# Just What is the Update roll out proceedure?



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

Still haven't reviece the latest update. Is there *really* a method D* uses to get it out? Or, is one box at a time from left to right coast? I don't get it. Does guide data streams only go to certain boxes? can't update streams cover large areas?

I don't buy the fact that because there are more boxes in service now than a couple months ago, that an update will take over 3+ weeks to get from Cal. to Ohio.

Will this be the last update before fall?

Does everyone who has it now going to be happy with it this fall?

If there does turn out to be a problem, will we recieve an update before the fall season starts or 3 - 5 week afterwards?:eek2:


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Some of the original rollouts, where simply by time zone.

Now as the user base has grown... they gotten "finner"... TimeZone/Regions
Hence why you are seeing it take longer then any of the other updates.

They do this to keep the "loads" down on the CSR centers... simply if there are any issues, people calling..."my screen went blue and it says it's downloading something", ect....

There is another update already in it's testing phase.


----------



## wohlfie (Dec 28, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> There is another update already in it's testing phase.


They have a testing phase? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

(I can't believe it took almost 2 hours for SOMEBODY to make this joke)


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

I've kept my thoughts to myself on this issue but I do think the roll-out time for new releases has gotten ridiculous.

We're not talking about a software release that comes out once or twice a year and applies some fixes and some new features as Tivo may have been rolling out. What we're talking about here is a DVR that was released with faulty software. A DVR that is advertised as


DirecTV's Web Site said:


> With advanced search, pause, record and rewind features, the DIRECTV Plus® DVR takes your TV viewing to new heights.


Bottom line is the R15 didn't, and hasn't yet.

10C8/1047 was hitting the streets a month ago. 07/03/06. I understand a gradual roll out for a week or so given the past history of DTVs ability to test software. But we are now a month out and this new version is still squeaking it's way across the nation? Not acceptable. :nono2:

DTV is now giving R15s away free again. So the customer base is still growing. When will everyone get this release? A month from now? Two months? What about the next release, will it take a year for all customers to get that release simply because DTV doesn't want to overload their CSRs? :eek2:

And what is the logic behind this concern about calls? This is very confusing.  At this point, these new software versions are fixing problems. DTV doesn't tell anyone what they fixed (aside from Earl  ) and they don't add new features. If they have done they work correctly, and properly tested the release, after a week or two of a controlled release to limited customers if problems have not been reported and the new release was not placed on hold, then it should go to the masses.

It's been a month. If there were show stopper problems then the release should have been pulled. If not, then everyone should have it. I do not see how CSRs will get more calls when customers get a new version of software that as far as they're concerned, they don't even know they received it.

Remember, unless you look for the version, there's no message such as there is on Tivos telling every customer they received an update.

Enough, let it go and let's get on with the next batch of fixes. Everyone is being forced to spend time wondering what the new software will do for them and when will they get it. DTV, I appeal to you, open it up this weekend. By Monday let's have 10C8/1047 out to EVERYONE.


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

Amen, brother!

And, 90% of the owners probably don't know that they push updates this way and wouldn't realized they got updated.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

DTV's software rollout procedure and customer notification procedure (or lack there of) is shameful. If a customer bought a new technology R15 or two back in January they probably determined SLs sucked and could not be depended on to record first runs and were questionable regarding repeats. So they could very well have moved the R15 to their bedroom and used their old technology Tivo/UTV units in their main viewing room. If they didn't have old technology DVRs they would just think that undependable performace is the norm.

They could have also come to the conclusion that anything they wanted recorded they would setup manually. 

Since DTV and the R15 doesn't let customers know that a new software version was released, or what they new software version fixed, this poor customer hasn't been informed that SLs do indeed work better now. The unit is much more stable now. Instead, that customer is telling everyone at work that the R15 works pretty much like their old SA DVR from their cable company.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

qwerty said:


> Amen, brother!
> 
> And, 90% of the owners probably don't know that they push updates this way and wouldn't realized they got updated.


But also then 90% of the owners out there, don't even know an Update is comming... so they are not even looking for it, or worrying about getting it...


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> But also then 90% of the owners out there, don't even know an Update is comming... so they are not even looking for it, or worrying about getting it...


Yes. That was my point. Maybe some would call their CSR when they saw Find changed to search, but I wouldn't think many would.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Given that it is not a 1-1 ratio on users and CSRs... if say 1 in 100 R15 users called because of the update... that is a lot of people calling...


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Given that it is not a 1-1 ratio on users and CSRs... if say 1 in 100 R15 users called because of the update... that is a lot of people calling...


Well then if a company chooses to release a customer electronics device that demands monthly/bi-monthly updates to fix bugs, shouldn't that company beef up their CSR pool until those bugs are fixed? 1) to handle to bugs them selves and 2) to handle calls when bug fixes/new releases come out?

On one hand we hear that most every customer has a R15 unit that works just fine for them, the user doesn't know there are bugs and doesn't know they are receiving an update. Yet on the other hand we're fed the line that DTV can't get the new releases out in less than a month because "we don't want to overload the CSRs with phone calls". If customers don't know about a problem or about a new version being released, why would they call?

To be fair Earl, is this "don't overload the CSRs" reasoning you've come up with or something you've been told?

As I stated above, I've kept quite on this up until this point. But when it takes over a month to roll out a new release it's time the tribe should deservedly get angry.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Just my two cents on this, and I really have no knowledge, but it could be that D* is doing a controlled roll-out for a reason. What Earl mentioned about limiting the number of calls makes alot of sense. What it also sounds like is that D* may just be trying to be a little more cautious with this roll-out. If you're making a dramatic, fundamental change to your s/w (I'm not saying that's happened here) doing a limited roll-out makes alot of sense. You want to see how your s/w will perform in the field, without exposing the ENTIRE field. That way, should something go catastrophically wrong, you've effectively limited the damage.

Again, this is just a guess on my part, but experience tells me that that's what D* is doing.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Oh, and as for what users will and won't call in for, you would be amazed. I've never been a CSR, but I can imagine some of the questions that they get. For example, when I got my Tivo installed a few years ago, the installer shared some interesting stories with me. One customer that he saw that day complained that his receiver just stopped working. Didn't take the installer long to figure out that the plug wasn't in the outlet. Kinda critical to have your unit plugged in.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least if you have users that would panic if they saw a change in their menu (Find to Search, e.g.). Also, users tend to like stability, so doing frequent roll-outs to all users can unnerve folks. And most users will never see the problems that people on this forum do. As many have mentioned, if you're a standard user (vs. a power user) you won't see many or any problems with the R15 (probably why I haven't hit too many problems - I'm definitely NOT a power user). As a result, if people aren't complaining about bugs with their system, I would certainly limit how frequently I update their s/w. If they're complaining left and right, then absolutely, you need to be putting out fixes fequently to give people confidence that you're working the problem.

But is most folks aren't complaining, then you can, and should, ease the roll-out schedule - the upheval you cause by changing the s/w would, at that point, outweigh the incremental benefits caused by the new s/w. That can actually lead people to believe your product is LESS reliable than it really is.

This leads to one more possibility - a return to normal. When the R15 was first released I'm betting that D* wasn't planning on putting out new versions of s/w every 6 - 8 weeks. But there were probably so many problems and complaints that they needed to nip in the bud. So, they probably stepped up their development efforts -- rolling out new versions like crazy. They have probably, since, have gotten fewer and fewer complaints on the R15. As a result, they've stepped back to a more normal schedule. Why would that mean that it takes longer to roll out s/w? Partly for what I said above - mitigate risk - and partly because that may have been their normal plan to start with.

Personally, I'd LIKE to see the 10C8 vs. of the s/w show up on my DVR, but I'm not overly upset that it's taking its time to get there...


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

jpl said:


> Oh, and as for what users will and won't call in for, you would be amazed. I've never been a CSR, but I can imagine


In the past, I have done CS for Art Products and people call in for the stupidest of reasons and the dumbest questions. I know the saying there are no dumb questions but I tell you there certainly are.

The real bad ones you pretend you have to ask someone something or check something and put them on hold and hope they hangup. If they call back you pretend your on another call and have to call them back which you never do.


----------



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> But also then 90% of the owners out there, don't even know an Update is comming... so they are not even looking for it, or worrying about getting it...


But those who do know they have a 'work in progress' product and want it finished.

Also, as far as CSR calls, unless they've doubled the number of R-15 users in the last 1-2 months, most users already experienced the blue screen or worse.

Again, I think the rollout routine sucks. I'm really concerned about the timing of the next rollout. Will it be during the first couple weeks of the fall season? The clock is ticking.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

I think they are just trying to buy some time so they can work on the next release. We cant start asking/complaining about another release as a lot of us havent even received the month old one yet. They also might have pulled people from the R-15 team to work on the new HD DVR which people have been blasting DirecTV for the delays in many articles.

I am just hoping it gets stable and reliable by start of football season. It needs this release and at least one more by then.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

OK, here's one: since a new unit (like the one I activated yesterday) is bound to get an update almost as soon as it's connected (hell, the ones that came out last November did that), why not just give new units the absolute latest?


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Bobman said:


> I think they are just trying to buy some time so they can work on the next release. We cant start asking/complaining about another release as a lot of us havent even received the month old one yet. They also might have pulled people from the R-15 team to work on the new HD DVR which people have been blasting DirecTV for the delays in many articles.
> 
> I am just hoping it gets stable and reliable by start of football season. It needs this release and at least one more by then.


That's certainly another possibility. One thing that I don't understand - why did they have two different R15 models produced (300 and 500)? If one was a step up from the other I could understand (one being the base model, the second having more features), but why in the world would you be in the business of creating two separate products that do the same thing? It forces them to do dual maintenance - two different versions of s/w, one for each machine. Not a very smart thing to do.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Wolffpack said:


> To be fair Earl, is this "don't overload the CSRs" reasoning you've come up with or something you've been told?


The "CSR" reasoning... is what I have been told.
The exact message I got back when I asked the other day....

"It is going out at the maximum pace ... unless it is an emergency"

When I pressed a little more, is when I got the details about the call centers and the ratio...ect...


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

Along with what I said above about new units, I see no reason why an overt action such as 02468 shouldn't get the latest.

So, to summarize: any box getting some update should get the latest, and 02468 should always get the latest, even if the box isn't in the scheduled region. Neither scenario would increase CSR calls. Only automatic updates from the prior version should be subject to schedule.


----------



## cobaltblue (Feb 22, 2006)

I cannot believe another week has gone by and no update. Could someone refresh me on how to download the latest software update. I feel at this rate, it will be next year by the time I get it. Not pleased with D*'s rollout procedure. Thanks...


----------



## cabanaboy1977 (Nov 16, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> The "CSR" reasoning... is what I have been told.
> The exact message I got back when I asked the other day....
> 
> "It is going out at the maximum pace ... unless it is an emergency"
> ...


I work in a call center and I understand that but I think they could have increased the flow and decreased the calls if they make use of the message center on the R15's like they have in the past on the UTV and Tivo.


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

cabanaboy1977 said:


> I work in a call center and I understand that but I think they could have increased the flow and decreased the calls if they make use of the message center on the R15's like they have in the past on the UTV and Tivo.


Good point. I've had mine almost 8 months and have never seen a message.


----------



## wohlfie (Dec 28, 2005)

For those tracking progress of the roll-out....I got mine overnight on Wed. night.
Just noticed it last night.

I guess for once I'm NOT last. :lol: 

On interesting thing....EVERY update I have received had been at 3:17 AM and (I am pretty sure) on a Wednesday night.....I guess thats my slot


----------



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

walters said:


> Along with what I said above about new units, I see no reason why an overt action such as 02468 shouldn't get the latest.
> 
> So, to summarize: any box getting some update should get the latest, and 02468 should always get the latest, even if the box isn't in the scheduled region. Neither scenario would increase CSR calls. Only automatic updates from the prior version should be subject to schedule.


I agree with this! If you 02468, you're at your own risk, and also, if you know to do a 02468 you may actually be better informed about the unit than many of the CSR's that you might talk to anyway. We own our boxes, give us the chance to keep it current or screw it up ourselves.


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

walters said:


> OK, here's one: since a new unit (like the one I activated yesterday) is bound to get an update almost as soon as it's connected (hell, the ones that came out last November did that), why not just give new units...


_...the absolute latest?_
Probably because the new units have been sitting in a warehouse. What would be the point in putting the very latest version on them just before they went into the warehouse, if they are just going to need to downloade the "latest latest" when they are actually installed?


PlanetBill said:


> I agree with this! If you 02468, you're at your own risk, and also, if you know to do a 02468 you may actually be better informed about the unit than many of the CSR's that you might talk to anyway. We own our boxes, give us the chance to keep it current or screw it up ourselves.


Well, I don't agree. What if your particular unit had its S/W get corrupted for some reason? Should you be "at risk" if you are attempting to restore the unit as it was? What they should have is 02468 (I-really-don't-"appreciate"...being messed with) to download the current version and a 13579 (I-can-take-care-of-mine-just-fine) to do an "at risk" download.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

rlambert7 said:


> _...the absolute latest?_
> Probably because the new units have been sitting in a warehouse. What would be the point in putting the very latest version on them just before they went into the warehouse, if they are just going to need to downloade the "latest latest" when they are actually installed?


No, maybe I wasn't clear. A new box activated today probably has the same version as the one Earl reviewed last November (which actually updated while he was setting it up). So it's going to get an update. Since it's going to get an update anyway, why not just make it the one that's only being done slowly so that there aren't too many updates happening at once.



> Well, I don't agree. What if your particular unit had its S/W get corrupted for some reason? Should you be "at risk" if you are attempting to restore the unit as it was? What they should have is 02468 (I-really-don't-"appreciate"...being messed with) to download the current version and a 13579 (I-can-take-care-of-mine-just-fine) to do an "at risk" download.


Again I wasn't clear. When I talk of "latest" I mean the latest "blessed" release. The one that's trickling out to reduce CSR call volume, *not* a release that is being tested.


----------



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

walters said:


> No, maybe I wasn't clear. A new box activated today probably has the same version as the one Earl reviewed last November (which actually updated while he was setting it up). So it's going to get an update. Since it's going to get an update anyway, why not just make it the one that's only being done slowly so that there aren't too many updates happening at once.
> 
> Again I wasn't clear. When I talk of "latest" I mean the latest "blessed" release. The one that's trickling out to reduce CSR call volume, *not* a release that is being tested.


ditto


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

An update that takes over a month, possibly even 6-8 weeks (its going on 5 now), to go countrywide is much much to long if you ask me.

I can see releasing it and waiting 1-2 weeks to see the results but when you can start counting in months, month and a half, etc.... not weeks thats to long.


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

walters said:


> No, maybe I wasn't clear. A new box activated today probably has the same version as the one Earl reviewed last November (which actually updated while he was setting it up). So it's going to get an update. Since it's going to get an update anyway, why not just make it the one that's only being done slowly so that there aren't too many updates happening at once.


Well, OK, let's say a particular R15 coming off the assembly line today, and gets 10c8 put on it. Then, it goes to some wearhouse and sits. If if sits for only 4 weeks before it is installed for a customer, I would say, yes, that might save some downloading, but it it sits for 8 weeks, it's probably going to want to download something regardless of what you put on it at the time of manufacture. Thing is, we don't know how long it sits. Another thing we don't know is the manufacturing process. Maybe the boards are loaded with the S/W at a different site than the final assembly process site. If that's the case, maybe the boards have already sat for a long time before they are put in a unit. In any case, it's a question of how much time transpires between the time the S/W is loaded, and the unit is actually becomes a product that is in use. If that time is greater than the time between releases, then there is not much point of going to extra trouble to put on the latest release of the software at the time of manufacture.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

OK, I'm still not getting my point across. I don't care what software is on the thing when I take it out of the box. I'm not suggesting they do anything at manufacturing different from what they do today. For all I care they can load something at manufacturing that only has code for doing guided setup and downloading the latest update.

What I'm saying, though, is that since it's going to do an update anyway, it might as well be the one that's being trickled out rather than the previous one. At least assuming that the reason for trickling out the current one is to limit the volume of updates. Not doing it this way increases the volume of updates.


----------



## cabanaboy1977 (Nov 16, 2005)

walters said:


> OK, I'm still not getting my point across.


If it makes you feel any better I knew what you meant


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

walters said:


> OK, I'm still not getting my point across. I don't care what software is on the thing when I take it out of the box. I'm not suggesting they do anything at manufacturing different from what they do today. For all I care they can load something at manufacturing that only has code for doing guided setup and downloading the latest update.
> 
> What I'm saying, though, is that since it's going to do an update anyway, it might as well be the one that's being trickled out rather than the previous one. At least assuming that the reason for trickling out the current one is to limit the volume of updates. Not doing it this way increases the volume of updates.


Ah, I understand now what you are saying. Sounds like a rather miniscule benefit. In any case, DTV could surely "do the math" to determine if they could significantly save on downloads. Maybe they already did.

So, you don't care what's S/W is on the box? That means it could be 1044. If DTV did what you are suggesting, and someone on the east coast had had installed an R15 a month ago, the newly installed R15 would see your "code" that says, download the one that's being "trickled out" (that would be 10c8). "Oh, sorry new customer, you aren't scheduled for a software update, yet. Hang tough." That new customer would still be waiting for 10c8 while they still had 1044. That's sound rather succulent. Maybe DTV doesn't care about the number of downloads caused* by new customers. Maybe they don't want new customers to be ROYALLY screwed, just screwed as bad as those on the east coast with 10b8 who are still waiting for 10c8.

*"caused" might be the wrong word. While a customer might be able to "cause" software to be placed on their box from the satellite, I don't think a custormer can "cause" the satellite to do something it would not do otherwise. Perhaps "obtained" would be more accurate.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm just going to cut my losses here.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

walters said:


> I'm just going to cut my losses here.


What where you talking about?


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

walters said:


> I'm just going to cut my losses here.


:icon_dumm :icon_dumm :icon_dumm

I see what you're saying too! :lol:


----------



## cabanaboy1977 (Nov 16, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> What where you talking about?


He is saying if you by a new R15 that it should update to the newest verison out there (regardless of it the new version is rolled out to the that area).

ie. If someone on the East Coast bought a new R15 today that it would update to 10C8 not 10B8.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

cabanaboy1977 said:


> If someone on the East Coast bought a new R15 today that it would update to 10C8 not 10B8.


I am in NJ and my new R-15 was just hooked up 10-15 minutes ago and it has version 1044 of the software, updated from 10b8.


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

walters said:


> I'm just going to cut my losses here.


I would have posted this sooner, but I was gone all yesterday. My apologies to *walters*. I was not feeling well Friday, and I guess I let that get me in a rut where I continually misunderstoond the point you were trying to make. Sorry. My apologies, too, to the rest of the folks on the forum for being an annoynance.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

My mistake above. :grin: It went from 1044 to 10B8 like Earl said elsewhere.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

cabanaboy1977 said:


> He is saying if you by a new R15 that it should update to the newest verison out there (regardless of it the new version is rolled out to the that area).
> 
> ie. If someone on the East Coast bought a new R15 today that it would update to 10C8 not 10B8.


 I should have added a smily face to the end of my post.


----------



## cabanaboy1977 (Nov 16, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I should have added a smily face to the end of my post.


LOL, yeah you should have 

Or I should have thought about your reply for more than a second before I replied


----------



## d0ug (Mar 22, 2006)

This is to Earl, 

Im wondering if there is anyway some of us on here could be registered with directv as willing beta testers, that would recieve new code 1st. Have you spoken with your contact at directv about something like this?


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

Still not in NJ yet.


----------



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

Bobman said:


> Still not in NJ yet.


Not here either in SW Ohio

:kickbutt:


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

d0ug said:


> as willing beta testers


All you have to do is force an update (02468) on your R-15 twice a day (morning and evening) and you will get a beta eventually.


----------



## d0ug (Mar 22, 2006)

Bobman said:


> All you have to do is force an update (02468) on your R-15 twice a day (morning and evening) and you will get a beta eventually.


That doesn't work. for awhile i was doing it about once a day, then i gave up. i still try it once a week or so.

I know some of you will say it will be pushed to your reciever when your reciever is in the stream to get the update. It might within a few days of getting in the stream, but i know for a fact that in the past when an update has been available i did not get it untill doing 02468. I probably would have gotten it in a day or so had i just waited. but still the point is that 02468 can possibly get u the update a bit faster, but your reciever still has to be in the stream to get the update.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

rlambert7 said:


> I would have posted this sooner, but I was gone all yesterday. My apologies to *walters*. I was not feeling well Friday, and I guess I let that get me in a rut where I continually misunderstoond the point you were trying to make. Sorry. My apologies, too, to the rest of the folks on the forum for being an annoynance.


Thanks. I appreciate that (and I would have posted this sooner but I was out of town until now).


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

d0ug said:


> This is to Earl,
> 
> Im wondering if there is anyway some of us on here could be registered with directv as willing beta testers, that would recieve new code 1st. Have you spoken with your contact at directv about something like this?


Sorry... didn't see your post...

I have talked about this with my contact multiple times in the past... Kinda like a Release Candidate program.

They are still mulling it over.


----------

