# Two whdvr questions



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

I apologize if I'm asking something already answered. I searched without success.

1. If I want to run unsupported whdvr with just a single dvr and single hd receiver, can I run a hard ethernet connection between the two units without using a switch or router? Would it need to be a crossover cable?

2. If there is an AM21 on the DVR (and not on the other receiver), can the other receiver access live OTA?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

tigerwillow1 said:


> I apologize if I'm asking something already answered. I searched without success.
> 
> 1. If I want to run unsupported whdvr with just a single dvr and single hd receiver, can I run a hard ethernet connection between the two units without using a switch or router? Would it need to be a crossover cable?
> 
> 2. If there is an AM21 on the DVR (and not on the other receiver), can the other receiver access live OTA?


Yes just a "simple" cat5 will do the job.
Once a recording is made from the AM21, it is watchable on the other receiver.
What you can't do though is setup a recording from the receiver on the DVR that is an OTA channel, since the two guides need to have the same channels. Sat channels aren't a problem, but it would take a AM21 on each to be able to select an OTA program to record, from the receiver, on the DVR.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

The challenge you'll have is getting DirecTV to activate Whole DVR Service on your unsupported network. They're getting pickier about that.


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

Thanks for all the good information.

The issue of not seeing the OTA guide on the receiver without the AM21 caught me by surprise. Glad I know that in advance. I suppose a second AM-21 could be in my future. (No locals in my DMA).

If I can't get unsupported WHDVR activated I will probably thrown in the towel with D*. I was originally going to go over to E* with their duo DVR, but retention offered me a deal that will keep the monthly cost close to what it would be with E*. No deal offered on WHDVR install, however. I'm not about to cough up front-end costs just to keep the klunky HR-22 when the new customers get HR-24s for nothing up front. I got the new UI a few days ago, and while it is a definite improvement, there's still up to a 5 second delay after some keypresses, and they are sometimes just discarded. From what I've read on the forum, the E* DVRs are reasonably responsive.


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

I'm not going to get the opportunity see see if I could get unsupported WHDVR activated or not. After I activated my 2nd receiver through retention, I asked if they could turn on WHDVR for me. It sounded like the rep was willing to, except for one problem, that the system said I didn't have SWM. I did have a SWM LNB, but it was installed by the installer a couple of years ago without being on the work order. The retention rep offered to solve the issue by ordering the $199 + $49 WHDVR upgrade and waiving the charges. This was a Friday afternoon call and there was a Saturday morning installation appointment available. The installer popped in 2 DECAs, an upgraded "green label" SWM LNB, and a new SWM splitter. The installer knew his stuff, it's all up and running, I'm a relatively happy camper, and barring any unforeseen circumstances I'll be staying with D* for at least a couple more years. I talked with 3 different people in retention and give all of them kudos for their professionalism and competence.

My only remaining gripe is that I think D* should have some sort of program to let longer term customers upgrade to newer hardware without feeling like they're being fleeced, while the new customers get the new hardware with no upfront cost. IMO, $100 or $200 for a newer DVR would be ok, a new 24 month contract would be ok, but both together is not reasonable.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

tigerwillow1 said:


> My only remaining gripe is that I think D* should have some sort of program to let longer term customers upgrade to newer hardware without feeling like they're being fleeced, while the new customers get the new hardware with no upfront cost. IMO, $100 or $200 for a newer DVR would be ok, a new 24 month contract would be ok, but both together is not reasonable.


+1. Totally Agree with you.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Unless you have been a customer for many many years(I've been since 97 for instance) most already got their new initial equipment at little to no upfront cost. Most don't deserve to get that same deal again, even though they feel they're entitled to it.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

CCarncross said:


> Unless you have been a customer for many many years(I've been since 97 for instance) most already got their new initial equipment at little to no upfront cost. Most don't deserve to get that same deal again, even though they feel they're entitled to it.


+1. Totally Agree with you.


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

> Unless you have been a customer for many many years(I've been since 97 for instance) most already got their new initial equipment at little to no upfront cost. Most don't deserve to get that same deal again, even though they feel they're entitled to it.


If what is referred to as the lease fee is really a lease fee, there has to be some point where the equipment is paid off. A few years ago I had to pay $199 upfront for an HR22. I'm stuck with the older slow box while the new customers get the HR24 for $0 upfront. The new guy with no history who is free to bail in 2 years now gets a better deal than the 15 year customer with a proven record. Guess it's all in how you look at it, doesn't seem like a very good business model to me. If it weren't for the slowness of the HR22 (even with the new GUI) I wouldn't care. Why not send the older boxes with the "free" deal and let the loyal customers get the new ones?


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

tigerwillow1 said:


> The new guy with no history who is free to bail in 2 years now gets a better deal than the 15 year customer with a proven record.


...who is free to bail at anytime.

See the difference? If you want an HR24, just buy one from Solid Signal (or other) and be free to bail in the same 2 year period. That's a decision only you can make. Both of my HR22's work just fine and I see no need to drop an additional $200.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

tigerwillow1 said:


> If what is referred to as the lease fee is really a lease fee, there has to be some point where the equipment is paid off. A few years ago I had to pay $199 upfront for an HR22. I'm stuck with the older slow box while the new customers get the HR24 for $0 upfront. The new guy with no history who is free to bail in 2 years now gets a better deal than the 15 year customer with a proven record. Guess it's all in how you look at it, doesn't seem like a very good business model to me. If it weren't for the slowness of the HR22 (even with the new GUI) I wouldn't care. Why not send the older boxes with the "free" deal and let the loyal customers get the new ones?


This is not leasing in the same way that you "lease" a car or "lease to own" furniture. This is leasing as in renting. Think renting a car from Hertz, leasing an apartment. You never own either of them.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

If they changed it to a rental fee like cable/FIOS/etc. do, would it make everyone feel better? I know that many of the other service providers don't charge upfront for their inferior stbs. But because most providers are inferior, they know they cant get away with it. Most cable boxes are big steaming piles, but some people live with it(albeit they constantly complain about it) because many are too cheap to buck up and get the good stuff. Noone has to stay after their commitments are up, after 2 years or after 15 years, it makes no difference. I feel D* is the best service in tv today, but I do know it may not be the cheapest service in many cases. Unfortunately the way the world works, the best and the cheapest rarely are the same...only the individual can decide which type of tv service they prefer.


----------



## tigerwillow1 (Jan 26, 2009)

OK, I surrender to popular opinion on equipment upgrades. To those of you who aren't bothered by 7 to 10 second responses for things like the Guide and List keys, you have loads more patience than I do. Since keypresses are often ignored, I usually press the key a second time after 5 seconds, then have to go back and start over when both keypresses are finally recognized together. And I'm not talking about the VOD screens that often have over a one minute response. Too slow for my taste, apparently just fine for others.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

tigerwillow1 said:


> To those of you who aren't bothered by 7 to 10 second responses for things like the Guide and List keys, you have loads more patience than I do.


I wait 5 sec for a channel to tune, but not 10.
7 "might be" on the outside of my patience, and if I waited longer, I'd be calling to get it fixed.


----------

