# Defies Logic



## Curmudgeon (Jul 15, 2004)

I am fascinated by the fact that software downloads result in such hugely disparate results!!
If we all have the same hardware and firmware, why are we not ALL getting the same results...or the same problems.
I am no engineer...software or hardware...but it makes no sense to me that so many people have so many problems, and so many others have few, if any.
What am I missing here?!


----------



## chewey (Jul 28, 2004)

Curmudgeon said:


> I am fascinated by the fact that software downloads result in such hugely disparate results!!
> If we all have the same hardware and firmware, why are we not ALL getting the same results...or the same problems.
> I am no engineer...software or hardware...but it makes no sense to me that so many people have so many problems, and so many others have few, if any.
> What am I missing here?!


After the last update, I was in heaven. I thought that they finally got things right. Now I can't even get my local digital channels, much less the guide data. If this last much longer, it may be time to turn to the dark side, cable.


----------



## phongluu (Mar 8, 2005)

Curmudgeon said:


> I am fascinated by the fact that software downloads result in such hugely disparate results!!
> If we all have the same hardware and firmware, why are we not ALL getting the same results...or the same problems.
> I am no engineer...software or hardware...but it makes no sense to me that so many people have so many problems, and so many others have few, if any.
> What am I missing here?!


Because your box is diff. with my box (hardware) and our boxes are diff. with Beta team boxes!

Yet, they have the same model 921! But designed and re-designed by diff engineers and team!

P.L


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Actually their is difference between 921 just as their are with any complex piece of hardware. If you buy the same computer model 6 months apart, odds are they will have some changers under the hood. Same things goes with Beta testers, they will have slight difference between them. And these difference could result in timing difference that could produce timing related bugs that my effect one receiver but not another.

Now add on top the different configurations that Dish supports, Different Dishes, Different LNBS, different switches etc. All with different installation different cabling etc. Lot of different external influences.

Finally add in the users. We all use the boxes different. We all change channels different have different ways of using favorites. Have different number of tuners. Have different viewing habits.

The factors above all can result in bugs found by one but not the other. For example, there is a thread in the 811 support forum by Tony. He provided a number of steps. I tried to follow them per his instructions but could not reproduce. He typed them out and then I found the step I was missng and was able to reproduce the problem. So when someone here gives a explaination and then someone else tries it, sometimes a step gets left out and that person thinks he does not have the problem.

There is a wide variation of experiences between 921 users. But if you look at the 721, the 942 and the 811 you will see similar patterns. Some have now problems and some have boat loads.


----------



## mwsmith2 (Nov 15, 2004)

The main reason I've been staying with dish is that I can get local OTA HD/SD and Sat HD/SD and record any of it all on one box with ease. Now that L216 has been done to us, it's really wearing on my patience. I'd be hyper-pissed if this was duing the regular HD season. Sure, getting them to turn on locals seems to be a fix, but I hear that you may loose your distant nets, even after you've had the locals turned off after the "fix" (and I use that term loosely) comes.

The other thing that really bothers me is their track record of fixes. They're only quick when it seems to benefit E*. I really, really, really hope that this isn't some sort of 2 month fix, but I wouldn't put it past them. Personally, I think they should roll users that called in back to 215, so at least we can watch my broadcast HD channels.

Man, this sucks. 

Michael

:icon_lame


----------



## HailScroob (Aug 3, 2004)

mwsmith2 said:


> Personally, I think they should roll users that called in back to 215, so at least we can watch my broadcast HD channels.


Apparently, it CAN be done.

From the Dish Tech portal:



http://rweb.echostar.com/departmental_content/TechPortal/content/tech/TechDepo.shtml said:


> Effective Wednesday, July 20th, Engineering plans to respool software version 8.26P for the 6000 receiver. This is to correct a video issue on HD channels only when in zoom or partial modes.
> 
> At this time 8.26P will be valid software version for the 6000. Customers may need to download 8.26 to replace 8.27.


----------



## mwsmith2 (Nov 15, 2004)

I doubt that will be done mainly because with L215:

1. E* was loosing money due to people unsubscribing from locals because they didn't need them
2. People who had subscribed to locals weren't getting the guide data they paid for
3. People who never subscribed to locals were getting content they were supposed to pay to have were now getting that content free.

As always, follow the money. :grrr:

As I was writing my previous post, I made up my mind to call E* again when I get back home and have them turn my locals on to prove to them that fixes it (so I can at least watch my darn local broadcasts) and have them credit me for the locals.

Bleh. I shouldn't have to be dealing with this at all. The symptoms are very consistent, they should have a fix done already and ready to uplink. Oh what am I saying? :hurah: :grin: :lol: !rolling :thats: :icon_lol: !Devil_lol 

Michael


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

> 3. People who never subscribed to locals were getting content they were supposed to pay to have were now getting that content free.


WAIT A MINUTE! 811 owners:
1.) Don't pay for their OTA guide data and 
2.) don't pay an extra fee like we do for the PVR.

I would not say that I got "content" for free.

I'm one of those who never subscribed to locals. With 215 all I gained was some guide data - I was not getting the actual satellite delivered channels (I would not want them anyway, there is too much compression on the LIL's). Before 215 my OTA's could not be recorded via the EPG like the satellite delivered channels could. The "clock" on the OTA's were wrong (when I clicked on the EPG for "Local Programming" the timer thought that the program was on at 8:00 PM Dec 31, 2029  BTW: Remember that date - we may have another Y2K fiasco should any 921's still be in service :rotfl:


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

mwsmith2 said:


> Personally, I think they should roll users that called in back to 215, so at least we can watch my broadcast HD channels.





> Apparently, it CAN be done.
> 
> From the Dish Tech portal:





http://rweb.echostar.com/departmental_content/TechPortal/content/tech/TechDepo.shtml said:


> Effective Wednesday, July 20th, Engineering plans to respool software version 8.26P for the 6000 receiver. This is to correct a video issue on HD channels only when in zoom or partial modes.
> 
> At this time 8.26P will be valid software version for the 6000. Customers may need to download 8.26 to replace 8.27.


Actually this looks like the are rolling back all 6000 users. This is different that rolling back individual users. The last line I believes refers to user that have downloads disabled.

With 216/215 you are looking at a two edge sword. Personally I think the only option for Dish is to give free LILs and that will fix some and and then come out with the better fix with 217 quickly.

This issue that we have seen on 216 and 217 shows the complexity of the external variables that the receviers has to deal with. One wrong or missed condition can be very painful.


----------



## HailScroob (Aug 3, 2004)

Actually, I'd like to go back to L210. My 921 was pretty kick-butt back then. 

Unfortunately, L211 - the greatest evil ever unleashed - started my box down a path of pain and misery that has only gotten worse with each subsequent release.

Right now, under L215/216, I have an SD picture that looks remarkably similar to a QuickTime movie off the web, timers that fire at random, a dozen other niggling problems that irk me every single day AND I still have to manually reboot every other morning or suffer a hundred additional horrors.

At this point, I'm just waiting for the HD Tivo to get version 6.2 of their software to address the ridiculously slow guide problem - then I'm jumping ship.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

mwsmith2 said:


> I doubt that will be done mainly because with L215:
> 
> 1. E* was loosing money due to people unsubscribing from locals because they didn't need them
> 2. People who had subscribed to locals weren't getting the guide data they paid for
> ...


#1 They lose more money anytime a janitor sweeps the broom twice. There is just not that much revenue in selling guide data to those who don't need locals! In fact, if you add up the cost of all this R&D just to make the 921 work in a dual role mode, A) guide data for those that pay, and B) no guide data for those that don't pay. They are really losing money and most likely, the 921 will be obsolete by MP4 before they recover all this R&D cost. Do the math- you'll see!
#2 That's why the concept of selling guide data when they don't know how to program it after 7 months of work is just stupid. Turn it on for all and move on to something that will generate real revenue, like sell us another 10 HDTV channels!
#3 NO! I never got any "content" for free. L215 didn't turn on the Dish LIL at all. It only turned on a display of information that is required by FCC regulation on all OTA ATSC broadcasts. A receiver manufacturer has the option to display the PSIP EIT that is broadcast or provide an alternative.

Follow the money- That I did in 1 and 2 but I can't help it if E* accountants are asleep on the job.

When you call E* and buy the extorted guide data, they win, you lose! I suppose you know what that makes you in this game?


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

I never believed it was impossible to roll back a software version to a code set that was "working" prior to the new one. That is just a management choice. Now to channel versions to specific receivers on a national scale may be a bit complex from an accounting and record keeping viewpoint but it could be done, It may just take quite a bit of time to set it up in the uplink.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

Ron, thank you for your detailed explanation of why the bugs happen to some folks but not others. All in all I don't buy it though.

You have DirecTV customers with different Dishes, LNB's cables etc and you see very few problems with them, even where there is a software update, there are very few issues.

Ultimately it comes down to poor management at Dish for not making standards for its equipment and software.


----------



## TonyB (Jul 5, 2004)

DonLandis said:


> I never believed it was impossible to roll back a software version to a code set that was "working" prior to the new one. That is just a management choice. Now to channel versions to specific receivers on a national scale may be a bit complex from an accounting and record keeping viewpoint but it could be done, It may just take quite a bit of time to set it up in the uplink.


They certainly can do it. Proof - Mark said last week that only 10K or so customers got 215. He said that it was a limited rollout. Therefore, there can be 2 (or more) versions out there at the same time.

Thus they can roll back the version machine by machine.

Further proof: They can send signals to each and every receiver one at a time - they do it all the time to individually customize your choice of viewing packages.


----------



## Scott Greczkowski (Mar 21, 2002)

TonyB said:


> They certainly can do it. Proof - Mark said last week that only 10K or so customers got 215. He said that it was a limited rollout. Therefore, there can be 2 (or more) versions out there at the same time.
> 
> Thus they can roll back the version machine by machine.
> 
> Further proof: They can send signals to each and every receiver one at a time - they do it all the time to individually customize your choice of viewing packages.


They also just rolled back the software on the 6000 series.

They can roll back, they just dont want to.


----------



## Guest (Jul 21, 2005)

Ron Barry said:


> Personally I think the only option for Dish is to give free LILs and that will fix some and and then come out with the better fix with 217 quickly.


Plus, they should install a SD for me so I can take advantage of this ad-hock solution.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Scott Greczkowski said:


> Ron, thank you for your detailed explanation of why the bugs happen to some folks but not others. All in all I don't buy it though.
> 
> You have DirecTV customers with different Dishes, LNB's cables etc and you see very few problems with them, even where there is a software update, there are very few issues.
> 
> Ultimately it comes down to poor management at Dish for not making standards for its equipment and software.


It is your choice to buy it or not. This comes from experience developing software and from my experience releasing enterprise level embedded software. External factors and different use cases can be reason why problems are seen in some receivers and not in others. Here is a typical use case. Customer A uses a receiver and never turns it off at night. Customer B always turns it off. Over time Customer A sees something customer B does not. Same hardware Same software. How about another one, DSL modem is released in to the market and is running fine... One day the the product starts randomely crashing. Some boxes see it some don't. Turns out a a virus targetted for windows boxes is crashing the modems. Same software... Different end user experiences. External factors can be a reason.

As to the DirecTV vs. Dish TV in terms of quality reliability. I don't think anyone here has reliability numbers in terms of hardware and software to compare. Yes the Dish forums here are more active, but that necessarly does not equate to DirecTV having very few issues vs Dish being filled with issue. I would love to see some numbers that support the wide disperatey that you speak of. The customer satisfication numbers surely don't support the claim. As to the software updates form DirecTV not causing any issues, I don't have any personal experience with the software to give an opinion. Not saying you are incorrect here in your assertion, just have never seen any actually evidence to support the claims.

Software quality is obtained through a number of different ways. Strong Process is one of them and so is having a strong management team behind it. There are also a boat load of other factors that contribute to ultimate software quality. Yes management plays a huge roll in it, but is by no means the ultimate factor. Anybody that has been in a full software product release cycle more than once I think would agree that there is a lot that goes into software quality and you can release what you think is a solid product to discover that there is a factor in the outside world that turns your product into a POS. Only needs one annoying bug for this to happen.

I would also disagree that Management is ultimately responsible for quality. It is the whole development team that is responsible for the quaility on the projects I have been part of. The Engineers, QA, support and Beta customers that all contribute bare some burden to our products quality. They feed information up in terms of quality and if they paint a roser picture than it is the product goes out with less quality than managment felt was there. There is also the external factors that may dictate releasing something before its time (business reason).

Ofcourse this is all based on my expierences and other people involved in the development process may vary. for the record, I by no means feel that all of Dish's defects are related to external factors or different use case scenarios. There is blame to go around in a number of areas. I was just answering the orginal questions without using it to throw a rock at Dish's management.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

TonyB said:


> They certainly can do it. Proof - Mark said last week that only 10K or so customers got 215. He said that it was a limited rollout. Therefore, there can be 2 (or more) versions out there at the same time.
> 
> Thus they can roll back the version machine by machine.
> 
> Further proof: They can send signals to each and every receiver one at a time - they do it all the time to individually customize your choice of viewing packages.


Yes there can, but that is ofcourse different than Send TonyB 216 Sent Ron Barry 214 send Jason 213 and send Mark 218. There is a limited about of band width and if you the 10K receivers are not each individual identified when releases. A range is specified.

From what I understand they cannot roll back the version from machine to machine. Mark/Jason/Allan... You guys know if that is possible. Maybe the distribution model might support it, but pratically it is not possible. That is my guess.

Setting a feature is much different than uploading an image. Just because you can do one does not mean you can do the other.


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Scott Greczkowski said:


> They also just rolled back the software on the 6000 series.
> 
> They can roll back, they just dont want to.


Just because you can roll back one version of software on one plateform, does not mean you can roll back any version.

Sure it is always possible to roll back a version. Just flash the old image. However, depending on what are the difference between images you may or may not be able to. It is a risky proposition and usually not a lot of testing is done with this scenario.

Also, in the case of 215 and 216. both revs cause customer pain. With the current rev you do have a work around for a lot of customers by adding locals. With the previous version you dont. If it was my call, Keep the current and give the affected customers free locals.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

Ron- all this is fascinating but do you and others really care WHY E* has such habitual problems with their hardware? As a paying customer, frankly, I don't. All I want is to watch the programming with a DVR that works. How they do that and what hoops they put me through to do that determins whether I do business with them or their competitors. I dont work for E* or D* and I'll be damn if I will spend my time conjuring up excuses for all these problems. Two groups of people got the shaft this summer. Those that paid for guide data and those that didn't. Between L215 and L216, both groups got screwed out of what they paid for. One thing is certain to me, it wasn't the Astrological charts or the time of the day that caused it.


----------



## lpickup (Jul 12, 2005)

"Fortunately", in my area we don't have OTA DTV (nor will we until November of 2006 if everything goes perfectly--and note that I am not in a rural area, I am in the #90 (out of 210) DMA--it's just that our local broadcasters have used every opportunity they could find to delay going digital, but that's another story). So I am reasonably unaffected by all the guide/OTA shenanigans going on.

But I can feel the frustration. Of course, as an "unaffected" observer, it appears to me that they broke something in L215, and rushed to get a fix out but went too far and broke something in the process. On the one hand we had people clamoring for them to put the release out ASAP, and sure enough, it went out without enough testing and seriously broke something. While any interruption in service (> a few minutes occasionally anyway) is too much, it does appear that at some level they are willing to provide a fix for most (by turning on LIL for free for those that are affected). Of course their process for disseminating this information to their CSR's is clearly flawed, and that should be addressed as well.

I think many feel that this was intentional or some kind of method for E* to make money. That doesn't sound very likely to me. The software group probably just screwed up in a major way. While it certainly would be taxing for me to be patient under such circumstances, I encourage those that are affected to take the workaround for now and see how this all works out over the next several days as we learn more about the facts and not jump to conclusions about whatever "motivations" may be been at play here.

Where I personally get upset, is that most of us pay $5 / month for this "service" and it continually has problems. I personally have called up with a list of complaints, most of which pale in comparison to actually losing the amount of functionality that some of you have experienced and the CSR has offered to waive the fee for 2-3 months. Now that those free months are over I will probably call again. I doubt it will work, but if their software is actually getting worse, I probably have a leg to stand on.

In my opinion, if as a group we want to be heard, I think we should all be pestering the CSR's about the fact that we are being charged $5 for buggy software and demand refunds. If you compare the 921's capabilities with the competition (that you have to pay a monthly fee for), it's ridiculous! Even if there were no bugs I don't feel it's worth $5/month. But certainly in light of the shabby software releases of late, I think it's high time to protest this charge.

...Lance Pickup


----------



## Ron Barry (Dec 10, 2002)

Don, 

Never mentioned time of day or the moons.  And to answer your question to the typical end user it does not matter the reason. What matters is the end experience and for some this experience is good other bad. Which brings us back to the orginal question.

As to conjuring up excuses, well if you feel that is what my post was about then I didnt make my point clear enough. I was not talking about a specific defect. I was talking from a much bigger picture. Basically, I answered the question the orginally poster asked based on what I my personal experiences. 

From what I know about the issue introduced in 215 and then further complicated in 216 having to do with getting locals is actually influenced by external factors. Some of the issues depends on the locals area you are in and ofcourse if you have LIL enabled or not. Also, contributing to this fact is multiple DMAs etc. These are what I would call all different use case scenarios. Yes to the end user it does not matter, but to the exposure and test coverage matrix these use cases matter a lot. If not properly understood, what happened can happen. 

In the end it all that matters is the customer experience and you are not going to get me to disagree that this OTA locals issues caused a lot of customer pain. All I did above is explain some possible reasons why people may have different end user experiences. Not excuses just reasons for the behavior.


----------



## DonLandis (Dec 17, 2003)

Ron- OK, I accept that you were just trying to suggest reasons things can go wrong. It is especially true that different locations may experience different results but these would be minor exceptions and not a wide spread similar observation that this has come to. Mark said in another post that the issue IS based on whether you subbed to locals or not and this I believe. Supportive of your suggestions that local deviations can cause isolated failures was a year ago when E* decided to implement PSIP call identifier to remap ALL locals to the PSIP channel and prevent the 921 from seeing the Rf channel. IMO, this screwup was entirely E*'s fault because they implemented this a month prior to the FCC PSIP regulation from going into effect. This caused 4 of my stations that were not yet set up with their PSIP generator from being seen. When I went to the station engineer with this report, suggesting he expedite things, he offered the complaint that E* had jumped the gun on the start date for this and I had to agree with him. 3 weeks later His two stations were PSIP compliant and he and I did the testing to confirm the tables were accurate. People all over the country were losing this or that station and didn't know why. Never did Mark publish that this was now a requirement of the 921 until nearly a month after the fact. In this example I can see where your "other local circumstances" can lead to different results. However, I believe this time the L216 bug of shutting down all the -1 subchannels for those who don't subscribe to locals is strictly a function of the software and not the stars, TOD or color of your morning urine.  Just kidding!

Time to go watch some DirecTV on my HDTIVO!  Outta here!


----------

