# Want to upgrade to HD, but can't get a straight answer from DISH



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

Right now I have a legacy Dish 500 with two SD receivers, a 4700 and a 311.

I'm interested in upgrading to HD using two 722s as I have two HDTVs.

So I'm assuming I'm looking at a $125 upgrade fee, plus 2x5.98/month DVR access fees, plus the lease fee for each box and $20/month additional for Ultimate HD. I'm assuming this includes installation of the new HD dish, and my old DP41 switches go away since the new boxes are all DISH Pro units.

Am I missing anything else?

All of the DISH reps I email ignore what I write and assume I want to replace my two receivers with *one* 722, which isn't what I want at all.

Also, can the signals still run over the single diplexed coax I have in place now, or will they have to run new wiring?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Rduce (May 16, 2008)

I upgraded from a single 322 to a 722 and wanted a second one for the bedroom, the upgrade would only cover one 722, the second would have to be purchased. I settled for a 211 for the bedroom, much cheaper than a 722!


----------



## tnsprin (Mar 16, 2003)

kucharsk said:


> Right now I have a legacy Dish 500 with two SD receivers, a 4700 and a 311.
> 
> I'm interested in upgrading to HD using two 722s as I have two HDTVs.
> 
> ...


Too many IFs and maybes. Are you keeping the old receivers or not. What area of the nation (e.g. ne, much of FL and southern TX require 61.5). Also Eastern Arc is coming soon (have they started any installs?).

DPP is likely but not definite. Cables may have to be replaced if its not good quality RG-6.


----------



## koji68 (Jun 21, 2004)

Whenever you tell them you have 2 TVs, even if both are HD, they will try to give you just one 722.

Keep in mind that a lot of CSRs are just following an script and making them understand your needs could be challenging.

Just tell them you have 4 TVs. When the installer comes in, he'll be happy he doesn't have to run a cable to the secondary TVs.

You current wiring would work. Only one cable per 722 is needed.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

koji68 said:


> Whenever you tell them you have 2 TVs, even if both are HD, they will try to give you just one 722.


This is VERY true. CSRs are hard-core-programmed to think that all of their dual-tuner DVRs = 2 TVs, and it can be next to impossible to convince them otherwise. They also don't seem to "get" that you want the second TV to be HD also.

I agree with the idea of telling them you have FOUR TVs. It will be much easier to get them to understand what you want.

However, Dish has limits on how many lease upgrades you qualify for in a given time period, and I believe that you can only get 1 HD-DVR every 6 months. To get more within that time period, you have to purchase them at full retail, and they will be owned and not leased. Last time I checked, a 722 was $549 retail.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

OK, today I got an email that *seems* to address my question:


Upgrade fee of $125 per box, meaning $250 for two 722s.

DVR access fee of $5.98 per 722, meaning $11.86/month

Upgrade includes installation of new HD-capable dish (likely a DISH 1000 here in Colorado)

$5 "extra box" fee takes care of both SD and HD programming for both boxes

$10 credit per SD box is available if I don't want to eBay/CraigsList them

As long as I can see 129, I should have no problem getting HD (no need to see 61.5)
Does anyone see anything obviously incorrect in their answers?

BTW, I specified the 722 because I wanted two tuner (watch while record) capability, so I suppose a 622 would work just as well.

Of course I also see that none of DISH's DVRs appear to actually *work* - users of the 612, 622 and 722 all seem to be having major problems with them. 

Obviously with the two new HD boxes, my old receivers will likely end up on eBay unless they get "turned in" to DISH as part of the upgrade (the 4700 and 311 are both purchased, not leased boxes.)


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

622 been working here with no problems for about 1 year. It does seem the latest software upgrade has a few problems but only a few people have been upgraded to that software so far.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

kucharsk said:


> OK, today I got an email that *seems* to address my question:
> 
> Upgrade fee of $125 per box, meaning $250 for two 722s.
> DVR access fee of $5.98 per 722, meaning $11.86/month
> ...


Extra HD boxes (DVR or non-DVR) are $7.00 each. There is a $5 fee per box additional to that if you don't connect them to a phone line or internet connection.

The rest of the stuff seemed correct to me.


----------



## BobaBird (Mar 31, 2002)

If you have an AT___ package and locals, the first DVR fee is essentially waived or at least greatly reduced in the DVR Advantage bundle.


----------



## fredinva (May 10, 2006)

kucharsk said:


> OK, today I got an email that *seems* to address my question:
> 
> 
> Upgrade fee of $125 per box, meaning $250 for two 722s.
> ...


Most 622s, 722s, work fine!!
The majority that work okay normally don't show up here!!!!!

fred


----------



## TulsaOK (Feb 24, 2004)

kucharsk said:


> Of course I also see that none of DISH's DVRs appear to actually *work* - users of the 612, 622 and 722 all seem to be having major problems with them.


To what problems with the ViP722 are you referring? Don't you think that statement is a little over the top? 
BTW, this is the second forum in which you've made this comment. Makes me wonder.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

TulsaOK said:


> To what problems with the ViP722 are you referring? Don't you think that statement is a little over the top?
> BTW, this is the second forum in which you've made this comment. Makes me wonder.


I've seen multiple people complain their 722s have locked up on more than one occasion, missing programs timers were set to record in the process.

There have also been several people complaining about HDMI issues with 622s and 722s, e.g:



> Over the past week my 722 has developed a new and annoying problem. For no apparent reason and with no warning we suddenly lose both HDMI and Component output and the TV goes to a blue screen. I can switch TV inputs back to Cable & all is well. Our other receiver (222) is fine. We're not losing signal, we're losing the output(s) to the TV.
> 
> You can wait it out, 5 minutes, sometimes longer or reboot and then of course get to watch all the startup screens for the next 5 minutes.


Most recently, people have been reporting software L5.10 breaks the ability to pause and restart OTA HD recordings.

Not trying to be a troll, just trying to go into this with my eyes open.

For example, my 311 has locked up three times in the past year, and that's enough for me to regard it as unreliable.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

kucharsk said:


> I've seen multiple people complain their 722s have locked up on more than one occasion, missing programs timers were set to record in the process.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


As I noted in the other thread, if you are keeping your eyes open you should read every complaint with a grain of salt.

I had a friend once who complained that the walkman he had bought was crap... but in observing his use habits I found that he liked to regularly put it into his back pocket and sit down on the sidewalk roughly... so while I would assume a piece of hardware should be designed to be sturdy, I did not think his use was typical and would not reflect how I would use the same device... so his opinion didn't ultimately matter to me.

Meanwhile, to your last statement... Out of curiosity, if you consider 3 times in a year "unreliable"... I would ask if you apply that same standard to everything. For instance... have you been late to work more than 3 times in the past year? Late for anything else?

That just seems like a high standard. I would consider 3 times a day to be unthinkably horrible... 3 times in a week to be intolerable as well... 3 times in a month definately worth calling and expecting a replacement unit before it became a worse trend... but 3 times in a year? I probably have accidentally set the wrong timer myself, deleted something by accident before watching, tuned to the wrong channel, accidentally powered off instead of pressing pause, etc etc more than 3 times in a year.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

HDMe said:


> That just seems like a high standard. I would consider 3 times a day to be unthinkably horrible... 3 times in a week to be intolerable as well... 3 times in a month definately worth calling and expecting a replacement unit before it became a worse trend... but 3 times in a year? I probably have accidentally set the wrong timer myself, deleted something by accident before watching, tuned to the wrong channel, accidentally powered off instead of pressing pause, etc etc more than 3 times in a year.


I'm coming at this from the C-Band world, and neither my analog nor digital satellite big dish receivers have ever locked up in fifteen and ten years, respectively.

My S3 TiVo is also going on three years and while it's locked up due to a keypress now and then it's never missed a recording.

So yeah, it's a high standard, but then again software for a MPEG2 receiver isn't exactly the same as writing software for a server, so at least in theory it should be easier to test and generally get right.

But when software manufacturers, whether it's DISH or Microsoft or whomever take the approach of "If something goes wrong, they can just unplug it and reset" it never turns out well. 

Worse, something like a 311 is much, much easier to code for than a DVR, so I'm hoping the DVR doesn't come with a corresponding increase in issues.

So if it occasionally screws up, I might be able to accept that, but if it locks up when it's supposed to be recording _Doctor Who_, there'll be hell to pay.


----------



## BattleZone (Nov 13, 2007)

kucharsk said:


> I'm coming at this from the C-Band world, and neither my analog nor digital satellite big dish receivers have ever locked up in fifteen and ten years, respectively.
> 
> My S3 TiVo is also going on three years and while it's locked up due to a keypress now and then it's never missed a recording.
> 
> So yeah, it's a high standard, but then again software for a MPEG2 receiver isn't exactly the same as writing software for a server, so at least in theory it should be easier to test and generally get right.


What you need to understand is that we are still in the middle of a MAJOR change in TV programming/broadcasting, with both analog-to-digital and standard-to-high-definition changes under way. Plus, manufacturers are continuing to add features to *existing* products to meet customer demand.

In the C-band world, there haven't been any substantial changes for 20+ years, and receivers have comparitively few features, so it's much easier to make stable equipment. And even the S3 Tivo is simple and limited compared to what Dish and DirecTV's HD-DVRs do NOW, much less with the features that are planned. There aren't many devices that you can buy (or lease) that continue to have substantial new features added to them over their usable life, but that's exactly what's going on. People who got a 622 2 years ago can now add external hard drives, have On Demand downloadable movies via Internet connection, and more features on the way. Yeah, that sometimes means that bugs creep in, but ultimately most folks are willing to accept that trade-off. If you can't, then maybe Dish isn't for you. It certainly isn't the best answer for everyone.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

IIP said:


> And even the S3 Tivo is simple and limited compared to what Dish and DirecTV's HD-DVRs do NOW, much less with the features that are planned. There aren't many devices that you can buy (or lease) that continue to have substantial new features added to them over their usable life, but that's exactly what's going on. People who got a 622 2 years ago can now add external hard drives, have On Demand downloadable movies via Internet connection, and more features on the way. Yeah, that sometimes means that bugs creep in, but ultimately most folks are willing to accept that trade-off.


Not to be argumentative, aside from receive satellite programming I'd like to know what the 622 or 722 can do that the S3 TiVo can't.

Aside from scheduling, the TiVo can record OTA and cable-based SD and HD programming, can download on-demand movies from Amazon via the Internet, play Internet radio station feeds from Live365, get weather and traffic updates from Yahoo!, share pictures, video, etc. over home networks and add external hard drives, etc.

It's by no means bug-free, but it seems to have fewer issues than DISH's DVRs do.

It also doesn't cost an extra $50 to activate the S3 TiVo's ESATA jack.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Honestly, and not meaning to pick on you here... but the more I read the more it sounds like you don't really want to stay with Dish. I'm not sure I've heard anything positive at this point, and it sounds like you are expecting and planning for failures that are yet to happen.

When I am in that mindset about something, it is usually a clear sign I need to move in another direction to be happy.


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

You mean issue like this?

Sometimes while switching channels on one tune while another is recording. The buffer will only record about 2 seconds of video then stop, freeze frame. The audio is still playing.

or 

I went back to see what was on the first hour of this recording. It was the episode of Moonlight that I had also recorded that same night. Instead of showing up as a separate recording, it somehow got connected to the next episode I recorded on the same channel.

or

Can we get a Sticky Thread for the latest version software/freezing issue?

or

I continually have the problem of shuttering/flickering/jerky playback of recorded programs. 


Funny, I just picked those posts from today on the TiVo S3 forum at tivocommunity.com


----------



## HobbyTalk (Jul 14, 2007)

kucharsk said:


> It also doesn't cost an extra $50 to activate the S3 TiVo's ESATA jack.


No, but you have to buy a special My DVR Expander (500G) drive from WD for $199 a pop for the TiVoHD. That extra cost more then makes up for the cost of my $110 500G EHD that I use on my 622.


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

HDMe said:


> Honestly, and not meaning to pick on you here... but the more I read the more it sounds like you don't really want to stay with Dish. I'm not sure I've heard anything positive at this point, and it sounds like you are expecting and planning for failures that are yet to happen.
> 
> When I am in that mindset about something, it is usually a clear sign I need to move in another direction to be happy.


You're reading far too much into this.

I'll be staying with DISH, the question is whether I'll just stay SD with my receive-only boxes or if the change to "HD-Lite" and DISH's DVRs is worth the hassle or not.

I already know picture quality is going to suffer somewhat on channels I can get in HD now, but if I'm regularly getting peeved at the DVRs for missing programs it makes more sense for me to stick with my current 4700 or 311 coupled with the Panasonic HDD/DVD recorders I have attached now.

My S3 TiVo has never screwed up a recording for me, so perhaps I'm just luckier than most.

I do however stick by my query as to what the 622/722 can do that the S3 TiVo can't, and I suspect they both have similar functionality.


----------



## fmcomputer (Oct 14, 2006)

My 622 never missed one recording in 18 months ( 1 1/2 years ) . How about that !!!


----------



## kucharsk (Sep 20, 2006)

fmcomputer said:


> My 622 never missed one recording in 18 months ( 1 1/2 years ) . How about that !!!


Actually, that's great to know. I appreciate it.


----------



## RasputinAXP (Jan 23, 2008)

The only problem I've had with my 722 is that I had to have my first one replaced because I'm the type of idiot who didn't realize just HOW MUCH clearance this thing needs to breathe.


----------



## Rduce (May 16, 2008)

kucharsk said:


> Of course I also see that none of DISH's DVRs appear to actually *work* - users of the 612, 622 and 722 all seem to be having major problems with them.


My 722 has work fine, I usually record 2 or 3 shows per day to watch when I have the time, which is sometimes a couple of weeks later..


----------



## GJJR (Jun 17, 2008)

Please let me know if this not the right forum for this question. I'm new here and no expert. But I do not understand. 

An HD signal travels through thin air to a satellite dish. Then through coax cable to a receiver. Then from the Receiver to an HDTV that has an HD tuner. Yet I'm told that the receiver has to be connected to the HDTV with a very short special cable that can carry an HD signal. 

Why can't a single receiver like the PVR 722 be used in one central location in a house and then distribute the HD signal to HDTVs throughout the house? Why do I have to have a separate HD Receiver and HDTV in each room when I have coax cable RG6/7 to every room? 

Why wouldn't it work If you attach a PVR 722 to a video modulator with output to a coax cable? I know this works with standard definition tv signals. Why not with HD? 

This would allow Programming on TVs in every room to be controlled by a single UHF remote.

It seems there should be an ingenious way to do this.


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

GJJR said:


> Please let me know if this not the right forum for this question. I'm new here and no expert. But I do not understand.
> 
> An HD signal travels through thin air to a satellite dish. Then through coax cable to a receiver. Then from the Receiver to an HDTV that has an HD tuner. Yet I'm told that the receiver has to be connected to the HDTV with a very short special cable that can carry an HD signal.
> 
> ...


There are several ways, none of them as cheap as distributing the old NTSC RF on a coax. How much can you afford? For instance, an appropriate modulator runs well over a thousand.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

The digital rights police will never allow you to have an ATSC RF transmitter, because you could rebroadcast a copywrited work and make perfect digital copies of it, not too much different from copying DVD's.

There may be units in the future that have satellite HD transmitters connected by cat5 cable or such, but not currently

I understand the the desire to save a copy of a program you see on TV. I do it when I can. My Series2 TiVo has the ability to record in SD and digitally download it to my PC.

I have several libraries of TV shows for my own use. I don't have to buy the DVD sets (yes Hollywood potentially loses a little money, but I probably wouldn't buy their over priced DVD sets anyway.

I started recording Star Trek on BetaMax and have gone from there.


----------



## dishgrrl (Jan 21, 2008)

Why can't a single receiver like the PVR 722 be used in one central location in a house and then distribute the HD signal to HDTVs throughout the house? Why do I have to have a separate HD Receiver and HDTV in each room when I have coax cable RG6/7 to every room? 

Why wouldn't it work If you attach a PVR 722 to a video modulator with output to a coax cable? I know this works with standard definition tv signals. Why not with HD? 


the 622 and 722 do have a home distribution but all of the tv 2 s would ahve to e sd coax isnt good enough quality to give all tvs hd and all of the tv 2 s would be watching the same thing !!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

dishgrrl said:


> Why can't a single receiver like the PVR 722 be used in one central location in a house and then distribute the HD signal to HDTVs throughout the house? Why do I have to have a separate HD Receiver and HDTV in each room when I have coax cable RG6/7 to every room?
> 
> Why wouldn't it work If you attach a PVR 722 to a video modulator with output to a coax cable? I know this works with standard definition tv signals. Why not with HD?


ATSC modulators are expensive AND the movie/network studios don't want people to have them anyway because it would allow people to make high-quality HD copies of their content.

I don't know what will happen in a few years, but I'll be very surprised to see ATSC modulators available for consumers as an affordable method of home distribution.

I suspect IF there is enough demand from consumers to see some sort of alternative over phone/network/power line or perhaps Ethernet that will also include built-in encryption that will require adapters at the central location as well as for each TV to be connected. There just has to evolve a market for it to push someone to develop it in an affordable package AND get permission to do so.


----------



## Jim5506 (Jun 7, 2004)

It can be done if you want all your HDTV's showing the same programming.

In the future, when persons with multiple HDTV's are more plentiful, there may be enough demand for a receiver that has multiple channel HDTV outputs, but it will NEVER be an ATSC output.

It might have multiple HDMI outputs that can be controlled for DRM (Digital Rights Management).

For most people it is more convenient to have a receiver at each TV than to have top rewire the house to spread HD around.


----------

