# Time Warner Cable's HD DVR is inadequate



## late1 (Aug 16, 2007)

I was at my sister-in-laws house to watch the bowl games today and they have a new HD plasma with a TW HR DVR box. WOW! what a bunch of crap that is.

I've been in subscriber to DirecTV since 1994 and I was totally surprised how bad the functionality was. No dual buffering and very slow channel changes. The backup function was only 2x or 3x that kept freezing. 

The image was decent, but glitched every few minutes.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

You won't find much disagreement here


----------



## bt-rtp (Dec 30, 2005)

The design of DVR hardware & software is actually very complex. There are many hard problems to solve. It's vastly different from the majority of other consumer electronic products.

Considering DirecTV came out of the gate cold with no prior experience developing a consumer DVR, they have done a pretty good job with the HR20/21.

I'd like to see them bring a more advanced DVR to market, something that gives the more demanding user what they want and also added revenue to DirecTV for their effort. This will be hard to do with the vast customer base that they have to support.

Today the HR20/21, and a good programming package from DirecTV, is the best HD service available for consumers, bar none.

My last point is that it seems to me, that it would be easier for cable companies to enhance their infrastructure to support more HD content versus what DirecTV has had to do in launching satellites and backhauling feeds to uplinks, and developing their own DVRs, not to mention RSNs and LILs. DirecTV has a much more progressive management team and strategy than all of the lousy cable companies of the U.S. 

Over the years DirecTV just seems to keep winning the race... and I'm a TV snob, I want the best.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I don't think you'll find a lot of disagreement on that. I don't know specifically which DVR you saw but it seems like cable companies tend to use the Motorola DVR which doesn't seem to have a lot of fans.


----------



## JerryElbow (Jun 14, 2007)

late1 said:


> I was at my sister-in-laws house to watch the bowl games today and they have a new HD plasma with a TW HR DVR box. WOW! what a bunch of crap that is.
> 
> I've been in subscriber to DirecTV since 1994 and I was totally surprised how bad the functionality was. No dual buffering and very slow channel changes. The backup function was only 2x or 3x that kept freezing.
> 
> The image was decent, but glitched every few minutes.


Time Warner uses different equipment and different software even on the same equipment, depending on the market area. For example, my buddy in Memphis had the same Scientific Atlanta 8300HD that I did in North Carolina but each used different software. His allowed him to add an external drive where mine did not (which really stunk as the HD capacity was only 20 hours or so on mine).

Other than capacity, I had no real issues with the SA 8300HD. I'd used two other SA HD DVRs prior to that and a TiVo prior to that and now have two HR20s as I've switched to DirecTV. I found the reliability and quality to be about equivalent (discounting the TiVo's inability to handle HD) on all of them. The user interfaces for the software varied the most, with TiVo's probalby being the most "friendly", but none of them were so bad that they were unusable.

If you were getting lousy-looking video, it was probably NOT the DVR's fault. It was more likely the signal coming into the DVR. Where I'm at, the HD signals came in fine on Time Warner, the analog channels varied from OK to lousy and the non-HD digital channels were surprisingly bad (WAY too much video breakup and dropouts). You put garbage into a DVR and the DVR will record and play back garbage. It can't fix what it's recording.

I'm not in love with TW or with cable TV but then I'm not in love with DirecTV. I will go with whoever gives me the greatest selection of HD channels that I care to watch along with the DVR to watch them when I want, all for the best price. If that's cable TV (which for now it isn't), fine. If that's satellite TV (which for now is DirecTV), equally fine. Actually, if both were equal, I'd probably go with cable TV as their upfront equipment costs are generall lower or non-existant, their commitments are shorter or non-existant and I don't have to have a satellite dish (which my neighbor HATES seeing on my house).


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

I've played with the 8300. Most electronic things, I can pick up fairly easy. I might have to get online or read the instruction manual for some small thing, but I can usually figure it out. Not those. I can't STAND them! I've played with multiple cable DVRs, even had one myself for a week. Much longer and I would have been in a psych ward lol The HR20 and the Tivo just seem so simple and easy to figure out.


----------



## dtrell (Dec 28, 2007)

the SA8300HD DOES have dual buffering. All you have to do is use the PIP function (which the DTV DVR does NOT have) and just swap between the two channels on PIP. It will then buffer both channels as long as the PIP is active. I am getting the DTV DVR this saturday, and I am sure I will not like it as much as my Time Warner SA8300.


----------



## rjheard (Dec 12, 2007)

I just switched to D* from Charter. I had a Moxi which I really liked. It's a bit better than the D* DVR and worlds better than the Motorola or Scientific Atlanta.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

the SA8300 is the most common box around these parts... it's overall a very solid/stable box from what I've seen... just doesn't have very many features... pretty stripped down... I'd take an HR20/21 any day over that box...


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

late1 said:


> I was at my sister-in-laws house to watch the bowl games today and they have a new HD plasma with a TW HR DVR box. WOW! what a bunch of crap that is.
> 
> I've been in subscriber to DirecTV since 1994 and I was totally surprised how bad the functionality was. No dual buffering and very slow channel changes. The backup function was only 2x or 3x that kept freezing.
> 
> The image was decent, but glitched every few minutes.


I found the opposite to be true at my sisters house. She has TWC with a Scentific Altantic (don't know what model). But I found the channel changes to be MUCH faster than my HR20 (mode settings were similar as to resolutions selected and such). I asked if they had any problems with it as far as getting hung-up and such, she said they haven't had to do anything since they set it up several months ago. In it's first month I have had to reset my HR20 4 times. Twice for a 'searching for signal message' that was stuck on tuner 1, once for frozen playback of a recording and once for non-functional channel changing.

As for the 'No Dual buffering' DirecTV dvrs don't offer that either, so that's a non-issue.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

I had an 8300HD when I was with Suddenlink in NC. It was a good DVR, but not at all on par with the HR20. There was no prioritization at all. Series recordings were a bit difficult to manage and there was no real conflict resolution. If you went to record a new series that conflicted with even one episode already scheduled, it gave you no way to control that.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

gregjones said:


> I had an 8300HD when I was with Suddenlink in NC. It was a good DVR, but not at all on par with the HR20. There was no prioritization at all. Series recordings were a bit difficult to manage and there was no real conflict resolution. If you went to record a new series that conflicted with even one episode already scheduled, it gave you no way to control that.


What did it do? Not allow the series to be recorded, or just decide on it's own?


----------



## webhype (Dec 28, 2007)

I had the 8300HD with TWC and it was a big adjustment using the HR20, frankly I liked the 8300HD better. If it wasn't for the amount of HD programming on D*and the constant "digital stutter" on TWC HD Channels I probably would still have TWC and the HD8300. To me the HR20 interface is just clunky and I constantly need to look at the "To Do list" to ensure I'm not recording multiple instances of the same show. The lack of a dual buffer is also an issue regardless of whatever workaround for the D* DVRs is out there.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

My parents have a TW HD DVR and it isn't too bad. Takes a bit of experimenting after being used to the HR20, but I would classify it as 'functional'. It had only a single input, so no dual HD tuners. 

The first post above complained that that one didn't have DLB. Heck, our HR20 doesn't either. At times, the HR20 also is slow at channel changes and updating the channel banner to match the channel it is tuned to.

I have noticed a bit of pixelating that far exceeds what we see with D*. Also, the PQ was far lower than D*, and they only get 8 HD channels.


----------



## Mark20 (Dec 25, 2006)

late1 said:


> I was at my sister-in-laws house to watch the bowl games today and they have a new HD plasma with a TW HR DVR box. WOW! what a bunch of crap that is.
> 
> I've been in subscriber to DirecTV since 1994 and I was totally surprised how bad the functionality was. No dual buffering and very slow channel changes. The backup function was only 2x or 3x that kept freezing.
> 
> The image was decent, but glitched every few minutes.


What make and model?


----------



## MarkN (Jul 13, 2007)

late1 said:


> I was at my sister-in-laws house to watch the bowl games today and they have a new HD plasma with a TW HR DVR box. WOW! what a bunch of crap that is.
> 
> I've been in subscriber to DirecTV since 1994 and I was totally surprised how bad the functionality was. No dual buffering and very slow channel changes. The backup function was only 2x or 3x that kept freezing.
> 
> The image was decent, but glitched every few minutes.


cable falls farther and farther behind everyday!!


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Coming from the DirecTiVo, handsdown the best DVR on the planet, I have no problems with my 8300HD, traded it in a few months ago for the newer 8300HDC, I find it a very adequate DVR, for being a DVR. I'm an electronics geek, I love gadgets and all that fun stuff, but I see DirecTV turning DVRs into what cell phones are now. A device that can do everything under the sun, but nothing all that well. While it’s a cool concept, honestly I don't want my DVR networked and able to listen to music on my DVR, share photos and all that stuff. I can connect my iPod to my home theater receiver and it's just as good. I want a cell phone that is a cell phone no a camera/MP3 Player/video camera/garbage disposal and I want a DVR that just records and records accurately,No filler or fluff, and that is the 8300HDC.

You see posts on here all the time about missing recordings and HDMI issues. My ‘crappy cable company’ DVR has never missed a recording, the guide data on ABC is correct, so for their 2 after the hour star time isn’t an issue, and I’ve never had an issue with HDMI not working, and I’m using it in conjunction with a Home Theater receiver that does HDMI switching. No issues.

This box does its job, the only things I would like to see added are

- Customizable Guide (to remove channels under 100. We have digital simulcast, and all the basic cable channels are mirrored in the 100+ range and categorized , after years with satellite starting off at channel 100, it’s just habit I guess)
- Better Search Function 
- Time Markers on the Progress Bar for recorded content
- A larger stock hard drive, the external SATA port is enabled here, and while honestly a 160GB hard drive on an HD DVR is plenty for me, too much even, even though I record 20 or so HD shows a week, a larger harddrive would be a better selling point.

I love my Scientific Atlanta DVRs, extremely slow channel changes could be due to poor signal strength. If the picture freezes every so often on a consistent basis, that could be related to poor signal strength as well, or even a failing hard drive. I had a DirecTiVo that did just that and the hard drive was going bad. 

Right now Time Warner runs three different software platforms on the DVRs, SARA, Passport and Navigator. What you have is based on your franchise. Here we have SARA and while it’s not a pretty UI, I have no issues fast forwarding or rewinding. On the new 8300HDCs there was a slight stutter issue when using skip back, it didn’t really bother me, but it that was fixed in a software update that was released a few weeks ago.


----------



## Matt9876 (Oct 11, 2007)

MarkN said:


> cable falls farther and farther behind everyday!!


The word is finally starting to get out about how far cable is falling behind.

Directv needs to get SWM "Single Wire Mode" out of testing and into the installers hands/cable customer homes.

Everyone wants a HR20/21 and most cable wired homes simply can't have a fully functional DVR.

If Directv can make it easier to switch away from cable many will !


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

kturcotte said:


> What did it do? Not allow the series to be recorded, or just decide on it's own?


In one software revision, it wouldn't let you record the new series without cancelling the other series.

In another software revision, it would cancel the original series when the second one had a conflict. This leads to entire series disappearing for no apparent reason.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

Steve Mehs said:


> - Customizable Guide (to remove channels under 100. We have digital simulcast, and all the basic cable channels are mirrored in the 100+ range and categorized , after years with satellite starting off at channel 100, it's just habit I guess)
> - Better Search Function
> - Time Markers on the Progress Bar for recorded content
> - A larger stock hard drive, the external SATA port is enabled here, and while honestly a 160GB hard drive on an HD DVR is plenty for me, too much even, even though I record 20 or so HD shows a week, a larger harddrive would be a better selling point.
> ...


The experience, as you suggest, is largely dependent on the software and the revision allowed by your cable franchise.

The version I had did not have customized guides. I found this horribly irritating, because it did have parental controls. This means you can keep kids from watching objectionable content, but you can't keep them from seeing suggestive titles on porn channels. Obviously, this was a great design.

The search function on the revision I had was unusable. Combine that with only one week of guide data and you constantly missed items.

I had an SD DirecTiVo unit, then an 8300HD and an HR20. The only one of those three to ever miss a recording was the 8300HD. It was also the only one I ever had replaced (3 times). And no, it wasn't the environment. My DVRs have always run on clean, UPS power.

I am glad you had a good experience with that model. If mine had been as pleasant, I might have been more tempted to stay with cable.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

I have two SA 8300HD DVRs with Comcast, carryovers from Adelphia. There are
a few features I would like to have, such as external HDD, blanking of unused or
undesireable channels in the guide, auto-channel switching, and a smoother GUI,
but overall it's a sweet unit. Very stable - never misses a recording, and a fast
channel change, great for habitual, old-time channel surfing.


----------



## webhype (Dec 28, 2007)

Well the good things I like about the HR20 are the built in OTA tuners (although they do have multipath issues). Customizing the guide to take out unwanted channels and it is alot quieter than my HD8300. Would like to reorder recorded programs in the list to place "low priority" recordings towards the bottom to ensure if thigs drop off they are those that I put in the bottom on the list. Was able to rearange the order of recorded shows on the HD8300 DVR, "Keep" is not sufficient on the HR20 - I think the lack of this feature (it exist in the Prioritizer in the "to do" section) is due to the fact the multiple episodes of one show are kept in a "folder" structure.


----------



## GregLee (Dec 28, 2005)

I had a TWC SA8300HD from February 2005 to October 2007, running the SARA software. It is much inferior to the HR20, overall, but there were a few nice things: snappier response, zoom/stretch applies to HD pictures, PIP/dual buffers, selectable color scheme for the IPG, an external eSATA disk adds capacity to that of the internal disk instead of replacing it.


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

Leaving the DVR out of the equation, TWC _itself_ is inadequate in my location. A baker's dozen of HD channels and not all the broadcast networks in HD.

On second thought, pathetic is a better descriptive than inadequate.


----------



## TBoneit (Jul 27, 2006)

bt-rtp said:


> Snip....
> 
> My last point is that it seems to me, that it would be easier for cable companies to enhance their infrastructure to support more HD content versus what DirecTV has had to do in launching satellites and backhauling feeds to uplinks, and developing their own DVRs, not to mention RSNs and LILs. DirecTV has a much more progressive management team and strategy than all of the lousy cable companies of the U.S.
> 
> Over the years DirecTV just seems to keep winning the race... and I'm a TV snob, I want the best.


It hs to be easier for DircTV or Echostar to upgrade one set of encoders to go from mpeg2 to mpeg4 for example...

Cable needs to run new wires past all their homes to improve service to all homes plus change boxes. Satellite needs to add capacity and maybe change out dishes and boxes only at affected subscribers.


----------



## Shield (Dec 24, 2007)

webhype said:


> I had the 8300HD with TWC and it was a big adjustment using the HR20, frankly I liked the 8300HD better. If it wasn't for the amount of HD programming on D*and the constant "digital stutter" on TWC HD Channels I probably would still have TWC and the HD8300. To me the HR20 interface is just clunky and I constantly need to look at the "To Do list" to ensure I'm not recording multiple instances of the same show. The lack of a dual buffer is also an issue regardless of whatever workaround for the D* DVRs is out there.


I completely agree. There's 2 different 8300HD that Time Warner uses, at least here in the central Ohio area. The older regular 8300HD, and a new one, the 8300HDC. The latter is horrendous and is the primary reason I switched over to Directv; it's the one with cable cards and the audio drops out all the time and the video does the digital stutter. I had the "good" one until about a month ago when it started powering off on its own - I called TWCOL and they brought out the "new" 8300HDC.
There was no 15 minute "tick" for ff/rw recorded content. The menus were painfully slow. Let's say you wanted to watch NBA Basketball - if you did a search, it'd result in a huge list that you had to be manually expanded to see all the games. Just say no to the 8300HDC. I'm thinking of dropping mine before the TW guy comes and gets it tomorrow....


----------



## dtrell (Dec 28, 2007)

Shield said:


> I completely agree. There's 2 different 8300HD that Time Warner uses, at least here in the central Ohio area. The older regular 8300HD, and a new one, the 8300HDC. The latter is horrendous and is the primary reason I switched over to Directv; it's the one with cable cards and the audio drops out all the time and the video does the digital stutter. I had the "good" one until about a month ago when it started powering off on its own - I called TWCOL and they brought out the "new" 8300HDC.
> There was no 15 minute "tick" for ff/rw recorded content. The menus were painfully slow. Let's say you wanted to watch NBA Basketball - if you did a search, it'd result in a huge list that you had to be manually expanded to see all the games. Just say no to the 8300HDC. I'm thinking of dropping mine before the TW guy comes and gets it tomorrow....


thats good to know. i guess i will keep my SA8300HD then. Does the HDC have a larger harddrive? the HD has a 160GB.


----------



## Shield (Dec 24, 2007)

dtrell said:


> thats good to know. i guess i will keep my SA8300HD then. Does the HDC have a larger harddrive? the HD has a 160GB.


It's 160. But get this - I had a 300GB drive in an external eSata bay that I used with the 8300HD. But for some reason this drive would not work (and it was set for 300) with the 8300HDC. I pulled a 750GB drive out of another box and replaced it, and it began to work.

Here's the biggest problem for me with the "C" unit:

Let's say you like MLB baseball. You browse the guide and begin watching a game. With the non-C box, you could hit "search" and it would display all the MLB games, the teams playing, and the channel as well as the time would be displayed on the right side, sorted chronologically.
With the "C" box, you have to do a manual search every time, and if the same game runs on multiple channels, you have to manually hit select to "expand" the showings in the left hand panel. Also, you cannot simply setup a series recording for sports showings.

After having Directv for a few days, I'll never go back to the stuttering, audio-dropouts of the 8300HDC.

Ever watch TNTHD on TimeWarner? If you watch a basketball game and they show a picture on the screen, the audio will always drop out multiple times.

I will say I do miss the MOJOHD channel, but that's it.


----------



## dtrell (Dec 28, 2007)

Shield said:


> It's 160. But get this - I had a 300GB drive in an external eSata bay that I used with the 8300HD. But for some reason this drive would not work (and it was set for 300) with the 8300HDC. I pulled a 750GB drive out of another box and replaced it, and it began to work.


thats because once you connect the drive to a specific unit it is then tied to that unit. you would have to reformat the drive and take all data off, then connect it to the new box and let it reformat for he new box. did you try that? and i never have a problem with TNT HD in Akron.


----------



## Shield (Dec 24, 2007)

dtrell said:


> thats because once you connect the drive to a specific unit it is then tied to that unit. you would have to reformat the drive and take all data off, then connect it to the new box and let it reformat for he new box. did you try that? and i never have a problem with TNT HD in Akron.


Oh yes, tried that several times. That external eSata cage also had a USB 2.0 port on it; in between tries I plugged it into a nearby PC and reformatted it (a few times).

The 750GB worked on the first try.


----------

