# New 921 replaces 721, nice but...



## bbriggs (Dec 17, 2003)

New 921 self installed today in place of 721 with no serious problems. A big disappointment, though, that I seem to be unable to buffer two tuners as I am used to on the 721. This was a favorable feature of the 721 -that a user could monitor 2 programs without recording either. Picture-in-picture, I find on the 721 and 921, is somewhat annoying and I preferred on the 721 to drop PIP using the silver 'dish' button. It appears the 921 can buffer 2 channels only if I select SD, and that I can no longer defeat PIP. If I select HD, my only option (it appears) is to record both programs and view them via PVR menu. I've not found a way to stop an ongoing recording without aborting the recording, perhaps I'll stumble across a solution. I've seen the bug reports regarding the stop button problem, perhaps therein lies a solution I've forgotten.

I've been lurking for over a year waching every post on this forum since last December, and today I searched again for answers to the following questions:

Can the 921 buffer both tuners while in HD mode, and if not why not? Seems like the hardware only has to display 1 picture, we would only have 2 streams writing, 1 stream reading off the HDD.

Can PIP be defeated while buffering 2 live broadcasts?


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

Unfortuantely, what you're seeing is the 921's mode of operation. You've just got to change your mode to accomodate it. That is, use the record buttno more.


----------



## bbriggs (Dec 17, 2003)

Sort of misses the point, though, doesn't it? What I speak of was added to the 721 and was met with some enthusiasm by users of that unit. I doubt there is any hardware limitation on this feature given that all the necessary elements appear to be functional on the 921 (even in HD mode) now. I would certainly buy the argument that there are bigger fish to fry, but you sound as if you've accepted defeat. Perhaps I will too given some time.


----------



## naqbrules (Oct 30, 2004)

There is a feature of the 721 that was added..basically it's an enhanced pip..basically allows you to keep a buffer on 2 inputs while using PIP but instead of using pip to close the window yo use the red .))) button (turn that little symbol 90 degrees CW and it kept your buffer. That is something the 921 doesn't have..but not sure if the issue you are having is due to that feature of the 721 or not. but the minute you close PIP on 921 you lose the buffer on that window.

sorry if it look like i went in circles with that response just got off of work tired and can't type right


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

bbriggs said:


> Sort of misses the point, though, doesn't it? What I speak of was added to the 721 and was met with some enthusiasm by users of that unit. I doubt there is any hardware limitation on this feature given that all the necessary elements appear to be functional on the 921 (even in HD mode) now. I would certainly buy the argument that there are bigger fish to fry, but you sound as if you've accepted defeat. Perhaps I will too given some time.


Regretably, the 921 has hardware limitations. Per Mark the Moderator, the chips (broadband or broadcom) that are in the 921 are inferior in that they can't function with HD. Also according to him, it is very unlikely that the chip(s) are modifiable. I think the question that needs answered, it WHY did the creators of the HD unit make such foolish limitations?


----------



## ClaudeR (Dec 7, 2003)

HD is still in infancy, and with the time from engineering to market, they probably did what they could with available chips. I remember my first PC...


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

ClaudeR said:


> HD is still in infancy, and with the time from engineering to market, they probably did what they could with available chips. I remember my first PC...


Yes, this is true. I wonder if there were workable chips in existence for HD at the time? Too bad they didn't think and plan a little bit better.


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

Broadcom, and it's not that the chip was inferior, it's just that HD PIP couldn't be done 2-3 years ago when the chips were chosen. Are there chips available today that can do it? If so, I'm not aware of them, unless the motorola dual tuner (6412?) can do it.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Mark Lamutt said:


> Broadcom, and it's not that the chip was inferior, it's just that HD PIP couldn't be done 2-3 years ago when the chips were chosen. Are there chips available today that can do it? If so, I'm not aware of them, unless the motorola dual tuner (6412?) can do it.


With respect to HD and the 921's PIP,the Broadcom chip is inferior as it can't do the HD or the OTA. It most likely is a superior chip for other purposes. It does a great job when it comes to swapping PIP in SD. It does nothing for HD and digital OTA. To me that is inferior.


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

boylehome said:


> With respect to HD and the 921's PIP,the Broadcom chip is inferior as it can't do the HD or the OTA. It most likely is a superior chip for other purposes. It does a great job when it comes to swapping PIP in SD. It does nothing for HD and digital OTA. To me that is inferior.


 "Inferior" implies a comparison. And that's exactly what I was asking - is there a chip on the market today that can be used in consumer electronics that would allow PIP with HD or digital OTA channels? If so, then when was it developed? Was it available 2 years ago? If so, then I'll agree the Broadcom chip was an inferior choice. But not until those questions get answered.


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Mark Lamutt said:


> "Inferior" implies a comparison. And that's exactly what I was asking - is there a chip on the market today that can be used in consumer electronics that would allow PIP with HD or digital OTA channels? If so, then when was it developed? Was it available 2 years ago? If so, then I'll agree the Broadcom chip was an inferior choice. But not until those questions get answered.


How about inadequate? That may be a better word to describe how the broadcom chips work with HD and OTA for PIP. I have a broadcom chip in my computer that works excellently for my WI-FI!


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

So, Dish should have not included the PIP for SD channels because there wasn't a chip available that could do PIP for HD channels?


----------



## boylehome (Jul 16, 2004)

Mark Lamutt said:


> So, Dish should have not included the PIP for SD channels because there wasn't a chip available that could do PIP for HD channels?


Direct TV's high end HD receiver doesn't even have PIP! I bought my 921 for HD. It's nice that it has SD but my main motivating factor for purchase was for HD DVR and OTA. I have other receivers for SD. My 721's PIP is better than the 921's. If PIP would have never been added to the 921, it might have been a feature request. What about the DishWire? Would people be complaining about it's non-functionality if it was never advertised and included in the 921? Hopefully, future HD DVR models from DISH will have useable and workable features. So, is the 921 unit expandable?


----------



## bbriggs (Dec 17, 2003)

My original interest/concern was with buffering 2 channels, not PIP. The 921 can record 2 channels so one might imagine it could buffer 2 channels. It can put a transparent overlay onto an HD image, so one might imagine it could place a small icon on the screen to indicate it is buffering a second channel (like the 721). I still don't see any hardware limitation precluding this feature.

I don't like PIP because it blocks too much of the main image, I'm sure others would agree. Buffering 2 channels, PIP or not, adds some versatility and convenience for viewers of semi-live broadcasts. The 921 seems to be better at semi-live viewing than is the HD Tivo. Why not extend upon that advantage?


----------

