# How do you switch between tuners?



## The Bad Guy (Feb 3, 2006)

I spent an hour trying to figure it out without luck.

I really, really dislike this unit right now. If I was never introduced to tivo, maybe I could accept it.

I hate the fact you have to keep toggling to turn the TV off. If you turn the receiver off, does it know to turn itself on when a recording is scheduled?

Any help with my questions would be appreciated. 

Thanks!


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

Yes the unit will record even if it is in the off mode for it is not actually off just in a standby state. It is actually recomend that you turn it off when not watching it so that it knows that no user is present and that it can do its housekeeping tasks.

As for toggling between tuners that is not possible and from what I have read in other posts it wont be for supposdly TIVO has a copyright on that. If I am wrong there someone please correct me.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

No, they don't have a copyright (or patent or trademark or anything else) on being able to switch between the two live buffers. There's been no explanation for why it's not there on the R15, only that it is "coming soon".


----------



## The Bad Guy (Feb 3, 2006)

walters said:


> No, they don't have a copyright (or patent or trademark or anything else) on being able to switch between the two live buffers. There's been no explanation for why it's not there on the R15, only that it is "coming soon".


Then what is the point of having dual tuners?


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

It can record two shows at the same time.

Also why is it you have to toggle to turn the TV off?


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

Thats what I thought I just read in a post somewhere either here on D* forum site that a CSR supervisor told someone that would not be a feature due to TIVO copyrights. And Since I could not find the post again I thought it best to ask if somone else had heard this. I am glad to hear its not true though for I did like that feature. Also I think that TBG is refering to switching the toggle on the top of his remote from Directv to Tv to turn off his tv so that it will not turn off his R15 at the same time.


----------



## fredo (Dec 1, 2005)

The Bad Guy said:


> Then what is the point of having dual tuners?


To record 2 shows at one time, or to record one show and watch another. I have also heard that the dual live buffers are "coming".


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Mavrick said:


> As for toggling between tuners that is not possible and from what I have read in other posts it wont be for supposdly TIVO has a copyright on that. If I am wrong there someone please correct me.


If there is a patent, somehow Dish and cable have gotten around it because the Dish DVR's have the ability and so do the Motorola boxes.

I read a bit of distressing news on another site that it was still up in the air whether Directv was going to add dual live buffers. That is in stark contrast to what Robert from Value Electronics was telling everybody two months ago.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

As that is my favorite phrase to throw out lately (it is a TiVo patent)

I haven't seen where they have or even could have a patent on a TOGGLE feature... 

As for it comming in a future version. It certainly won't be in the next update... but it is known "request" and it hasn't been ruled out for a future update.

There are good arguments on both sides of it being there and not being there... It is one of those features that falls into the bucket of "if you had it before, it is hard to give it up".


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

OK, I'll bite. What are the good arguments for it not being there? I'm not talking about "too complicated", "we ran out of times before we shipped". I'm saying an actual negative aspect to the feature itself that would make one happy it's not there.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

ebonovic said:


> As that is my favorite phrase to throw out lately (it is a TiVo patent)
> 
> I haven't seen where they have or even could have a patent on a TOGGLE feature...
> 
> ...


Earl, what is a good argument for it not to be there (other than more work for Directv which I could care less about), especially if like you said, if you had it before its hard to give up.

For me it is a showstopper to ever moving it into the main room.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

Looks like raott and I are on the same page


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

The "one" argument.. is basically the basis for a feature we haven't seen yet.

If the 2nd tuner is not being used for recording, it can then be used to download the VOD and other "items" that will come via the SAT feed. but if that 2nd tuner had to be CONSTANTLY recording a 2nd buffer that may or may never be used....

Thus VOD content wouldn't have to wait for a "scheduled" download time during the evenings..

I don't buy too much into the argument of increasing the lifetime of the hard drive, but it would help since the head wouldn't be flying around recording two live buffers... 

I do use the dual live buffers, and would like to see it as an option... but at least over the last few months, I have gotten a tad used to not having it... and I am not going to the mountain to toss the unit over the edge...


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

ebonovic said:


> The "one" argument.. is basically the basis for a feature we haven't seen yet.
> 
> If the 2nd tuner is not being used for recording, it can then be used to download the VOD and other "items" that will come via the SAT feed. but if that 2nd tuner had to be CONSTANTLY recording a 2nd buffer that may or may never be used....
> 
> ...


Those items can and should be handled in the middle of the night. It is also no different than if I am watching one tuner and it is recording a suggestion on the other, I can still flip back and forth and have the option of stopping the recording of the suggestion. If one tuner is constantly tied up with VOD, then the R15 is basically no better than a one tuner cable DVR.

For me, if it comes down to choosing a provider who can offer a dual live tuner and one who cannot - I know where I'm going, especially since the difference between Directv and Cable has become razor thin, whereas there used to be a huge gap.


----------



## ISWIZ (Nov 18, 2005)

For me it's way down the list from "just record things properly'. I see arguments on both sides. What is a solution for some "do it at night" might be a problem for the people who watch TV at night and don't during the day.
I'd like to at least see it run a live buffer on the channel you're on while watching a movie so you could catch up on the news/ball score, etc. when the wife (or husband) took a break.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Each person has their own "wants" and feature set... There absolutely positively is not one single system out there that has 100% of the features... Just can't... as either the cost will get too high, or one type of feature cancels out another.

The way my and my family viewing habits are... The only one who watches live tv, (for the most part) is my 4 year old son. And that is just because non of the DVRs out there have batch playback... So we set it on Nick, while we are doing our things... after that... Pre-Recorded material all night long.

Sports are the exception to that rule, and that is when I get my most usage out of the double buffer. Which I have just gotten in the habit of recording both sport events, while watching them live... just incase a suggestion kicks in.

There is no perfect system... never will be... Even if you try to build one for yourself, it maybe PERFECT for your usage... but the next guy it may be the worse thing out there..


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

ISWIZ said:


> I'd like to at least see it run a live buffer on the channel you're on while watching a movie so you could catch up on the news/ball score, etc. when the wife (or husband) took a break.


And that is one of the things on the "short" list of things to be corrected, much sooner then later....


----------



## ISWIZ (Nov 18, 2005)

ebonovic said:


> And that is one of the things on the "short" list of things to be corrected, much sooner then later....


Still 4 dots Earl, let's hope it's down to ...


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

ISWIZ said:


> Still 4 dots Earl, let's hope it's down to ...


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

From the perspective of someone who started out with the R15, and had never previously experienced dual live buffers and then later added an R10 to my mix that has them, I can honestly say that I find them to be important, or significant, or whatever adjective you want to throw in. I do believe that the lack of dual live buffers is an issue that will adversly effect DirecTV over time, especially when any competing product does have them.

The concern over downloading VOD stuff is one I had not considered, but now that it has been mentioned, I think that is MUCH lower priority to me as a user than is having the second buffer available for my use. I turn my R15s (2 of them) off when I'm not using them. And generally speaking, they are off much more during any given 24 hour period than they are on. That should be more than adequate for VOD stuff to get shoved out to me (whether I want it or not).

Carl


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ebonovic said:


> The "one" argument.. is basically the basis for a feature we haven't seen yet.
> 
> If the 2nd tuner is not being used for recording, it can then be used to download the VOD and other "items" that will come via the SAT feed. but if that 2nd tuner had to be CONSTANTLY recording a 2nd buffer that may or may never be used....
> 
> ...


To that reason my answer is: bologna.

If the 2nd tuner has a live buffer you'd never get VODs?

There's already a standard operating procedure that one is suppose to "turn off" their unit when not in use so it can do it's housekeeping. So, when the unit is "turned off" no need for live buffers, two tuners available to download VODs. Sorry, not a real reason.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

I say they need to open up the USB ports, tell you that you need a wireless or ethernet USB adapter and push the VOD over that at any point they want. As long as it streams in at a low enough rate as to not affect my internet usage during the day it wouldn't bother me. I think they use a tuner also for the Mix Channels. But if you think about it what are the odds that both tuners are going to be recording 24 hours a day constantly? I would say not very high at all. While I really don't care one way or the other I do understand that people who have had the feature may care and rightfully so it should be added. Does it make me hate the box that it's not there? No not at all.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Kanyon71 said:


> I say they need to open up the USB ports, tell you that you need a wireless or ethernet USB adapter and push the VOD over that at any point they want. As long as it streams in at a low enough rate as to not affect my internet usage during the day it wouldn't bother me. I think they use a tuner also for the Mix Channels. But if you think about it what are the odds that both tuners are going to be recording 24 hours a day constantly? I would say not very high at all. While I really don't care one way or the other I do understand that people who have had the feature may care and rightfully so it should be added. Does it make me hate the box that it's not there? No not at all.


I agree the feature is more important to some than others, probably more important to sports fans like myself than anybody else.

That said, it is just one more notch to consider in choosing a service provider. As a long time Directv subscriber (since 97), I have seen the advantage over cable erode significantly in the past two years to the point now where its almost a toss-up in my area.

Reading today that Directv was still considering whether to add dual live buffers was disturbing (especially after certain distributors came on this site and others saying it was going to happen).


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Wolffpack said:


> To that reason my answer is: bologna.
> 
> If the 2nd tuner has a live buffer you'd never get VODs?
> 
> There's already a standard operating procedure that one is suppose to "turn off" their unit when not in use so it can do it's housekeeping. So, when the unit is "turned off" no need for live buffers, two tuners available to download VODs. Sorry, not a real reason.


The unit can still record when it is "off"... and the "off" isn't so it can do housekeeping... It is so it knows it can do the housekeeping much sooner then waiting for 4 hours of no IR activity to "guess" that no one is using the unit.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Kanyon71 said:


> I say they need to open up the USB ports, tell you that you need a wireless or ethernet USB adapter and push the VOD over that at any point they want. As long as it streams in at a low enough rate as to not affect my internet usage during the day it wouldn't bother me. I think they use a tuner also for the Mix Channels. But if you think about it what are the odds that both tuners are going to be recording 24 hours a day constantly? I would say not very high at all. While I really don't care one way or the other I do understand that people who have had the feature may care and rightfully so it should be added. Does it make me hate the box that it's not there? No not at all.


But the argument there is that it could FLOOD your internet connection.
could you imagin downloading 60gb of VOD via your broadband connection.

If this was a year ago, comcast would shut me down in a blink if that was the case. Broadband still is not fast enough to download MPEG-2 full TV resolution programming in a reasonable speed... and I have a 6mb Cable modem, and it would take longer then a live broadcast.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

ebonovic said:


> Each person has their own "wants" and feature set... There absolutely positively is not one single system out there that has 100% of the features...


I totally agree.  It amazes me that so many people are expecting a non TiVo box to act identically to a TiVo box. The R-15 is not going to just duplicate feature by feature of the DirecTiVos and if it were there would be no sense in creating a different product.

The R-15 is a non TiVo model with different features, different interface, different options, etc... If people just want it to 100% duplicate their TiVo's then just go buy a TiVo as its never going to happen. The R-15 IS different than TiVo either get used to the way it works and the features it offers or get a TiVo if that has the features you want.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Bobman said:


> I totally agree.  It amazes me that so many people are expecting a non TiVo box to act identically to a TiVo box. The R-15 is not going to just duplicate feature by feature of the DirecTiVos and if it were there would be no sense in creating a different product.


Bobman - the point I'm trying to make is that it is lacking a feature (dual live buffers) that is a standard feature on all other providers DVRs, not just the Tivo box.

Nobody said it should act identical to the Tivo, overall there should be an improvement it both the GUI and features

A two tuner DVR with one tuner not being fully utilized because D* is saving it for VOD and other "features" is much less useful than a cable DVR with dual live buffers and VOD and with the pricing and programing advantage of D* over cable almost completely gone it is one more factor that could possibly make me and others switch.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

raott said:


> A two tuner DVR with one tuner not being fully utilized because D* is saving it for VOD and other "features" is much less useful than a cable DVR with dual live buffers and VOD and with the pricing and programing advantage of D* over cable almost completely gone it is one more factor that could possibly make me and others switch.


Just for the record: DirecTV didn't "state" that it didn't have dual buffers because it is saving it for VOD.... It is just one of the arguments/reasons why it is not there.

One of the primarily reasons it isn't there, is that it usuage was "under estimated".

There is also the "no 30second skip", dealbrakers... same argument.
Flip side is, once some of the Direct2Go featuers start kicking in, those would be "features/factors" that have people switch from cable-co's or other providers to DirecTv...

That is the POSITIVE side to competion... either a product get's better, or you have the right/choice to switch.

How many of us have had the EXACT SAME wireless provider... I now I have had 5 different ones in the 10 or so years I have had a wireless provider, and that doesn't include "name changes"


----------



## HossMcD (Jan 25, 2006)

Having retired from the computer industry after 24 years I think I can guess pretty accurately what is going on with the R15 software. According to Tech Support, Tivo wanted to make their contract with DirecTV non-exclusive. Understandably, TIVO didn't want to depend essentially on DirecTV for all their revenue. My conclusion is that that was a deal breaker for DirecTV. Next, I am assuming, DirecTV rushed to purchase/create their own ersatz TIVO software. (It's never been made clear to me that actual DirecTV employees are coding and fixing the software. It may have been sourced out partially or completely.) 

The bugginess in the software says "rush job". If they had had more development time we wouldn't all be "beta" testers. 

The lack of essential product features may be due to the fact that marketing is very inexperienced and doesn't really know what customers want. Programmers seldom have a good idea of the product features non-techie customers actually want. (I was in marketing myself but I managed an airline reservation system development/software maintenance team for my $10 billion main-frame company.) It's also possible that marketing has little input into this product because management doesn't give them any right to give input. Or it may be that rushing to market simply meant incomplete/unfinished/fragile software. (anyone ever heard of Microsoft?:grin: )

Now that this very fragile software has been released, DirecTV should be prioritizing bug fixes and enhancement requests based on marketing input. Marketing should know what is important to the user. If they don’t, they should hire new marketing people. Fixes should come out at least once a month or more often if the bug is a Class 1 bug (it brings the system to its knees.)

The fact that the series recording is so badly broken should have been fixed a long time ago. The fact that I see posts on this topic going back 3+ months says DirecTV knows it is a big problem. 

Yet the other day when I called in a 2nd level tech claimed that she had just received a tech bulletin outlining the problem with a workaround. (The workaround doesn't actually work though.)

Apparently DirecTV is not keeping tech support properly informed of bug issues or tech support has learned to lie like a marketeer.

For this to go unfixed for 3+ months could be dur to one or more of several reasons. 1. If they have a fix but haven't released it, someone's priorities are really poor. or 2. If they don't have a fix yet, that may mean that someone has foolishly not made this a high priority issue. or 3. If they don't have a fix and it is rated a high priority then the development team must be made up of mostly recent graduates from coder school.

Because this software is so broken, I reactivated my TIVO and use it alongside the R-15. This costs me $5.00 extra per month (to rent the DVR software for the second DVR) but it's still fixes my problem for now. Unfortunately for DirecTV it has cost them even more. They had to send their nearest technician from a town 250 miles away from my small town to upgrade the multi-switch on my satellite dish to handle to 5 coax cables. (2 each for each DVR and 1 for the non-DVR in another room). It was done at no cost to me but at considerable cost to DirecTV.

If all the R-15 users take advantage of my "workaround" it might be cheaper for DirecTV to fix the software instead of upgrading a ton of multi-switches.

DirecTV management needs to have marketing prioritize what the development team fixes and enhances. Next they need to be sure that senior programmers are assigned to these major issues and lastly they need to release fixes far more often than they have been. 

Unfortunately for us DirecTV doesn't offer an e-mail address for users like us to vote on or give input on bug fixes or enhancement requests. Maybe they should re-think that. It certainly would give marketing valuable input on what is important to us. It would also give us, the customers, a feeling that DirecTV cares and listens. 

I also don't get the feeling that DirecTV management ever reads posts from boards like this either so I think I’m “preaching” to the choir here.

But then who am I to give advice to DirecTV? I'm just an old, retired computer geek.:sure:


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> But the argument there is that it could FLOOD your internet connection.
> could you imagin downloading 60gb of VOD via your broadband connection.
> 
> If this was a year ago, comcast would shut me down in a blink if that was the case. Broadband still is not fast enough to download MPEG-2 full TV resolution programming in a reasonable speed... and I have a 6mb Cable modem, and it would take longer then a live broadcast.


Yes thats true but you don't have to seed the whole 60gb at one time. I am just giving some possible ways they could get this done. Also they could use the Stand-By time or no IR activity time to get this from the stream. I seriously doubt you will ever see a DVR like these recording 24/7 and if they are most likely the person who owns it would never have a need for VOD.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

raott said:


> Bobman - the point I'm trying to make is that it is lacking a feature (dual live buffers) that is a standard feature on all other providers DVRs, not just the Tivo box.
> 
> Nobody said it should act identical to the Tivo, overall there should be an improvement it both the GUI and features
> 
> A two tuner DVR with one tuner not being fully utilized because D* is saving it for VOD and other "features" is much less useful than a cable DVR with dual live buffers and VOD and with the pricing and programing advantage of D* over cable almost completely gone it is one more factor that could possibly make me and others switch.


The second tuner is also there to allow you to record two shows at one time.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

HossMcD said:


> ...
> (It's never been made clear to me that actual DirecTV employees are coding and fixing the software. It may have been sourced out partially or completely.)
> 
> ...
> ...


Very nice first (or was it your second) post... well thought and well stated.

To address some of your points:

-) It is DirecTV employees who are coding the software, it is not outsourced.
-) It is very possible that "we" maybe out of touch of what the "millions" of other DirecTV subscribers, or what ever the "marketing" base is... Most of are techies and geekes when it comes to this stuff, so we want as many features as possible... So we are already on the higher end of the technology side. There is no doubt that some areas where underestimated, but unless we get on the inside and can see the white board sessions... we (as in a forum community) have ZERO idea of what led to decisions... We can just make educated guestimates
-) There are flaws with the Series Record, part data, part coding. The next software release is directly targetting the Series Links
-) They are... the next software release is 100% maintenance release... No new features.
-) Historically there has been a disconnected between development teams, product teams, and the 1st/2nd line techs... not sure why, but that pattern has existed for several years.
-) There have been two software releases since the launch of the product (sure one of them was on day one) but the other was right after Christmas. There is on on deck, but it's release date hasn't been set as this particular version is pending final approval.
-) The one down side to the testing phase, with the series links... as right now in Alpha/Beta testing in the actual units... they have to wait calandar days (just like we would) for programs to air... Analyze, test, correct, test again... So this particular "issues" takes much longer then others to validate the corrections.... Either way, a fix is on it's way.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

Hey, now Earl is a moderator ? What did I miss ? No complaints as I cant think of a more fair person just caught me off guard.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

The begged me... 

Nah... They asked me if I was intrested... And I agreed....
I'll try to not let the power go to my head....


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> -) It is DirecTV employees who are coding the software, it is not outsourced.


Someone should really tell NDS that they didn't do this so they can stop telling their investors.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

walters said:


> Someone should really tell NDS that they didn't do this so they can stop telling their investors.


Okay... hmm..... I will have to then double check with my "resource", to make sure I have my facts straight... Let's say that I am 95% sure, that it is employees who recieve a pay check from DirecTV doing the coding.

I wouldn't find it surprising if pieces are done by NDS (as there certainly has to be pieces of shared code), and they are a sister company....

I will see if I can get a better answer... but I am certain that it is 100% being coded under the NewsCorp umbrella.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

I've always found the story incredibly hard to swallow. Something to the effect that NDS, with their 6+ years of DVR experience, wasn't responsive enough to DirecTV on fixing issues so DirecTV decided to write their own DVR from scratch. 

Nah, the core of this thing *must* be XTV (and if it isn't, as I said, NDS is flat-out lying in their quarterly results, released about a week ago). DirecTV may have tweaked some UI stuff to make it look more like the rest of their receiver line. Actually, XTV is *designed* for that sort of branding. But functionally this thing must be XTV.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

walters said:


> I've always found the story incredibly hard to swallow. Something to the effect that NDS, with their 6+ years of DVR experience, wasn't responsive enough to DirecTV on fixing issues so DirecTV decided to write their own DVR from scratch.
> 
> Nah, the core of this thing *must* be XTV (and if it isn't, as I said, NDS is flat-out lying in their quarterly results, released about a week ago). DirecTV may have tweaked some UI stuff to make it look more like the rest of their receiver line. Actually, XTV is *designed* for that sort of branding. But functionally this thing must be XTV.


I don't think it was DirecTV they weren't responsive enough to. It was every other person who had an NDS DVR out there. They have had the same issues with their boxes for many years and not fixed them. Now while there may be some NDS code in the box it wouldn't surprise me if it's an in-house developed box as it doesn't seem to have much in common with the NDS from what I have read on the net but then again this is just from some general reading. While it does have a SL problem like the NDS it doesn't seem to be the same problem they have. Now as for their quarterly results all they have to do is provide something used in the box and it's not a lie, it's licensed technology.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

Well, they provide conditional access technology to all boxes, including DTiVos, so it's not just "NDS inside". They're claiming the DVR is XTV by NDS, period.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

walters said:


> Well, they provide conditional access technology to all boxes, including DTiVos, so it's not just "NDS inside". They're claiming the DVR is XTV by NDS, period.


In that case I would really like to know one way or the other.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Hey... "moderator hat on"... not that I don't mind the banter behind the development of the unit.... the thread has gotten a bit off track, from it's original topic.

If want to continue the debate on who built what, let's move it to a thread dedicated to it....


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Hey... "moderator hat on"... not that I don't mind the banter behind the development of the unit.... the thread has gotten a bit off track, from it's original topic.
> 
> If want to continue the debate on who built what, let's move it to a thread dedicated to it....


Well actually I think in that case the topic could be closed. There is no way to switch between tuners and no one really knows if there ever will be.


----------



## matty8199 (Dec 4, 2005)

Here's a workaround for switching between tuners:

Watching something on tuner 1, want to pause and switch to tuner 2?
- press record
- press pause
- change channel

Want to switch back to tuner 1? Go into your recordings list and play that recording...it's an odd way of doing it but it works - I believe it even starts from the spot you had paused live TV at...


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

That is a workaround but most people dont want to have to go to all this trouble to switch tuners. I think we just have to wait and hope that D* fixes this in a future software update but until then like Kanyon71 said this topic can basicly be closed for there is no real way to easily switch between tuners and it is up to D* if there ever will be. This said hopfully there will.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

I agree that there isn't much more to say on it, but I will leave the thread open... as in the chance that soemone else wants to post a work around, or the day comes that it does get enabled....

google hits will get directed to the ultimate end game solution.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Will be nice to know if they don't add what their reasoning is or if they do add it what sort of time frame they are talking. Doesn't bother me that it's not there but I can see why so many people would want it.


----------



## DoobieBrother (Feb 25, 2007)

So, 1 year later and it's still "Coming Soon". Wow. This and a few other features have me kind of regretting taking this unit.


----------



## blade (Sep 20, 2006)

Well I would like to know how come the unit doesn't have built in Picture-in-Picture. The unit I had (a scientific atlanta) box with TW that had two tuners, but you could watch them simultaneously with p-in-p. It made it nice because you didn't have to have a p-in-p tv and if you weren't recording anything you could watch two different things. if you were recording one of the tuners then that one couldn't be changed but you could still use the swap button. Why isn't this available? Is this the same kind of issue you are referring to with switching between tuners? I have never had a tivo so I am unfamiliar with what it does.


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

Close to the same, but no PIP. With the DirecTivo, you could have the two tuners on different channels and "swap" between the two.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

blade said:


> I have never had a tivo so I am unfamiliar with what it does.


I can see how that would cause an R-15 owner to become confused. The idea is simple. Tivo is a DVR--a Digital Video Recorder. That means that a Tivo actually records the programs specified by its user.

Sorry--I couldn't resist. 

Cheers,


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

wbmccarty said:


> I can see how that would cause an R-15 owner to become confused. The idea is simple. Tivo is a DVR--a Digital Video Recorder. That means that a Tivo actually records the programs specified by its user.
> 
> Sorry--I couldn't resist.
> 
> Cheers,


My R15 records what I tell it to, so by your definition the R15 is also a DVR.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Clint Lamor said:


> My R15 records what I tell it to, so by your definition the R15 is also a DVR.


I disagree with your conclusion. _Some_ [the italics are improperly subtle] R-15s, including yours, are DVRs. But, the characteristic is by no means universal. Many R-15s, including my own (as I pointed out), are not DVRs. So, the characteristic we refer to as "DVR" can't reasonably be associated with the class of objects we refer to as "R-15s". It's a matter of formal logic. As an analogical example, all giraffes do have long necks. But, not every animal having a long neck is a giraffe.

Moreover, the question whether a particular R-15 is a DVR is a function of time rather than invariant. According to information shared via this forum, over time, some R-15s have become DVRs and others have ceased being DVRs. A few R-15s seem to have experienced multiple state transitions.

So, still more precisely, _your_ R-15 is a DVR _at this time_. 

Cheers,


----------



## mikewolf13 (Jan 31, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> I disagree with your conclusion. _Some_ [the italics are improperly subtle] R-15s, including yours, are DVRs. But, the characteristic is by no means universal. Many R-15s, including my own (as I pointed out), are not DVRs. So, the characteristic we refer to as "DVR" can't reasonably be associated with the class of objects we refer to as "R-15s". It's a matter of formal logic. As an analogical example, all giraffes do have long necks. But, not every animal having a long neck is a giraffe.
> 
> Moreover, the question whether a particular R-15 is a DVR is a function of time rather than invariant. According to information shared via this forum, over time, some R-15s have become DVRs and others have ceased being DVRs. A few R-15s seem to have experienced multiple state transitions.
> 
> ...


Wow, I know you are just having fun, But I gotta disagree..the R-15 is a DVR..that is what is is designed and suppossed to do. THe failure to record doesn't make it NOT a DVR... The tylenol I took this morning was tylenol even though I still have headache

My car does not stop being a car just cause there is no gas in it...It can't run...yet it still is a car.

If your giraffe is born with some abnormality where it does not have along neck..it does not stop being a giraffe...genetically it IS a giraffe.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

mikewolf13 said:


> ...the R-15 is a DVR..that is what is is designed and suppossed to do. THe failure to record doesn't make it NOT a DVR... The tylenol I took this morning was tylenol even though I still have headache
> 
> My car does not stop being a car just cause there is no gas in it...It can't run...yet it still is a car.


But, you can own a Tylenol tablet, a car, or a giraffe. Generally, we don't own the R-15. And, even if we do, it's useless without the related service. In my mind, the service is what makes the DVR a DVR. If you have some odd bundle of rights called a service, that's alleged to enable you to R your DV but you can't actually R, do you really have a DVR? I think not. But, I concede that at least one important entity does take your side in this question: DTV. They'd argue that a unit designed to record digital video is a DVR irrespective of what it actually does.

The problem arises from the fact that objects have several names. Depending on which name is chosen, the state of an object may cause the name to become inappropriate. More specifically, I agree that the R-15 is an R-15 irrespective of the fact that it doesn't generally record. But, I don't agree that an R-15 that doesn't record can be fairly considered a DVR.

Having laid this groundwork, we can take up one of the cases you raised, the "car" object. Suppose that, instead of the term "car," we consider the term "transportation." I do agree that your car continues to be a car despite being out of gas. But, being out of gas, it _does_ cease being transportation. QED.

So, we find that some terms ("DVR" and "transportation") reflect essential properties of the objects to which they refer. Other terms ("R-15" and "car") reflect non-essential properties. Such terms are more or less arbitrary and do not become inappropriate owing to a change in state of the referent object.

Now, isn't this more fun than actually trying to use an R-15 for its putative purpose? 

Cheers,


----------



## mikewolf13 (Jan 31, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> Now, isn't this more fun than actually trying to use an R-15 for its putative purpose?
> 
> Cheers,


Sadly, Yes it is.

Good day to you sir.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

If I owned a giraffe I think my neighbors might get mad. I wonder if they have anything in my HOA laws that forbids such a thing.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Generally, even chickens are forbidden by local law, due to the morning habits of roosters. However, you might find an error in the law--you know, a "giraffe gaffe." 

Cheers,


----------

