# DTV very slow, channel changes and GUI are horrible



## rynorama (Feb 12, 2010)

Enough is enough. I've defended DTV because I thought picture quality has been better with more HDtv channels. But come on, I just can not take how unresponsive and slow the boxes are any more. Close to $200 for what? The almost ability to change channels at will? The almost ability to watch what you want? PLEASE, do not tell me to reset my box, or change to guide before channel changes, or any of the other fixes and tricks. Guess what, it's horribly written code, nothing more. Two kids into great college programming degrees and I've been convinced that DTV does not care about their customers otherwise they would take a day or three and rewrite the GUI that I now know is unbelievably simple. All this and I've not even brought up the FACT that I have two local cable companies and I have witnessed both of them 100% faster than DTV. RCN and Service Electric are better. I know 99% of the country does not have 3 choices but I do. Too much money for slow BS. They don't understand seconds count. Cable companies will last, DTV wonm't. Why? Cable cutters will still have internet. DTV will have nothing. I just think $200 per month is not worth the horribly slow channel changes when I see cable working just fine.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Yeah, the slowness has made the trick play useless for going back to review a play in sports as you can't get to stop where you want it.

Really everything that was good and proficient is now old and getting slow. Their software has not really been improve for customer use in over five years.

And their push to replace your networked STBs with Minis is not the direction I like this company to go.

Really, if I was given the opportunity, I would be out of here.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

I notice from your equipment profile that you don't have an HR44 Genie DVR. That box might change your speed perception.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

rynorama said:


> ...Cable companies will last, DTV wonm't. Why? Cable cutters will still have internet. DTV will have nothing. I just think $200 per month is not worth the horribly slow channel changes when I see cable working just fine.


Hence the AT&T deal...that would give both companies everything they need to compete.

But you are right. But why do they get away with slow, poorly designed, software? Because if you DON'T have a good cable alternative, and you are a sports fan, you want DirecTV and ONLY DirecTV equipment can be used. Everyone that is happy with DirecTV as a service, but unhappy with their hardware would follow and support the current FCC process to select the successor to CableCard, which will be applied to satellite and IPTV based linear TV as well. That will open up the satellite providers to competition from TiVo, Western Digital, Arris and Cisco, just to name a few.

We switched to Verizon FiOS for TV (we were already Internet and phone customers) with TiVo DVRs and Minis. Not only do we get the same channels with the same picture quality, we have responsive, stable equipment, and we save over $100 per month. The problem is that not everyone has decent alternatives. If we didn't have FiOS, our options would be Dish (with "near HD" PQ) or Cablevision (with bad PQ and cloud DVRs).

If the FCC process continues along the path it is currently on, in a few years we may be able to buy any STBs we want from any manufacturer and use it with any provider. Then you will see everybody's equipment improve.


----------



## APB101 (Sep 1, 2010)

I called about this months ago.

DirecTV told me that its engineering department knows.

It's still a problem. It will be a response that reminds me of trying to awaken a deep-sleeping person. It takes a while to come to.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

litzdog911 said:


> I notice from your equipment profile that you don't have an HR44 Genie DVR. That box might change your speed perception.


No kidding! And a few mini clients to replace other fusty equipment, and you're in biz, pal.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

Perhaps you have other Issue's with your system - When was the last time you had a service call? are all you connections outside, What are your signal readings - 99a ,99b 101,103 a 103b

I'm running 0x097Fon (2) HR22-100- 0x497f (1) H21-200- I Don't have any speed issue for channel changes or anything on those boxes and the are in use. For me those current sf loads have been the most stable ever.

I also have a genie Hr44-200 and it is runs circles around the older boxes -for channel changes -Should you add a Genie -having a truck roll may get your system working better than it is now -YMMV


----------



## ep1974 (May 22, 2010)

litzdog911 said:


> I notice from your equipment profile that you don't have an HR44 Genie DVR. That box might change your speed perception.


I agree. Just recently switched from a 34/700 to a 44/200. Big difference in changing channels and all commands. Also, now that I'm used to it, I prefer the RC72 remote by a wide margin.


----------



## rynorama (Feb 12, 2010)

litzdog911 said:


> I notice from your equipment profile that you don't have an HR44 Genie DVR. That box might change your speed perception.


I'm not sure what you're saying. You think I should buy all new boxes to lease from DTV to solve the problem? I think they hire better programmers. It's not that complicated.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

rynorama said:


> Enough is enough. I've defended DTV because I thought picture quality has been better with more HDtv channels. But come on, I just can not take how unresponsive and slow the boxes are any more. Close to $200 for what? The almost ability to change channels at will? The almost ability to watch what you want? PLEASE, do not tell me to reset my box, or change to guide before channel changes, or any of the other fixes and tricks. Guess what, it's horribly written code, nothing more. Two kids into great college programming degrees and I've been convinced that DTV does not care about their customers otherwise they would take a day or three and rewrite the GUI that I now know is unbelievably simple. All this and I've not even brought up the FACT that I have two local cable companies and I have witnessed both of them 100% faster than DTV. RCN and Service Electric are better. I know 99% of the country does not have 3 choices but I do. Too much money for slow BS. They don't understand seconds count. Cable companies will last, DTV wonm't. Why? Cable cutters will still have internet. DTV will have nothing. I just think $200 per month is not worth the horribly slow channel changes when I see cable working just fine.


If you are having slow channel changes on all those receivers then you have a problem that is not in your receivers.
Those D12s should change instantly and the HR24 should be slower but not slow.
Could you check the satellite signal strengths as someone previously asked ? Low signals can cause slow channel changes.


----------



## WestDC (Feb 9, 2008)

rynorama said:


> I'm not sure what you're saying. You think I should buy all new boxes to lease from DTV to solve the problem? I think they hire better programmers. It's not that complicated.


As I suggest -I would first start with a Service call -if it's been awhile since your last one and get your system up to speed


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

rynorama said:


> I'm not sure what you're saying. You think I should buy all new boxes to lease from DTV to solve the problem? I think they hire better programmers. It's not that complicated.


It's pretty easy to get a service call and get the DVR replaced, if the installer has HR44s. There might be a fee for a truck, but no change in contract.

I've seen some pretty bad boxes from the cable companies as well. I don't know if Dish boxes are faster, but if they are, is it because they have better programming or because they reboot them nightly?


----------



## lparsons21 (Mar 4, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> It's pretty easy to get a service call and get the DVR replaced, if the installer has HR44s. There might be a fee for a truck, but no change in contract.
> 
> I've seen some pretty bad boxes from the cable companies as well. I don't know if Dish boxes are faster, but if they are, is it because they have better programming or because they reboot them nightly?


Short of getting a HR44, there really is no speeding up D*'s other boxes in any meaningful way. Whether it was relatively weak hardware or poor programming, the slowness is and has been there for some time. A service call isn't going to make it better except if they bring an HR44. Of course, then the other boxes you might have are still slow though the HR24s aren't horribly so.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

lparsons21 said:


> Short of getting a HR44, there really is no speeding up D*'s other boxes in any meaningful way. Whether it was relatively weak hardware or poor programming, the slowness is and has been there for some time. A service call isn't going to make it better except if they bring an HR44. Of course, then the other boxes you might have are still slow though the HR24s aren't horribly so.


Right, but it also depends on how they are used. HR22 used for recording but viewed through a HR44 is different than using the HR22 directly. Of course it's also different even directly on the HR22 if you are just going from a playlist and not changing live channels, scrolling through guide etc.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Diana C said:


> If the FCC process continues along the path it is currently on, in a few years we may be able to buy any STBs we want from any manufacturer and use it with any provider. Then you will see everybody's equipment improve.


The same company that designed the CVP-2 standard (which is what I think the cable companies are discussing using) also designed Directv's RVU. From what I can tell from the application stack, if they aren't identical they're very very close. Sure would be nice to have everything from a Directv or cable company 'server' (basically a headless box with a bunch of tuners, which might end up built into the LNB) to Apple TV to Roku and so on all speaking the same protocol so the same client could receive them all.

You supply the clients (which may be built into your TV eventually) and other devices capable of saving streams that are allowed to be saved to a hard drive. No more worrying about losing your recordings if your Genie dies, no more worrying about running out of space - you'd control how much storage you have. They support the content of a remote UI similar to RVU, but I don't think that's required.

It sounds too good to be true, so the Comcasts and TWCs of the world will probably find a way to stay proprietary so they can keep that juicy STB rental income. Or force everyone to use their crappy UI so they can keep pushing ads at people when they look at the guide.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Diana C said:


> If the FCC process continues along the path it is currently on, in a few years we may be able to buy any STBs we want from any manufacturer and use it with any provider. Then you will see everybody's equipment improve.


The move to MPEG4 will help ... the challenge today would be to make a receiver that is DBS and DSS compatible that would work with either satellite system. For bonus points make that receiver work with "cable". But do not forget the security - the third party box would need to honor and protect the security of any system it connected to. Not an impossible task - but a show stopper if security isn't adequate.

I am not sure having multiple designers and vendors will make a better product. Existing builders for DirecTV have a leg up with DirecTV (basically selling theri existing receivers direct to customers instead of via DirecTV) but for other vendors to create ANY product they are going to need to be able to get a return on their investment and make money. Paying a third party full retail for the box (unless there was some discount offered for signing a contract with a provider at the time of purchase).

I look at the concept of "bring your own receiver" much like the way cellphones are sold. One can pay full retail and sign up with any carrier (some offer a discount for BYOD). Or one can get hundreds of dollars off of their phone by signing a contract. But can one buy a phone that works with every carrier? Not many exits that can do everything a phone build for a specific provider can do.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

James Long said:


> The move to MPEG4 will help ... the challenge today would be to make a receiver that is DBS and DSS compatible that would work with either satellite system. For bonus points make that receiver work with "cable". But do not forget the security - the third party box would need to honor and protect the security of any system it connected to. Not an impossible task - but a show stopper if security isn't adequate.


That's not how this is supposed to work. Directv would still provide you a receiver - basically a headless box with multiple tuners that serves CVP-2 streams (which are similar or possibly the same as RVU) Dish would provide you the same thing that would serve CVP-2 streams, as would the cable companies except they have QAM tuners in theirs.

You could subscribe to Directv, Dish, and Comcast simultaneously, and have your one Directv box hooked up the Directv dish, your one Dish box hooked up with your Dish dish, and your one Comcast box hooked up to their cable entering your house. Everything else you supply. You'd have a CVP-2 client, maybe built into your TV or maybe a little HDMI stick like a Chromecast, that could talk to all of them and you could switch between watching Directv one minute, Dish the next, then Comcast after that. You could have a DVR from Tivo, or maybe you have a client running on your PC, and you could record Directv, Dish and Comcast content simultaneously on the same DVR (it is Tivo's problem to provide you a good interface for this) The CVP-2 client at your TV could communicate with the Tivo or your PC to set recordings, so it would work just like a Genie Client or Joey as far as setting recordings.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

APB101 said:


> I called about this months ago.
> 
> *DirecTV told me that its engineering department knows.*
> 
> It's still a problem. It will be a response that reminds me of trying to awaken a deep-sleeping person. It takes a while to come to.


Know what?

In my book, they're the cause. It's called bloating software.

The only fixed I know of is a complete rewrite of the code.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

rynorama said:


> RCN and Service Electric are better. I know 99% of the country does not have 3 choices but I do.


You must be in the Lehigh Valley! Me too! But sadly I can't get RCN or Service Electric.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> You must be in the Lehigh Valley! Me too! But sadly I can't get RCN or Service Electric.


How come? Are you in a private development?


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> How come? Are you in a private development?


No, I'm 1/2 mile beyond the reach of cable! And Blue Ridge is the cable co I'm my township.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Yep, we paid Blue Ridge $4000 in 2001 to run cable a 1/2 mile into one of my rental properties. 
But I'm glad we did, because we have 7 families now at that location.
Even Verizon won't run wires there.
Very heavy woods, and rules a regulations on tree removal are very strict.
So Satellite is very difficult to obtain a LOS.


----------



## CTJon (Feb 5, 2007)

I have found in the past the slowness between channels was caused by having DirectV determine the HD Resolutions rather than using just one. Don't remember which settings etc. allowed that but it seemed to be "testing" resolutons before selecting one and showing item.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

CTJon said:


> I have found in the past the slowness between channels was caused by having DirectV determine the HD Resolutions rather than using just one. Don't remember which settings etc. allowed that but it seemed to be "testing" resolutons before selecting one and showing item.


That is the NATIVE setting. Setting NATIVE to ON, would pass the resolution of the show as it is received. Thus as you flipped through channels with different resolutions, the TV has to "resync" every time. With NATIVE set to OFF, DIRECTV® either up-converts or passes through to a set resolution. Thus, no re-sync and faster channel changes.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Indeed. But how the TV handles the changes is important as to whether it's speedy or not. I keep mine on native, and experience no lagging.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> Yep, we paid Blue Ridge $4000 in 2001 to run cable a 1/2 mile into one of my rental properties.
> But I'm glad we did, because we have 7 families now at that location.
> Even Verizon won't run wires there.
> Very heavy woods, and rules a regulations on tree removal are very strict.
> So Satellite is very difficult to obtain a LOS.


Not to get off topic but DSL should be available there, if not already by the end of the year. PA has a 100% DSL deployment law ... That's how we finally got our DSL here!


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Laxguy said:


> Indeed. But how the TV handles the changes is important as to whether it's speedy or not. I keep mine on native, and experience no lagging.


Indeed, but there is a lag, nonetheless.


----------



## energyx (Aug 8, 2011)

I've had DTV since 2011. Started with an HR24 and still have it, as well as an HR34. Both have gotten progressively slower over the past couple years, and I blame the software updates. Same resolution settings, same peaked satellite signals... even the same TV on the HR34. They have done something with all the updates to make the "older" hardware slower and slower. I don't need any new features if it means the basics of changing channels will suffer. It's almost painful to switch channels, even when simply typing in the channel you want. Forget any type of channel surfing as the HR24 sometimes takes up to 20-30 seconds to decide if it wants to do something. I've tried CLEARMYBOX on both with no real change. My contract is up in August and unless they improve this somehow, I'm seriously looking at alternatives.

On a side note, my grandmother called because her H25 got so bad and they left her with an old H23-600. I didn't know anything about it until after the call, or I would have told her not to bother.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

Laxguy said:


> Indeed. But how the TV handles the changes is important as to whether it's speedy or not. I keep mine on native, and experience no lagging.


Up until very recently, this used to be the case for me as well. Even on my old HR21. TVs had no problem keeping up with the res changes. Now, though, it seems like both the HR21 (and also the H25) seem to have to cycle through the entire res spectrum every other time the channel is changed. They used to go directly to the required resolution quickly, and now they act as if they have to start at 480i and go through the entire spectrum, even sometimes between same resolution channels (I can watch the res lights on the HR).

I'm not sure what changed, but it definitely takes longer than it should when it didn't used to, even a month ago.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

So, in the meantime, you've turned native off?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> Not to get off topic but DSL should be available there, if not already by the end of the year. PA has a 100% DSL deployment law ... That's how we finally got our DSL here!


 Verizon started installing Home LTE services since last summer. They have stopped adding DSL customers as they are at Max capacity.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

damondlt said:


> Verizon started installing Home LTE services since last summer. They have stopped adding DSL customers as they are at Max capacity.


Maybe they say it is because of capacity, but they just don't want to sell it anymore. They want to get out of the copper wire business all together. They want you to go FiOS or wireless. If they could, they would rip all the copper down and sell it for scrap (and make a pretty penny doing so, too).


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Diana C said:


> Maybe they say it is because of capacity, but they just don't want to sell it anymore. They want to get out of the copper wire business all together. They want you to go FiOS or wireless. If they could, they would rip all the copper down and sell it for scrap (and make a pretty penny doing so, too).


Very well could be , but any event they have stopping adding landline internet customers.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> Verizon started installing Home LTE services since last summer. They have stopped adding DSL customers as they are at Max capacity.





Diana C said:


> Maybe they say it is because of capacity, but they just don't want to sell it anymore. They want to get out of the copper wire business all together. They want you to go FiOS or wireless. If they could, they would rip all the copper down and sell it for scrap (and make a pretty penny doing so, too).


But in PA it is a state law, look up Act 183 of 2004. They are required to provide it. They built a brand new RT and DSLAM for me and my 10 neighbors, fed with fiber.

I know they are getting away from DSL, but it's here to stay whether they like it or not.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> Very well could be , but any event they have stopping adding landline internet customers.


Why do you say that? Have you called to check?


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> Why do you say that? Have you called to check?


Yes, several times just to see if they had the 15 MBPS dsl.
The said they are not adding addtional dsl customers in my area .
Just LTE services.
And the Act 183 is Broadband, not specifically that they have to add and provide DSL landline services.
Its says nothing about running new lines. It just says it has to update the existing lines by 2015.

But by all means I'm not going to argue with them.
But by all means you can.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

damondlt said:


> Yes, several times just to see if they had the 15 MBPS dsl.
> The said they are not adding addtional dsl customers in my area .
> Just LTE services.
> And the Act 183 is Broadband, not specifically that they have to add and provide DSL landline services.
> ...


I think that was just a line they told you. 15 Mbps might not be available, but I am sure 3 is. the reps on the phone don't know anything about the state law.

I was the "aggregator" for my area, collected forms to turn in to speed up the deployment. I also talked on the phone with a woman from the state Department of Economic Development, which is responsible for the legislation.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> The move to MPEG4 will help ... the challenge today would be to make a receiver that is DBS and DSS compatible that would work with either satellite system.


The downlink reception challenge is all in the LNB assembly.

The assist from MPEG4 comes in the form of forcing hold-outs to upgrade to equipment that can handle it.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Diana C said:


> Hence the AT&T deal...that would give both companies everything they need to compete.
> 
> But you are right. But why do they get away with slow, poorly designed, software? Because if you DON'T have a good cable alternative, and you are a sports fan, you want DirecTV and ONLY DirecTV equipment can be used. Everyone that is happy with DirecTV as a service, but unhappy with their hardware would follow and support the current FCC process to select the successor to CableCard, which will be applied to satellite and IPTV based linear TV as well. That will open up the satellite providers to competition from TiVo, Western Digital, Arris and Cisco, just to name a few.
> 
> ...


This system used to exist and the majority of customer's hated it. One of the largest complaints would be customer's having different remotes, functions, menu's in different rooms because of different manufacturers. Customer's also balked at the upfront cost of the equipment. There's is clearly room for improvement with DIRECTV equipment but for the average customer they just don't care that much. Speed is is a nice thing to have but given that most people don't channel surf anymore and most customer's don't stay on top of the technology that their company offers it's just not a factor.

Now the OP is specifically claiming issues with changing channels. If you have native on I would turn it off as that adds a considerable delay when changing channels. Without really explaining if it was a specific instance, which it usually is that causes a post like this, there's no way to really offer any advice.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> This system used to exist and the majority of customer's hated it. One of the largest complaints would be customer's having different remotes, functions, menu's in different rooms because of different manufacturers..


Well, the point would be that if you choose to use TiVos, you would have their menus and remote. If you choose to use Arris/Pace equipment, then you use those menus and remote. The goal of the FCC rules are and continue to be to foster innovation. If DirecTV and Dish had to compete with TiVo, Silicon Dust, WD, et.al, just as cable does today, it would drive improvements in their hardware/software. Do you think the cable companies would be deploying the Arris Home Media Server today if it were not for TiVo having come out with an equivalent platform (the Roamio) more than a year earlier?

TiVo's retail subscriber count is rising at a rate not seen for years...largely because they have what is arguably the best DVR available, and because TiVo is exploiting cord-cutting (where there is no provider sponsored equipment) to sell a LOT of OTA capable Roamios. I think that shows that the right product for the market will be embraced by users.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

mrknowitall526 said:


> I think that was just a line they told you. 15 Mbps might not be available, but I am sure 3 is. the reps on the phone don't know anything about the state law.
> 
> I was the "aggregator" for my area, collected forms to turn in to speed up the deployment. I also talked on the phone with a woman from the state Department of Economic Development, which is responsible for the legislation.


Okay, if Landline don't exist, then not sure how they can provide anything other than LTE.
But again , don't really care because Verizon sucks anyway.


----------



## Reaper (Jul 31, 2008)

dpeters11 said:


> I don't know if Dish boxes are faster, but if they are, is it because they have better programming or because they reboot them nightly?


I had a Hopper up until about a year ago, and now have the HR44 Genie. The Hopper was faster and had a better UI, no question. Rebooting nightly is a bit of a cheat, but that's easily overlooked and forgotten because the box performs so well.


----------



## inf0z (Oct 16, 2011)

lparsons21 said:


> Short of getting a HR44, there really is no speeding up D*'s other boxes in any meaningful way. Whether it was relatively weak hardware or poor programming, the slowness is and has been there for some time. A service call isn't going to make it better except if they bring an HR44. Of course, then the other boxes you might have are still slow though the HR24s aren't horribly so.


I agree with this suggestion. The HR44 is quick. Also depending on the last time you upgraded and account status you MIGHT be eligible for a reduced cost or free upgrade. If you have the protection plan on your account, that might also make your account eligible for a reduced cost or free upgrade (this is dependent on how long you've had the protection plan, and when the last time you upgraded or ordered an additional receiver).


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

harsh said:


> The downlink reception challenge is all in the LNB assembly.
> 
> The assist from MPEG4 comes in the form of forcing hold-outs to upgrade to equipment that can handle it.


It is not the LNB but the receiver where the DVB-S/DVB-S2/DSS encoding is interpreted. That said even if you wanted one box able to tune both Directv & Dish (you won't, as I explained above) it is a solved problem - substantially all DVB-S2 chipsets available today also support DSS. It is highly likely the Hopper uses a chip that supports DSS, even though it doesn't need it. Likewise, Genies almost certainly support reception of Dish's "turbo" transponders with reduced roll off even though that's not part of DVB standards.

As chips with more and more transistors are able to be made, the marginal cost of supporting niche protocols like DSS in all chips you ship (even though it is only needed in chips destined for Directv receivers) is less than the marginal cost of maintaining a separate SKU.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Reaper said:


> I had a Hopper up until about a year ago, and now have the HR44 Genie. The Hopper was faster and had a better UI, no question. Rebooting nightly is a bit of a cheat, but that's easily overlooked and forgotten because the box performs so well.


As long as you're not a night owl, since the reboot can't be changed (unless they have fixed that). I can't comment on the UI, the only Dish UI I've seen I hated, but that wasn't on a Hopper.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

dpeters11 said:


> As long as you're not a night owl, since the reboot can't be changed (unless they have fixed that). I can't comment on the UI, the only Dish UI I've seen I hated, but that wasn't on a Hopper.


My neighbor across the street has Dish and in her setup somewhere is the option to choose the time of day / night that you want it to reboot. It was defaulted to 3 am.

Something else I noticed is that you must choose the output setting. It did not have an Automatic or native ON / OFF like we do.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

Laxguy said:


> So, in the meantime, you've turned native off?


Nah, I just put up with the newly-reintroduced lagginess. PQ is generally better on my main set with native on. I might turn it off occasionally if I'm checking up on a ballgame or something and get tired of the complete cycling every time I switch back and forth.

(Thinking it might be just an HDMI thing, I unplugged the HDMI and the HR was still res-cycling on the TV using component. Not sure why it has to do that now when it didn't used to...)


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Delroy E Walleye said:


> Nah, I just put up with the newly-reintroduced lagginess. PQ is generally better on my main set with native on. I might turn it off occasionally if I'm checking up on a ballgame or something and get tired of the complete cycling every time I switch back and forth.
> 
> (Thinking it might be just an HDMI thing, I unplugged the HDMI and the HR was still res-cycling on the TV using component. Not sure why it has to do that now when it didn't used to...)


Have you tried unchecking all but the 720p and the 1080i unless you do PPVs and then you might need the 1080p.


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

jimmie57 said:


> Have you tried unchecking all but the 720p and the 1080i unless you do PPVs and then you might need the 1080p.


Good idea. I'll give this a try to see if it speeds anything up. Although, 480i does look better native on my set, I don't use it enough to justify the lag. Thanks.


----------



## ejbvt (Aug 14, 2011)

rynorama said:


> Enough is enough. I've defended DTV because I thought picture quality has been better with more HDtv channels. But come on, I just can not take how unresponsive and slow the boxes are any more. Close to $200 for what? The almost ability to change channels at will? The almost ability to watch what you want? PLEASE, do not tell me to reset my box, or change to guide before channel changes, or any of the other fixes and tricks. Guess what, it's horribly written code, nothing more. Two kids into great college programming degrees and I've been convinced that DTV does not care about their customers otherwise they would take a day or three and rewrite the GUI that I now know is unbelievably simple. All this and I've not even brought up the FACT that I have two local cable companies and I have witnessed both of them 100% faster than DTV. RCN and Service Electric are better. I know 99% of the country does not have 3 choices but I do. Too much money for slow BS. They don't understand seconds count. Cable companies will last, DTV wonm't. Why? Cable cutters will still have internet. DTV will have nothing. I just think $200 per month is not worth the horribly slow channel changes when I see cable working just fine.


The issue you are experiencing is because of your receivers. If you got a HR44 and some clients and/or maybe and a couple HR24s, your experience would GREATLY improved. I was in the same boat as you - I couldn't take my HR34. Miserable, primitive machine.

I know others have said this, too, but hopefully seeing it more will help...

As for the actual guide, yeah, it's old-school. The not-so-new black guide doesn't show enough info and is harder to read than it should be. Logos instead of a line of gibberish would be nice, too. There have been improvements recently, which are appreciated, but there is more room to go.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

Reaper said:


> I had a Hopper up until about a year ago, and now have the HR44 Genie. The Hopper was faster and had a better UI, no question. Rebooting nightly is a bit of a cheat, but that's easily overlooked and forgotten because the box performs so well.


I know little about Dish's setup so I don't know why the nightly reboot; if that's to fix issues in their software like slowness/crashes that would otherwise crop up or is some sort of maintenance thing to make it check for updates. But as rebooting doesn't make Directv receivers faster no matter if they've been up and running for a year (which some of mine have) even if Directv "cheated" in the same way it wouldn't help.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

slice1900 said:


> I know little about Dish's setup so I don't know why the nightly reboot; if that's to fix issues in their software like slowness/crashes that would otherwise crop up or is some sort of maintenance thing to make it check for updates. But as rebooting doesn't make Directv receivers faster no matter if they've been up and running for a year (which some of mine have) even if Directv "cheated" in the same way it wouldn't help.


Agreed that it wouldn't help on this side, but I do wonder how things would work on the Dish side if they went a few months between reboots.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

They lose their Guide data the longer you put off the nightly reboot.
That was on the VIPs.
The Hopper I'm told has no way to change the time of the nightly reboot.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

damondlt said:


> They lose their Guide data the longer you put off the nightly reboot.
> That was on the VIPs.
> The Hopper I'm told has no way to change the time of the nightly reboot.


I know that my neighbor does not have a Hopper. I did not get the whole number but it was a VIP something ( not a DVR ).


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Diana C said:


> Well, the point would be that if you choose to use TiVos, you would have their menus and remote. If you choose to use Arris/Pace equipment, then you use those menus and remote. The goal of the FCC rules are and continue to be to foster innovation. If DirecTV and Dish had to compete with TiVo, Silicon Dust, WD, et.al, just as cable does today, it would drive improvements in their hardware/software. Do you think the cable companies would be deploying the Arris Home Media Server today if it were not for TiVo having come out with an equivalent platform (the Roamio) more than a year earlier?
> 
> TiVo's retail subscriber count is rising at a rate not seen for years...largely because they have what is arguably the best DVR available, and because TiVo is exploiting cord-cutting (where there is no provider sponsored equipment) to sell a LOT of OTA capable Roamios. I think that shows that the right product for the market will be embraced by users.


I understand what you're saying but that doesn't change the point. Either customer's would have to go all TiVo or have a mix of equipment, which they hated even when TiVo was the default DVR of DIRECTV. That's not to say they hated all of the menu's or ui's but they hated having different ones all over. At the end of the day consumers don't care enough and TiVo wants to be like Apple where they dictate the terms of their software and options. My local cable company is advertising the TiVo system now as well. I know this is becoming more common so TiVo has done great strides in it's contract negotiations with them to get their brand out there again. Is it enough and will consumers really latch on? Who knows but I think their subs are not from cord cutters but from better marketing contracts with cable companies. Again though if given a choice I bet most customer's would base the decision on cost not on performance.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

mrknowitall526 said:


> Why do you say that? Have you called to check?


As a retired NYNEX employee that has kept informed via my union, CWA, I can verified the abandonment of copper by Verizon. They wont even run fiber in areas that don't meet their density formula.


----------



## mrknowitall526 (Nov 19, 2014)

Drucifer said:


> As a retired NYNEX employee that has kept informed via my union, CWA, I can verified the abandonment of copper by Verizon. They wont even run fiber in areas that don't meet their density formula.


But NYNEX is not PA. To sum up the law, Act 183 of 2004:

Universal Broadband deployment

Act 183 of 2004 requires 100% deployment of broadband service (defined as a minimum of 1.544 Mbps downstream and 128 Kbps upstream) by Incumbent Local Exchange Carriers (ILECs) to every access line in Pennsylvania - even the most rural and remote areas - no later than 2015. CenturyLink and Windstream will complete their build outs by 2013. Verizon will finish by 2015. All other ILECs were completed by 2008. The law also required all ILECs to provide universal broadband deployment for schools, industrial parks, and health care facilities no later than 2006.

http://www.newpa.com/community/broadband-initiatives

I have pictures of my brand new RT that was installed last year, along with over a mile of new copper that was run on 15 new poles to re-route our lines to connect to the RT. The RT is connected with fiber. If you dive into the legislation you'll find that the new RTs are required to be fiber fed.

Someone on DSLreports contacted a Verizon rep who is in charge of the new deployments, which can be sped up by completing a certain number of petitions in an area. She told him it was unnecessary to fill out a petition because the deployment would be complete by the end of this year. And, a contact in the state economic development corp told me they fully intend to hold Verizon accountable to the requirement or they will face fines to the state.

I see VZ trucks all over the area on a regular basis (3-4 a week) fixing various lines, including one who I saw replace a splice case that had been trash-bagged for years.

And a link to Verizon's PA website: http://www.verizon.com/about/community/pa_vhsi.html


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Diana C said:


> If DirecTV and Dish had to compete with TiVo, Silicon Dust, WD, et.al, just as cable does today, it would drive improvements in their hardware/software.


Imagine what would happen if DIRECTV had to admit transfer capabilities to their programming providers come contract time. They've been avoiding it like the plague thus far (GenieGo being an almost negligible exception). Ad skipping isn't something they've wanted to visit either but if another vendor's DVR delivered it on DIRECTV's system, the contract negotiation parameters would be different.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

damondlt said:


> They lose their Guide data the longer you put off the nightly reboot.
> That was on the VIPs.
> The Hopper I'm told has no way to change the time of the nightly reboot.


I just was in the manual for the Hopper for another post. It does show and tell you how to change the nightly reboot time of it also.

Another thing I noticed is an esata connection and it says coming soon.
I would assume that when it is available then DTV would have use of the USB connection.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

jimmie57 said:


> I just was in the manual for the Hopper for another post. It does show and tell you how to change the nightly reboot time of it also.


Manuals do not always match the product.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

James Long said:


> Manuals do not always match the product.


very true, specially nowadays that products gets updated (software) very frequently. If you were to look on a DIRECTV® Genie/HR manual you may find that they do YT, that is no longer the case.

Of course, manuals (online versions) from time to time get updated as well, but not as fast as the electronics get updated.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

James Long said:


> Manuals do not always match the product.


I am aware of that but since I do not have a Hopper it is all the info that I have.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

I've just heard what others here said about the Hopper, and that was the Nightly reboot wasn't changeable .

But even when I had my VIPs, the nightly reboot was nothing to complain about IMO. For 10 minutes in the middle of the night, to have a flawlessly working receiver for the other 23 hours and 50 minutes IMO it was welcome .


----------



## patmurphey (Dec 21, 2006)

The Hopper nightly reboot does not interfere with recording. I believe you get a prompt to delay if you're watching live. (I'm never up to see it.) If you are watching and want no interruption, all you have to do is hit record a the beginning of your show. It is not hard to delete a recording.


----------



## NyDirect (Dec 21, 2011)

Not only the 34 is slow changing channels, but it ignores the remote button presses. Like skip ahead or skip back. Press 10 times and it does it once. Or once now and 9 more in 2 minutes. When fast forward (or rewind) reaches the spot you want, then hit play button and it keeps zooming past.
Randomly ignoring button presses, or saving them up until it feels like doing them really sucks.
Already on a replaced 34 and it is no better. Maybe I need to be a pain until they give me a 4 without a new contract


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

Changing channels has always been slower on Satellite vs. Cable. But I have to wonder if new hardware designed with Broadcom's new BCM4258 would help. The 4258 chip has something called full band capture. Instead of individual discrete tuners, it captures the entire 950-2150 MHz spectrum in a single chip. Details here: https://www.broadcom.com/products/Satellite/Satellite-Set-Top-Box-Solutions/BCM4528

So if the entire spectrum is presented to the receiver, then maybe the software defined radio driver that controls the filtering of this signal would work much better in conjunction with Broadcoms Fast RTV feature commonly seen in newer cable boxes and DTA's (details on Fast RTV here: https://www.broadcom.com/products/features/fastrtv.php ).

Full band capture digital SoC's have started to see their way into the latest DOCSIS 3.0 cable modems, allowing full 1 GHz tuning in one pass. This allows the software to define if the modem can do 8, 16, 24, or 32 channel bonding. It also allows the operator to put DOCSIS channels anywhere in the spectrum vs. the old rule that they had to be within 100 Mhz of each other. I have one of these modems and it provides an RF spectrum analyzer on cable without disturbing any of the existing 16 bonded downstream channels. This multi-threaded like capability must be because of the full band capture.

So imagine this technology taken to DirecTV. If you change the channel, in reality the next channel is already 'tuned'. Fast RTV kicks in to filter the proper PID's and frequency out of whats already tuned and perhaps we would see a huge improvement. I'm hopeful that the physics of slow satellite channel tuning can be improved or overcome by technology. You pair this with the native function off, and you could have cable DTA like channel surf-ability.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

cypherx said:


> Changing channels has always been slower on Satellite vs. Cable. But I have to wonder if new hardware designed with Broadcom's new BCM4258 would help. The 4258 chip has something called full band capture. Instead of individual discrete tuners, it captures the entire 950-2150 MHz spectrum in a single chip. Details here: https://www.broadcom.com/products/Satellite/Satellite-Set-Top-Box-Solutions/BCM4528
> 
> So if the entire spectrum is presented to the receiver, then maybe the software defined radio driver that controls the filtering of this signal would work much better in conjunction with Broadcoms Fast RTV feature commonly seen in newer cable boxes and DTA's (details on Fast RTV here: https://www.broadcom.com/products/features/fastrtv.php ).
> 
> ...


This not a chip issue. It is a badly written bloated software issue. Because as the speed of our remote commands have progressively gotten slower over time, our STBs have remain the same. The only thing that changed is the STB software.


----------



## energyx (Aug 8, 2011)

NyDirect said:


> Not only the 34 is slow changing channels, but it ignores the remote button presses. Like skip ahead or skip back. Press 10 times and it does it once. Or once now and 9 more in 2 minutes. When fast forward (or rewind) reaches the spot you want, then hit play button and it keeps zooming past.
> Randomly ignoring button presses, or saving them up until it feels like doing them really sucks.
> Already on a replaced 34 and it is no better. Maybe I need to be a pain until they give me a 4 without a new contract


Same thing here, for about a year... At first I thought it was me, the remote, gremlins... nope. Crappy software.


----------



## WB4CS (Dec 12, 2013)

My HR44 is almost two years old now and I have had no issues with lag when using the remote. Those of you with remote issues, have you changed the batteries in your remote recently? :shrug:

My receiver is set to native output and there is a delay when changing channels if the resolution needs to change, but really it's not an issue. I haven't "channel surfed" in over a decade. I browse the guide, find what I want, and change to that channel. In under a second the channel is playing. On the rare occasion that I want to just channel surf, I either accept the delay or change my settings from native to 1080i so that they lag is gone. That slight delay is not really worth loosing my ****.


----------



## Reaper (Jul 31, 2008)

cypherx said:


> Changing channels has always been slower on Satellite vs. Cable.


This may be true, but channel changes with my Dish Hopper were noticeably faster than they are with my DirecTV HR44.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

Sure the programming feels sloppy because of the slowness. But faster chips with the newer technologies can't hurt future receivers. 

Isn't it amazing how many circles your smartphone runs around DirecTV equipment? There's just way more power in ARM multi-core architecture vs MIPS designs in set top boxes. I think there's a combination of things at play here. If the software could be optimized to make things faster, why wouldn't they have done this by now?


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

WB4CS said:


> My HR44 is almost two years old now and I have had no issues with lag when using the remote. Those of you with remote issues, *have you changed the batteries in your remote recently?* :shrug:
> 
> My receiver is set to native output and there is a delay when changing channels if the resolution needs to change, but really it's not an issue. I haven't "channel surfed" in over a decade. I browse the guide, find what I want, and change to that channel. In under a second the channel is playing. On the rare occasion that I want to just channel surf, I either accept the delay or change my settings from native to 1080i so that they lag is gone. That slight delay is not really worth loosing my ****.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

cypherx said:


> Sure the programming feels sloppy because of the slowness. But *faster chips with the newer technologies can't hurt future receivers.*
> 
> Isn't it amazing how many circles your smartphone runs around DirecTV equipment? There's just way more power in ARM multi-core architecture vs MIPS designs in set top boxes. I think there's a combination of things at play here. If the software could be optimized to make things faster, why wouldn't they have done this by now?


And help coverup sloppy bad written code.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Dru-

Do you think you may have banged that drum enough recently??


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

Reaper said:


> This may be true, but channel changes with my Dish Hopper were noticeably faster than they are with my DirecTV HR44.


The VIPs were also noticeably faster then the HR24s too.
Maybe he's talking about C band.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

I was always told sat takes awhile to surf because all the commands and latency changing frequencies, polarities, acquiring the signal, filtering the selected stream. I think a FBC (Full Band Capture) technology would help greatly. The spectrum is already "acquired". My SB6183 cable modem boots fast because it's full band capture. The 54-1000 GHz range is already acquired. It finds the 16 DOCSIS downstream channels much faster than if it had to jump in 6 MHz increments from 54 MHz on up.

So if this technology could be applied in this scenario, maybe some of the delay would be mitigated. Maybe dish does this. Maybe dish preemptively tunes the next channel up and the next channel down so when hitting up or down, it's already halfway there.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

cypherx said:


> So if the entire spectrum is presented to the receiver, then maybe the software defined radio driver that controls the filtering of this signal would work much better in conjunction with Broadcoms Fast RTV feature commonly seen in newer cable boxes and DTA's (details on Fast RTV here: https://www.broadcom.com/products/features/fastrtv.php ).


You must not confuse wideband tuner with processing the entire spectrum. SDR is not looking at the entirety of the radio spectrum, it is simply looking a slices of the spectrum in a particular format.

DISH is using a subset of what you're talking about in the Hopper by parsing out an entire transponder into its component channels for its PTAT feature. The changes between PTAT channels aren't that much faster than channels from any other transponder as you still have to find a good place in the stream to start and make sure that the format of the display is appropriate.

The TS's gripe sounds to me to be more of an issue of the execution of channel changes lagging significantly behind the button presses; the DVR is quite simply not paying attention because it is busy doing other things (like garbage collection).


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

cypherx said:


> So if this technology could be applied in this scenario, maybe some of the delay would be mitigated. Maybe dish does this. Maybe dish preemptively tunes the next channel up and the next channel down so when hitting up or down, it's already halfway there.


Such technology would require an additional tuner to "pre-tune" the next channel. The next channel could be anywhere ... a different satellite slot or polarity or both.


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

harsh said:


> You must not confuse wideband tuner with processing the entire spectrum. SDR is not looking at the entirety of the radio spectrum, it is simply looking a slices of the spectrum in a particular format.
> 
> DISH is using a subset of what you're talking about in the Hopper by parsing out an entire transponder into its component channels for its PTAT feature. The changes between PTAT channels aren't that much faster than channels from any other transponder as you still have to find a good place in the stream to start and make sure that the format of the display is appropriate.
> 
> The TS's gripe sounds to me to be more of an issue of the execution of channel changes lagging significantly behind the button presses; the DVR is quite simply not paying attention because it is busy doing other things (like garbage collection).


I'm all to familiar with the my HR24 ignoring commands. The 44 is much better, but none can just surf (consecutive channel ups) as fast as a cable DTA.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Drucifer said:


> This not a chip issue. It is a badly written bloated software issue. Because as the speed of our remote commands have progressively gotten slower over time, our STBs have remain the same. The only thing that changed is the STB software.


Receivers are getting older as well


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

cypherx said:


> I'm all to familiar with the my HR24 ignoring commands. The 44 is much better, but none can just surf (consecutive channel ups) as fast as a cable DTA.


Right, but channel surfing is sooooo 20th Century. 

I jest, but there's little reason for surfing in my household. You see something you like, you hit R in the Guide.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

Laxguy said:


> Right, but channel surfing is sooooo 20th Century.
> 
> I jest, but there's little reason for surfing in my household. You see something you like, you hit R in the Guide
> .


I Guide Surf. When the guide is on the screen I hit channel up or down and jump a screen full of lines at a time.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

OK, J! I guess that makes us both power Guide users!


----------



## Delroy E Walleye (Jun 9, 2012)

Channel changes on the H25 seem to take between one and a half to three seconds, even within the same resolutions and adjacent channels. It seems to take a few channel changes to get the thing to realize it doesn't always need to start over with the res changes each time. 

This is a new problem, and is almost intolerable with the older HRs. But admittedly, I haven't "channel surfed" in years until I got this H25. One and a half seconds is "lightning speed" compared to the HR21! The HR's guide is almost unusable any more, and I do most "guide surfing" with the H, as well as set recordings...


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

peds48 said:


> Receivers are getting older as well


True, but what they do has been the same the same for decades. Receive a signal and transmit it to a boob tube.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

peds48 said:


> Receivers are getting older as well


Performance of solid state electronics is not measurably impacted by age unless there is a cooling issue (i.e. dust bunnies) that throttles the speed to keep it from roasting.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

I have said this before and I will repeat it.
Adding all that other stuff to the system like DECA, Whole Home, Internet, etc. is what slows them down.
I have zero problems with my remotes response and the receivers changing channels, etc. This is with my HR24 and H21.
If you are running native ON like I am, most of the delay is actually coming from the TV having to adjust to the new signal it is getting.
I have one TV hooked up with Rabbit ears, no other connections, not DTV, etc..
When I change the channel on it , it takes longer than the changing on the DTV boxes.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

James Long said:


> Such technology would require an additional tuner to "pre-tune" the next channel. The next channel could be anywhere ... a different satellite slot or polarity or both.


Surely cypherx's scheme is based on delivering the entire spectrum at once to all receivers and that's not possible with 2.5GHz of coax bandwidth.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

jimmie57 said:


> I have said this before and I will repeat it.


Repeating it doesn't make it right.


> Adding all that other stuff to the system like DECA, Whole Home, Internet, etc. is what slows them down.


DECA is pretty much transparent to the receiver as it is all done in hardware and with DMA access. The only programming involved in occasionally configuring the hardware.

What slows them down is inefficient high level programming that must port easily between chipsets of substantially different vintages.

Many of these things you blame only come into play when they are being used. The system doesn't have to maintain an active Internet conversation to support fetching things from the Internet in "pull" fashion. There's a part that may be actively listening for SHEF traffic but I can't imagine that is a particularly intense process.

I think it is pretty obvious that a DVR doesn't have to be entertaining a WHDS session to be slow.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

harsh said:


> Repeating it doesn't make it right.
> DECA is pretty much transparent to the receiver as it is all done in hardware and with DMA access. The only programming involved in occasionally configuring the hardware.
> 
> What slows them down is inefficient high level programming that must port easily between chipsets of substantially different vintages.
> ...


Like I said, I have zero of that stuff and have no problems.
Others have disconnected their systems from the internet and the slowness was instantly gone.
I don't know why.
I do know that every time I think of connecting to the net I see reasons not to do it.
Lots of people said the HR23 was terrible slow. Mine wasn't. I woke up one morning and all the lights were out and it smelled like an electrical component had burned.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

IMHO, there are two main reasons for delays in stuff like changing channels. One, the part of the software that polls (listens for) IR commands does not run often enough. If you hit a button and it isn't looking at that moment the press is lost entirely, though usually the button is pressed long enough that it'll wake up before it is released. The second is the GUI is slow to draw things. The GUI changes when you hit a button to change channels, and it takes time to draw.

What I don't understand is why some receivers of the same model are faster than others. I have seven H24-700s, and some are noticeably quicker to respond than others. This changes once in a while - after a power outage a couple years ago one receiver that was really slow became faster, but a couple others became slower. I wish there was a way to truly reset a receiver to new out of the box condition, but there must be something in the NVRAM settings that causes it to slow down that survives stuff like red button resets, 'reset and clear everything' and CLEARMYBOX.

Even with the SHEF commands the response time is variable (between 2/3 of a second and nearly 1.5 seconds) I posted about this with some data last year, one of the mods said that a Directv engineer saw my post and forwarded a couple questions he had which I answered, but I never heard anything further and the issue still exists. Since Directv appears to be phasing out active development of the H2x/HR2x series, I suspect the long term fix will be to switch to whatever equipment replaces these and hope they are so overpowered CPU/memory wise they can overcome poorly written software.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Drucifer said:


> True, but what they do has been the same the same for decades. Receive a signal and transmit it to a boob tube.


pretty sure a hard drive does not perform the same way five years from now as it does new from the box.

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

harsh said:


> Performance of solid state electronics is not measurably impacted by age unless there is a cooling issue (i.e. dust bunnies) that throttles the speed to keep it from roasting.


Directv doesn't use SShard drives. And yes, you would be surprised the conditions these HRs are kept like. Having roaches sleeping inside your DVR by no means is helpful.

Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## cypherx (Aug 27, 2010)

Any chip is considered solid state, so that means the CPU, RAM, etc.

Anyway I put a 64gb SSD in my HR24 once to hold me over while I could get a replacement hard drive. System ran noticeably quicker vs the 5900 rpm drive that originally came in it. But 64gb drive after it makes its 3 partitions isn't enough space for any recordings... 0% free, but still preformed better.

That has something to do with it, but it was still not as fast as an HR44. Yeah code has a lot to do with it, but newer generation hardware makes a big difference. I'd love to see the transition to faster multi-core ARM based system, which I think is required to decode 4k HEVC. Broadcom's latest 4k capable STB on a Chip SOC is multi-core ARM at its heart. It's about time.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

cypherx said:


> That has something to do with it, but it was still not as fast as an HR44. Yeah code has a lot to do with it, but newer generation hardware makes a big difference. I'd love to see the transition to faster multi-core ARM based system, which I think is required to decode 4k HEVC. Broadcom's latest 4k capable STB on a Chip SOC is multi-core ARM at its heart. It's about time.


The CPU doesn't matter for HEVC decoding, that is done by a dedicated block on the SoC. Same is true in current generation receivers for their MPEG2/MPEG4 decoders.

There have been faster MIPS SoCs with multiple cores available for a while but they weren't designed into STBs because they are trying to make them for as little money as possible. I don't know the clock rate of their latest ARM SoCs, but I suspect if you compared its computational ability to what the iPhone 6 or GS6 is capable of you'd be sorely disappointed


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

The ARM stuff isn't used for decoding, decryption, rendering text or anything like that. It is used to supervise these subsystems at a high level, process user inputs (via remote or SHEF) and maintain the guide.


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

peds48 said:


> pretty sure a hard drive does not perform the same way five years from now as it does new from the box.
> Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk


As long as it is defragmented regularly, a hard drive should perform at 100% of its original specs right up to the moment if fails. While a marginal component on the embedded controller could cause problems, if a drive survives the first few weeks without failure it should run for years.

The key is defragmentation - based on my unscientific observations over 8 years and 7 different DirecTV DVRs, I don't think they have a defragmenter in their software stack. As the disk fills up, the device slows down. As the system ages, it gets progressively slower. While I am sure that there are places where things could be made more efficient in software, the lack of effective defragmentation may be as large a factor.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

Diana C said:


> As long as it is defragmented regularly, a hard drive should perform at 100% of its original specs right up to the moment if fails. \


I disagree 100%. I have never, ever needed to difrag any of my Macs, yet overtime they slow down. Reading and writing speeds tends to take a dump with age on all PCs. Even when I used Windows (terrible days) defraging the hard drive only helped so much. Linux is known for not needing defrag.

http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-explains-why-linux-doesnt-need-defragmenting/


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

peds48 said:


> I disagree 100%. I have never, ever needed to difrag any of my Macs, yet overtime they slow down. Reading and writing speeds tends to take a dump with age on all PCs. Even when I used Windows (terrible days) defraging the hard drive only helped so much. Linux is known for not needing defrag.
> 
> http://www.howtogeek.com/115229/htg-explains-why-linux-doesnt-need-defragmenting/


You can disagree all you want, but you're 100% wrong. If it averages 100 MB/sec reading the entire disk the day you buy it, it will do the same the next day, and the next, and the next until the day it dies. The only exception is if it is throwing off errors and has to retry reads, but every modern OS supports S.M.A.R.T. which will alert you to such errors so that doesn't happen silently. I've been an enterprise IT consultant for 15 years, and have consulted for a number of Fortune 100 companies, and a lot of my work has been with multi-million dollar disk arrays sold by EMC. I can assure you that drives do not slow down due to age, not even by a single percent.

Fragmentation is irrelevant to the performance of a hard drive, fragmentation is a filesystem problem it does not affect the hard drive itself. A 1TB hard drive like in the Genie can only see the 2 billion 512 byte blocks it has, it doesn't see "files", and therefore cannot be fragmented. If you took a really badly fragmented Windows drive and tried to read all the data file by file it may take forever because fragments of each file (hence the name...) may be in many locations on the disk spread across all those tiny blocks the hard drive has. Hard drives are mechanical devices, and having to go to dozens of places on the disk to read a single file really makes them perform poorly. However, if you dump the entire contents of the disk block by block (such as using dd on Linux or a shell on the Mac) it is just as fast the day it was purchased - easily hundreds or thousands of times faster than the time required to read a badly fragmented file. Because the fragmentation is only in the filesystem, and defragmenting fixes the filesystem so the files are in contiguous (or less discontiguous, at least) blocks instead of spread all over. The hard drive's actual performance is the same before and after defragmentation.

Fragmentation is very unlikely to affect a DVR, not because it runs Linux but because it has a small number of very large files. If you had a Windows machine that had only files that were over 1GB in size, you would never have to defragment it, because you'd have so many contiguous blocks making up each file most of your reads/writes would be near the max speed of the drive. Likewise if you only had files that were a few KB in size you wouldn't have fragmentation problems either. It is when you have a mix of small and large files and a filesystem that doesn't handle that combination well that you can run into issues. Whatever is going on with Directv receivers that makes them slow, it has nothing to do with the drive being fragmented (if that was the reason, it would sure be odd how some of my H24 receivers are so much slower than others, since they don't have hard drives!)

SSDs are a different animal, and they can suffer from internal fragmentation (especially ones sold a few years ago) but a running a defragmenter on Windows is the last things you want to do. That would make its internal fragmentation WORSE!

The best way to keep any filesystem healthy is to never fill it beyond 90% full. If you get beyond 95% full and especially if you let it get completely full Linux and Mac filesystems will become fragmented.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

The OS plays a major role in speed as does the CPU, not to state the obvious or anything. Software changes, more apps, more complex apps, all add to apparent slowness over time.


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

slice1900 said:


> You can disagree all you want, but you're 100% wrong. If it averages 100 MB/sec reading the entire disk the day you buy it, it will do the same the next day, and the next, and the next until the day it dies.


In perfect lab conditions, correct, in real life, not so much.


----------



## damondlt (Feb 27, 2006)

slice1900 said:


> You can disagree all you want, but you're 100% wrong. If it averages 100 MB/sec reading the entire disk the day you buy it, it will do the same the next day, and the next, and the next until the day it dies. The only exception is if it is throwing off errors and has to retry reads, but every modern OS supports S.M.A.R.T. which will alert you to such errors so that doesn't happen silently. I've been an enterprise IT consultant for 15 years, and have consulted for a number of Fortune 100 companies, and a lot of my work has been with multi-million dollar disk arrays sold by EMC. I can assure you that drives do not slow down due to age, not even by a single percent.
> 
> Fragmentation is irrelevant to the performance of a hard drive, fragmentation is a filesystem problem it does not affect the hard drive itself. A 1TB hard drive like in the Genie can only see the 2 billion 512 byte blocks it has, it doesn't see "files", and therefore cannot be fragmented. If you took a really badly fragmented Windows drive and tried to read all the data file by file it may take forever because fragments of each file (hence the name...) may be in many locations on the disk spread across all those tiny blocks the hard drive has. Hard drives are mechanical devices, and having to go to dozens of places on the disk to read a single file really makes them perform poorly. However, if you dump the entire contents of the disk block by block (such as using dd on Linux or a shell on the Mac) it is just as fast the day it was purchased - easily hundreds or thousands of times faster than the time required to read a badly fragmented file. Because the fragmentation is only in the filesystem, and defragmenting fixes the filesystem so the files are in contiguous (or less discontiguous, at least) blocks instead of spread all over. The hard drive's actual performance is the same before and after defragmentation.
> 
> ...


Well said.


----------



## mkdtv21 (May 27, 2007)

Do we have absolute proof that the HR's are not using the NDS platform anymore for their software. Cause when I see the way the current software is it still has reminiscences of the NDS platform including Directv active, the colored buttons such as hitting red to get up a service such as score guide or an interactive advertisment. All of this that is used on Sky tv service in the UK which is done by Newscorp which started this stuff on Directv when they once owned them. When Directv was free of Newscorp why didn't they make new boxes completely different from something like the R15. Even the genies user interface has a very similar layout to the old R15. With the exception of the HR44 all the Directv remotes look the same dating back to the D10s. When Directv decided to make the Genies why didn't they create new boxes and software completely new and different from the ground up. Dish did that with the Hopper when comparing to the 722. It just seems to me that the software is the real problem with the performance issues. I bet if you put a completely different software platform on the HR24 that was written well and had even more features than the HR44 it would run a million times better than the HR44.


----------



## slice1900 (Feb 14, 2013)

peds48 said:


> In perfect lab conditions, correct, in real life, not so much.


Yes, in real life too. A hard drive's read/write speed is dictated by the speed at which data moves under the read head. The disk rotates at the same rate every time, whether it is in lab conditions or inside a PC in the home of someone who owns five cats but never vacuums or dusts leaving the air vents completely clogged and running hot 24x7.

Any sort of physical damage (whether via surge, vibration, temperature, moisture or manufacturing defect) that affected either the rotation rate of the platter or the ability of the drive's head to move across the platter resulting in decreased performance you were able to measure would almost immediately render it completely inoperable. If it reached that point it wouldn't stay running long enough for you to copy all your data off it. It is not possible for it to stay in that state for months or years, any more than you can keep driving your car for months on end after it throws a rod.


----------



## jimmie57 (Jun 26, 2010)

On a fragmented disc the read / write head is constantly moving in and out to get the next bits of data. This does slow down the speed of the data transfer.
In essence this does affect the realized degradation of the initial speed of the drive.
A comparison would be like a person reading a book. If you can start on page 1 and continue reading the article you want to the end it is continuous.
If the book tells you to jump to page 50 paragraph 2 and then jump back to page 1 paragraph 3. Flipping pages definitely slows down the reading of the book.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

jimmie57 said:


> On a fragmented disc the read / write head is constantly moving in and out to get the next bits of data. This does slow down the speed of the data transfer.
> In essence this does affect the realized degradation of the initial speed of the drive.
> A comparison would be like a person reading a book. If you can start on page 1 and continue reading the article you want to the end it is continuous.
> If the book tells you to jump to page 50 paragraph 2 and then jump back to page 1 paragraph 3. Flipping pages definitely slows down the reading of the book.


If someone bought a disk and in the first three days filled it and then deleted and refilled different parts of it to the point of total defragmentation it'd work the same after three days as an old hard drive would that was just as defragmented. It's speed didn't change. What it has to accomplish to read all the data is what is changing the end user perception of its speed. De fragmenting will FOX the extra work required to read all the disk and make it's seem to be faster again.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

People are arguing semantics at this point in time.

HD read write and access times do not change over the course of it's life unless there is a failure. With that said if a drive has to look for the same information in many different places this can cause delay in usability of the device the HD is in until it has all of the information. This perception is that the HD is slow when in reality it's just not optimally setup to retrieve the specific information that is being requested.

With that said this doesn't impact performance as much as people think. Hard drives are by far the slowest component in a PC today and when people install an SSD it's usually the largest thing they can do to increase usability by removing the time it takes to retrieve the information. Unfortunately this comparison is not valid when dealing with custom built OEM products and justifies what people think is the cause of a decline in usability.

I would state that the issue isn't CPU or hard drive but either poor memory management or not enough memory. As we know from the past when going to channel 1 it would kill excess applications until it was used again. This implies that either there are memory issues. They could be something as simple as not enough to deal with new items, memory leaks in the code, or just non-optimized coding.

DIRECTV, in the past has, clearly taken a minimalist in terms of hardware requirements for machines I would guess that it's not enough memory. Given that most of these machines were designed years ago it's not going to be surprising to see older memory in use as well lower memory bandwidth being the real culprit. 

With all of that said I think we're seeing a lot of changes now compared to how things used to be the HR34 was a few years old when it was launched. The times from FCC filings to product releases has been getting shorter so that clearly indicates that they've learned from the past.

Given that the HR44 has been out for 2 years and we're not hearing the complaints that people have had of the HR34 after that time things have changed.


----------

