# Is the DVR921 obsolete or not?



## Raymond255 (Apr 2, 2006)

I’ve read in forums here that Dish Network will not activate new DVR921s; but eBay has a dozen 921s currently for sale. Does anyone know what the story is? 

I’m not looking to buy, I’m looking to get rid of mine; but I don’t want to deceive a buyer who is assuming that they can activate the box only to discover that Dish Network won’t do it.


----------



## mwgiii (Jul 19, 2002)

Yes and no.

New customers cannot add HD programming to the 921. Existing HD customers can add the 921 as an additional receiver. I have seen threads where non-HD customers have added the 921 as a SD receiver.


----------



## David_Levin (Apr 22, 2002)

Dish will NOT activate Hi-Def on an account that doesn't have an mpeg 4 box (921 is mpeg 2).

Dish will activate a 921. If the account already has hi-def it'll get the older mpeg 2 hi-def channels (not the new mpeg4 channels - locals, espn 2, etc). If the account only has Std-Def then that's all the 921 will get.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

If Dish do not expect to use MPEG-4 encoders for UHD, ESPN2 HD, etc in near future, then they could remove the 'ViP' flag from stream in one second and will allow to watch the channels on any HD receivers, ie 6000, 811, 921, 942. 
By they prefer keep theyr hands on your eyes .


----------



## Raymond255 (Apr 2, 2006)

Thanks for the info guys. That clears it up. Looks like I can put my 921 up for sale with a clear conscience.


----------



## mwsmith2 (Nov 15, 2004)

I don't think the flag is as much of a problem as that the old "hd pak" is simply not availible anymore. I've you've already got it, you're grandfathered in. If you don't have it, you can't get it. Really kinda sucks, because I used to prepay a year in advance and get a month free.

I've got my mail-back-box sitting right next to my TV. I may end up ebaying it. I'm not really seeing them go for much more than $230 or so...I'm not sure if the extra $30 is worth the hassle.

Michael


----------



## Kenkali (Jul 18, 2004)

Raymond255 said:


> I've read in forums here that Dish Network will not activate new DVR921s; but eBay has a dozen 921s currently for sale. Does anyone know what the story is?
> 
> I'm not looking to buy, I'm looking to get rid of mine; but I don't want to deceive a buyer who is assuming that they can activate the box only to discover that Dish Network won't do it.


are you thinking get rid of your box? I think its worth it.. just to watch OTA... Sell it to me. Mine is being kindda dying


----------



## brettbolt (Feb 22, 2006)

921s are under-valued in my opinion. I'm a 'late-adopter'. I purchased a used 921 for $275 a few months ago -- after the cutoff date for activating the Voom HD channels (which I didn't want anyway). I can still get OTA HD and HBO HD. PBS (OTA local) has some very good HD documentaries, like the one last night about the Grand Canyon.

So you can sell the 921 on eBay without any guilt whatsoever!


----------



## welchwarlock (Jan 5, 2005)

David_Levin said:


> Dish will NOT activate Hi-Def on an account that doesn't have an mpeg 4 box (921 is mpeg 2).
> 
> Dish will activate a 921. If the account already has hi-def it'll get the older mpeg 2 hi-def channels (not the new mpeg4 channels - locals, espn 2, etc). If the account only has Std-Def then that's all the 921 will get.


But if you upgrade to the new MPEG 4 package, your 921's HD will be de-activated. So if you lease a 622vip, then choose the new package, the only thing you will be allowed to watch on your 921 is HBO, Showtime, and OTA HD.

Again, Early 921 adopters take it in the shorts.

WW


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

If for nothing else, a 921 is a good OTA receiver. The MPEG-4 receivers will not work on OTA without being activated, while the 921 does not require activation to get OTA (although the DVR may not work correctly w/o activation). Finally the 921 has the ability to tune (but not record to the DVR) analog OTA. Again the MPEG-4 receivers cannot tune to analog signals. At least in my case, there are still a few stations on the air analog only.


----------



## madbrain (Dec 10, 2004)

welchwarlock said:


> But if you upgrade to the new MPEG 4 package, your 921's HD will be de-activated. So if you lease a 622vip, then choose the new package, the only thing you will be allowed to watch on your 921 is HBO, Showtime, and OTA HD.
> 
> Again, Early 921 adopters take it in the shorts.
> 
> WW


Not true. I leased a 622 and kept my 921. I still have HD on my 921 - including all the HDPak channels like TNTHD, HDNet ... But of course I can't see the MPEG4 channels on the 921.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

At work our media engineer was here today. He told me that we were going to update our V-Brick STB's that we use for interactive class and conference use. I asked him if the new STB's were going to be MPEG-4. He asked me why take a step backwards? According to him the only thing MPEG-4 does is compress the data even more than MPEG-2 currently does.

It appears that the only entitity benefitting from MPEG-4 deployment over DBS are the service providers, since they can cram more into less bandwidth.

MPEG-2 with stat-mux Vs. MPEG-4, which system overall will give us better PQ?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Very dependable of bandwidth - that stat-muxes have some biases for certain channels like PPV.


----------



## Rovingbar (Jan 25, 2005)

I'm no expert but my understanding is that MPEG 4 is simply a compression algorithm that is optimized for digital a/v content. It has all the features of MPEG2 plus things like improved codecs and options for DRM. I don't see how MPEG4 can be a step backward. I'm sure MPEG4 can be tuned to produce video that is equivalent to MPEG2 compression with the same or less bandwidth.


----------



## tm22721 (Nov 8, 2002)

Eventually Dish will be forced to give a free 622 to all 921/942 HD 'holdout' customers because the HD MPEG2 channels are costly bandwidth hogs. 

In the interim, the 622 upgrade program is an obvious attempt to 'reel in' as many 921/942 suckers as possible.

Holdouts - just hang in there.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

"HD MPEG2 channels are costly bandwidth hogs" - well, any HD channel should fall in the definition regardless a type of compression.


----------



## BarryO (Dec 16, 2003)

Rovingbar said:


> I'm no expert but my understanding is that MPEG 4 is simply a compression algorithm that is optimized for digital a/v content.


So is MPEG 2, for that matter. The key difference is that MPEG 4 is a newer, *better* compression algorithm. In other words, take the same video input, and compress it with both MPEG 2 and MPEG 4, with the encoders set so that the output bit rate of both are the same, and the MPEG 4 will look better. It'll look *alot* better.

Said another way, for the same input video and the same quality level, the MPEG4 stream will be a much lower bitrate than the MPEG2 stream.

MPEG4 is newer, requires more computing power, and uses newer compression algorithms (i.e., object-based, as opposed to the transform-based (DCT) that MPEG2 used) than does the older MPEG2.


----------



## JMikeF (May 2, 2003)

BarryO said:


> So is MPEG 2, for that matter. The key difference is that MPEG 4 is a newer, *better* compression algorithm. In other words, take the same video input, and compress it with both MPEG 2 and MPEG 4, with the encoders set so that the output bit rate of both are the same, and the MPEG 4 will look better. It'll look *alot* better.
> 
> Said another way, for the same input video and the same quality level, the MPEG4 stream will be a much lower bitrate than the MPEG2 stream.
> 
> MPEG4 is newer, requires more computing power, and uses newer compression algorithms (i.e., object-based, as opposed to the transform-based (DCT) that MPEG2 used) than does the older MPEG2.


Oh boy, another long "this format is better" war - much like DD vs DTS. 
OK, I'll bite - what is your specific claim that MPEG4 looks 'better.' What parameters?


----------



## craig8868 (Jul 20, 2005)

My 921 just crapped out today and they are sending a replcement...they said I will either get another 921 or a 942. Does anyone have any info on what my chances of getting the 942 are??

Thanks
Craig


----------



## DucTape (Feb 18, 2006)

Pretty good I would say since last I heard Charlie was donating the 921's to New orleans to be used as boat anchors and levy fill.


----------



## debpasc (Oct 20, 2005)

Mine decided not to work the remote at the end of April. When they said they would put a replacement on UPS and have it to me in a few days, I asked for a 942. They said no. I asked why some got 942s instead of 921s as replacements, they said that 942s only go out if there are no 921s available to send. Three days later I got a 942 dropped off by UPS!!!!!


----------



## danm2z (May 18, 2005)

In order to get a replacement box, when yours quit working, do you have to have the DHPP or a similar insurance program?


----------



## debpasc (Oct 20, 2005)

I didn't have any such program, but my 921 (owned not leased) was only about 7 months old and plagued with problems after about the first month. For sure it was still under the original 1-year warranty. I kind of have the feeling that the 921 is such a mess that E* may be willing to replace them regardless of warranties just to get them off line. Also, if you bought yours with a credit card, some have suggested here that many credit cards have their own extended warranty program for items purchased through the card.


----------



## BarryO (Dec 16, 2003)

JMikeF said:


> Oh boy, another long "this format is better" war - much like DD vs DTS.
> OK, I'll bite - what is your specific claim that MPEG4 looks 'better.' What parameters?


I never said it'll look better in all circumstances. A 20 Mbps MEG2 stream will look alot better than a 500 Kbps MPEG4 stream. But as I said, MPEG4 takes advantage of newer research in video compression theory and uses more powerful algorithms. A 10 Mbps MPEG4 stream is gonna look better than a 10 Mbps MPEG2 stream, all other things being equal.

If it didn't, why would the MPEG committee have bothered developing it? It's the same committee rsponsible for MPEG2 that developed MPEG4. The employers of the committee members wouldn't have paid their salaries, nor paid for them to fly all around the world going to committee meetings, if their was no benefit realized in the effort.


----------

