEE to HDD adapter. I don't think my 722 would like it. Maybe I'll test it. If I do, I'll report back.


----------



## GrumpyBear (Feb 1, 2006)

inazsully said:


> As my original post asks. Who was first and did the other choose a different method for competitive reasons? Perhaps that answer is beyond our pay grade but lets face it. If you want to switch providers your current EHD is worthless. That to me is a very compelling reason not to switch. hence, good marketing.


It wouldn't matter if both used USB, or eSATA, with the encryption that is needed for the hard drive, moving from one Company to another would require a reformat of the drive. All of my EHD's support both USB and eSATA.
I believe the reason for USB to continue with the 922 is backwards compatiblity for users that have USB only EHD's.


----------



## freerein100 (Dec 14, 2007)

One thing both providers need to consider now is USB 2.0 and (SATA + eSATA) are effectively obsoleted with USB 3.0 now rolling out in main stream MB and addon cards


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

joenhre said:


> Well personally I disagree that USB 2.0 will always be fast enough.


Except in the case of Dish... they know what they intend the support for, playing content from the external drive. USB 2.0 is more than sufficient to do that... and always will be.

The only thing that would drive the need for more speed, would be more feature support... which Dish has proven is unlikely on older receivers. Typically more advanced receivers means a new receiver.

Consider the 622/722, that Dish no longer manufactures... An eSATA port on those would have been a complete waste of money since they stopped making both receivers before there was any need to do anything that would require the speed.

I suspect the 722K will similarly see an end one day... and maybe in 5 years they have something out to replace the 922.

The point being... not all future-proofing is cost-effective if the powers-that-be know they will not implement any features on the device to use the port.

I don't disagree with your sentiment... I asked why my iMac didn't have eSATA (it has USB 2, Firewire400, Firewire800) since it has SATA internal... but honestly, after a year I still haven't had a need yet for an eSATA external drive... and by the time I do, it will probably be time to buy a new iMac.


----------



## bnborg (Jun 3, 2005)

I figured the need for reformatting went without saying.

But I guess there are those who would not understand that each provider is using their own proprietary format.

As far as speed goes, the new SATA III drives would imply that eSATA III is not far behind.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

SATA 6Gb/s you mean.

The terms *SATA III or SATA 3.0*, which are considered to cause confusion among consumers, *must not be used*.
http://www.serialata.org/developers/naming_guidelines.asp


----------



## bnborg (Jun 3, 2005)

Thank you P Smith for the information.

I stand corrected


----------

