# 921 Users Get Hosed by DIsh for Olympics



## Alpaca Bill (Jun 17, 2005)

Just saw a commercial for the Olympic broadcast while watching Discovery Channel. ONLY available on Ch. 100 (i.e. Dish Home) and since Dish STILL has not given the 921 the ability to use this much promoted feature (a feature they promised from day one fo the 921) we will not be able to use this feature. WAY TO GO DISH!!!!

Add to that the timing of their 921/942 to 622 upgrade rebate of 4/1, they are just kicking sand in our faces.


----------



## LASooner (Jan 24, 2005)

Alpaca Bill said:


> Just saw a commercial for the Olympic broadcast while watching Discovery Channel. ONLY available on Ch. 100 (i.e. Dish Home) and since Dish STILL has not given the 921 the ability to use this much promoted feature (a feature they promised from day one fo the 921) we will not be able to use this feature. WAY TO GO DISH!!!!
> 
> Add to that the timing of their 921/942 to 622 upgrade rebate of 4/1, they are just kicking sand in our faces.


Don't the actual feeds have to occupy some actual channels? Like when TBS does their six camera setup for football games?


----------



## dpd146 (Oct 1, 2005)

LASooner said:


> Don't the actual feeds have to occupy some actual channels?


Yes


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Alpaca Bill said:


> Just saw a commercial for the Olympic broadcast while watching Discovery Channel. ONLY available on Ch. 100 (i.e. Dish Home)


As LASooner points out, all of the real content will be available on the respective networks which are indeed available to the 921 owner. There just won't be the handy index.


> Add to that the timing of their 921/942 to 622 upgrade rebate of 4/1, they are just kicking sand in our faces.


From where I sit, what I'm missing between now and April 1 is ESPN2 and the new Voom channels. This is not a deal breaker for me.

In my case, I would forfeit the free Voom that I have remaining with my current Voom standalone subscription. I guess I'll have to look at the February statement next Wednesday to make sure I'm on the right track.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Except for the handy menu, all channels that are part of the Olympics will be available to 921 users.


----------



## Alpaca Bill (Jun 17, 2005)

That's not really the point though.

They advertise it as available to all customers...well that is simply not true. Shows how much Dish rally cared about the 921 customers in the first place.

The handy menu available on DishHome makes it easy to switch back and forth between the 6 channels. Last time I checked the recall button on my remote only works between the the current and last channel making it 2 not the 6 the Olympics are being shown on.


----------



## Slamminc11 (Jan 28, 2005)

Alpaca Bill said:


> That's not really the point though.
> 
> They advertise it as available to all customers...well that is simply not true. Shows how much Dish rally cared about the 921 customers in the first place.
> 
> The handy menu available on DishHome makes it easy to switch back and forth between the 6 channels. Last time I checked the recall button on my remote only works between the the current and last channel making it 2 not the 6 the Olympics are being shown on.


Way to try and make it sould like you can't get the olympics at all with a 921, your spin makes you sound like the people from Lifetime and their bashing of Dish during that dispute. Then again, we all know that Dish is just out to screw you all who have the 921, that is why they made the thing!  
As far as channel 100 goes, you can enter in the individual numbers of each channel by the time that loads and begins playing. I don't use it and even with the olympics I won't, but I guess it's nice for some people.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

It's becoming a moot point anyways with the 921 and other non-DishHome receivers being replaced. Sorry that your long obsolete receiver doesn't work as well as a 2006 model.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Slamminc11 said:


> Then again, we all know that Dish is just out to screw you all who have the 921, that is why they made the thing!


I was wondering how long it would take for someone to point out this fact.:lol: Just kidding, maybe. :grin:


----------



## LASooner (Jan 24, 2005)

Alpaca Bill said:


> That's not really the point though.
> 
> They advertise it as available to all customers...well that is simply not true. Shows how much Dish rally cared about the 921 customers in the first place.
> 
> The handy menu available on DishHome makes it easy to switch back and forth between the 6 channels. Last time I checked the recall button on my remote only works between the the current and last channel making it 2 not the 6 the Olympics are being shown on.


You could just set up a favorite's list with those channels. It's what I do for watching football games during the season.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The 6000u doesn't support DishHome either... but it didn't stop me from watching the different Olympic feeds last time around, so I don't see it stopping me this time either!


----------



## SummitAdvantageRetailer (Feb 20, 2005)

James Long said:


> It's becoming a moot point anyways with the 921 and other non-DishHome receivers being replaced. Sorry that your long obsolete receiver doesn't work as well as a 2006 model.


That's exactly the point isn't it mate? That our receiver doesn't work like a 2006 model and the reduced cost upgrade path is 2 months away. And since 921's were purchased, not leased, paying $100 (after the $200 rebate) to get a leased 622 isn't exactly the same as paying $100 to go from a leased 942 to a 622. If you purchased a 942, then I feel your pain there though you likely paid $300 less than the 921 owers who shelled out $1000. Regardless, the point is that 921 users have endured a long time of bad software design from the Eldon team and I think it's perfectly fine for people to voice their displeasure. Good mods should see that subtle difference and allow both positive and negative opinions here.


----------



## nsafreak (Mar 23, 2004)

So you don't have the quick and handy index, BIG DEAL. If I was in your shoes I'd just make a favorite list of all the channels broadcasting the Olympics only and flip between those. Sure you don't get the onscreen previews but it does make it easier to flip through them all.


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

SummitAdvantageRetailer said:


> That's exactly the point isn't it mate? That our receiver doesn't work like a 2006 model and the reduced cost upgrade path is 2 months away. And since 921's were purchased, not leased, paying $100 (after the $200 rebate) to get a leased 622 isn't exactly the same as paying $100 to go from a leased 942 to a 622. If you purchased a 942, then I feel your pain there though you likely paid $300 less than the 921 owers who shelled out $1000. Regardless, the point is that 921 users have endured a long time of bad software design from the Eldon team and I think it's perfectly fine for people to voice their displeasure. Good mods should see that subtle difference and allow both positive and negative opinions here.


Well Said !


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SummitAdvantageRetailer said:


> That's exactly the point isn't it mate? That our receiver doesn't work like a 2006 model and the reduced cost upgrade path is 2 months away. And since 921's were purchased, not leased, paying $100 (after the $200 rebate) to get a leased 622 isn't exactly the same as paying $100 to go from a leased 942 to a 622. If you purchased a 942, then I feel your pain there though you likely paid $300 less than the 921 owers who shelled out $1000. Regardless, the point is that 921 users have endured a long time of bad software design from the Eldon team and I think it's perfectly fine for people to voice their displeasure. Good mods should see that subtle difference and allow both positive and negative opinions here.


For the purposes of this thread the complaint is "921 users will be missing one channel - the index to the Olympic coverage". And of course the thread was started by someone who should have left E* a long time ago for as much negative stuff he has posted. Can 921 users put their pent up anger aside? Probably not.

There is a reason why 921s were replaced with 942 and soon ViP-622s. It's called progress.

But if you want to continue the 921 pity party I'm not stopping you. I'm just expressing my opinion and allowing you you express yours.


----------



## Alpaca Bill (Jun 17, 2005)

James Long said:


> And of course the thread was started by someone who should have left E* a long time ago for as much negative stuff he has posted. Can 921 users put their pent up anger aside? Probably not.
> 
> There is a reason why 921s were replaced with 942 and soon ViP-622s. It's called progress.


Why because I expect a company that advertises receiver features to actually deliver on those...especially over a period of 2+ years? Since 1996 I have spent alot of money with E*. Had 4 of the 7100/7200 and had to deal with the "pink screen of death" almost daily. Got rid of those for the 501s which were upgraded to 508s WHICH ARE VERY GOOD RECIEVERS. Skipped the 721 since I wanted HD. Spent $1550 on 2 921s and upgraded all LNBs and switches to DP (another $300). A LOT OF FEATURES were promised and STILL HAVE NOT BEEN DELIVERED. The biggest of which is having it work reliably. I do not consider daily reboots reliable. I do not consider having to have them replaced 9 TIMES in 2 years reliable. Then Dish released the 942 but Dish did not allow us 921 owners to upgrade unless we purchased for another $750 each. Dish knew the 921 was a failure yet they waited over 2 years to offer us anything for that but no more than the 942 users. I even had StarBand that ran $1300 + $60/mo for 18 months.

I am sorry you feel Dish is in the right here. A company that really cared about their customers would have offered the 921 users an upgrade route to the 942 over a year ago. This would have worked out in both sides favor since Dish would not have to continue (at a snail's pace at that) development of that software and the customers would have had a much more reliable receiver via the 942. Dish could have then spent the 921 support resources to the development of the 622, MPEG4 changeover, or anything else so that they could have been ready with this technology late last year.

I personally don't like being bent over. I'm sorry if you don't mind it.

I like Dish overall. I like their programming. I have, in the past, referred at least 20 people to Dish. I like most of their older receivers and yes I do have a VERY SOUR taste in my mouth due to the 9 921s I have had to endure that sometime taints my opinion. I am hoping the 622 will cure this. I just happen to be a person that won't lay over and be quiet about their empty promises.

Yes the 6 Olympic channels are available to me. Yes I could set up a favorites list for them. That is not the issue. Dish is advertising the "Olympic Channel on DishHome" as being available to all customers. This is a blatant lie on Dish's behalf. It's not like the 921 is an ancient receiver. If I had a 1000 or 4000 and was complaining that DishHome wasn't available it would be different. Like it or not there are a lot of 921(I forgot the 6000 is not DishHome compatible also) users out there still and Dish just has a history of forgetting about them and this is just another example of that.

Dish has changed over the years and unfortunately it has been for the worse overall. While they may offer the best programming (argueable depending upon your viewing habits) their customer service and gratitude to their longtime, loyal customers has all but disappeared.


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

James Long said:


> There is a reason why 921s were replaced with 942 and soon ViP-622s. It's called progress.
> 
> .


Yeah right !
The 942 was replaced by the 622 through a progression of lies and deceit. (misleading statements in Charlie Crap etc.)
I can't comment on the 921 since I never had one, but I am sure the owners of that heartache were also lied to.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

johnnyd1023 said:


> Yeah right !
> The 942 was replaced by the 622 through a progression of lies and deceit. (misleading statements in Charlie Crap etc.)
> I can't comment on the 921 since I never had one, but I am sure the owners of that heartache were also lied to.


I think many 921 owners and me would have proactively fought for getting satisfaction, refunds, or a better DVR, early on, but with the software issues and belief that future releases would fix the problems, it allowed for a long delay to the point in time that little if anything is possible now. I will say that a lot of bugs were fixed but at this point, I doubt that the remaining bugs are fixable. At least the 921 was the front runner that provided a future blue print on what not to do on future models. Maybe someday, the 921 will become a collectors item for showcase:lol:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

johnnyd1023 said:


> I can't comment on the 921 since I never had one


You should have said "shouldn't comment" as opposed to "can't comment" as you've obviously chimed in on the subject.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

boylehome said:


> At least the 921 was the front runner that provided a future blue print on what not to do on future models.


The 6000 was certainly an earlier attempt at a receiver with upgradeable hardware. The 921 didn't really break an ground there. The 721 was the first public pilot of a Linux-based Dish receiver but using an established OS is not something that is generally considered a drawback.

I'd have to say that the satellite providers saw the writing on the walls that cable operators have been reading for years and decided that customers owning hardware can only slow down the deployment of new technologies. In the grand scheme, I would bet that they've discovered that a brand new mainboard is just as inexpensive as a plug-in module. If you look at the back some of the modern cable receivers, they bear a remarkable resemblance to an ATX form factor mainboard "backplane".


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

harsh said:


> The 6000 was certainly an earlier attempt at a receiver with upgradeable hardware. The 921 didn't really break an ground there. The 721 was the first public pilot of a Linux-based Dish receiver but using an established OS is not something that is generally considered a drawback.


Yes the 921 did. If you take the 6000 HD and mix it with the 721 DVR then your response is correct. the 921 was the first HD DVR. Your right about the the 6000 being upgradable however the 921 was downgraded then degraded.


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

harsh said:


> You should have said "shouldn't comment" as opposed to "can't comment" as you've obviously chimed in on the subject.


Another teacher !


----------



## DRJDAN (Apr 28, 2002)

I am a 942 that paid $700 for it because I was a current user and could not lease it. I will be very happy to pay $100 to go to 622. In today's rapidly changing technology world, $100 is a cheap price to stay on top. I don't care if I own or lease because is it only useful on Dish Network and don't have any use for it if not subscribing to Dish.


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

DRJDAN said:


> I am a 942 that paid $700 for it because I was a current user and could not lease it. I will be very happy to pay $100 to go to 622. In today's rapidly changing technology world, $100 is a cheap price to stay on top. I don't care if I own or lease because is it only useful on Dish Network and don't have any use for it if not subscribing to Dish.


That is exactly what Dish wants to hear... If dish begins to charge you for every software update (3-4/year) would you be willing to pay for that too ? Just to keep "on top".


----------



## UTFAN (Nov 12, 2005)

Alpaca Bill said:


> That's not really the point though.
> 
> They advertise it as available to all customers...well that is simply not true. Shows how much Dish rally cared about the 921 customers in the first place.
> 
> The handy menu available on DishHome makes it easy to switch back and forth between the 6 channels. Last time I checked the recall button on my remote only works between the the current and last channel making it 2 not the 6 the Olympics are being shown on.


Neither our 921 or 721 get the multi-pic screen. Our 508 does, but it's essentially next to our computer and not a prime viewing site.

Oh well, if you play baseball, .333 can make you a multi-millionaire. But if you watch DISH, you can't be a multi-screen viewer.

End of the day, Olympics isn't a real turn-on for us. But sure wish when they say it's available to all viewers, that indeed all viewers can watch it.

It's a cold cruel world isn't it?


----------



## Hoxxx (Jun 19, 2004)

LASooner said:


> You could just set up a favorite's list with those channels. It's what I do for watching football games during the season.


now that's a great idea. I will do just that.


----------



## Larry Caldwell (Apr 4, 2005)

James Long said:


> There is a reason why 921s were replaced with 942 and soon ViP-622s. It's called progress.


No, it's called defective hardware. The big difference between the 921 and the 942 is a different RAMDAC that doesn't quit accepting commands at the drop of a hat. Dish was never able to fix the stuck aspect ratio bug on the 921. I have done driver programming, and setting registers on a RAMDAC is just a matter of writing the correct values to the ports. If the problem was the software, any second year computer science student could have fixed it in a week.

The 921 was supposed to have an expansion bus that would allow hardware upgrades as well as software upgrades. It was supposed to have Name Based Recording, and Dish Home. What 921 owners ended up with was paying $300 to $500 a year for a buggy receiver that Dish couldn't wait to dump. In exchange, we get to pay another $99, plus $200 in advance on programming (Dish doesn't write checks) for the privilege of leasing a new receiver, and they may require us to return the one we own as part of the deal.

You can call that progress if you want. I call it screwing up and screwing the customer into paying for it.


----------



## Alpaca Bill (Jun 17, 2005)

Larry Caldwell said:


> No, it's called defective hardware. The big difference between the 921 and the 942 is a different RAMDAC that doesn't quit accepting commands at the drop of a hat. Dish was never able to fix the stuck aspect ratio bug on the 921. I have done driver programming, and setting registers on a RAMDAC is just a matter of writing the correct values to the ports. If the problem was the software, any second year computer science student could have fixed it in a week.
> 
> The 921 was supposed to have an expansion bus that would allow hardware upgrades as well as software upgrades. It was supposed to have Name Based Recording, and Dish Home. What 921 owners ended up with was paying $300 to $500 a year for a buggy receiver that Dish couldn't wait to dump. In exchange, we get to pay another $99, plus $200 in advance on programming (Dish doesn't write checks) for the privilege of leasing a new receiver, and they may require us to return the one we own as part of the deal.
> 
> You can call that progress if you want. I call it screwing up and screwing the customer into paying for it.


Amen brother!!!!


----------



## normang (Nov 14, 2002)

johnnyd1023 said:


> That is exactly what Dish wants to hear... If dish begins to charge you for every software update (3-4/year) would you be willing to pay for that too ? Just to keep "on top".


I don't recall anyone charging for receiver firmware updates, and I would never expect them to. The issue is, your using hardware that is service specific, at what point does owning it any significant advantage over leasing it?

If Dish were to go out of business tomorrow, millions of people would have slews of receivers and dish hardware that is nothing more than boat anchors..

Leasing this hardware has the following advantages, upgrades are probably cheaper than buying a new one. When it dies for any reason, they send you a new or refurb unit that works.. If you own it, you have to pay for a repair plan about the equivalent of the lease fee. If there is a new receiver, you have to spend more to buy a "new" reciever than you would if you merely turn it back in and get the next generation for perhaps some minor install fee if any.

It would be different if this were some generic receiver that you could use for something else, but you can't.. Dish should have probably done this along time ago and leased the receiver for their service..


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

normang said:


> I don't recall anyone charging for receiver firmware updates, and I would never expect them to.
> ..


Oh c'mon . Re Read my post and stop spinning it !


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

Larry Caldwell said:


> ,,, and they may require us to return the one we own as part of the deal.


sadly, I just got off the phone with a tech support gent, who after some checking on the 4/1 deal, came back and read it, and it said owners of a 921/942 could swap their receivers for a 622. Then, after a bit, he "thought" maybe it would be any receiver could be swapped, just you needed to have a 921/942. I'm sure hoping the latter.

I think we 921/942 owners need to keep the pressure on Dish, their are only 2 acceptable options. 1) If i have to trade my 921 to get the $99 deal, then I'd better OWN that 622. 2) If I have to lease the 622, I'd better be able to keep my 921/942 if I want to


----------



## normang (Nov 14, 2002)

johnnyd1023 said:


> Oh c'mon . Re Read my post and stop spinning it !


You said



johnnyd1023 said:


> That is exactly what Dish wants to hear... If dish begins to charge you for every software update (3-4/year) would you be willing to pay for that too ? Just to keep "on top".


How am I supposed to read that? Give me a clue as to how you really meant that..


----------



## Redster (Jan 14, 2004)

Rogueone said:


> sadly, I just got off the phone with a tech support gent, who after some checking on the 4/1 deal, came back and read it, and it said owners of a 921/942 could swap their receivers for a 622. Then, after a bit, he "thought" maybe it would be any receiver could be swapped, just you needed to have a 921/942. I'm sure hoping the latter.
> 
> I think we 921/942 owners need to keep the pressure on Dish, their are only 2 acceptable options. 1) If i have to trade my 921 to get the $99 deal, then I'd better OWN that 622. 2) If I have to lease the 622, I'd better be able to keep my 921/942 if I want to


yup yup. I do not have the need for another receiver, but I can always part out the 921. Wonder if I can get the tuner card to work in my pc. Plus it has a decent harddrive, can always use more space.


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

James Long said:


> It's becoming a moot point anyways with the 921 and other non-DishHome receivers being replaced. Sorry that your long obsolete receiver doesn't work as well as a 2006 model.


Long obsolete?

They just started selling the things in quantity for $1000 18 months ago (I don't count the trickle supply from December 2003 to June 2004), and they were the supposed flagship until last summer.

If you were talking about the 5000, I'd agree with you.

I think these things should be expected to last at least as long as a PC (3-4 years) before they start acting up or becoming obsolete.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

BobMurdoch said:


> Long obsolete?
> 
> They just started selling the things in quantity for $1000 18 months ago (I don't count the trickle supply from December 2003 to June 2004), and they were the supposed flagship until last summer.
> 
> ...


How about D* and the owners of the HR10-250's? It sounds like their boat is sinking faster than ours. At least E* is providing ATSC tuners with the new MPEG2-4 DVR.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Ok Guys.. lets keep it civil. Nothing wrong with having different opinions and voicing them, but personal attacks will not be tolerated. I have removed or edited posts I felt fall into this catagory.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Larry Caldwell said:


> ......
> The 921 was supposed to have an expansion bus that would allow hardware upgrades as well as software upgrades. It was supposed to have Name Based Recording, and Dish Home. What 921 owners ended up with was paying $300 to $500 a year for a buggy receiver that Dish couldn't wait to dump. In exchange, we get to pay another $99, plus $200 in advance on programming (Dish doesn't write checks) for the privilege of leasing a new receiver, and they may require us to return the one we own as part of the deal.
> .....


Good points Larry, but as I recall NBR was never a stated feature for the 921 receiver. As to the deal dish is offering current 921 users, well I guess each 921 user has their own opinion and own experience.

As for getting hosed. As a 921 user I feel I am being hosed. Personally I am glad Dish home has not made it into the 921 because I do feel the software base is fragile and I don't use Dish home enough to want to take the risk. I understand that different boxes support different features and just consider this feature not included in the 921. Yes it is suppose to be there... but as I see it and the value it adds to my 921 I dont see this as a huge deal. Ofcourse everyone has their take on this and we all have our own ideas of were this feature falls in terms of critical features.


----------



## kingdaddy (Jan 10, 2006)

I cant even use Dish Home on my 811 receiver, every time I try to exit out it hangs up and I have to cycle power.


----------



## Redster (Jan 14, 2004)

Just to add, maybe calm the 921 fire. I do not think I have seen anywhere in all the VIP622 posts that Dish has explicitly stated we are to return our 921/942. I think different people have gotten different answers from different CSR's. Personally, if I can lease a 622 for $99 after a $200 programming credit, I will do it. My 921 will then be relegated to which ever pile is most convenient.


----------



## jmurphy644 (May 19, 2003)

Ron Barry said:


> Good points Larry, but as I recall NBR was never a stated feature for the 921 receiver. As to the deal dish is offering current 921 users, well I guess each 921 user has their own opinion and own experience.
> 
> As for getting hosed. As a 921 user I feel I am being hosed. Personally I am glad Dish home has not made it into the 921 because I do feel the software base is fragile and I don't use Dish home enough to want to take the risk. I understand that different boxes support different features and just consider this feature not included in the 921. Yes it is suppose to be there... but as I see it and the value it adds to my 921 I dont see this as a huge deal. Ofcourse everyone has their take on this and we all have our own ideas of were this feature falls in terms of critical features.


I heard Charlie with my own ears promise Dish Home and Name Based Recording on the 921 on separate Charlie Chats. I was early on the 921, paying $1000 for it. It's a case of getting the shaft for being an early adopter but Dish could have stepped up to the plate if they wanted to. They really don't care about my business all that much which is why I am most likely going to switch to FIOS TV.


----------



## IamtheEggman (Sep 21, 2004)

James Long said:


> There is a reason why 921s were replaced with 942 and soon ViP-622s. It's called progress.


 You must be a shill for Dish.

Progress??? I guess if the 622 works like its supposed to then its progress as the 921 never has and is basically a 1000 dollar mistake


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Well jmurphy644 I guess that is a matter of how you interpert what was said and the context it was said. I suggest you do a search here on the subject. It has been discussed here before numereous times. I agree Dish has indicated on a number of occassion it plans to add Dish Home. As to NBR for the 921, it is my opinion that it never was a planned feature or promised feature. This definitely is a topic that keeps popping up. See below.

I would start here.... 
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=40297&highlight=+921++NBR

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=46409&highlight=+921++NBR

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=43584&highlight=+921++NBR

Tech chat where they state no NBR on 921.
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=41759&highlight=+921++NBR


----------



## johnnyd1023 (May 14, 2005)

normang said:


> You said
> 
> How am I supposed to read that? Give me a clue as to how you really meant that..


Never mind.

I've got better things to do !


----------



## socceteer (Apr 22, 2005)

James Long said:


> It's becoming a moot point anyways with the 921 and other non-DishHome receivers being replaced. Sorry that your long obsolete receiver doesn't work as well as a 2006 model.


Nice attitude...!

we paid $1k for the receiver and should not have to pay another $1k or so to upgrade because they don't want to support it. Is like saying that you must buy a new car every time we change the smog laws.


----------



## jmurphy644 (May 19, 2003)

Well you can debate whether he said it or not, but I'm not quoting what someone else said that Charlie said, I was listening to the chat live and I heard him say it. But that point aside, the 921 is a boat anchor that Dish used us as lab rats for. At least mine is stable, sort of, for now. Maybe I can foist it off on eBay. Also, I'm definitely not some E* hater or something. I've been a loyal customer for a number of years, 5000, 6000, 721, 921. I've just reached my endurance limit with crappy receivers. I'm on my 3rd 921 and 3rd 721 (tuner and HD failures).


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

E* did the best they could with the hardware and software on the 921.
Then they did better on the 942 and continued to work on the 921.
Now they are working on building a better receiver.

Do the people complaining so much about the 921 really want E* to continue to build what they consider to be such a cursed model?


----------



## MikeW (May 16, 2002)

If the best they can do on the 921 is what they put out, then why are they building boxes? Maybe they should leave that up to the professionals (Tivo). If I'd have shelled out a grand for a 921, I'd want them to get the box to perform more reliably.

JL...Do you own a 921? How much did you pay for it?


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

James Long said:


> E* did the best they could with the hardware and software on the 921.
> Then they did better on the 942 and continued to work on the 921.
> Now they are working on building a better receiver.
> 
> Do the people complaining so much about the 921 really want E* to continue to build what they consider to be such a cursed model?


Heck YES! I'll have mine around for a while. E* is only allowing 1 622 per home for some time to come. They surely are continuing on improving the 921 software?


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

MikeW said:


> If the best they can do on the 921 is what they put out, then why are they building boxes? Maybe they should leave that up to the professionals (Tivo). If I'd have shelled out a grand for a 921, I'd want them to get the box to perform more reliably.


They do have experts/professionals build the receivers. Getting all the internal parts to work congruently is another story.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

jmurphy644 said:


> Well you can debate whether he said it or not, but I'm not quoting what someone else said that Charlie said, I was listening to the chat live and I heard him say it. But that point aside, the 921 is a boat anchor that Dish used us as lab rats for. At least mine is stable, sort of, for now. Maybe I can foist it off on eBay. Also, I'm definitely not some E* hater or something. I've been a loyal customer for a number of years, 5000, 6000, 721, 921. I've just reached my endurance limit with crappy receivers. I'm on my 3rd 921 and 3rd 721 (tuner and HD failures).


I am not quoting either. If you looked at the posts I pointed you too you would have seen that a number of those posts in the thread was from me 8 months back. As Mark mentioned in the first post listed is how I recall it. There was some general statement made in some charlie chat and later clarified as to what receivers were actully going to get NBR. This point has been made and remade though people keep claiming that NBR was planned for the 921. I guess I need more than a passing statment as proof this feature was slated for the 921.

I am not claiming that it was never said. Anybody got the exact quote? As I remember it, it was a general statement about all DVRs getting NBR and I also thought at that time great. But as the months went on clarification was made and it was obvious the 721 and 921 were never in that list.

Thats my perspective and I believe the opinion of most that have been along with the ride. But like any opinions here, each person has the right to theirs. 

Oh.. how can a boat anchor also be relatively stable at the moment.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

I remember Charlie saying that NBR would be added to the 921 in one of the four quarters on one of his Chats, when, I can't remember. I also remember that he later said on a later Chat that the 921 would not be getting NBR. I at that point in time had a personal flame and gave up any hope of getting NBR on the 921. One would think that every Charlie Chat is archived somewhere (perhaps in the secret facility where they are keeping the lost ark.)


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Ron Barry said:


> Oh.. how can a boat anchor also be relatively stable at the moment.


I also always find it interesting that Dish is bad for selling bad receivers... but customers who pawn them off on unsuspecting eBay buyers is ok?

If I had a lemon, the last thing I would do is pass it to someone else... Being mad at Dish is understandable, but being willing to pass the problem to an even less informed person isn't nice.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

HDMe said:


> I also always find it interesting that Dish is bad for selling bad receivers... but customers who pawn them off on unsuspecting eBay buyers is ok?


I feel that it is wrong. I wonder if a current customer to E* can buy an eBay MPEG-2 receiver such as a 921 and get it authorized to work as a replacement to any other active used receiver?


----------



## MikeW (May 16, 2002)

HDMe said:


> I also always find it interesting that Dish is bad for selling bad receivers... but customers who pawn them off on unsuspecting eBay buyers is ok?
> 
> If I had a lemon, the last thing I would do is pass it to someone else... Being mad at Dish is understandable, but being willing to pass the problem to an even less informed person isn't nice.


Unsuspecting EBay buyers? I believe it is a cult following of buying and selling E* equipment on EBay. I sold all of my equipment on EBay and basically broke even. These "unsuspecting" individuals asked questions like :

Is there a balance
Were they leased
What are the S and R numbers
Have they been removed from your account

I highly doubt they are naive.:nono:


----------



## IowaStateFan (Jan 11, 2006)

James Long said:


> Do the people complaining so much about the 921 really want E* to continue to build what they consider to be such a cursed model?


NO!! You are setting up a straw man argument here. They just want E* to recognize the problems that they've had and to be compensated for them. FWIW, I got my 921 last April. I didn't know about this forum then or I might not have purchased mine. I've experienced many of the bugs that have been documented in these forums, but didn't realize it was a problem until I found dbstalk. For me, they've been minor annoyances. But that doesn't excuse E* from putting out a product with so many problems and then expecting their early adopter customers to put out more money for the priviledge of getting a working product. Sure, if this model was years old and had performed up to expectations, I would agree with much of what you are saying. It's not. I've had mine for 8 months, and I bought it with an eye to the future. Little did I realize that I was really buying an obsolete product. Technology changes quickly, but this is just wrong.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

MikeW said:


> Unsuspecting EBay buyers? I believe it is a cult following of buying and selling E* equipment on EBay. I sold all of my equipment on EBay and basically broke even. These "unsuspecting" individuals asked questions like :
> 
> Is there a balance
> Were they leased
> ...


Problem is... virtually NO one selling those receivers on eBay uses the above logic when complaining about Dish! IF the above is reasonable justification to sell to an eBay customer without guilt... then Dish should be similarly absolved from the sale of the receiver to the original purchaser?

Note... I'm agreeing that folks have a gripe with Dish about their 921 purchase and problems with the receiver... just asking that those people consider what they are doing if they knowingly pass their self-described "lemon" onto someone at eBay.

I, for instance, own my 6000u... not a lemon by any means but perhaps a soon to be much less valuable receiver due to MPEG4... so unless I hear some more positive definitive news from Dish, I wouldn't feel right about selling my receiver to anyone now, knowing it would be potentially very limited and perhaps not all bidders for my receiver would know fully what they were buying even if I took care to describe the limitations.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

If customers are hosed during the Winter Olympics...

isn't that getting iced?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Note... I'm agreeing that folks have a gripe with Dish about their 921 purchase and problems with the receiver... just asking that those people consider what they are doing if they knowingly pass their self-described "lemon" onto someone at eBay.


Morals and responsibility is for other people?


----------



## IamtheEggman (Sep 21, 2004)

MikeW said:


> JL...Do you own a 921? How much did you pay for it?


JAmes
Are you going to answer this question??


----------



## Redster (Jan 14, 2004)

I do not think we need any more bashing about the 921. There are some of us who expected to have problems with our new state of the art $1000 receiver. What I and maybe some others didnt expect was that advertised features would never be implemented or that we would still continue to have issues with the basic functions of the 921. I fully expected the 921 to become outdated as much as I expected it too (not to) work correctly. Until Dish clarifies its position on whether or not we have to turn them in to get the 4/1 deal on the 622, we are beating a dead horse to death.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

IamtheEggman said:


> JAmes
> Are you going to answer this question??


Kinda demanding, aren't you?

Didn't see the question. But if anyone going to say I have no right to an opinion just because I avoided the 921 then you are wrong. And no ... I don't have a 921.


----------



## MikeW (May 16, 2002)

Redster...The 921 is what..about 4 years old? You don't have expectations that Dish would get it fixed after this many years? Now the box is nearly obsolete. You can't put it on E-Bay because Charlie won't activate any HD programming on it. Your only choice is to bend over and give him the money to lease a new 622. What are the expectations that the 622 is going to be delivered to the masses in working order? 

JL...I didn't say you don't have the right to an opinion. I insinuated that you simply can't feel the anger/frustration of a high end user who paid premium dollars for both programming and equipment then ended up on the short end of the stick.


----------



## IamtheEggman (Sep 21, 2004)

James Long said:


> And no ... I don't have a 921.


Thanks for answering, it speaks volumes about your opinions as you have no investment in the 921. You seem to blow it off easier than us owners who spent hard earned money on something that never has worked as advertised.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

I have not been burned by E* - but I have been burned. It just seems that some people are happier complaining about the 921 until nobody else cares instead of accepting that E* is now making better receivers (942 and hopefully 622).


----------



## mwgiii (Jul 19, 2002)

James Long said:


> E* did the best they could with the hardware and software on the 921.


That is our point. No matter how you try to spin it, the "Flagship" 921 was and still is a disaster unleashed upon some of Dish's highest revenue customers.

I don't understand why Dish doesn't try to earn some goodwill with the 921 owners by just swapping them out with a 622. Instead they offer a $200 rebate which is available to everyone, further alienating the 921 owners.


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

MikeW said:


> Redster...The 921 is what..about 4 years old? You don't have expectations that Dish would get it fixed after this many years? Now the box is nearly obsolete. You can't put it on E-Bay because Charlie won't activate any HD programming on it. Your only choice is to bend over and give him the money to lease a new 622. What are the expectations that the 622 is going to be delivered to the masses in working order?
> 
> JL...I didn't say you don't have the right to an opinion. I insinuated that you simply can't feel the anger/frustration of a high end user who paid premium dollars for both programming and equipment then ended up on the short end of the stick.


2 years, it came out late Dec 03/early Jan 04. Got mine about Feb 4th or so.

for those who bought one 'last april' or some such, at some point you have to stop looking at your own situation and look at the larger picture. dish tested the 921, things were going ok, box seemed ok to ship. they crank up the manufacturing plants and start selling. Shortly after a few thousand are out, there are some issues, and at first it was not thought these were hardware. So they start trying to fix bugs in software only to find out there was a bad solder point on the display board. so they had to replace all those early models as people called in about the blue line issue. Heck, mine took 9 months to start doing the blue line issue visibly.

they had features planned when the design was made, but they knew they wouldn't have the code ready for until after release. But those features were not 'primary' features, so it didn't matter if they were tested before hand. So once they got around to trying to do the code for those, more hardware issues. My point is, dish didn't know the box had these issues, and the beta testing they'd been doing hadn't provided an expectation of such problems, as far as I recall. I was on these forums then and don't recall anything but many of us salavating to get our hands on a 921.

If Dish had figured out the 921 would be so much trouble during beta, not only would they have not released it in Jan 04, but likely would have had to scrap it, the way it turned out. But you have to also realize not everyone has had the same problems at the same frequency. Many here have posted all sorts of problems, but few like myself have countered with how few problems we've had. I eventually had the blue line issue, dish replaced the 921. I've had an occassional hiccup where the box won't fire both tuners when I'm manually recording or trying to use the DVR, and I've had to reboot. But these are rare. I've lost a couple entire shows in 2 years, and I've had to reboot during a show a couple of times. I've had a couple timers misfire and only record 10 minutes or something, but I've learned to compensate.

Any time I'm recording only one show at a time, I set it up on both the OTA HD and the dish local channel, so I have an emergency SD backup. OTA had some issues originally where it didn't start if the signal for that channel was being received at the moment the timer started, and with my indoor antenna back then, it happened too often. But that was as much my fault as Dish's, as I wasn't getting the box a stable signal.

figure also the 921 was barely out a year when they rolled out the 942 and stopped offering 921's. The 942 has been much better, which makes sense as they had a chance to find out what hardware issues the 921 had versus software ones, and could compensate the 942's design to correct those hardware issues. But, is the 921 any different than Ford/Chevy/etc., putting out a first year car, thinking all is fine, then after a few months finding out there is a glitch in the manufacturing process, they try to fix that, and other problems occur from wiring to engine parts etc., to the point that by the time the 2nd year of that model rolls out, it's almost a totally new car underneath? it's happened before, and many times all the versions of that car are labeled as junk because the first year was bad. But all the following units may have been fine. It takes time to find and resolve problems when a new one crops up while you are fixing the one you're working on.

No manufacturer tries to make something like the 921, it costs them more money than it made them. But while trying to fix the 921, they quickly went to work on the 942 so they could alleviate as many issues as possible from the 921. it's not like they could have rolled out the 942 in May of 04. They spent a lot of money developing the 921 and needed to try to fix it while still selling it to those dieing for an HD DVR. As i recall, the D* unit has had a lot of problems too, it hasn't been all roses. At some point they realized it was never going to be possible to fix the 921, hence the NBR that was announced then recinded.

But overall, after many software patches, the 921 does normally do what it was designed to do. It does record 2 TV shows at once, either off the sat tuners or off a sat and the OTA, and it does record 2 HD programs at once, all while letting you watch a recorded program while it records others. It still does more than any DVR that was out when it was released. Sure, no NBR, but is that hard to tell it to record weekly in a certain timeslot? not really. And it's not difficult to delete the shows you've already seen when repeats occur. And Dish is standing by the product and constantly fixing bugs/issues that are reported, and they try very hard to keep the 921 functioning with as few a problems as possible.

and I suspect they didn't do an upgrade to 942's program because they knew the box to get upgrades to was this 622, as there would be the need for mpeg4. I bet the 942 was really the 622 but had to be rushed out a year early to provide a better functioning unit. About the only part of the upgrade I'm not pleased with myself is that for the $99 upgrade fee, I'm not "owning" that 622. I paid $1000 for a 921 and all it's issues. I should be compensated with a tradein program that involves me owning the new box, not leasing it. But as long as I can keep the 921, I'll do $99 for the 622 so I can have both


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The $200 rebate is not 'available to everyone' - just 921/942 customers.
Beyond that the details have not been announced.


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

I'm hoping he meant to say how giving 921 and 942 owners the same deal is alienating the 921 owners. I'd personally state it such that anyone who bought a 921 before the big price breaks, especially those buying in the first 3 months who could not have known about all the problems and shilled out 1g, those people should be getting a better deal. but until all the details are out, and still hoping they allow owners to keep their existing box while leasing the 622 for $99.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Cue the Voom bleeding edge adopters who bought their equipment in the three months before Voom started charging a monthly fee (and actually got the receivers working). There is a high price to pay for being first.

Are the people who paid thousands for one of the first HDTV displays screaming their heads off because they can't get a better deal on a replacement set than a 'never had HD' person? Are the people who waited for this moment to buy smarter or stupid? Is your answer a reflection of which group you are in?


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

good point JL. I wasn't patient, and rushed out in 2001 and bought a mitsu 65" that only has RGB inputs. The next model has RGB and DVI. Do I can't use new products like the samsung DVD that upscales to 1080i because that feature doesnt work on the RGB out  

but the TV is still wonderful. Sure, I'd rather spend $2000 today on the same kind of TV than $3500 then, but today for $3500 i'd get DLP instead


----------



## mwgiii (Jul 19, 2002)

James Long said:


> Are the people who paid thousands for one of the first HDTV displays screaming their heads off because they can't get a better deal on a replacement set than a 'never had HD' person?


As far as I know, those HD sets worked as advertised and are still working.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

mwgiii said:


> As far as I know, those HD sets worked as advertised and are still working.


More importantly, they aren't being artificially disabled by the content providers.

I'm very upset to learn that a Dish Metallic subscription currently removes HD PAK and Voom access from the MPEG2 units. It is one thing to move on, but I assumed incorrectly when Charlie said that the MPEG2 crowd wouldn't lose anything that we would be able to subscribe to the DishHD plan. This is not the case.


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

harsh said:


> More importantly, they aren't being artificially disabled by the content providers.
> 
> I'm very upset to learn that a Dish Metallic subscription currently removes HD PAK and Voom access from the MPEG2 units. It is one thing to move on, but I assumed incorrectly when Charlie said that the MPEG2 crowd wouldn't lose anything that we would be able to subscribe to the DishHD plan. This is not the case.


where are you getting this from? I haven't seen any comments like that. only a few people who had issues where their existing HD shutoff when they activated the metal pack and had to get Dish to reactivate the old tuners


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

harsh said:


> More importantly, they aren't being artificially disabled by the content providers.
> 
> I'm very upset to learn that a Dish Metallic subscription currently removes HD PAK and Voom access from the MPEG2 units. It is one thing to move on, but I assumed incorrectly when Charlie said that the MPEG2 crowd wouldn't lose anything that we would be able to subscribe to the DishHD plan. This is not the case.


Really..... That sounds like a mistake... People should right in. That does not make sense to me... Sounds like a hickup in the process.


----------



## IowaStateFan (Jan 11, 2006)

Rogueone said:


> I suspect they didn't do an upgrade to 942's program because they knew the box to get upgrades to was this 622, as there would be the need for mpeg4. I bet the 942 was really the 622 but had to be rushed out a year early to provide a better functioning unit. About the only part of the upgrade I'm not pleased with myself is that for the $99 upgrade fee, I'm not "owning" that 622. I paid $1000 for a 921 and all it's issues. I should be compensated with a tradein program that involves me owning the new box, not leasing it. But as long as I can keep the 921, I'll do $99 for the 622 so I can have both


There seem to be two camps here. 1) "Would the 921 owners just shutup and quit whining 'cause their box is obsolete "and 2) "my 921 sucks and I deserve to have a better deal than anyone else". I think there is something to be said for both sides. I also think that Rogueone's statement sums up what most 921 users feel. I've been pretty happy with mine. Sure its suffered the bugs, but they've been minor annoyances. Everyone that is complaining should lighten up. After all, it's only TV. Does that mean they shouldn't be compensated for the issues? No way. E* really needs to make it right for the early adopters. We still don't know all the details for the upgrade path. E* reads these boards. They know the issues. I can only hope when April rolls around that they come up with something to take care of their customers.

The people I feel really sorry for are the ones that bought their 942 in January. E* dumped their remaining inventory on unsuspecting customers, and now are telling them it will cost an additional $99 to get the HD programming they were expecting. I feel somewhat cheated and I've had my 921 for 8 months. The only saving grace for me is that it will be a long time until I get HD LiLs, so there isn't a compelling reason for me to upgrade. I just think they should have done a better job of warning people about the switch to MPEG4.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

MikeW said:


> Redster...The 921 is what..about 4 years old? You don't have expectations that Dish would get it fixed after this many years? Now the box is nearly obsolete. You can't put it on E-Bay because Charlie won't activate any HD programming on it. Your only choice is to bend over and give him the money to lease a new 622. What are the expectations that the 622 is going to be delivered to the masses in working order?
> 
> JL...I didn't say you don't have the right to an opinion. I insinuated that you simply can't feel the anger/frustration of a high end user who paid premium dollars for both programming and equipment then ended up on the short end of the stick.


Well I can.. I am an 921 user and I have felt the frustration. Not to the extent of people swapping boxes 4 and 5 times, but I have felt my share. I see both sides of this argument. Lot of Dish customers have felt a lot of pain. I personally am not sure if the $200 rebate is fair, but during the transition a number of people will not bet happy with it. Cost of a paradigm shift. I feel for the people that went the 921 and 942 route. I purposely did not because I new that eventually a MPEG4 reciever would be available and I can make the shift then. Though I have gotten some use from my 921, I do feel disappointed in the reliability. Something Dish has had a hard time getting right as mentioned by a number of people above.

As to options.. there are more than what you say MikeW. You can keep your 921 with current programming. You can change companies and vote with your wallet. You can understand the ramifications of this paradigm shift and come to the conclusion that the 921 was not a good purchase and a leason learned. There are others but Dish is not forcing anyone to do anything. Yes if you want the extra VOOM, your locals in HD (If available), and some other HD channels you need to make the switch. Price of progress and some will and some will not.

Are they taking care of their 921 customers that felt pain. Yes there is some effort there, but I think personally they should have gone a bit farther or should for the unusual cases.

Well the 622 is based on the 942 and Dish is gaining expertise as they continue to polish this code base. Yes there are going to be bugs. Yes some people will not not the 622 for various reasons (Does not look like Tivo, can't copy content to PC, etc), but I personally feel it will be a big jump from my current 921.


----------



## IowaStateFan (Jan 11, 2006)

Ron Barry said:


> Well I can.. I am an 921 user and I have felt the frustration. Not to the extent of people swapping boxes 4 and 5 times, but I have felt my share. I see both sides of this argument. Lot of Dish customers have felt a lot of pain. I personally am not sure if the $200 rebate is fair, but during the transition a number of people will not bet happy with it. Cost of a paradigm shift. I feel for the people that went the 921 and 942 route. I purposely did not because I new that eventually a MPEG4 reciever would be available and I can make the shift then. Though I have gotten some use from my 921, I do feel disappointed in the reliability. Something Dish has had a hard time getting right as mentioned by a number of people above.
> 
> As to options.. there are more than what you say MikeW. You can keep your 921 with current programming. You can change companies and vote with your wallet. You can understand the ramifications of this paradigm shift and come to the conclusion that the 921 was not a good purchase and a leason learned. There are others but Dish is not forcing anyone to do anything. Yes if you want the extra VOOM, your locals in HD (If available), and some other HD channels you need to make the switch. Price of progress and some will and some will not.
> 
> ...


Thanks Ron. I think that says what I was trying to say - only better


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

Ron, you bring up some good points. 

Myself, I'd have no reason to upgrade my 921 until my HD locals come out, If I didn't "want" not "need" to record at least 2 OTA signals in HD at the same time. I hope to be able to keep the 921 running for OTA and extra space, like maybe holding football games beyond gameday, and stuff like that. And once HD locals are up, I probably have no real use for the 921, other than having it record in case something onthe 622 hiccups. But it is purely my choice. I have no reason to upgrade, as I don't care about the vooms or food or hgtv. the only station I'll get with the 622 for now, that I'll be happy I have, is Uni HD, as that means I'll be able to see Battlestar Galactica in HD. That is "cool". But it's not needed, I'm not throwing a fit watching it in SD right now  

we all have different "needs and wants", but I think most of us also have an addiction to technology and wanting to be the "first" to get new stuff. so we pay for our obsessions with new tech, and our ability to crow about being first, even if being first was the stupid thing to do  haha


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

harsh said:


> More importantly, they aren't being artificially disabled by the content providers.


Well... this is off-topic, but those of us early HDTV adopters who bought before HDMI inputs, and in my case before DVI inputs, are facing this with the new HD-DVD and Blu-Ray HD DVD players as well as those existing DVD players that do a 720p or 1080i upconvert.

Currently these new DVD players do not output anything other than 480i/p over the component HD outputs... thereby crippling our HDTVs that do not have the HDMI connector.

Yet to be seen how long the movie studios will stick to forcing this, and some of them don't agree with the practice, but there is some artificial disabling of our HDTV starting already... and it is in the specs that it *could* happen via cable or satellite as well but so far it hasn't.


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

exactly. based on the concerns about pirating, it's possible right now for a broadcaster to throw up a flag which would force my RGB signal to only be 480p. And if that starts happening, I'd be screwed until I go pay for a new TV. So I am technically being artificially disabled by concerns with supporting older tech.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Rogueone said:


> where are you getting this from?


Here's a thread started by someone who had their HD PAK and Voom cut off on their 942 after transitioning to DishHD:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=52261

There is also a thread that I can't seem to find from someone who had the same experience with a 921 but they were switched back to their previous setup by Tech Support.

I suppose this might be a side effect of not having a ViP series primary receiver on the account or something similar. I'm just glad of read of the experience before I made the same mistake. The DishHD Platinum package is awfully attractive coming from AT180 with a movie Value Pack.

There is a post by Kingloop about Dish treating the 921/942/811 receivers as SD only, but I haven't found any first-hand experience to support this claim.

Again, just because someone posts something a number of times doesn't make it true.


----------



## normang (Nov 14, 2002)

IowaStateFan said:


> I just think they should have done a better job of warning people about the switch to MPEG4.


The MPEG4 Discussion has been going on for over a year almost a year and half now I think.. There were signs that Dish was ramping to something last fall. late summer when at some show of some sort, the 411 showed up, an MPEG4 811 I think they referred to it.

Course people that read online of course have far more info, though to find it sometimes takes a grain of salt and perhaps the ability to read between the lines.

Those that do not pay attention would be caught off guard. Course those not paying attention probably don't care as much as many people do here, thus the constant debate over Dish's tactics and the less then perfect recievers, while in all this, there are short-comings all over, D* has their problems, cable companies have their issues, and the list could go on and on..

While I think the rollout should have been phased in more smoothly, programming packages from before MPEG4 should be available for few more months until all existing receivers are unavailable and then begin the migration from those models by attrition, warning customers that eventually they will need to upgrade, but that would take even longer. With abrupt cut offs, which appears top have happened here, customers get frustrated and Dish looks bad.

At one level, I can understand why Dish did it. It was probably a business choice that said if we don't start this *now* it will take 5 years to get this done, if we continue to support legacy recievers, we cannot grow the business, because we'll be stuck supporting MPEG2 HD customers that don't want to upgrade.

And while there is pain and suffering for those affected, in the long run, it should mean more HD channels, more DMA's with HD locals and perhaps more and better recievers with easier upgrade paths because if everything is leased, there are no ownership issues to contend with. No one spent $5-6-7-1000 for a receiver..


----------



## normang (Nov 14, 2002)

mwgiii said:


> As far as I know, those HD sets worked as advertised and are still working.


Yes, HD sets from a few years ago are still working, as advertised perhaps, but...

You probably spent $3000-4000 for that set, your lucky now if its worth $500-700.

It doesn't have the inputs that may eventually be needed to watch some content if some sort of DRM ever comes along. So then what do you do??


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HDMe said:


> Currently these new DVD players do not output anything other than 480i/p over the component HD outputs... thereby crippling our HDTVs that do not have the HDMI connector.


DVD was designed to play back 480i and it does it. That some units can do progressive scan is a simple form of upconverting.

Most HDTVs and indeed most monitors can handle the up-conversion from 480i to whatever they need. Upconverting is a necessity for handling the full breadth of digital television which isn't just 1920x1080i.


----------



## Larry Caldwell (Apr 4, 2005)

harsh said:


> DVD was designed to play back 480i and it does it. That some units can do progressive scan is a simple form of upconverting.
> 
> Most HDTVs and indeed most monitors can handle the up-conversion from 480i to whatever they need. Upconverting is a necessity for handling the full breadth of digital television which isn't just 1920x1080i.


That's not precisely true. For instance, film programming is played at 24 frames per second, while a n interlaced TV scan is 30 fps. A DVD contains extra information that can be used to reconstruct a higher definition picture. Some DVD players can manage the trick. It is called 3:2 reverse pulldown. A good DVD player can give you very close to a true 720p, assuming the content is encoded in the first place. Not all DVDs have the necessary info. I even have some DVDs that vary from scene to scene, depending on if they converted the film to video for special effects before encoding it.

If the extra information is on the disc, the upconversion has to be done on the DVD bitstream, before the programming is converted to a video signal. Check the online reviews and lab tests of DVD players before buying.


----------



## Bob Ketcham (Jan 2, 2006)

I fired up channel 100 on the 942 this morning to see the six NBC screens. What a waste of time. Waiting for the download each time you return to channel 100.

I quickly made a favorites list of the Olympic channels to replace it.

Then I discover the this thread... I can't believe that anyone is griping about not having access to channel 100. I certainly won't be using it.

As to the general headaches the 921 owners have had, when you choose to be an early adopter of any technology, "you pays your money and you takes your chances". You wanted to be first. You've had 2-4 more years of HD than I have. You've spent a bunch for the privilege. You've watched the price of HD sets and satellite receivers plummet. You've watched the reliability and features improve. Now you think you should get some money back for your early entry into HD? Get real!

I went into HD a year or so back, adding a second, better HD set in December. I spent a little more for a cable card capable set and then found out how lousy Time-Warner's support of cable cards was. So, I ordered Dish and paid the lease upgrade for a 942. I found out two days after ordering that the 942 and 811 would likely soon be obsolete. I chose not to cancel the order. I made mistakes on the purchases - failing to check out cable card experiences and the coming MPEG-4 technology change on satellite - that wasted or will cost me some money. It is my responsibility to check out the technology, learn about it and make wise decisions on how to spend my money.

If the 921 owners think they have a warranty problem or other legal claim on which to stake their gripes, form a class, hire a lawyer and take it up with Dish. Otherwise, quit cluttering up the forum with silly petty gripes like not having access to Dish Home during the Olympics.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Bob Ketcham said:


> As to the general headaches the 921 owners have had, when you choose to be an early adopter of any technology, "you pays your money and you takes your chances". You wanted to be first. You've had 2-4 more years of HD than I have. You've spent a bunch for the privilege. You've watched the price of HD sets and satellite receivers plummet. You've watched the reliability and features improve. Now you think you should get some money back for your early entry into HD? Get real!


Bob, thanks for that punch in the bread basket. At least now I have a better perspective, that is after I got my breath back.


----------



## rice0209 (Oct 11, 2005)

Alright, so I just read all 4 pages of this thread and just want to say a couple of things.

Early adopting--- No one 'chose' to be an early adopter in the sense that they were being a pioneer in uncharted territory and taking a risk on getting a problem product. To me, the way some people phrase early adopters on this board is more likened to being a 'beta tester' which is not correct. Dish put out a product, placed claims on what that product could do, and in many, but definitely not all aspects, failed to meet the expectations of a reasonable, working product. Paying $1000 for a satellite receiver should put you in a bracket of priority service within a company. There is no reason for 921 users to endure so much hardship only to be passed up by the 942. The deal we are getting in april should have been for the 921 - 942 upgrade, not 2 generations later with the new 622.

Progression of Technology --- James Long is correct when he said that Dish needed to make changes in order to move ahead. I understand completely about technology progressing. I owned an early HD tv. I wasn't mad when they came out with new technology, because my tv worked perfectly for what it was advertised to do. In the electronics world, most of us understand that what you buy now could be obsolete in the next year, etc. The problem that many of us were trying to spell out is that we never got a working product to begin with. 

Most of us are complaining because we have had to take 3 or 4 returns of our 921 units only to be faced with the same problems with the refurb unit. The 921 was anything but reliable and dish really did not do anything to appease that. They kept quiet and tried to avoid confrontation. I am excited about that 622, and am happy that we will be able to get more HD content with higher quality for all channels. This is great news, but I can't help feel a little cheated because I have been beaten down for over a year with all the problems with my 921. I think the rebate program and price is a step in the right direction, but for those who own, they should be able to keep their current units as they paid big money for them. Dish should recognize the investment we made to them (directly or indirectly) and honor that. For many of us, a simple admittance to these issues would be enough to make us feel as if Dish is listening.

Personally, I have had my 921 replaced 3 times. Honestly, there has not been a month (almost week) go by that the 921 has not had some minor or major quirk. It is extremely frustrating. The amount of software revisions alone is staggering, not to mention that major problems still exist with the units on a monthly basis. I still don't understand why 921/942 users have to wait two months for this change over to happen. Part of me thinks it has something to do with financial numbers and not wanting to risk having a mass amount of $200 rebates flying out the door making them look bad fiscally so close to then end of most companies 'fiscal years.' Who knows. You would just think that 921 users would be getting something better. As I sad earlier, the rebate, equipment, and what not is great, but I hope come April 1st, they address some of the concerns of 921/942 owners on this board have put out there, and not get the hard nosed replies we have gotten from people on this board who don't own the units and understand the frustrations that we have gone through.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Larry Caldwell said:


> That's not precisely true. For instance, film programming is played at 24 frames per second, while a n interlaced TV scan is 30 fps. A DVD contains extra information that can be used to reconstruct a higher definition picture. Some DVD players can manage the trick. It is called 3:2 reverse pulldown. A good DVD player can give you very close to a true 720p, assuming the content is encoded in the first place. Not all DVDs have the necessary info. I even have some DVDs that vary from scene to scene, depending on if they converted the film to video for special effects before encoding it.


In fact, many, if not all of the newer HDTVs are capable of 3:2 pulldown. It is known by many names:

Hitachi: "Film Processing"
JVC: "Natural Cinema"
Samsung: "Cinema Smooth Film Mode"
Sony: "CineMotion"
Toshiba: "Cinema Mode"

This same process has been done mechanically with "film chains" for as long as anyone in television can remember.

As far ask I can tell, 3:2 pulldown is still a straightforward process that uses field (half a frame) information and averages a solution. No special encoding or extra data is required. It does not magically give the picture higher resolution nor does it convert standard DVD to HD.


----------



## socceteer (Apr 22, 2005)

mwgiii said:


> As far as I know, those HD sets worked as advertised and are still working.


Was it advertise that you would get timers starting at any time, was it advertised that your recorded show had incorrect information. was it advertised that the information of the info was going to have missing data..?

I missed all those pieces on the advertisement..!

As far as I am concern these are all basic function expected of any DVR. pure basic Tivo junction.


----------



## Fifty Caliber (Jan 4, 2006)

James Long said:


> Are the people who paid thousands for one of the first HDTV displays screaming their heads off because they can't get a better deal on a replacement set than a 'never had HD' person? Are the people who waited for this moment to buy smarter or stupid? Is your answer a reflection of which group you are in?


By that logic Laserdisc player owners should demanding that Pioneer upgrade them to DVD players, just because.


----------



## Rogueone (Jan 29, 2004)

bang bang your dead!

good one fiddycal!!


----------



## Fifty Caliber (Jan 4, 2006)

And let's not forget those folks who own CED players, RCA owes them too. :lol:


----------

