# Have had an R10 for 4 years, what's next?



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

So I've had an R10 for 4 years and I'm ready for something else. I'm interested in the Directv on Demand service, remote scheduling (I don't have the 6.4a update or a phone line) and I don't need HD. I don't see getting an HDTV for probably another year. 

What should I do?


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> So I've had an R10 for 4 years and I'm ready for something else. I'm interested in the Directv on Demand service, remote scheduling (I don't have the 6.4a update or a phone line) and I don't need HD. I don't see getting an HDTV for probably another year.
> 
> What should I do?


Upgrading to a HD-DVR now will give you the features your interested in and extras. Bigger hard drive than what's available in a SD-DvR, access to the HD channels which have better picture quality than the Standard def version. These channels are viewable because the DVR will downconvert the signal for your TV. This way when you do get a HDTV your already able to receive the HD no need to upgrade again.


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

DVDKingdom said:


> Upgrading to a HD-DVR now will give you the features your interested in and extras. Bigger hard drive than what's available in a SD-DvR, access to the HD channels which have better picture quality than the Standard def version. These channels are viewable because the DVR will downconvert the signal for your TV. This way when you do get a HDTV your already able to receive the HD no need to upgrade again.


Thanks for responding to my post. A couple questions:

1.) Would a new HD-DVR require a phone line for anything? I don't have one, and constantly have to delete the daily, nagging message from my R10.

2.) Would I be able to activate the HD-DVR without adding a monthly fee for HD?

3.) How much would the HD-DVR cost? I only need one, and am out of contract in about a month.

4.) What's the current model? Would I be better off waiting for the Tivo HD HDVR?

Thanks for any help you're able to provide.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

1) no
2) no
3) call D* for uprade deals
4) HR22/23 most likely (I wouldn't hold my breath for a Tivo as yet)


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> Thanks for responding to my post. A couple questions:
> 
> 1.) Would a new HD-DVR require a phone line for anything? I don't have one, and constantly have to delete the daily, nagging message from my R10.
> 
> ...


1. A phone line isn't required and no nags are displayed. HD-DVRs HR2x can connect by internet, but also not required.

2. Depends on your location, in some areas the HR2x are being activated without the HD Access fee since these areas need MPEG-4 boxes for locals. Otherwise there would be a $10/month HD fee.

3. The HD-DVRs go for about $199, however DirecTV does sometimes offer them at discounted prices. Need to call and ask.

4. The current released models are HR22/HR23. The TiVo model is due before the end of the year.

Keep in mind any new receiver regular or HD receiver will come with a two-year commitment.


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

DVDKingdom said:


> Keep in mind any new receiver regular or HD will come with a two-year commitment.


What would my options be to avoid the contract? Could I buy an R22 off eBay and activate it?

If I were to wait until the R10 finally died, then have it replaced under the protection plan, would that cause a contract extension?

Thanks for all your help. This is a fantastic online community you have here.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

If you can find a previously OWNED HD DVR, then you can activate on it on your account as "owned", not "leased". But be very careful buying used DirecTV Receivers/DVRs that way. Too many sellers misrepresent stolen or leased items. Always get the "Receiver ID Number" from the seller and verify its subscription status by calling DirecTV yourself. And you'll still need to buy a new Access Card from DirecTV for $20. 

Replacement of an OWNED Tivo DVR with a newer non-Tivo SD DVR should not trigger a contract extension. Only upgrades do that. But realize that you probably won't get an R22 that way. More likely an R15 or R16 SD DVR.


----------



## Blurayfan (Nov 16, 2005)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> What would my options be to avoid the contract? Could I buy an R22 off eBay and activate it?
> 
> If I were to wait until the R10 finally died, then have it replaced under the protection plan, would that cause a contract extension?
> 
> Thanks for all your help. This is a fantastic online community you have here.


Buying a receiver off Ebay is risky and DirecTV may still require a contract. If you replaced the R10 under the protection plan there should not be a contract extension. However you get whatever they send no chance to pick the model you prefer.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

DVDKingdom said:


> Buying a receiver off Ebay is risky and DirecTV may still require a contract. If you replaced the R10 under the protection plan there should not be a contract extension. However you get whatever they send no chance to pick the model you prefer.


If you buy a receiver off of ebay and it is an owned receiver, there will be no contract extension. If it is a leased receiver, DirecTV will not even let you activate it.

And a replacement under the PP *DOES NOT* extend your commitment.

As for getting an HD-DVR without and HDTV, it has been stated that sometimes DirecTV/installers will not let you do this. This is due to the fact that they want to be able to test that the HD service is working correctly so they don't have to come back out at a later time.

- Merg


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

The Merg said:


> As for getting an HD-DVR without and HDTV, it has been stated that sometimes DirecTV/installers will not let you do this. This is due to the fact that they want to be able to test that the HD service is working correctly so they don't have to come back out at a later time.
> 
> - Merg


SOme may not like this but does anyone blame them for not wanting to do it if they have the potential to get charged back for something they have no way to test or any control over? I for one dont.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> SOme may not like this but does anyone blame them for not wanting to do it if they have the potential to get charged back for something they have no way to test or any control over? I for one dont.


I completely understand it. I wasn't criticizing it at all, just informing the OP that they might not be able to get an HD receiver with a SDTV.

- Merg


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

I hooked up my R10 to a neighbor's phone line and forced a call at least 10 times...and one time, it was downloading for a very long time, perhaps 30 minutes...but then subsequent calls were short and sweet. 

Bottom line: I am still stuck on software version 6.3e-01-2-521. I've rebooted the receiver multiple times. 

Anyone know what gives?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> I hooked up my R10 to a neighbor's phone line and forced a call at least 10 times...and one time, it was downloading for a very long time, perhaps 30 minutes...but then subsequent calls were short and sweet.
> 
> Bottom line: I am still stuck on software version 6.3e-01-2-521. I've rebooted the receiver multiple times.
> 
> Anyone know what gives?


I read somewhere that once a receiver has been flagged as downloading the new software there is nothing that can be done to get it again. It's possible this happened. I believe weaknees was selling HD's with the new OS preloaded but those were mainly for people wanting to upgrade their drive. At this point I would say unless you cannot in no way shape or form go away from TiVo going to a new DVR would be better.


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

Shades228 said:


> I read somewhere that once a receiver has been flagged as downloading the new software there is nothing that can be done to get it again. It's possible this happened. I believe weaknees was selling HD's with the new OS preloaded but those were mainly for people wanting to upgrade their drive. At this point I would say unless you cannot in no way shape or form go away from TiVo going to a new DVR would be better.


Thanks for replying. I'm going to give up. It works and is functional, I'm not going to care about remote scheduling. Perhaps the "coming soon" DirecTivo will finally arrive.

Shame on Directv for ever selling DVRs that absolutely required a phone in the first place. Landlines have been dying for 10 years. There's no reason this box shouldn't have a functioning ethernet port that connects to the Internet.

But that's another argument. If I want MLB Network, I have to bow to the mighty blue tornado and accept what they give me.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> ....
> 
> Shame on Directv for ever selling DVRs that absolutely required a phone in the first place. Landlines have been dying for 10 years. There's no reason this box shouldn't have a functioning ethernet port that connects to the Internet.
> 
> ....


You can thank Tivo for that. It's part of the original Tivo design.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> You can thank Tivo for that. It's part of the original Tivo design.


All of the original non-DVR DirecTV boxes required phone connections as well, so I don't see how Tivo had anything to do with that requirement.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

whitepelican said:


> All of the original non-DVR DirecTV boxes required phone connections as well, so I don't see how Tivo had anything to do with that requirement.


Those are two separate requirements. One (Tivo) was (and still is) a Tivo requirement. Tivo DVRs were required to call "home" for various reasons, including authorization for new software.

DirecTV policy did (and still does) require a phone line connection to every receiver. That is for two purposes. First, it is how the receiver reports pay per view purchases via the remote and second, it is one way of verifying that all receivers on an account are at the same location.

Recently, DirecTV has not enforced the phone line policy because of the transition in personal telecommunications (a combination of more cellular use and VOIP - neither of which works with analog modem connections). But it is still policy.

DirecTV had nothing to do with the requirement for Tivo DVRs to call Tivo.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

whitepelican said:


> All of the original non-DVR DirecTV boxes required phone connections as well, so I don't see how Tivo had anything to do with that requirement.


Only required to report PPV purchases, and that's still true. But the Tivos can't even be initially setup without an initial "phone home".


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

carl6 said:


> Tivo DVRs were required to call "home" for various reasons, including authorization for new software.


Actually I believe the bigger goal is to confirm "Account Status". If you watch on the screen when the TiVo connects it's one of the first steps, along with setting the clock.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

bidger said:


> Actually I believe the bigger goal is to confirm "Account Status". If you watch on the screen when the TiVo connects it's one of the first steps, along with setting the clock.


That is certainly part of "various" reasons. And to clarify, we are talking about account status at Tivo, not at DirecTV. Both must be valid/current.

The real point Litzdog911 and I are both trying to make is that the telephone requirement for the DirecTivo products (including the R10) is a Tivo requirement. Don't blame DirecTV for that requirement (even though they also have a phone line requirement).


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

carl6 said:


> The real point Litzdog911 and I are both trying to make is that the telephone requirement for the DirecTivo products (including the R10) is a Tivo requirement. Don't blame DirecTV for that requirement (even though they also have a phone line requirement).


And my point was, why blame Tivo for something that has been on every DirecTV box ever produced and has always been policy for DirecTV?


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

whitepelican said:


> And my point was, why blame Tivo for something that has been on every DirecTV box ever produced and has always been policy for DirecTV?


The difference is Tivos need it for full functionality, none of the D* boxes need it.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> The difference is Tivos need it for full functionality, none of the D* boxes need it.


The Tivo boxes need to phone in exactly once, during guided setup. After that they never need to be connected to a phone line. And since DirecTV turned off my standard Hughes receivers more than once because they weren't connected to phone lines, I wouldn't say the Tivos are the only ones that are required to be connected.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

whitepelican said:


> The Tivo boxes need to phone in exactly once, during guided setup.


Do you have complete knowledge of the details of what the agreement between DIRECTV and TiVo includes? It may indeed specify that DIRECTV must insure that the DirecTiVo is connected. Perhaps DIRECTV was unable to negotiate this condition out of their current agreement because their own agreement(s) included this requirement at that time.

DIRECTV doesn't seem to be very good about how it establishes and follows its rules. It seems that there is a lot of wiggle room involved where it is literally not provided for. The "cabin" argument is an excellent example of this.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

whitepelican said:


> The Tivo boxes need to phone in exactly once, during guided setup. After that they never need to be connected to a phone line. And since DirecTV turned off my standard Hughes receivers more than once because they weren't connected to phone lines, I wouldn't say the Tivos are the only ones that are required to be connected.


Tivos would nag you constantly if they could not call in every 30 days or so. They required a phone line not to nag you and for software updates. All other receivers only needed a phone line for PPV purchases. The Tivos liked to be connected so they could send back viewer data and talk to Tivo. They actually called in to a different Tivo number just like the standalone Tivos did at the time. I even set mine up to call through the internet via a special serial connection just to get around the nag message and since I could not get a phone line to where my Tivo was (but it did have internet there).

I have had Directv since 1996 and never had a phone line on my receivers (because I could not get a line to them in their old spot) except for now with my HD-DVR simply for Caller ID. I also have lots of friends and family with Directv receivers that have never been connected to phone lines. No issues at all.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

Grentz said:


> I have had Directv since 1996 and never had a phone line on my receivers (because I could not get a line to them in their old spot) except for now with my HD-DVR simply for Caller ID. I also have lots of friends and family with Directv receivers that have never been connected to phone lines. No issues at all.


Which just goes to show you how randomly DirecTV enforces their own rules. I had my receivers (not DTivos) turned off on a couple of different occasions because they weren't connected to phone lines. The DTivos never had that problem, though.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

whitepelican said:


> Which just goes to show you how randomly DirecTV enforces their own rules. I had my receivers (not DTivos) turned off on a couple of different occasions because they weren't connected to phone lines. The DTivos never had that problem, though.


I doubt that's why they were "turned off". Usually this just happens if they're disconnected from the satellite signal too long.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> I doubt that's why they were "turned off". Usually this just happens if they're disconnected from the satellite signal too long.


Well, doubt all you want if you enjoy that sort of thing. But the receivers were never disconnected from the satellite at all. All of the "mirrored" receivers were shut off, while the one main one was left on. When I called in to DirecTV to report the problem they claimed that it was due to not having the phone line connected. This happened maybe three times over the course of 4-5 years, and each time when I called in I was told they were shut down for the same reason.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

whitepelican said:


> Well, doubt all you want if you enjoy that sort of thing. But the receivers were never disconnected from the satellite at all. All of the "mirrored" receivers were shut off, while the one main one was left on. When I called in to DirecTV to report the problem they claimed that it was due to not having the phone line connected. This happened maybe three times over the course of 4-5 years, and each time when I called in I was told they were shut down for the same reason.


Well at least you got them "turned on" again. It's not something I've ever seen reported, so I don't think it's very common.


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

litzdog911 said:


> Well at least you got them "turned on" again. It's not something I've ever seen reported, so I don't think it's very common.


You've seen it reported now. Obviously this was several years ago, and as I said it happened more than once.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

When I first got DirecTV (mid 90's) I had a single receiver (all that was available). I had multiple phone lines in my house, and connected the receiver to a secondary line that was primarily used for modems, not voice. However I gave DirecTV my voice number when setting up the account.

About two months later I got a phone call about the fact that the receiver was not connected to the phone line at my house. They (DirecTV) were adamant that I had to connect the phone line showing on my account to the receiver.

Today, I only have a phone line connected to one receiver (and that only for caller ID) and have never gotten a call or complaint. Times change.


----------



## hombresoto (Sep 10, 2006)

carl6 said:


> Recently, DirecTV has not enforced the phone line policy because of the transition in personal telecommunications (a combination of more cellular use and VOIP - neither of which works with analog modem connections). But it is still policy.
> 
> DirecTV had nothing to do with the requirement for Tivo DVRs to call Tivo.


This is not true. If you are a contractor technician (at least in the northeast), you are REQUIRED to connect 35% of all IRDs activated on new installs to a phone line. If you do not meet this requirement:
1. you will be charged back $2 for EVERY work order completed during the measurement period. Every service, upgrade, movers, and install work order.
2. you will not be routed new install work orders, as the supervisors bonuses are tied to these numbers
3. eventually you will not receive any work whatsoever.

Years ago, the requirement was 65%, and if you did not meet that metric you would be charged back $5 per box for every box you activated on new installs for the month. That really added up. No wiggle room either. 64%? Too bad, you're getting charged back $500 for the 100 boxes you installed last month.

So in summary, D* has RELAXED the phone line requirement, but has certainly not ELIMINATED it.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

I think the issue here is if the customer has to have the phone line connected. While techs might be required (35% of the time) to connect the phone line, the customer could very well just disconnect the line after the tech walks out.

The customer agreement states the following:



> For optimal performance of your Receiving Equipment, including ordering with your remote control or receiving certain Services, each of your receivers must be directly connected to the same land-based telephone line. If you add Service on additional TVs, you may purchase a separate subscription for each additional TV, or, if all your receivers are continuously connected to the same land-based telephone line, we can "mirror" programming to your additional TVs and charge you only the fee amount described in Section 2.


So, while connecting you receiver to a phone line is not mandatory, you need to do it to have your additional receivers mirrored to the programming on your initial receiver. Does DirecTV still enforce this section? Not that I know of, but it is there and they could use it if they so desired.

- Merg


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

Wow...never thought I would touch off such a firestorm!

My point is this: this is 2010. Home satellite television is so extremely advanced...and yet...Directv and Tivo insist on tying its full functionality to a 134-year-old technology. 

It is baffling. An ethernet jack can accomplish the exact same thing. 

This addiction to dinosaur technology reminds me of the ongoing fax machine fetish. 

People and companies can't let it go. Why? Other choices are far superior.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> It is baffling. An ethernet jack can accomplish the exact same thing.


This is not a correct statement. To wit:

1. Not all DIRECTV receivers have Ethernet capability (none of the _currently manufactured_ SD models, assuming they are still being manufactured, do).

2. Ethernet addresses cannot generally be tied to a a particular household.

The phone line requirement was intended, among other purposes, to insure that people weren't leasing receivers and using them at their places of business. If you took all of your receivers somewhere else and hooked them up, they would only be able to tell that they were all on the same LAN. They wanted to know that they were all in your home, not just all in one place.


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

harsh said:


> The phone line requirement was intended, among other purposes, to insure that people weren't leasing receivers and using them at their places of business. If you took all of your receivers somewhere else and hooked them up, they would only be able to tell that they were all on the same LAN. They wanted to know that they were all in your home, not just all in one place.


That may be true, however that is a level of control Directv is just going to have to give up.

In another couple years, landline networks are going to begin being turned off. It's a dead technology.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

SCDishMan2006 said:


> That may be true, however that is a level of control Directv is just going to have to give up.
> 
> In another couple years, landline networks are going to begin being turned off. It's a dead technology.


Landlines will be around much longer than a couple of years...


----------



## SCDishMan2006 (Feb 3, 2006)

CCarncross said:


> Landlines will be around much longer than a couple of years...


Not if AT&T has anything to say about it:

http://consumerist.com/2009/12/att-asks-fcc-to-deep-six-landlines.html


----------

