# DVR fee renamed to VOD fee



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

This is confirmed by E.

A fee is a fee is a fee no matter what you call it.

Incidently E at present doesnt have the software to turn it off, but that will be coiming shortly.

For people who want a UHF remote and optical out which really isnt available in any other current receiver.


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Bob Haller I don't know who told you DISH has any plans of turning off DVR capabilities. DISH in a facts blast to dealers did a question and answer format explaining fees. 
"question: Can you turn off the DISH Video-On-Demand Service?
The DISH Video-On-Demand Service is directly associated with the DISH Player-DVR receiver and cannot be removed without rendering the set top box inoperable."


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

Bob Haller, 

The new name is DVOD (DISH Video on Demand), not just VOD. The want the "D" in their service to seperate it from cable's VOD (which works very differently from the way the cable service works).

You are right, a fee is just a fee, no matter what they call it.


----------



## Bill R (Dec 20, 2002)

Boba,

I am hearing the same thing Bob mentioned. I was told "in a future software upgrade, the DVOD service will be an 'option'." I asked "is this because you plan on charging for it on other model (501, 508) receivers?" I didn't get an answer for that question. The information that DISH is sending out NOW to dealers is correct but we never know what they _may_ do in the future. A couple of months ago the dealers didn't have any idea that DISH would start charging for DVR service (via the DVOR fee).


----------



## Bob Haller (Mar 24, 2002)

My info is solid. right now a 510 will have no choice but pay the fee. later it will be optional once they get the software written. I assume it will still allow purchases of downloaded programming by E that $$ charge.

With charlies public statement no charge for 501, 508s aND 721S AT THIS TIME IHAVE NO confidence at that a fee could appear in the future.

charlie should address this during the next chat.


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

http://retailer.echostar.com/news/blast/blast_08_26_03.pdf


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

So basically if you want the 510 activated you will have to pay not only the $4.99 additional outlet fee (if you add it to as an additional receiver on an account) but also have to pay the 
$4.99 VOD charge as well or not be allowed to activate it? This would allow them to guarantee extra income for these receivers that are activated.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

You know at first I thought that Dish should drop the additional outlet fees on receivers and also the additional dvr fees, but I know now why they won't. If they were to do this they would get new subs but eventually they would loose to much revenue in the long run. They would probably run themselves out of business. 

I think the idea of the 500 series and the 721 ,was to get people to try the new seris of dvrs and to forget the old Dish player fiasco. Now that people have tried them and won't go without them , they add the fees. Eventually you will have to upgrade to the newer dvrs with fees. When they run out of refurbished dvrs to rma they will either offer you a $ amount with depreciation, or you will take the newer series with fees attached.

Either way you are going to pay , to upgrade or to sub to AEP. This is very smart from a corporate way of looking at things. But of course to bring back the old name ,no matter how you spell it ,so soon after the mess with the original dish player dvrs is another story. :nono:


----------



## Peluso (Sep 11, 2002)

ah, but how many dish players were out there? We must always remember that we are the extreme minority.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

If they want people to pay the VOD service fees bad enough then they would support their previous product less and less, but that is common anyways whenever they come out with a new DVR, they quit coming out with as many updates and new features on the older ones out. Their focus goes to the newer DVR's. Now if the newer ones have the same type of platform as the older ones then that does help get the software to the older ones as well in which I think may be the case with the 501, 508, and the new 510. I do worry about the 721 though unless the 921 will get similar software to what the 721 has. 

Perhaps it will be the same software just a larger hard drive and HD tuner, or is it possible to have the same software in the 921 that is in the 721 because of the HD tuner? Isnt there supposed to be other differences as well? If they would add the internet access feature in which would be specific to the 721 then that would make differences in the software to the 721 than the 921 but they could send that particular software for the internet access features to only the 721 receivers.


----------



## Mike D-CO5 (Mar 12, 2003)

The chip set was based on the 721 for the 921 according to last month's tech chat. So I figure the menus and the way it operates will be same. The linux software is suppossed to be cheaper cost for manufactures and it will be included in a lot of new electronic gadgets including dvr recorders etc. 

Like I said in an earlier post , the idea of internet was probably created when ultimate tv and web tv were new, and it took to long to get it to market and its time has passed . But who knows when Dish gets it's own boadband service going at the end of 2004 or the begining of 2005 then maybe they will turn it on in the 921 as well as the 721.


----------



## Peluso (Sep 11, 2002)

Mike D-CO5 said:


> Like I said in an earlier post , the idea of internet was probably created when ultimate tv and web tv were new, and it took to long to get it to market and its time has passed . But who knows when Dish gets it's own broadband service going at the end of 2004 or the beginning of 2005 then maybe they will turn it on in the 921 as well as the 721.


Ultimately to get 'internet' functionality, all you need is an internet stack and a browser. Since we are working with a linux based product running on what is essentially a low power computer it shouldn't be a problem to throw this support into the linux boxes.

I have always felt that the biggest problem with Internet on TV was the ultra low resolution of the actual TV's. Very little information can be presented on the screen and it doesn't look good. This is ultimately why the PC industry moved to progressive scan high resolution monitors as standard equipment.

This barrier completely changes with HDTV. I have a feeling that eventually every single STB with an Ethernet port will have some sort of basic web browsing functionality. All the technology needed for this is inexpensive to implement, and adds great value to the product. To me it's inevitable.


----------



## Guest (Sep 2, 2003)

The lack of OpenTV on the 721 is just another prime example of the total ineptitude of the software developers at E*. In fact, it still won't be available even when the long overdue software upgrade for the 721, which is close to 7 months late now, finally gets released. I would expect that it likely never will be available on the 721 at this point. And E* will probably try to deny that it ever was supposed to be available on the 721 at all.


----------

