# 50 Series Link Limit



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

I have 42 SL's (Series Links) currently and I'm sure I will have a few more with the new shows coming up in January, so I'm afraid that I will soon hit the 50 SL limit and get to a point where I have to make a decision instead of just being able to add what I want.

Does anyone (especially Earl) know why this limit is there? I see that you (Earl) posted previously that you had no idea why there was the limit. I wonder if that's still the case? Anyway you can ask your contacts?

Can anyone else speculate why? Could it possibly be a hardware limitation where the system might slow down or become unstable (even more so) if you had more than 50?

I see the R15 has the limit too so I fear that we'll never see the limit go away.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

I guess the lack of response means I watch too much tv.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

It is Saturday, on a Holiday weekend... So the forum isn't "hoping" like it normally does...

I have never been given a reason on why, other then that is what they did.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

ALN(BIBE) strategy. (Arbitrarily Large Number (But Isn't Big Enough))

Tom


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

cause somebody sitting at a desk (problably not an engineer) decided that was all anybody would need... 
noone will ever need more than 512k of memory.. bill gates...:lol:


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

It probably is a memory thing. There probably is only enough memory for 50 Series links allocated to this function.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

houskamp said:


> cause somebody sitting at a desk (problably not an engineer) decided that was all anybody would need...
> noone will ever need more than 512k of memory.. bill gates...:lol:


In the mid '60s, IIRC, IBM released the first model of the IBM 360 with 16k of memory as a default. Two weeks later, they changed that to 32k.

In 1980, IBM released their PC with 16k of memory. And yes, two weeks later they increased it to 32k.

Some mistakes are born, others have mistakes thrust upon them again and again cuz they don't learn from history. 

Have a Happy New Year,
Tom


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

It just seems weird to arbitrarily pick a limit when no limit should be necessary (unless it's truly a memory issue). You'd think they'd just copy TiVo as much as possible. I'm sure TiVo doesn't have a patent on their non-limit to Season Passes. 

I haven't called to complain to D* about the HR20 (haven't really had any major issues), but I think I may have to on this one.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

mtnagel said:


> It just seems weird to arbitrarily pick a limit when no limit should be necessary (unless it's truly a memory issue). You'd think they'd just copy TiVo as much as possible. I'm sure TiVo doesn't have a patent on their non-limit to Season Passes.
> 
> I haven't called to complain to D* about the HR20 (haven't really had any major issues), but I think I may have to on this one.


Now you've got me wondering. I'm going to have to look up the patents Tivo does own. :lol: :lol:

I'm sure memory plays a bit part in all this, the more you have the more processing time the HR20 will take each time it loops thru the lists of SL, Todo, Guide updates, and the purging cycle.

Happy New Year,
Tom


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

So I wonder if they did testing on different limits? Does 55 cause instability? How come my TiVo is just as slow as the day I got it


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Now the poor Tivo has many good things within, but it had one nasty flaw hidden under the covers--a very unscalable database. It probably worked great when there where only 5 local channels, but on a cable system with 68 it started to become marginal, I'm guessing. Then when Directv hit, with 300+ channels of data, the db showed its true flaws. So the Tivo dudes and dudettes had to tweak the db heavily somewhere between 3.5 and 6.x. (I don't know if it was in the SA 4.0 or 5.0 versions.) Its better, but still hampered by how it handles that much relational data.

Happy New Year,
Tom


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

That sucks. One of my TiVos has like 140 season passes on it. I like to rack them up.

50 is way too small for my habits.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

marksman said:


> That sucks. One of my TiVos has like 140 season passes on it. I like to rack them up.
> 
> 50 is way too small for my habits.


Wow! If I may ask, for my education, are they mostly wishlists, season passes for current shows, or something I'm missing? I bet your list would make an awesome test case!

Happy New Year,
Tom


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

tibber said:


> I'm sure memory plays a bit part in all this, the more you have the more processing time the HR20 will take each time it loops thru the lists of SL, Todo, Guide updates, and the purging cycle.


Series-2 DTivo = 42MB Memory
HR10 = 92MB Memory
R15 = 64MB Memory
HR20 = ???

So if Tivos have an unlimited number of SPs and the 50SL limit of the R15/HR20 are due to lack of memory, then one would have to question the designers of the R15/HR20 and their reason to rely so heavily on everything being memory resident.


----------



## houskamp (Sep 14, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Series-2 DTivo = 42MB Memory
> HR10 = 92MB Memory
> R15 = 64MB Memory
> HR20 = ???
> ...


simple answer=speed


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Wolffpack,

Sorry, let me clarify: I'm still firmly believing in ALN (Arbitrarily Large Number) as how the limit was set at 50. I completely agree with your memory analysis; I tried to answer a previous post as to how more SL means more memory and processing. I should have also stated that 50 is still way too low for a well designed architecture cuz the newer boxes likely have faster CPUs as well as more memory.

In short: 50 too low. 

BTW, did you see the report from awhile ago where someone, was it milominderbender?, who talked to a D* person about many topics? One of the questions was "why not store guide between reboots" and the answer was telling (in many ways). Something like needing to process 3200 channels of locals which has to be done in memory (but doesn't address why my 30 channels can't be stored to disk...) It does help explain how D* is using that much memory.

Happy New Year,
Tom


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

It's just that some of the reasoning doesn't make sense when Tivos can do the same job with SPs and guide data stored on disk.

Regarding the 3200 local channels, is that indicating that the guide data for every SD and HD local channel is stored in everyone's unit? Why would that be? SD locals don't work that way.


----------



## carrot (Aug 3, 2006)

50 is way too low.

This PVR has just been in folks homes for an average of just a few months and that barely covers one “season” of TV schedules. As the TV seasons revolve some SL’s will be dormant until next year and many more will be added. With the current 50 limit you are forced to delete dormant SL’s and miss the out of season repeats or when the new series returns.

This problem is going to get much worse and even those with 20 SL’s now will hit the limit long before a year.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Wolffpack said:


> It's just that some of the reasoning doesn't make sense when Tivos can do the same job with SPs and guide data stored on disk.
> 
> Regarding the 3200 local channels, is that indicating that the guide data for every SD and HD local channel is stored in everyone's unit? Why would that be? SD locals don't work that way.


Yupper. Storing data to disk isn't that hard...(obviously, so why don't they, even if its just an occasional snapshot?)

IIRC the comment re: 3200 channels might mean they only store all that data only while they process out to another area of memory the guide data for CIR. But I'm guessing here.

Ah well, one thing at a time, I guess 
Tom


----------



## theantidote (Dec 20, 2006)

I don't know how D* codes their DVR software but I think the Tivo will create a cron job for a recording and then forget about it. I'm assuming that the D* way is different because it tends to miss recordings. I guess they just hold a record function in memory until a specific time? I'm not sure how it would work for them.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

I'd like to see the limit raised but I'll never even see 50. I can't imagine having 100+! My family only has 25 or so and we don't have enough time to watch all those.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

bonscott87 said:


> I'd like to see the limit raised but I'll never even see 50. I can't imagine having 100+! My family only has 25 or so and we don't have enough time to watch all those.


Not picking on you bonscott87, but does that mean if you don't do much, or are an average DVR user the DVR+ units will workfor you? Yet if you expect the flexibility that your old generation Tivo units provided you need to look elseware?

A limit of 50 probably works. A TDL list of 100 (oh, that's right, the HR20 now has a limit of 400) will probably work. But the real fact was, and is, that on UTV or Tivo units there were no limits. Again I must ask how DTV is making advances in their DVR technology by imposing limits that did not existed in ANY previous DVR which DTV sold? Replay TV didn't have limits. UTV didn't have limits. Tivo didn't have limits. So the brand new DVR+ technology has limits. Hummm. :nono2:


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Wolffpack said:


> Not picking on you bonscott87, but does that mean if you don't do much, or are an average DVR user the DVR+ units will workfor you? Yet if you expect the flexibility that your old generation Tivo units provided you need to look elseware?


I wasn't commenting on the limit (other then it should be upped). I was commenting that some people obviously watch a whole lot more TV then I do...and I thought I watched quite a bit.  No troubles.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

bonscott87 said:


> I wasn't commenting on the limit (other then it should be upped). I was commenting that some people obviously watch a whole lot more TV then I do...and I thought I watched quite a bit.  No troubles.


Ah, gotcha. I understand. The most I've got on any one Tivo is about 35, but then I've spread my recordings through many Tivos as only two tuners won't be able to schedule what want to record. MRV on the Tivos helps make this work. 8 virtual tuners between my Tivo units. Just managing the SPs that gets to be a pain. :grin:


----------



## Starrbuck (Jun 25, 2004)

mtnagel said:


> I guess the lack of response means I watch too much tv.


I'm glad you said it and not me. 

We have about twenty and I thought that was a lot. Jesus, man, get a life!


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

tibber said:


> Wow! If I may ask, for my education, are they mostly wishlists, season passes for current shows, or something I'm missing? I bet your list would make an awesome test case!
> 
> Happy New Year,
> Tom


I think I actually posted a full list up on the TiVo tv forums not too long ago. I will not lie, a not small portion of them are shows that may not even be on the air anymore and have not been removed. It is a mixture, some wishlists. I usually wishlist shows on HBO, Showtime etc, and some that rerun on cable networks. The bulk is season passes for current shows. I tend to set up season passes for anything I might have a mild interest in. I actually have quite a few Tivos, and now the HR20, but this is my work TiVo where I record most of my tv viewing. I watch a ton of sports too, though, and none of that is recorded on this particular TiVo.

Some of the season passes are really obscure too. I might have a season pass for a show that only ever aired like 3 episodes but gets rerun on one of the cable channels and every six months ends up on my TiVo.

One of the main reasons why it is so unkempt though, is because I simply threw in the towel of wasting my time managing it. Deleting and re-arranging simply became a monumental whip and a waste of time. So I do some other mojo to make sure I get what I want recorded. I suspect if I did not do a wipe on this particular unit the last time I upgraded it, I would have well over 200 season passes on it.  Maybe one day I will go in and clean it up. But sometimes you never know if a show will come back. 

Which reminds me, I actually did delete a season pass in the last few years, for "It Takes a Thief" on the Discovery Channel. I thought it was not coming back, and for some reason I deleted it. Of course it came back.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

It probably has to do with the math that is being used.

*Current Math:*
Hard drive is limited on how much D* is going to format and use. Worst case is, 2 hour movies X HD Foramt / Size limit of hard drive D* has claimed. Let's make it 50.

When D* starts giving options of increasing the size of usable space is when they may have thought about increasing the size.

*New Math:*
Lets see, use the whole hard drive that I find in the eSATA space. No limit on SL's. OK, now let's build a dynamic table for pointers to the space.

Hum, seems like most file systems already do that! Amazing!

TaDa! Fixed!


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

I have been told that the problem is not with memory or hard drive space. Nor was the limit of 50 arbitrary.

Another D* DVR was crashing at 40 Series Links. A big list of Series Links may have been a reason for instabillities in the HR20. Think about how often it is the real power users who report problems and also mention that when they reformated they lost a zillion Series Links, Autorecords, Searches, etc.

How long does an engine last at red line?

- Craig


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> How long does an engine last at red line?
> 
> - Craig


That's true. But designing a new DVR with the red line at 40-50 SLs is like designing a new sports car with the top speed of 45 and a red line at 3500 RPM. Great for getting around town but very limited potential and appeal.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Glad to see some more discussion on this. I'd recommend if you don't like the limit to call and complain. I probably won't until I actually hit the limit.


----------



## BarryTheSprout (Jan 15, 2007)

Think I will give them a call tonight and let them know 50 is just too small for many users.


----------



## Vinny (Sep 2, 2006)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> I have been told that the problem is not with memory or hard drive space. Nor was the limit of 50 arbitrary.
> 
> Another D* DVR was crashing at 40 Series Links. A big list of Series Links may have been a reason for instabillities in the HR20. Think about how often it is the real power users who report problems and also mention that when they reformated they lost a zillion Series Links, Autorecords, Searches, etc.
> 
> ...


Maybe also that housekeeping may take a lot longer when adding or prioritizing large series link lists; which can lead to crashes.


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

tibber said:


> ALN(BIBE) strategy. (Arbitrarily Large Number (But Isn't Big Enough))
> 
> Tom


Ah, yet another TLA (three-letter acronym)


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

I guess I just never thought to ask. I sure would like the option of not having to worry about how many different things I get to record. I always have a reserved way of setting up links, so I don't have to worry about filling up the series links, hard drive or the lack of a second DLB. I am always riding at 50% on the space available to leave space, in case I get called out of town. 
I kind of rambled off topic there, but I just never thought to take advantage of having D*'s ear, to suggesting a greater capacity on all levels. Especially ones like the series link which is nothing more than a software manipulation.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

armophob said:


> I guess I just never thought to ask. I sure would like the option of not having to worry about how many different things I get to record. I always have a reserved way of setting up links, so I don't have to worry about filling up the series links, hard drive or the lack of a second DLB. I am always riding at 50% on the space available to leave space, in case I get called out of town.
> I kind of rambled off topic there, but I just never thought to take advantage of having D*'s ear, to suggesting a greater capacity on all levels. Especially ones like the series link which is nothing more than a software manipulation.


That's exactly it. I shouldn't have to worry about it. I should be able to set up as many as I want without having to worry.


----------



## buist (Nov 12, 2002)

Vinny said:


> Maybe also that housekeeping may take a lot longer when adding or prioritizing large series link lists; which can lead to crashes.


Housekeeping right now is instantaneous (compared to the HR10-250 for instance). I can live with a slight delay (heck I endured minutes on the Tivo) if the SL doubled - which would probably appease 99% of everyone who complains about the limit..

Tim


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

buist said:


> Housekeeping right now is instantaneous...


Says who?


----------



## buist (Nov 12, 2002)

Wolffpack said:


> Says who?


Compared to the HR10-250?


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

Especially when your wife watches a different set of shows than you do, 50 is not enough.

I've been at the limit of 50 since I got this thing, and it bugs the hell out of me.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

mrshermanoaks said:


> Especially when your wife watches a different set of shows than you do, 50 is not enough.
> 
> I've been at the limit of 50 since I got this thing, and it bugs the hell out of me.


If she were my wife, I would just tell her she is going to watch what I want and that's the end of it. I mean come on.


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

armophob said:


> If she were my wife, I would just tell her she is going to watch what I want and that's the end of it. I mean come on.


There's a smily face missing in your post...

DirecTV: Up the Prioritizer limit. Soon.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

mtnagel said:


> I guess the lack of response means I watch too much tv.


mtnagel you do NOT watch too much TV! I cannot believe this limit myself. UNREAL. So short sighted. Obviously these GEEKS who program the HR20 don't watch their own DVRs. At least not power users and power searchers.

I posted this SAME exact post a year ago! 

Someone up there asked... so here is my DESIRED prioritizer shows and searches:

*NEARLY 100...* Double the 50 limit.. Goddamn.. this sucks... makes it SO hard. DISH TV never had these limits.. I'm almost ready to switch back. 

*2057
3 Lbs.
30 days 
99 most 
Aaron Martin's
Air Emergency
Amazing moments
Amazing Planet
Amazing vacation homes
Anthony Bourdain
B.a.s.s insider 
Bass Pro Shops Fishing
Bass tech 
Basscenter 
Battlestar
Beyond Tomorrow
Boating today 
Brainiac
Beat Charlie Moore 
Corwin
Crank yankers 
Curious world 
Decoding the Past
Dirty Jobs
Discoveries This Week
Disorderly Conduct
Doctor Who
Earth Revealed
Equator
ER
Everything You Need to Know
Explorations 
Explorer
Extreme Engineering
Extreme machines
Gamer Generation
Globe Trekker
Guts and 
History's lost and found
Holy ....!
Hooked:
Hot rocks 
How It's Made
I Shouldn't be Alive
Insectia
Inside RC
Jellyfish 
Lindner's Angling Edge
Lindner's Fishing Edge
Master plans 
Maximum exposure
Mega Builders
Megamachines 
Megastructures
Men of iron 
Miracle pl 
Mission con 
Modern Marvels
Most evil
Mythbusters
Nature
Going Tribal 
Nova
Science of the deep
Our Generation
planet weather 
pleasure boater 
power of place 
powerboat 
Ratzen
Real sex
Red Bull
Road Trip
Rockets in 
Rvtv 
Saturday Night Live
Scientific a
Seconds from Distaster
Seinfeld
South Park
stanker 
stunt junk 
Super Ships
super ships 
The New Adventures
The Tonight Show
The World's Most Dramatic
Tom green 
tribal life 
Ultimate Factories
Ultimate Impact
We Built This City*


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Slyster said:


> mtnagel you do NOT watch too much TV! I cannot believe this limit myself. UNREAL. So short sighted. Obviously these GEEKS who program the HR20 don't watch their own DVRs. At least not power users and power searchers.
> 
> I posted this SAME exact post a year ago!
> 
> ...


Good list. I assume you're similar to me in that you're not watching every single episode of shows you have SL's for, but it's good to have some episodes of shows you like in case there isn't one of the shows you do watch every episode recorded.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Slyster said:


> *NEARLY 100...* Double the 50 limit.. Goddamn.. this sucks... makes it SO hard. DISH TV never had these limits.. I'm almost ready to switch back.


I'm not aware of any DVR in history (except NDS's DVR) that had these limits. What's that tell you?


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

I pick and choose! But having a wealth of programs allows me to see only the BEST. I probably one watch 1/4th of what I record. I double dash the rest.

Thats the POWER of DVR's... why LIMIT IT???


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

NO ONE has anything else to say??? This is almost the NUMBER ONE issue with the HR20... this our most basic and de-powering flaw! Yikes! I am SO close to going ahead and spending the extra money to go BACK to DishTV where I didn't have these limits. 

So unreal!... these Directv programmers must NEVER have actually used DVR's for any extent of time.... 

How crippling these limits are.. with it being 2007 and all with our current technology... oh how so sad...


----------



## briang5000 (Aug 11, 2004)

At first when I noticed this thread... I thought it was no big deal.
Who would need 50 Series Links.

Then I checked and saw my wife and I have 27 set up right now.

I'll admit I'm pretty good about deleting SL for shows that have been cancelled or for shows I no longer seem to watch, but lately we've been re-discovering some old shows on USA, TVLand, etc and could easily add another 10 or 15 SL to our current list. That would put me dangerously close to our limit of 50.

I can only imagine how many we might need if we had a coupld kids of TV viewing age.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Slyster said:


> NO ONE has anything else to say??? This is almost the NUMBER ONE issue with the HR20... this our most basic and de-powering flaw! Yikes! I am SO close to going ahead and spending the extra money to go BACK to DishTV where I didn't have these limits.
> 
> So unreal!... these Directv programmers must NEVER have actually used DVR's for any extent of time....
> 
> How crippling these limits are.. with it being 2007 and all with our current technology... oh how so sad...


I don't know... maybe it is just how I use my DVR's (plural)... 
I have 4 of them active in the house now...

And I just balance my recordings on them... mostly to compensate for disk space, and conflicts.

As to answer your question on "why" no other responses...
Honestly... I think it is because not a lot of people have more then 50 Series Links? and while it is an issue... it is just not effecting them.

Similar to DLB, Wishlists, Suggestions, and some of the other "missing" features...

And before you ask, no... I don't know what their plans are for increasing the limit on Series Links... if they are going to, or when they may do so.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

I only wish for more than 50 is all.... as I COULD use 150.. but I still really do like DTV and the HR20 currently! Just add some more prioritizers and this will be the best of the best!


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> As to answer your question on "why" no other responses...
> Honestly... I think it is because not a lot of people have more then 50 Series Links? and while it is an issue... it is just not effecting them.


Or....we've all been complaining since day one on the R15, 16 months ago and day one on the HR20 and nothing has been done. Stop assuming a slack in posts, comments, complaints means we all accept what we're getting. Having any limit is ridiculous. No one is accepting this we're just tired of complaining here with nothing being done and running the risk of being attacked by those that think 50 is fine.

There isn't one other DVR in production (other than the Sky+ boxes) that have a limit. Not cable, not Dish. Only the DTV Flagship product has a limit. What's that tell the world?


----------



## davidord (Aug 16, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> I guess the lack of response means I watch too much tv.


I agree with you. I complained on a post a few months back about only 50 series links. 50 is way too low a number. And to those of you who respond that I watch too much TV, my response is I don't watch every minute of every series link. For example, I had the Trailers show in HD set as a link and I would watch it occasionally. But, when I wanted to watch it, it was there. I had to remove this series link to keep it under my limit. Additionally, not every series link is for me, some are for other family members.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I don't know... maybe it is just how I use my DVR's (plural)...
> I have 4 of them active in the house now...
> 
> And I just balance my recordings on them... mostly to compensate for disk space, and conflicts.
> ...


You do realize that forcing us to have 2 or more DVR's isn't really a good solution, right? I assume so.

Anyway, I also have multiple DVR's (an HR20 and an R10 hooked up to my main tv). I could easily put all the SD stuff on my R10 and have the HR20 for HD stuff, but that just makes it confusing (especially for the wife and kid, not so much me). I shouldn't have to do that. I already think it's annoying that my Survior shows are on the R10, but after this week's final OC, I won't have that conflict anymore. That's basically the only time I need 3 tuners (I have other times when there are 3 things I want to record, but always at least 1 of them replays at later times).

I could also probably get away with deleting SL's for shows that aren't currently playing new episodes, but that means I have to make sure I check when the new episodes are starting. But again, I shouldn't have to do that.

I hate calling them so much, so I just e-mailed them on their website and I would encourage anyone else that is annoyed by this to either call or e-mail. I'll let you know if I get a response.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Here's the response


> Thanks for writing. I am sorry that you are unable to add more that 50 items to the Series Link. I have forwarded your e-mail to our engineering department. Hopefully they will increase the limit in a future update to the software.
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't have any information as to why they limited the number of series links that are allowed in the receiver. I did additional searches, but they do not get that specific.
> 
> Thanks again for writing.


Makes it sound like he doesn't even know what he's talking about the way he used Series Link 

So anyone that is annoyed with the limit, PLEASE call or write D* and let them know. The squeaky wheel and all.


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I don't know... maybe it is just how I use my DVR's (plural)...
> I have 4 of them active in the house now...
> 
> And I just balance my recordings on them... mostly to compensate for disk space, and conflicts.
> ...


PATHETIC ANSWER

we need more than 150 series links on each HR20

dlb as well

saved searches

and something similar to suggestions

i have a feeling a certain person with directvs ear, is telling them the masses do not want or need any of that, and dont want 50 series links increased,


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

Wolffpack said:


> Or....we've all been complaining since day one on the R15, 16 months ago and day one on the HR20 and nothing has been done. Stop assuming a slack in posts, comments, complaints means we all accept what we're getting. Having any limit is ridiculous. No one is accepting this we're just tired of complaining here with nothing being done and running the risk of being attacked by those that think 50 is fine.
> 
> There isn't one other DVR in production (other than the Sky+ boxes) that have a limit. Not cable, not Dish. Only the DTV Flagship product has a limit. What's that tell the world?


cause they have people talking in their ear, and directv buys it hook line and sinker,, that more than 50 series links is not needed, when that is false


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> You do realize that forcing us to have 2 or more DVR's isn't really a good solution, right? I assume so.
> 
> Anyway, I also have multiple DVR's (an HR20 and an R10 hooked up to my main tv). I could easily put all the SD stuff on my R10 and have the HR20 for HD stuff, but that just makes it confusing (especially for the wife and kid, not so much me). I shouldn't have to do that. I already think it's annoying that my Survior shows are on the R10, but after this week's final OC, I won't have that conflict anymore. That's basically the only time I need 3 tuners (I have other times when there are 3 things I want to record, but always at least 1 of them replays at later times).
> 
> ...


he dont care, he uses a programmers mentality which most of the time is detached from reality of actual peoples needs, and the fact his solution just get more dvrs, would dramiticaly increase our costs, and have us going all over our houses to watch the shows we should be able to on just 1 tv,

again his solutions AND most programmers so called solutions are not grounded in reality


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

gncsbg said:


> he dont care, he uses a programmers mentality which most of the time is detached from reality of actual peoples needs, and the fact his solution just get more dvrs, would dramiticaly increase our costs, and have us going all over our houses to watch the shows we should be able to on just 1 tv,
> 
> again his solutions AND most programmers so called solutions are not grounded in reality


Dude, just a tip, but you might want to tone it down a notch. You just joined yesterday and you're coming off a bit harsh. Yes, I feel strongly about this issue too, but there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things. Just my opinion.


----------



## red.bean.head (Feb 1, 2007)

You speak as if you know why the decisions are being made at D*. Trust me, the limit is a known issue but not high on the proritization of fixes. It will be ammended, to what amount & when I do not know. I think that bringing this up now is a good sign that other bugs/issues have been addressed to most people's satisfaction. By the way I have 50 Series Links already ;-)


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> Dude, just a tip, but you might want to tone it down a notch. You just joined yesterday and you're coming off a bit harsh. Yes, I feel strongly about this issue too, but there is a right way and a wrong way to go about things. Just my opinion.


gee, if stating facts is being too harsh, the bosses here, must like to squash people revealing facts and calling them on the carpet, pathetic


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

red.bean.head said:


> You speak as if you know why the decisions are being made at D*. Trust me, the limit is a known issue but not high on the proritization of fixes. It will be ammended, to what amount & when I do not know. I think that bringing this up now is a good sign that other bugs/issues have been addressed to most people's satisfaction. By the way I have 50 Series Links already ;-)


because they put the customers needs of series links (we came from way over 50) 
to just 50, shows they do not care

if they cared, when box was released we would had at least 100 series links


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

gncsbg said:


> gee, if stating facts is being too harsh, the bosses here, must like to squash people revealing facts and calling them on the carpet, pathetic


Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just because Earl says something doesn't mean it's an opinion everyone else should share. This is a place for discussing ideas, not quarreling. Nothing wrong with disagreeing with Earl or any other member on this forum, just try to keep it worded in a manner that doesn't seem too confrontational.

With that said, :backtotop


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

PoitNarf said:


> Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just because Earl says something doesn't mean it's an opinion everyone else should share. This is a place for discussing ideas, not quarreling. Nothing wrong with disagreeing with Earl or any other member on this forum, just try to keep it worded in a manner that doesn't seem too confrontational.
> 
> With that said, :backtotop


when said person, is telling a company things that are not true, and limiting what we really want, then thats not koolwhen said person, is telling a compant


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

gncsbg said:


> when said person, is telling a company things that are not true, and limiting what we really want, then thats not koolwhen said person, is telling a compant


Earl is just a messenger of news from D* to us and occasionally a deliverer of messages from us to D*. Earl DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THIS ENTIRE BOARD. D* does not only listen to Earl's input or opinions. D* is active in looking at all the issues noted by ALL USERS here. If you have an issue with Earl and the way he voices his opinion or moderates or whatever, I highly suggest you bring it up with him via PM. This part of the conversation will end now and this thread WILL get back to topic.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

PoitNarf said:


> Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Just because Earl says something doesn't mean it's an opinion everyone else should share. This is a place for discussing ideas, not quarreling. Nothing wrong with disagreeing with Earl or any other member on this forum, just try to keep it worded in a manner that doesn't seem too confrontational.
> 
> With that said, :backtotop


Yep. Exactly.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

I call TROLL on *gncsbg*.


----------



## gncsbg (Feb 20, 2007)

PoitNarf said:


> Earl is just a messenger of news from D* to us and occasionally a deliverer of messages from us to D*. Earl DOES NOT SPEAK FOR THIS ENTIRE BOARD. D* does not only listen to Earl's input or opinions. D* is active in looking at all the issues noted by ALL USERS here. If you have an issue with Earl and the way he voices his opinion or moderates or whatever, I highly suggest you bring it up with him via PM. This part of the conversation will end now and this thread WILL get back to topic.


i have contacted office f president, not cs, and yes his feelings on not needing 50 or more links, saved searches and dlb is a huge reason they have not been added


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

gncsbg said:


> i have contacted office f president, not cs, and yes his feelings on not needing 50 or more links, saved searches and dlb is a huge reason they have not been added


The president of D*? I find it hard to believe that D*s reasoning for not currently having an implementation for any of the features you listed above is because "the executives don't have a need for it".


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

Something isn't right here.

This puppy is going down hill.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

PoitNarf said:


> The president of D*? I find it hard to believe that D*s reasoning for not currently having an implementation for any of the features you listed above is because "the executives don't have a need for it".


I may have read gncbgs post wrong. But i read it as it hasn't been done becasue "Earl said it wasn't important". I could be wrong though. But that's how I read it.


----------



## kaz (Sep 18, 2006)

50 is low...

on one tivo I have 102, and on the other tivo I have 30. my HR20 only has 12 right now, still debating its stability.

People shouldnt be expected to clean out their seasonpasses/serieslinks every sweeps, they should be allowed to keep stuff for next year. 50 isnt alot, 200 is


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Slyster said:


> NO ONE has anything else to say???





Earl Bonovich said:


> As to answer your question on "why" no other responses...
> Honestly... I think it is because not a lot of people have more then 50 Series Links? and while it is an issue... it is just not effecting them.





Wolffpack said:


> ...
> Stop assuming a slack in posts, comments, complaints means we all accept what we're getting. Having any limit is ridiculous.
> ...
> What's that tell the world?


Slyster asked the question...

I answered with my theory on why "I" think there wasn't thousands of posts responding to his question.

And yes, honestly I do think it is a reason why you don't see pages and pages and pages of people upset about the limit.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

mtnagel said:


> You do realize that forcing us to have 2 or more DVR's isn't really a good solution, right? I assume so.


You are correct... I don't think it is a good solution, nor was I suggesting it as well. My comments where in the same context as answering "Slysters" question on why there where not more responses to the issue.

People have asked me why I haven't hit the 50 limit... simply put.. I do record programs on all my DVRs... have so for 6 years, and just the way I have adapted my DVR usage style... that was even with the unlimited TiVos I did it that way.

So yes... I posed it as one of many theories on why the walls are not breaking down with people upset by the lack of a larger SL "limit"


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

gncsbg said:


> PATHETIC ANSWER
> 
> we need more than 150 series links on each HR20
> 
> ...


Where do you get the impression that I have informed DirecTV that 50 limits is suffice... as I can guarantee you that is the exact opposite...

You do have saved searches, 25 of them.

"Something Similar" to suggestions... what do you suggest, that would not violate TiVo's patents?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

gncsbg said:


> he dont care, he uses a programmers mentality which most of the time is detached from reality of actual peoples needs, and the fact his solution just get more dvrs, would dramiticaly increase our costs, and have us going all over our houses to watch the shows we should be able to on just 1 tv,
> 
> again his solutions AND most programmers so called solutions are not grounded in reality


I don't care? Because I am a programmer? Seriously? 
I am detached from reality? Sorry.... not very true... Just because I find solutions with in the given "reality", makes me detached from reality?

Okay.

As for my solution is getting more DVRs... Again... I did not suggest that a "solution" to the issue, just as a plausable reason on why not everyone is upset enough to post about it. And the actual reason why I personally and not effected by the limit.

Do I think it should be raised... most certainly.

And in all honesty... I would argue with you that most programmers solutions are closer to reality then the people making the requests...

But thanks for understanding me, and how I think... My wife hasn't figured it out in 14 years... but you figured it out in a day... :nono2:


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

gncsbg said:


> gee, if stating facts is being too harsh, the bosses here, must like to squash people revealing facts and calling them on the carpet, pathetic





gncsbg said:


> when said person, is telling a company things that are not true, and limiting what we really want, then thats not koolwhen said person, is telling a compant


What facts? You where assuming that I have "said" things.. 
Which is not true...

But then again, You haven't believed anything I have said in 16 months... so why start now...


----------



## luckydob (Oct 2, 2006)

Let's put this baby to bed...we agree it's not enough. Okay. Move on.

Blah.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

luckydob said:


> Let's put this baby to bed...we agree it's not enough. Okay. Move on.
> 
> Blah.


I'm not sure if D* realizes it's enough though. I think people should write or call D* if they feel it's not enough. They won't know if we don't tell them.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

Some people just do NOT understand that a 'power user' (me) would like to have perhaps 50 or more slots JUST for SUPER NARROW keyword searches in narrrow catagories. Not series links.. but keyword searches! Very different things.. BUT... they use the same 50 slots.

Meaning searches that are usually idle.. they do NOT record shows very often.. perhaps I catch only ONE on "transpiration" or "ham radio" ever month or two. That's the POWER of DVR's and high numbers of memory slots.

I don't use my 50 just for "ER" and "Star Trek" and "American Idol" etc.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Slyster said:


> Some people just do NOT understand that a 'power user' (me) would like to have perhaps 50 or more slots JUST for SUPER NARROW keyword searches in narrrow catagories. Not series links.. but keyword searches! Very different things.. BUT... they use the same 50 slots.
> 
> Meaning searches that are usually idle.. they do NOT record shows very often.. perhaps I catch only ONE on "transpiration" or "ham radio" ever month or two. That's the POWER of DVR's and high numbers of memory slots.
> 
> I don't use my 50 just for "ER" and "Star Trek" and "American Idol" etc.


No, I think peple do realize that there are power users out there.
It is just that in it's current state, the HR20 is not designed or setup for the Ultra-Power user.


----------



## jasonblair (Sep 5, 2006)

What is a series link?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

jasonblair said:


> What is a series link?


Series Link is when you setup a "Series/Show" to record based on it's schedule.

Series Link = TiVo's Season Pass


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

jasonblair said:


> What is a series link?


A series link is when you tell the HR20 to record all episodes of a TV show from a given channel. There are options to limit the recordings to "new" episodes" or all episodes.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## dixoncider (Sep 10, 2006)

Is this going to be fixed?? 50 is a low number.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

dixoncider said:


> Is this going to be fixed?? 50 is a low number.


I doubt any time soon. If you think it's a problem, call or write D* and tell them that it's a problem. They won't fix it if they don't know it's a problem.


----------



## jasonblair (Sep 5, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Series Link = TiVo's Season Pass


Never had any DVR before my HR20 arrives next week, so I don't now what a Tivo Season Pass is either.

So someone is complaining because they record more than 50 TV series?!?! That seems like a lot. Once I have a DVR, I plan to record these series: 24, Jericho, Lost, CSI, Earl, Office, Law & Order, Leno, Kimmel, Conan. I'm sure I could set it to record more than those from time to time, but that's only 10! If you follow more than 50 series at a time, you must be either unemployed or never sleep!


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

jasonblair said:


> Never had any DVR before my HR20 arrives next week, so I don't now what a Tivo Season Pass is either.
> 
> So someone is complaining because they record more than 50 TV series?!?! That seems like a lot. Once I have a DVR, I plan to record these series: 24, Jericho, Lost, CSI, Earl, Office, Law & Order, Leno, Kimmel, Conan. I'm sure I could set it to record more than those from time to time, but that's only 10! If you follow more than 50 series at a time, you must be either unemployed or never sleep!


Well I work full time and try to get 8 hours of sleep a night 

Since you've never had a DVR, you might not understand, but the beauty of no limit on the tivo was that you could set up SP's for shows that you don't necessarily watch all the time, but is nice when you have watched all your main shows. For example, I have SL's for all the news mags, like Dateline, Primetime, 20/20, and 60 Minutes. I don't watch everyone one of them, but when an interesting topic is on, I'll watch it.

Also, I had SP's for shows that aren't doing first runs now, like South Park, the 4400, Rescue Me, etc. Also, I'm sure there were some SP's for shows that were canceled. Yes, I could have gone through and removed them, but it was nice to not have to worry about it. Now, I have to take the time to research which shows have been canceled already and delete them. Before, I just waited till I didn't see a new show come up for awhile and then just assumed.

Plus, did you see Slyster's post? I don't know if you know, but you set up keyword searches that will record shows when something matches that keyword (I don't use them though). For example, say you like Tom Cruise. You can set up a keyword search for Tom Cruise and it will record everything he's in. They can get more detailed than that. So they may not record something for awhile, but it will catch everything, so it's very powerful.

Those are just some of the reasons why the 50 SL limit is too low.


----------



## red.bean.head (Feb 1, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> I'm not sure if D* realizes it's enough though. I think people should write or call D* if they feel it's not enough. They won't know if we don't tell them.


D* does know 50 is not enough but as I stated before, it is not the highest priority issue to fix right now. This was known to be an issue prior to launch but due to other higher priority items, was not changed. It will be addressed but date is TBA still. This also needs to be corrected on the R15 as well.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

I think I am going to drag the second box out of the bedroom and just run a feed in there. Now I can have a 100 limit.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

armophob said:


> I think I am going to drag the second box out of the bedroom and just run a feed in there. Now I can have a 100 limit.


I already have an R10 next to mine, so I could record lots of stuff in SD, but then I have to switch to a separate box. I have plenty of storage on mine for more SL's, so there is no reason that I shouldn't be able to have more SL's on my HR20.


----------



## kaz (Sep 18, 2006)

jasonblair said:


> Never had any DVR before my HR20 arrives next week, so I don't now what a Tivo Season Pass is either.
> 
> So someone is complaining because they record more than 50 TV series?!?! That seems like a lot. Once I have a DVR, I plan to record these series: 24, Jericho, Lost, CSI, Earl, Office, Law & Order, Leno, Kimmel, Conan. I'm sure I could set it to record more than those from time to time, but that's only 10! If you follow more than 50 series at a time, you must be either unemployed or never sleep!


One common side effect of a dvr: you'll end up recording all the new shows not knowing if they are crap yet. You'll end up liking the ones the cancel, and not liking the ones they keep, but later cancel. Then you find yourself scrolling through a huge list of seasonpass/serieslinks and comparing stuff you arnt sure is still on the air w/ tv.com.

enjoy being able to watch tv on your own schedule, you might gain some weight


----------



## luckydob (Oct 2, 2006)

we agree it's not enough...complaining here solves little if anything. Call D*.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

luckydob said:


> we agree it's not enough...complaining here solves little if anything. Call D*.


Calling D* also solves little if anything. So who ya gonna call????


----------



## jasonblair (Sep 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> So who ya gonna call????


Don't make me say it....


----------



## jasonblair (Sep 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> So who ya gonna call????


GHOSTBUSTERS!!

(I couldn't resist)


----------



## BobV (Dec 15, 2006)

jasonblair said:


> If you follow more than 50 series at a time, you must be either unemployed or never sleep!


!rolling


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

mtnagel said:


> I'm not sure if D* realizes it's enough though. I think people should write or call D* if they feel it's not enough. They won't know if we don't tell them.


Based on your orignal post and this comment, I'd tend to agree that a good approach is to share your position with them.

Personally, the viewers in this household feel there's not enough quality TV on the air to support more than 50 Series Links, so its not viewed as a limitation.

That said, I suspect we could find people who also feel:

1) The internal hard drive should be at least 1TB
2) The external eSata port should be activated to support storage of the internal drive in combination of the internal drive or else use either one individually
3) There should be an option to upgrade the processor or memory in the HR20, just like any PC
4) The guide should retain 30 days of schedule in advance, not just 14 days

....and so forth.

To summarize - your point is well taken, but there will always at least a few people who feel some aspect of a product is too limiting. I could make similar cases for the Tivo3 box, which has its own shortcomings.

Perhaps you'll get some response for your input to D*TV. Best wishes.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Based on your orignal post and this comment, I'd tend to agree that a good approach is to share your position with them.
> 
> Personally, the viewers in this household feel there's not enough quality TV on the air to support more than 50 Series Links, so its not viewed as a limitation.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the good wishes I guess.

If you don't feel that having an arbitrary limit on SL's is a bad thing, fine, don't call or write D*. If you feel passionately about your ideas, then voice them. Start a thread or call/write D*.

Obviously people will have different ideas on how they might improve the HR20. There really is no need to tell me you don't care about my idea.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

mtnagel said:


> Thanks for the good wishes I guess.
> 
> There really is no need to tell me you don't care about my idea.


I think its a good idea. I was just indicating that the users here have no pressing need - it's still a good idea.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I think its a good idea. I was just indicating that the users here have no pressing need - it's still a good idea.


Yeah, not a single user has a need. That is except for the ones posting in this thread that they have a need for more than 50 SL's


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I think its a good idea. I was just indicating that the users here have no pressing need - it's still a good idea.


I'm hoping your are referring to the "users" in your house.


----------



## Alexandrepsf (Oct 26, 2005)

Alright, 

I just received my HR20. I wanted to schedule all my Tivo SPs in HR20 SLs, and I already am at 50.

Some of you guys make fun and say people watch too much TV, but here is the thing, you put ALL the series and programs that you like, and you watch some of them. I do not have to EVERYTIME watch the same show I just widden my choices and pick.

This 50 limit is stupid and does not make sense. How big can be the file that would contain the list of this items?

Anyway. Seems like enough of people lost already their hair screaming about this, I do not think it is necessary for me to add myself to the list. 

Sort it out D*.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Alexandrepsf said:


> Alright,
> 
> I just received my HR20. I wanted to schedule all my Tivo SPs in HR20 SLs, and I already am at 50.
> 
> ...


Try calling or e-mailing D*. Maybe if we all call, they might do something about it.


----------



## smileyw (Jan 19, 2007)

Just as an FYI, I just ran into the 50 limit, and I am not happy at all. Having had a Tivo for 7 years, and now moving to the HR20, I don't think it is too much to ask to have the same limit of my version 1.0 series 1 Tivo (none).
With 3 people in the house who all watch different things, I don't know how we are going to solve this. Obviously I cannot count on D* to do anything about it soon.

W


----------



## turls (Jul 8, 2006)

Just ran into this, I had over 100 season passes on Tivo boxes. Now I remember why I was so upset about giving up Tivo in the first place, because the "little" things Tivo did were going to be at risk in a new box. This isn't a "little" thing it is a "huge" thing that people are going to be surprised that they run into when they do.

I am a big Wishlist person, I used to have wishlists for programs that I was looking for on Tivo that may have not aired since the 80s for example (like old Miniseries that aren't on DVD). Throw that out the window now (luckily I still have a HD Tivo active).

Another thing this kills is setting up multiple passes for the same show on multiple channels, like ESPN and ESPN2. There are lots of good reasons to do this. I'm going to have to figure out now why my "Baseball Tonight" search isn't picking up any shows even though I have a ton of Baseball Tonight on 72 and 73. On Tivo I just setup a different SP for both and have different settings (keep at most, etc) for each.

50 is pretty arbitrary. Without looking through all the numerous posts on this, does anybody know if DirecTV is actively working on taking this limit away once any performance problems are resolved?

I knew before I came here there would be those that have no clue about why this is an issue and would complain about people getting upset about it. These people either are very light TV watchers, or have no clue or no interest on how to use DVR technology past the basics.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

turls,

I don't think anyone besides D* knows whether they are working on removing the limit or not. I would love to get confirmation that once they feel the box is stable, that they will remove the limit, but I doubt I'd get that.

I think I have 47 SL's, but there are some stuff that I don't have in there that I could and I actively manage the list. For instance, Las Vegas had it's season finale already, so I removed it, but that means next year I'll have to monitor when it starts and add it again, _if_ I have room. And I removed my NFL pregame SL after the season was over. But, I'm sure there are series coming up in the summer (Rescue Me, the 4400, Rockstar) that I will want SL's for, but I guess I could remove some of the SL's that aren't active in the summer. So I could probably manage with right around 50, but it will require too much work that I shouldn't have to do.

I've already e-mailed D* about it, but maybe it's time for a call today. Thanks for bringing this up again as it's probably in my top 3 issues with the box.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

So I had a few extra minutes, so I figured I'd call to complain. I got the first level support by saying "tech support" and then "complaint" when it asked for more info. The first person asked for my name and number and after I told her my issue, she seemed confused and put me on hold a couple times. She had to transfer me to Technical Support (isn't that what I asked for?). Anyway, the Tech Support lady asked for my phone number and name again and after telling her my issue, she immediately said she would have to transfer me to the HD Specialty Group. The next person to answer needed my name and phone number again and she had to put me on hold. When she came back, she confirmed there was a limit (oh really, I didn't know that ) and they didn't know when or if the limit would get removed. I said I wanted it noted that it really affected the way I watched TV and I would like it removed. She basically said there was nothing she could do. Probably 11 minutes and 46 seconds of my life wasted, but maybe if enough people call to complain, they will see a trend and do something about it.


----------



## turls (Jul 8, 2006)

This is definitely one I'll be calling about when I get the time. There is no way that 50 is a number I want to live with forever after having no limits since 2000. If the multi-room technology ends up having this same limitation, there is no point. Its not even enough for multi-user right now (which has been mentioned), much less whole-house.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

turls said:


> This is definitely one I'll be calling about when I get the time. There is no way that 50 is a number I want to live with forever after having no limits since 2000. If the multi-room technology ends up having this same limitation, there is no point. Its not even enough for multi-user right now (which has been mentioned), much less whole-house.


Did you ever call? Curious what they said if you called.


----------



## turls (Jul 8, 2006)

not yet


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

I never thought I would ever have to worry about a 50 SL limit. *I was wrong.*

We have SL's for these kinds of channels:

Networks
HIST/DISC/TLC/SCI Channels
HBO
SCIFI
USA

Nothing big you say....

Well some of these channels have split seasons.
Some have shows that air in the summer when the networks are off.
My wife watches GH.
My daughter watches ANIME and other shows that we don't.
We have several shows that we have a SL for that we just watch certain episodes. We look through the 'TODO' list to pick-n-choose(e.g. FoodTV or a series where we missed a few episodes).

I was kinda surprised how quickly SL's can add up. We are now pushing the limit (amazing how I'm the one who has to give something up...2 Women - Me...and I always seem to lose).

At any given point in time we aren't using all of the SL's but they come and go with the time of year.

I agree with *Mr. Tibbs*....It was an arbitrary number that "_seemed like it should be enough_.

All you need is a few people in the house with their own shows to watch, the common ones everyone whatches, the ones that come at certain times of the year........

It's not like we do nothing but watch TV. Between everyone few hrs a day(including personal SL's). We never get to the point where we are worried about space on the drive even if we don't watch for a couple of days(mostly during the summer)..._*AND YET*_ we seem to hitting the limit.

Mike


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> I never thought I would ever have to worry about a 50 SL limit. *I was wrong.*
> 
> We have SL's for these kinds of channels:
> 
> ...


Couldn't have said it any better. I'm getting to the point where I'm deleting shows that have already ended (Friday Night Lights) to make room for shows that are starting soon (Rescue Me, the 4400). But then I'll have to remember to remove the summer ones and add the fall ones in the fall.

Sad that I have to babysit it so much


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> Couldn't have said it any better. I'm getting to the point where I'm deleting shows that have already ended (Friday Night Lights) to make room for shows that are starting soon (Rescue Me, the 4400). But then I'll have to remember to remove the summer ones and add the fall ones in the fall.
> 
> Sad that I have to babysit it so much


I'm putting the sticky notes on the calendar now.

Ya know.......so my DVR knows what to record and when. 

Mike

PS - Thanks for reminding me about _The 4400_, I almost forgot.


----------



## DrEricCarlson (Mar 6, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> Couldn't have said it any better. I'm getting to the point where I'm deleting shows that have already ended (Friday Night Lights) to make room for shows that are starting soon (Rescue Me, the 4400). But then I'll have to remember to remove the summer ones and add the fall ones in the fall.
> 
> Sad that I have to babysit it so much


I just wanted to add my name to the list of people that have hit the 50 SL.

The point of a DVR for me is such that i can watch a show on my schedule not the networks (I also work late so i would miss most of prime-time if i did not record it). The series links allows me to record shows that i like and not have to worry about "When they are playing or if they move" as noted by DirecTV. However with the 50 SL limit I have to start worrying about when the shows are playing because I have to remove shows that have ended their seasons and add summer shows and do the reverse process in the fall. This defeats the purpose of the series link system in my opinion. I have many shows that come on seldom or at very random times (Adult swim on Cartoon network has a tendency to have a widely changing schedule) so it is difficult to keep track of when shows are on, when they have finished their season, when they are starting again, etc. Personally I think this is a very large problem with the HR20 which my old TIVO Sat-T60 did not have. I will call and write DirecTV to see what they say.

-DrEric


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

DrEricCarlson said:


> I just wanted to add my name to the list of people that have hit the 50 SL.
> 
> The point of a DVR for me is such that i can watch a show on my schedule not the networks (I also work late so i would miss most of prime-time if i did not record it). The series links allows me to record shows that i like and not have to worry about "When they are playing or if they move" as noted by DirecTV. However with the 50 SL limit I have to start worrying about when the shows are playing because I have to remove shows that have ended their seasons and add summer shows and do the reverse process in the fall. This defeats the purpose of the series link system in my opinion. I have many shows that come on seldom or at very random times (Adult swim on Cartoon network has a tendency to have a widely changing schedule) so it is difficult to keep track of when shows are on, when they have finished their season, when they are starting again, etc. Personally I think this is a very large problem with the HR20 which my old TIVO Sat-T60 did not have. I will call and write DirecTV to see what they say.
> 
> -DrEric


I'll add my name to this list...

I've set most of my summer time SL's but I'm finding myself VERY close to my 50 limit. I suppose I get desperate, I can remove all of my primetime fall/spring SL's on hiatus for the summer but I don't really want to.

Any developments on an increase to the limit of 50 SL's?


----------



## Vinny (Sep 2, 2006)

I'm at 45 series links and 3 auto records from search reslults, so I'm worried as well.


----------



## Michael D'Angelo (Oct 21, 2006)

I also wish this would get fixed soon. I am surprised that it has not yet.


----------



## jzekeb (Jun 4, 2007)

Dear D*,

Please fix this! I can deal with most of the other issues, but having a limit of 50 series links is extremely frustrating.

No, I don't sit around and watch TV 12 hours a day. I just want to set up a SL and forget it between seasons, etc.

Memory issues? Write it out to disk. That would solve all kinds of other problems also.

Please. Help me like you. This is a huge step backwards for a DVR.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

Has anyone pushed the envelope on this with the new CE's?


----------



## Diana C (Mar 30, 2007)

You know, another solution would be to enable MRV, then you could have multiple HR20s with different SLs and transfer recordings between units. I have about 120 Season Passes spread across my DirecTiVos, and MRV lets me avoid any duplication.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Radio Enginerd said:


> I'll add my name to this list...
> 
> I've set most of my summer time SL's but I'm finding myself VERY close to my 50 limit. I suppose I get desperate, I can remove all of my primetime fall/spring SL's on hiatus for the summer but I don't really want to.
> 
> Any developments on an increase to the limit of 50 SL's?


Thanks for the bump. And nope, no developments that I've seen (but I'm not in "the know").



BMoreRavens said:


> I also wish this would get fixed soon. I am surprised that it has not yet.


Me too.



armophob said:


> Has anyone pushed the envelope on this with the new CE's?


What do you mean? I'm sure there are people that have 50. I've been able to stay around 45 by deleting some of the canceled fall shows before adding the summer series.



Titan25 said:


> You know, another solution would be to enable MRV, then you could have multiple HR20s with different SLs and transfer recordings between units. I have about 120 Season Passes spread across my DirecTiVos, and MRV lets me avoid any duplication.


That would be nice *if* they provide them at no cost. If I have to pay extra, no thanks.


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> Thanks for the bump. And nope, no developments that I've seen (but I'm not in "the know").
> 
> Me too.
> 
> ...


This seems like such a simple issue to resolve which leads me to believe it's tied to the overall performance of the box or demand on system resources? I understand the reason for no DLB but this is simply allowing for more scheduled routines... right?


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Add me to the list too. I've got 98 season passes on my HR10-250, not sure what I'll do on the HR20.


----------



## josejrp (May 5, 2007)

Put my name in the list. I've only had the HR20 for a month or so, and I am already at 45 SLs. I don't know what I am going to do if the new fall season starts and the 50 SL limit is still there.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

The 50 series limit flies right in the face of the "you don't need DLB's because you are watching TV wrong by not recording everything" rationale I've seen used by the we don't need DLBs crowd.

If I'm suppose to be recording everything so that there is no need for DLBs (even though that is LESS convenient in many instances), how can I do that with a 50 Series Link limit.


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

I don't think I have anything new reasoning to add except that I too think this is very important (and ridiculous), so instead I offer only additional emotional reinforcement.  

I left my TiVo in operation with a secondary D* subscription thinking it would only be for a month or so while my family transitioned to the HR20 UI, etc. Well, when moving my season passes and wishlists over, I immediately hit the limit. Huh? 

I think I have >75 items on TiVo (don't know for sure since I was deleting them as I added them to HR20). This was after (1) forgetting about truly obsolete entries, (2) skipping season passes for shows in hiatus (I hadn't figured out how to autorecord searches when I did this), (3) even silently dropping some of my wife's and kids' items that I thought were too dumb for humans to watch (hey, he who controls the remote controls destiny). That's not even counting the new stuff I found on the new (basic) HD channels I get. Things seem to show up on Universal and HDNet as series that only last a few weeks ... then the season pass hangs around forever.

We now have "the grownups' satellite" and "the kids' TiVo" (most of the kid stuff is in SD anyhow). This is not a long-term solution, though. Those who suggest having multiple units and load balancing are being unrealistic for the habits of the great unwashed masses. It wasn't exactly cheap to get into the D* HD DVR game to begin with. Your average person isn't going to want to do it twice. 

We have two adults and two kids (each pair of opposite genders) in our house. When you add up the preferences of all those people, 50 is obviously a trivial number. Add to that that autorecording a search result consumes a slot, and you're completely hosed. That's a slot for one show (typically a movie). I don't feel at all like we're some kind of aliens who have way too many season passes. We don't watch all the shows we record, but we also don't just record everything that floats in front of us like a butterfly.


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

I just wanted to bring this back up top. Adding Eureka this week brings me into the 40's and I know I'll be up against 50 by Fall. Does anyone know if increasing the 50 SL limit is even on the radar screen for the development team?


----------



## kramerboy (Mar 10, 2006)

gpg said:


> I just wanted to bring this back up top. Adding Eureka this week brings me into the 40's and I know I'll be up against 50 by Fall. Does anyone know if increasing the 50 SL limit is even on the radar screen for the development team?


Yeah, I know that this fall will be an issue when the new shows start. I'm already at around 35 and I've only had this HR20 for a month! I should hit 50 very soon!


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

gpg said:


> Does anyone know if increasing the 50 SL limit is even on the radar screen for the development team?


It was mentioned in a recent chat session that it is indeed on their radar to increase this limit if they are able to.

I have a feeling that once VOD is rolled out and is stable that some of these lagging issues will get addressed.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

I really wish that VOD was backburnered, and they focused on the other issues instead. But I also understand from a financial standpoint VOD is a big deal for them. Based on the speculative costs, they wont get a dime from me for VOD...I already think the HD PPVs are a ripoff.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

Oh the weekly battle of choosing what to get rid of to keep it under 50... I wish I could transfer this frustration directly to D* staff. Can't believe this isn't fixed yet. 

HOW HARD COULD IT BE? 

A 5 minute fix for one tech.. just change "total=50" to "total=100" in the code or something like that I'm sure.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Thanks for the bump gpg. I also just added Eureka and something else and now I'm at 47 I believe. 

D* please fix this!


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Slyster said:


> Oh the weekly battle of choosing what to get rid of to keep it under 50... I wish I could transfer this frustration directly to D* staff. Can't believe this isn't fixed yet.
> 
> HOW HARD COULD IT BE?
> 
> A 5 minute fix for one tech.. just change "total=50" to "total=100" in the code or something like that I'm sure.


I'm sure it's been talked about several times in this thread but obviously it's not hard. But we don't know the *real* reason why the limit. Obviously it was for a technical reason such as stability or something similar. I'm sure once they are confindent that raising it won't destablize the box it will be a quick thing to up the limit or remove it completely.


----------



## generalpatton78 (Dec 17, 2003)

I hit the limit after having this thing for a week! I'm a long time tivo user and this is a huge deal! Seriously I'll be keeping my HR10 and HR20 bit if my cable company doesn't go SDV I may get a Series3 tivo and move to cable. That said if they fix this to 100 then I can live with the HR20.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

Have not read all the post in this thread, but is it possible with >50 SLs that there would some sort of conflict the prioritizer could not handle?


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

machavez00 said:


> Have not read all the post in this thread, but is it possible with >50 SLs that there would some sort of conflict the prioritizer could not handle?


I sure hope not. Some have speculated that they don't think it has the processing power to handle more, but no one knows for sure (except D*, I guess).


----------



## tfederov (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm not near the ceiling (by far) but until there is the fix to remove SLs that no longer have shows playing (Darn NBC for dropping Studio 60!) there is a chance a good quarter of my SLs will just be taking up space.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

If you want to remove an SL with no upcoming episodes, you just dash-dash it. That has never been a problem. The big stink being raised currently is the inability to EDIT an SL with no upcoming episodes.


----------



## JMCecil (Jan 20, 2007)

Slyster said:


> HOW HARD COULD IT BE?
> 
> A 5 minute fix for one tech.. just change "total=50" to "total=100" in the code or something like that I'm sure.


Now I know who was snoring during data structures class.


----------



## JMCecil (Jan 20, 2007)

We've only had the HR20-700 for 5 or 6 months. With three of us in the house and very little TV time, we are at around 40 SLs. So, I can see for people who watch TV every night that 50 just doesn't cut it. Especially if there are 4 or 5 people. 

But, we run into the 2 channel simultaneous recording limit constantly. This seems to be the reason we haven't hit the 50 SL limit. Obviously, the physical tuner problem can only be solved by another DVR. I'm just surprised that the power users don't have this problem. I'm fairly sure this is a large contributing factor that shaped Earl's multi-DVR habits.

Anyhow, as a programmer, I always find it funny when people condense coding down to "just turn the switch in the code to ON". However, this is clearly an issue for what seems to be a smaller population of the user base. That doesn't make it un-important. It just makes it lower on the priority list(this is speculaiton, I have no idea where it is in the priority list). It is even possible that they have "coded themselves into a corner." And, adding extra SLs will break 2309420398402394 other functions in the code base.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

JMCecil said:


> We've only had the HR20-700 for 5 or 6 months. With three of us in the house and very little TV time, we are at around 40 SLs. So, I can see for people who watch TV every night that 50 just doesn't cut it. Especially if there are 4 or 5 people.
> 
> But, we run into the 2 channel simultaneous recording limit constantly. This seems to be the reason we haven't hit the 50 SL limit. Obviously, the physical tuner problem can only be solved by another DVR. I'm just surprised that the power users don't have this problem. I'm fairly sure this is a large contributing factor that shaped Earl's multi-DVR habits.


Surprisingly, even though we record what I think is a lot of tv, we rarely need 3 things recording simultaneously. Either there just aren't 3 things on at the same time, or you can catch a rerun of the shows on FX, MTV, USA, Comedy Central, etc shortly after the original airing. We did have an SD Directivo as a back up hooked up to our main tv, but our daughter's tivo died, so I gave her our's, as we just really don't need it. For the rare occasion where there is 3 things on that won't get repeated right away, either we don't watch it or I bittorrent it.


----------



## Jacquelyn (Aug 17, 2006)

My $.02

50 is just not enough. I currently have 4 HD TiVos and 2 SD TiVos. 

ALL of them have more than 50 season passes.

I know I have to switch some of them out with HR20's before the fall season starts. I was hoping that with MPeg 4 and external drives that I could cut the number of DVRs from 6 to 4. Now that I know about the 50 SL limit, I'll have to rethink this.


----------



## kbohip (Nov 19, 2005)

Lol, this HR20's been out for almost a year now and they STILL haven't fixed this problem?:nono: I guess it's lucky for me I've never had my SP's above 50, or I'd be in trouble.


----------



## leww37334 (Sep 19, 2005)

kbohip said:


> Lol, this HR20's been out for almost a year now and they STILL haven't fixed this problem?:nono: I guess it's lucky for me I've never had my SP's above 50, or I'd be in trouble.


Oh yeah, well we've got a nice new GUI color, isn't that much more important? ( This site really needs an icon for sarcasm).


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

leww37334 said:


> Oh yeah, well we've got a nice new GUI color, isn't that much more important? ( This site really needs an icon for sarcasm).




Or would rolling your eyes not convey the emotion behind your post?


----------



## DonCorleone (Jan 29, 2006)

_Fifty_ SL's?? I mean, my God, I thought I watched a lot of TV...50??? You need to read a book.


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

DonCorleone said:


> _Fifty_ SL's?? I mean, my God, I thought I watched a lot of TV...50??? You need to read a book.


Please clarify. Are you applying for a job with the D* marketing team or the D* development team?


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

DonCorleone said:


> _Fifty_ SL's?? I mean, my God, I thought I watched a lot of TV...50??? You need to read a book.


Don't forget that every autorecord series link you set up also takes a slot in the Prioritizer. So if you just saw a commercial for a movie that comes out next month, and set up a keyword autorecord SL for it, you just used a slot.

If you have Premium, you may also have a lot of autorecord SLs for HD movies, so you have a little VOD library of your own.

Also, consider the changes networks are making to how they schedule their programs. Fox essentially has two seasons, so they're running one program in the 8 PM slot in the first half of the new TV year, and a different program in that same slot in the second half. Before, you'd have one program with lots of preemptions and repeats, so you only used one slot in the prioritizer. Now, if you watch both Fox 8 PM programs, you're using two slots in the prioritizer.


----------



## mnbulldog (Aug 25, 2006)

To me this says it all and I don't understand why D* doesn't get this:

NO OTHER DVR HAS THIS LIMIT - END OF CONVERSATION.

Sorry for the yelling but I just don't get the argument or discussion. I work for a retailer that sells the HR20 and I can guarantee you "average users" constantly complain to me about the 50 limit.

This is just something that needs to be resolved. If you don't hit the limit - great. But obviously many do and that makes it a problem because it is after all - a DVR which is meant to record series ... along with one-time recordings.

I know that is not the end of the conversation since the problem clearly exist. But just ranting.

I really do - as I have stated numerous times - love the HR20 but man the flaws are just glaring and to a non-programmer seem simple to resolve.


----------



## thekobk (Dec 14, 2006)

I cant believe this has not been fixed yet. I hit 50 a while ago and have to use my tivo in the bedroom.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Yeah, 7 months since I first posted and it's been there for almost a year now. Simply shocking.


----------



## jacobp (Dec 22, 2003)

This 50 SL limit is the most problematic part of switching from Tivo to the DTV DVRs. Other than picture quality the ability to use the DVR to record the shows you want would seem to me to be the most important aspect of having a DVR in the first place. Please, DTV, raise or eliminate the limit. I certainly hope that this is not a hardware issue.


----------



## johnd'oh (May 1, 2007)

I really hope this gets fixed soon. I am sitting at 49 SL's and am even recording a few shows manually. I could easily shatter the 50 limit if I was able to put all the shows I want in the prioritizer. 

Does anyone know if this problem is even on the radar to be fixed? Are there any time estimates or anything to give us hope?


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

Hmm does autorecord count against series links?? Cause if you key in the exact name of the show for a keyword then you wont have to worry about it recording something you dont want. and al problems will kinda be solved.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

drx792 said:


> Hmm does autorecord count against series links?? Cause if you key in the exact name of the show for a keyword then you wont have to worry about it recording something you dont want. and al problems will kinda be solved.


An autorecord search is always present in the prioritizer, because the HR20 is constantly looking for programs to record based on the search criteria that was input.

Inputting a specific title as a keyword search does not guarantee it will record off of a specific channel ... consider "FRIENDS" as a keyword search. It's the name of a show, but also will appear in longer titles ("Friends with Benefits"), and descriptions ("four friends find a dead body on railroad tracks").


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

jacobp said:


> This 50 SL limit is the most problematic part of switching from Tivo to the DTV DVRs. Other than picture quality the ability to use the DVR to record the shows you want would seem to me to be the most important aspect of having a DVR in the first place. Please, DTV, raise or eliminate the limit. I certainly hope that this is not a hardware issue.


I certainly hope not either.



johnd'oh;1039209 said:


> I really hope this gets fixed soon. I am sitting at 49 SL's and am even recording a few shows manually. I could easily shatter the 50 limit if I was able to put all the shows I want in the prioritizer.
> 
> Does anyone know if this problem is even on the radar to be fixed? Are there any time estimates or anything to give us hope?


I wish I knew the answer to that.



drx792 said:


> Hmm does autorecord count against series links?? Cause if you key in the exact name of the show for a keyword then you wont have to worry about it recording something you dont want. and al problems will kinda be solved.


Yes, autorecords count as an SL.


----------



## dtomlinson (Aug 7, 2007)

Add me to the list. I just "upgraded" two HR10-250s to two HR-20-100s and quickly learned of this limitation. I had 109 season passes in my primary box so the limit of 50 doesn't make me happy. Granted, I can pare that number down a bit, but not to 50! And I was just coming to grips with the lack of dual buffers. 

Dan


----------



## rposly (Aug 10, 2007)

Yeah, add me to the list of annoyed HR20 users. I just upgraded to the HR20 from my old standard Tivo, and I couldn't believe it when it told me that I had reached my limit in the Prioritizer. I had about 80 Season Passes and AutoRecord WishLists on the old Tivo, so 50 is just not gonna cut it. 

I plan on calling and emailing DirecTV every day on this, as it's kind of a deal-breaker for me.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

They should have to provide as many hr20's as it takes to handle the same number or hr10 season passes.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

rposly said:


> Yeah, add me to the list of annoyed HR20 users. I just upgraded to the HR20 from my old standard Tivo, and I couldn't believe it when it told me that I had reached my limit in the Prioritizer. I had about 80 Season Passes and AutoRecord WishLists on the old Tivo, so 50 is just not gonna cut it.
> 
> I plan on calling and emailing DirecTV every day on this, as it's kind of a deal-breaker for me.


I like your enthusiasm :up:


Sirshagg said:


> They should have to provide as many hr20's as it takes to handle the same number or hr10 season passes.


I like the way you think.


----------



## johnd'oh (May 1, 2007)

I know several posters have said they've called D* on this issue. I'm just curious what their response has been? Are they even aware of it? Any hint of it being fixed at some point?


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> *Hate the 50 SL limit? Call (800-DIRECTV) or write Directv to let them know and join the discussion here.*


Just emailed them. 
about to shamelessly lift your tagline.


----------



## Vor (Jul 5, 2007)

johnd'oh;1049042 said:


> I know several posters have said they've called D* on this issue. I'm just curious what their response has been? Are they even aware of it? Any hint of it being fixed at some point?


I don't have any information from D*, but I am a highly experienced embedded systems developer. Hard limits are usually set for one of the following reasons:

1) They set it there "just because". Maybe that's all they had time to test. Maybe the coder just said "this should be enough". in any case, if this was the reason, I'd have expected them to have it bumped up as soon as somebody complained.

2) Memory issues, they could only have enough RAM to store a prioritizer table of 50. It's doubtful that this is the case, if it was then they wouldn't have enough memory for the VOD feature to fit. Although they may want to make sure VOD fits into the memory space before they commit more of it to the prioritizer table.

3) Some time-sensitive piece of code walks the whole list, and it only has time to walk 50 entries. This is actually my guess.

Let's say that you have a recording conflict, there could some piece of code that wakes up X amount of time before the conflict starts, walks the prioritizer list to find the priority of the first program, walks it again to find the priority of the second, etc, then has to pick the top two before the shows start. It could be that it can only get done in X amount of time IF the list is less than 50.

Now, there's ways around that (store the list in a more quickly searchable structure, move X back a bit, work out the conflicts as they're scheduled rather than as they record, etc), but they take a large amount of coding/testing to make sure everything still works.

Anyhow, I hope this answers the "why don't they just turn it up?" questions, even if it's not authoritative.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

johnd'oh;1049042 said:


> I know several posters have said they've called D* on this issue. I'm just curious what their response has been? Are they even aware of it? Any hint of it being fixed at some point?


Dear Mr. SirShagg,

Thanks for letting us know your concerns about the limited series links of the HR20. I see that you've been with us since December of 2000 and we appreciate your continued support.

We're always looking for ways to enhance our services, and customer feedback is very important to us. I have forwarded your comments on to DIRECTV Management.

We often make changes to our service based on customer requests, and we conduct customer surveys on a regular basis to get feedback and new ideas.

Thanks again for writing and stay tuned to directv.com for the latest news and information about our services.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> Just emailed them.
> about to shamelessly lift your tagline.


It all makes sense now 

And thanks again for "stealing" it :up:


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> It all makes sense now
> 
> And thanks again for "stealing" it :up:


Now, who's got something i can steal for MRV? :hurah:


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

johnd'oh;1049042 said:


> I know several posters have said they've called D* on this issue. I'm just curious what their response has been? Are they even aware of it? Any hint of it being fixed at some point?


They are aware. This was my conversation when I called back in March


> So I had a few extra minutes, so I figured I'd call to complain. I got the first level support by saying "tech support" and then "complaint" when it asked for more info. The first person asked for my name and number and after I told her my issue, she seemed confused and put me on hold a couple times. She had to transfer me to Technical Support (isn't that what I asked for?). Anyway, the Tech Support lady asked for my phone number and name again and after telling her my issue, she immediately said she would have to transfer me to the HD Specialty Group. The next person to answer needed my name and phone number again and she had to put me on hold. When she came back, she confirmed there was a limit (oh really, I didn't know that ) and they didn't know when or if the limit would get removed. I said I wanted it noted that it really affected the way I watched TV and I would like it removed. She basically said there was nothing she could do. Probably 11 minutes and 46 seconds of my life wasted, but maybe if enough people call to complain, they will see a trend and do something about it.


----------



## johnd'oh (May 1, 2007)

Thanks for sharing your conversation. ^^^

I just can't fathom the decision making process that led to implementing this limit of 50. My only other experience with DVR's is the SD DirecTivo units. Of course there was no known limit with those units. And as far as I know, I'm not aware of any other DVR's having limits like this. Why did D* think it was fine to unleash their latest offering and make it crippled compared to everything else out there. (Of course DLB can apply here as well) It just boggles the mind. 

And that CSR's response that maybe it will never get fixed had better d*mn well not be true. I agree with you, it does completely alter the way I watch TV. Currently, I've become my own Prioritizer and must manually record several shows each week because I can't add a SL for them. "Gee Mr. HR20, is there anything else I can do for you to make your life easier? No, you just sit back and relax and let me take care of everything."

The DVR is supposed to make my life easier, not more difficult.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> Dear Mr. SirShagg,
> 
> Thanks for letting us know your concerns about the limited series links of the HR20. I see that you've been with us since December of 2000 and we appreciate your continued support.
> 
> ...


Lovely, just lovely. Here's my response. Look familiar  


> Dear Mr. Nagel,
> 
> Thanks for letting us know your concern with regards to your equipment. We're always looking for ways to enhance our services, and customer feedback is very important to us. I have forwarded your comments on to DIRECTV Management.
> 
> ...


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

PLEASE FIX THIS D*

Really limiting.

And to think.... almost FORTY years ago we went to the MOON! Unreal how these technologically tiny (yet so troublesome) issues can exist today. Come on.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

SO, here is what I sent them:



> DIRECTV FEEDBACK MESSAGE
> 
> Name: Lee L
> Status:
> ...


Here is their response:



DirecTV person who can't read said:


> Dear Mr. and Ms. Lee L,
> 
> Thanks for writing. I'm glad to hear that you are planning to upgrade your DIRECTV system to HD DVR. Please visit www.directv.com/HDDVR for more information regarding the equipment and the costs. You can also call us at (888) 355-7530 during business hours for immediate assistance on your upgrade. A Customer Service Representative will be most happy to assist you.
> 
> ...


I wrote back asking for an answer to the question regarding the series link limit so we will see what happens.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Lee L said:


> SO, here is what I sent them:
> 
> Here is their response:
> 
> I wrote back asking for an answer to the question regarding the series link limit so we will see what happens.


Typical. It's like they didn't even read the email but instead found the keyword "tivo" and sent a canned PR response based on that. Didn't even come close to addressing the actual questions.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Lee L said:


> SO, here is what I sent them:
> 
> Here is their response:
> 
> I wrote back asking for an answer to the question regarding the series link limit so we will see what happens.


Gotta love it!

And BTW, hi Lee for TCF (I think this is the first time I've noticed you here)


----------



## PRMan (Sep 16, 2005)

The e-mail responses are automated. We've known that for a long time.

I find on my HR10-250 that I have a limit of about 45 SP items. Beyond that, it starts running really slow and locking up a lot. When I am below that, it runs great.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

I had over 100 with no problems.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, I sent them a response and they sent another apologizing for the misunderstanding and they said that I would receive a call from a tech. I took the day off form work and am waiting by the phone and plan to stay here until I get the call.


----------



## JMCecil (Jan 20, 2007)

Lee L said:


> ... said that I would receive a call from a tech. I took the day off form work and am waiting by the phone and plan to stay here until I get the call.


You might want schedule another week or two off.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

:icon_lol:


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Well, I sent them a response and they sent another apologizing for the misunderstanding and they said that I would receive a call from a tech. I took the day off form work and am waiting by the phone and plan to stay here until I get the call.


Be sure to post a response. I'd be curious to see if anything has changed since I called in March.


----------



## vegasflyby (Aug 7, 2007)

I had to call last week to activate a receiver and they had no clue about the limit. The CSR transfered me to tech support and the lady I got there also had no clue about the limit either. She had to put me on hold and go ask her co-workers about it. It took about 5 minutes for her to find someone who could verify the limit. I asked her if there were plans to fix it. She had no idea and I didn't have the energy to carry on.


----------



## DaHound (Nov 20, 2006)

Add me to the 'GET RID OF THE 50 SL LIMIT' list.


----------



## knivan (Jan 14, 2007)

DaHound said:


> Add me to the 'GET RID OF THE 50 SL LIMIT' list.


Add my vote to remove the 50 SL limit. Today was my second time hitting the 50 limit, forcing me to selectively delete.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

knivan said:


> Add my vote to remove the 50 SL limit. Today was my second time hitting the 50 limit, forcing me to selectively delete.


Please be sure to make it official with the wish list survey.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

knivan said:


> Add my vote to remove the 50 SL limit. Today was my second time hitting the 50 limit, forcing me to selectively delete.


Welcome to the club and welcome to my "no more 50 SL club"


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, they did call me back at home about 6:30 Eastern Friday, but I was not there. I forgot the reference number they left so I will try tonight or tomorrow AM.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

OK, I caled them back. I could not use the 4 digit code they gave me, eveidently they expire or something. I got bounced around and finally talked to someone who genuinely wanted to help but of course had nothing. He did some research and said he could find nothing in the system that said they were working on changing the limit, but he also found nothing saying it would not be changed.

He also said he knew the new HR21 receiver was coming out in a few months but of course had no specs on that.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

With an intentional effort to keep this thread alive, I decided to ask this question here instead of a new thread. 

Way,way back when I first joined I asked if there was an issue when you hit a certain amount of saved programs in my playlist. I then found that the reason I was hitting that number was coincidence and both shows just had that exact number of episodes.

I am asking that question again about 100 episodes. It seems my Good Eats recordings are stuck at 99. At 8pm tonight I will know if they are being deleted or it is canceling the over recording.

You ask why I save them all? Well I have come to enjoy using his show like a cookbook. Nuff said.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

armophob said:


> With an intentional effort to keep this thread alive, I decided to ask this question here instead of a new thread.
> 
> Way,way back when I first joined I asked if there was an issue when you hit a certain amount of saved programs in my playlist. I then found that the reason I was hitting that number was coincidence and both shows just had that exact number of episodes.
> 
> ...


:eek2: Wow, a 100 episodes huh? Not that I would ever hit that, but it would be interesting to find out if there is another limit built in. Let us know.


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> :eek2: Wow, a 100 episodes huh? Not that I would ever hit that, but it would be interesting to find out if there is another limit built in. Let us know.


Nope apparently not. I have hit episode 100. Just another milestone. Thanks to D* for not limiting our episodes.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Any movement on this? We just went and added some Season passes for new TV and got rid of some duplicates. Right now we are at 62 downstairs. Now, some of them are not airing now so when I set the new HR20 up, I will probably only have 52 or 53 right away and I could delete some wishlists to get to that number or shift some shows upstairs that we would normally want to have downstairs, but why should I have to. The point of a DVR is not to have to add Series Links in the fall, then add new ones for Summer shows.




DirecTV, up the limit to something more usable.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Lee L said:


> but why should I have to. The point of a DVR is not to have to add Series Links in the fall, then add new ones for Summer shows.


That's what I've been saying all along.

And I just had to do the same myself. I deleted some SL's for summer shows to make room for the new fall shows.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> That's what I've been saying all along.
> 
> And I just had to do the same myself. I deleted some SL's for summer shows to make room for the new fall shows.


Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Why should the DVR have to remember all those show with no new epirodes for 6 months. Humans are much better for that sort of thing.


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

Sirshagg said:


> Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Why should the DVR have to remember all those show with no new epirodes for 6 months. Humans are much better for that sort of thing.


Heh, couldn't agree more. That's why I have given up on SL completely. Now I just remember when things are going to be on, show up at my TV, and hit record.

Once I get used to this new system (which, through weakness, I still find inconvenient in the middle of the night or when I'm supposed to be at work), I'm going to try showing up at my TV at the appointed time and just watching the shows. I'm going to call it Viewing On Demand (VOD).

:hurah:


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> That's what I've been saying all along.
> 
> And I just had to do the same myself. I deleted some SL's for summer shows to make room for the new fall shows.


Matt,

With the new HD channels on the horizon me thinks I'll *really* need to see this limit increased.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

I decided to reply to an earlier reply from D* about this. My message


> I just had to remove several series links in order to make room for the new
> shows starting soon. The whole point of a DVR is that I can set up a series
> link and not have to think about it. Even when shows aren't currently
> airing, I can just leave the SL and it will just start recording new
> ...


Their response


> Thank you for writing us back. I understand your concerns about the current limit on the series link feature of your HD DVR. As indicated in our previous response, we're always looking for ways to enhance our services, and customer feedback is very important to us. Rest assured that your feedback has been forwarded to the appropriate department for review.
> 
> As a reminder, to make sure that you continue to receive our HD programming - including new HD programming we're launching later this year - you will need to make sure that a device called a B-Band converter is connected to each Satellite-In port on your DIRECTV HR20 receiver. The B-Band converter came in the carton with your receiver and if you had professional installation, it is most likely already connected. For instructions on how to check for B-Band converter connection or to order one, go to directv.com/bbc.
> 
> ...


Gotta love it  Just blow me off


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

mtnagel said:


> I decided to reply to an earlier reply from D* about this. My message Their response Gotta love it  Just blow me off


Hey, maybe if you'd _bother _to check your B-band converters, you'd get your higher SL limit. I mean, come _on_, work with us here!


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

wjcarpenter said:


> Hey, maybe if you'd _bother _to check your B-band converters, you'd get your higher SL limit. I mean, come _on_, work with us here!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Maybe I will send them another email. Not that it will do any good. Heck, I doubt they even know WTF we are talking about when we mention it.


----------



## vegasflyby (Aug 7, 2007)

Well I set up SL #40 last night. I'm expecting this to go up even more when the new HD channels go live. I'm starting to get a little nervous. Is this even on Directv's radar. I don't think I've ever seen the 50 SL limit in the "what's hot" section of Steve's wishlist.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I got a response back to my email that at least makes it seem like the CSR understands the isuse this time. However, the bottom line gist of it is still the standard "We have no plans to update this feature at this time, but we are always looking at ways to improve the customer experience at DirecTV". The rep did say the request was being passed on to the appropriate people for what that is worth.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

vegasflyby said:


> Well I set up SL #40 last night. I'm expecting this to go up even more when the new HD channels go live. I'm starting to get a little nervous. Is this even on Directv's radar. I don't think I've ever seen the 50 SL limit in the "what's hot" section of Steve's wishlist.


I think it's usually around the middle.

And AFAIK, no one has ever come out and said that they are actively working on removing the limit, so I take that to mean they aren't.



Lee L said:


> I got a response back to my email that at least makes it seem like the CSR understands the isuse this time. However, the bottom line gist of it is still the standard "We have no plans to update this feature at this time, but we are always looking at ways to improve the customer experience at DirecTV". The rep did say the request was being passed on to the appropriate people for what that is worth.


Probably not much


----------



## marty45714 (Dec 16, 2006)

Add me to the list of those thinking this is at the top of the HR-20 issues. Now that more people are using ESATA (I just added a 1TB drive), and with the impending new HD channels, more and more people will see this limit affecting their units.


----------



## jrodhotrod (Jan 27, 2007)

We came across this earlier this year when we started adding summer series to our HR-20 DVR that we got in February. We have dealt with it, but it is a real pain point. 

With new Fall shows coming out I am having to delete wishlist items and series links for summer shows. What a pain to have to keep on top of when a series will start airing new episodes again.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

jrodhotrod said:


> We came across this earlier this year when we started adding summer series to our HR-20 DVR that we got in February. We have dealt with it, but it is a real pain point.
> 
> With new Fall shows coming out I am having to delete wishlist items and series links for summer shows. What a pain to have to keep on top of when a series will start airing new episodes again.


:welcome_s 
Yep, Definitely a PITA.

So here's a proposal. If it's not reasonably possibly to up the 50 SL limit (which i still hope it is) then give us 2-3 prioritizer lists and let us choose which one is active at any given time.


----------



## mikek (May 18, 2007)

Holy crap. I thought this thing would be fixed by now. Their are going to be a lot of people pissed off now that the new fall season is starting.

Let the deleting begin. 

ps. I now have about 45 SLs. What happens when you try for #51? i imagine you get a message saying you have to delete some SLs.

-mk


----------



## HolmesCo (Dec 4, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> :welcome_s
> Yep, Definitely a PITA.
> 
> So here's a proposal. If it's not reasonably possibly to up the 50 SL limit (which i still hope it is) then give us 2-3 prioritizer lists and let us choose which one is active at any given time.


That seems like an excellent idea, or maybe each set of 'favorites' could have its own list, something like that. Might end up with a lot of cockpit confusion though I guess.
I'd also like to see several more 'favorites' be possible. 2 just isn't enuf. I like my old RCA origianal box thaht had several. I even setup one that just had 3 or 4 channels on it so I could toggle thru them quickly, maybe several ball games or something. A sort of temprorary scratch pad of channels for that evening. Change it regularly. It was real handy.


----------



## cbaker (Dec 20, 2006)

mikek said:


> Holy crap. I thought this thing would be fixed by now. Their are going to be a lot of people pissed off now that the new fall season is starting.
> 
> Let the deleting begin.
> 
> ...


A popup comes up saying you have too many and can't save that SL. At least it gives you a choice to go to the Prioritizer, right. If D* can't fix the issue (for whatever hardware performance issue) they can at least make it easy for you to delete Prioritizer items to free up space. :lol: I just wish we had some feedback from them on their plans on this item.


----------



## cbaker (Dec 20, 2006)

marty45714 said:


> Add me to the list of those thinking this is at the top of the HR-20 issues. Now that more people are using ESATA (I just added a 1TB drive), and with the impending new HD channels, more and more people will see this limit affecting their units.


Been at the top of many a list for a long time. It was a serious issue (not #1 at the time when just getting things to record was a bigger issue, but up there) the day I got my HR20 about a year ago. Again, it just seems to fall on def ears.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

cbaker said:


> A popup comes up saying you have too many and can't save that SL. At least it gives you a choice to go to the Prioritizer, right. If D* can't fix the issue (for whatever hardware performance issue) they can at least make it easy for you to delete Prioritizer items to free up space. :lol: I just wish we had some feedback from them on their plans on this item.


Send a message to DirecTV. Use the link in my sig.

mtnagel, I stole the idea - hope you don't mind.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Send a message to DirecTV. Use the link in my sig.
> 
> mtnagel, I stole the idea - hope you don't mind.


Nope, I love it.

And thanks cbaker for taking up the cause.


----------



## drisner (Jun 8, 2007)

Sirshagg said:


> So here's a proposal. If it's not reasonably possibly to up the 50 SL limit (which i still hope it is) then give us 2-3 prioritizer lists and let us choose which one is active at any given time.


This feature is already implemented. You simply unplug your external drive for summer usage and plug it back in for fall/winter. 

BTW: I sent in my e-mail to D* today.


----------



## tealcomp (Sep 7, 2007)

Well, I was thinking, 50 seems like a lot of favorites, but then what I forgot about (and was reminded consequently reading this thread), is that I do not watch everything all of the time and also, sometimes series go into hiatus and I just frankly forget they are still there. So, given that scenario, I can see how this could be a problem. Hey, maybe this is D*'s way of selling more DVRS? I mean after all, if I have 2 DVR's I could essentially have 100 SL's LOL. That was a little humor on my part; but that is how I plan on handling my situation. I can only hope that at some point some type of sharing between DVR's will be permitted, so you can share shows between devices; that would be awesome.

-Dan


----------



## mndwalsh (Nov 16, 2005)

I didn't this was a big deal about a month ago, now I am at 45. Just sent and email in to DTV


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

mndwalsh said:


> I didn't this was a big deal about a month ago, now I am at 45. Just sent and email in to DTV


I think that's going to happen to a lot of people.


----------



## Bista-Buster (Apr 15, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> :welcome_s
> Yep, Definitely a PITA.
> 
> So here's a proposal. If it's not reasonably possibly to up the 50 SL limit (which i still hope it is) then give us 2-3 prioritizer lists and let us choose which one is active at any given time.


Why not just make it unlimited? How hard can that be. I will not be controlled by DirecTV as to how many programs I can set up to record.


----------



## PittCaleb (Nov 2, 2007)

I just sent them the following:


> I recently "upgraded" from an HR10-250 to the HR21-700 in order to receive the new MPEG-4 channels. I'll admit a bunch of my problems/issues are learning curve related, but there is one thing that needs to be addressed by your engineering team ASAP!
> 
> There appears to be a limit of only 50 'season passes' - with 2 adults and 2 children of different ages and the fact that networks run programs in the fall, winter and summer these days, we have about 100 programs scheduled on our TiVo unit. I'd rather the HR21 run slowly and auto-record everything I want to see than run fast, but only record half the programs I'd like to watch.
> 
> ...


their auto-response is this:


> We have forwarded your inquiry to our e-mail response team.
> 
> Our goal is to reply within 48 hours. However, we are currently receiving an unusually high volume of e-mail, which may delay our response to you.


The HR21 is working fairly good for me so far, but this is an issue to me. I have no kids programs on this unit, now they're restricted to the old SD-TiVo upstairs in the playroom. The Shield, Rescue Me, Damages, etc. are not scheduled yet either - thus when they come on, I'll miss them unless I see an advertisement - and considering I don't watch ads, this may be difficult for me. 24, Lost also aren't on yet...

Here's hoping for a quick fix to this, although I see some of you have been waiting for quite some time already...

PittCaleb


----------



## rsblaski (Jul 6, 2003)

Sirshagg said:


> :welcome_s
> Yep, Definitely a PITA.
> 
> So here's a proposal. If it's not reasonably possibly to up the 50 SL limit (which i still hope it is) then give us 2-3 prioritizer lists and let us choose which one is active at any given time.


I think this would drive many people to the rubber Ramada.
You would sill have to monitor when a series is about to return. Then you would have to make sure that any series on list #1 that was still active was also on the second list, AND if it wasn't, add it to list #2. Then if the series you added pushed over the limit of list #2, you would have to delete series that were not on list one, but started at a later date during the time that list two is active.
As you can see, explaining what I mean is confusing enough. Trying to juggle two or three SL lists would make for an interesting exercise.


----------



## looter (Oct 1, 2007)

I just replaced my R10 with an HR21. Somehow, I missed the 50SL limit in my reading about the HR20/HR21.

I don't watch that much TV. Wrote down the Season passes from the R10 to put on the HR20, ahem, HR21. There 65 of them. Sure a few were outdated, but SO WHAT????????????

This and no Dual live buffers seriously make this thing MUCH less usable.

Also, of course D* customer service told me I'd be getting an HR20 but the guy shows up with an HR21. Bait and switch, again. Just like 6 months ago when they told me they were sending out and R10 and said it would be a "Tivo". Of course it was an R15 that is sitting in my garage in the box it came in.

Damn NFLST. It keeps me supporting D* and their half-cocked products and poorly trained employees.


----------



## Hemi (Dec 27, 2007)

looter said:


> I just replaced my R10 with an HR21. Somehow, I missed the 50SL limit in my reading about the HR20/HR21.
> 
> I don't watch that much TV. Wrote down the Season passes from the R10 to put on the HR20, ahem, HR21. There 65 of them. Sure a few were outdated, but SO WHAT????????????
> 
> ...


I hate that this is my first post in this forum but, is this still an issue? Holy cow! I have an install scheduled for Monday (12/31) when D* will "upgrade" my 2 HR1-250s with HR20s (or so I've been promised) and now I find out that this limit is still not fixed? Now I have three things on my watch list of known issues with the HR20/21s;

1) Dual live buffers (I use this almost everytime I watch TV)
2) the list of channels I receive (CIR) is locked

and now,

3) Season Pass/Series Link limit of 50 (I currently have 73 on my HR10-250 and another 45 on my old SAT-T60 (still running!) sitting on top of it).

I think that I am going to call back and ensure that with this upgrade, I don't extend my commitment to D* any longer than it already was... I will keep an open mind and give these units a try but if these are as bad as I think they are, I would like the ability to cancel and jump to Comcast or AT&T and buy a "real" TiVo.

Please tell me that in some alternate universe that these issues have been solved and that within a month or two they will be old news. I remember waiting for D* to activate the 2nd tuner in my SAT-T60 but at least I knew that, a) many people were waiting with me and b) it would come since the hardware was already there. Correct me if I am wrong, but all of these issues sound like software fixes and not hardware fixes.

Dan


----------



## kathymoore (Mar 3, 2006)

Hemi said:


> I hate that this is my first post in this forum but, is this still an issue? Holy cow! I have an install scheduled for Monday (12/31) when D* will "upgrade" my 2 HR1-250s with HR20s (or so I've been promised) and now I find out that this limit is still not fixed? Now I have three things on my watch list of known issues with the HR20/21s;
> 
> Dan


I "upgraded" from three HR10-250 HD Tivo DVRs to three HR20/21 HD DVRs
a couple of week ago.

Within two days, I found out the hard way about the 50 series link limit...  
On the old HR10s, I only used them for HD, so it was only a dozen HD channels.
(local HD and 74 to 79)

I thought the HR20/21 was kidding when it informed me that I already had 50...
it won't let me add more until I removed some....


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 9, 2007)

Hemi said:


> I hate that this is my first post in this forum but, is this still an issue? Holy cow! I have an install scheduled for Monday (12/31) when D* will "upgrade" my 2 HR1-250s with HR20s (or so I've been promised) and now I find out that this limit is still not fixed? Now I have three things on my watch list of known issues with the HR20/21s;
> 
> 1) Dual live buffers (I use this almost everytime I watch TV)
> 2) the list of channels I receive (CIR) is locked
> ...


No the limit hasnt been raised and it does not appear that it is being worked on, or at least being given high priority. Also I would seriously doubt that at this time you are going to get HR20's. HR21's have been the norm for several weeks if not months at this time and finally getting the new equipment will almost certainly trigger a new commitment. Sorry to be the vearer of bad news.


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

Earl, any chance you could check with your contacts to see if they have any plans to increase the sl limit?


----------



## tlrowley (Jun 21, 2007)

With some cable shows starting their winter seasons, I'm hitting the 50 SL limit, and I'm hitting it hard. Without futoncritic, I would have missed the Stargate:Atlantis winter season (I had deleted the SL to make room), but my HR10 picked it up since I still had the SP sitting around. Yes, I realize the HR10 can only get Stargate:Atlantis in SD, but at least it gets it.

I miss DLB, but I find the 50 SL limit to be the biggest problem for me in my HR20. I like to keep inactive SL/SP around to catch these new split seasons.


----------



## bt-rtp (Dec 30, 2005)

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=114275



mtnagel said:


> I have 42 SL's (Series Links) currently and I'm sure I will have a few more with the new shows coming up in January, so I'm afraid that I will soon hit the 50 SL limit and get to a point where I have to make a decision instead of just being able to add what I want.
> 
> Does anyone (especially Earl) know why this limit is there? I see that you (Earl) posted previously that you had no idea why there was the limit. I wonder if that's still the case? Anyway you can ask your contacts?
> 
> ...


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> Now you've got me wondering. I'm going to have to look up the patents Tivo does own. :lol: :lol:
> 
> I'm sure memory plays a bit part in all this, the more you have the more processing time the HR20 will take each time it loops thru the lists of SL, Todo, Guide updates, and the purging cycle.
> 
> ...


As I've written before, with a multi-gigabyte hard drive available, there's no excuse for limiting the number or size of lists--Series Links, Favorites, whatever. Similarly, the amount of CPU time required to maintain/monitor the lists is trivial, and the programming techniques (treads, monitors, prioritized timers, etc.) are covered in the second year of undergrad Computer Science studies.


----------



## Bista-Buster (Apr 15, 2006)

Reading all these posts explaining DTV's lack of programming experiences and the fact that I was stupid enough to buy one of those POS DVR's, just makes me sick to my stomach.

I can't afford canceling with them just yet, but I will be gone when summertime hits. Going back to TiVo.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Bista-Buster said:


> Reading all these posts explaining DTV's lack of programming experiences and the fact that I was stupid enough to buy one of those POS DVR's, just makes me sick to me stomach.
> 
> I can't afford canceling with them just yet, but I will be gone when summertime hits. Going back to TiVo.


Well, the 50 SL limit is pretty much my only issue with the box. And now that my wife and I are separating, it's not really even that big an issue for me. I think I have 45 now (after getting rid of the wife's) and I'm sure there are several SL's that I can delete when the shows are canceled. But, I'd still like to see it removed for the people that it does affect.


----------



## Bista-Buster (Apr 15, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> Well, the 50 SL limit is pretty much my only issue with the box. And now that my wife and I are separating, it's not really even that big an issue for me. I think I have 45 now (after getting rid of the wife's) and I'm sure there are several SL's that I can delete when the shows are canceled. But, I'd still like to see it removed for the people that it does affect.


Sorry to hear your situation. There are many more things in there that affect other people. How do I know? I'm one of them.:hurah:


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

It would be really nice if this got fixed soon.


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> It would be really nice if this got fixed soon.


If you look back at the history of this thread, I said I couldn't imagine hitting the 50 mark. I hit it this weekend.

I too wish the limit could be doubled at the very least.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

This 50-SL limit is going to start hitting more people, I believe, especially now, when the writers' strike is wreaking havoc on schedules and people are looking for alternate programming. They're not going to want to delete their series links for the network programs cut short by the strike, but as they find new programs on cable, or new reality programs, they'll add new series links and start hitting that limit.

This needs to be fixed - there should be NO limit on the number of series links a user has!


----------



## Radio Enginerd (Oct 5, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> This 50-SL limit is going to start hitting more people, I believe, especially now, when the writers' strike is wreaking havoc on schedules and people are looking for alternate programming. They're not going to want to delete their series links for the network programs cut short by the strike, but as they find new programs on cable, or new reality programs, they'll add new series links and start hitting that limit.
> 
> This needs to be fixed - there should be NO limit on the number of series links a user has!


Drew2k - Excellent point and the exact reason we hit the 50 mark. SL's remain in place for our "normal programing" but we've since found "replacement programing" to fill the void. It was VERY easy to hit the 50 mark.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Woops - I didn't mean to say "on cable" ... I meant to say "on non-network channels!"


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> This 50-SL limit is going to start hitting more people, I believe, especially now, when the writers' strike is wreaking havoc on schedules and people are looking for alternate programming. They're not going to want to delete their series links for the network programs cut short by the strike, but as they find new programs on cable, or new reality programs, they'll add new series links and start hitting that limit.
> 
> This needs to be fixed - there should be NO limit on the number of series links a user has!


Exactly why It's become more of an isue for me.


----------



## Indiana627 (Nov 18, 2005)

I'm at 48 now and can easily see hitting the 50 limit. D* really needs to raise or eliminate the limit. And Soon.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

The only reason I'm currently safe is I have two HR20s hooked up to one TV. 

I have 35 series links on one HR20, and 27 on the other. If it wasn't for having two HR20s, I would clearly be over the limit.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> The only reason I'm currently safe is I have two HR20s hooked up to one TV.
> 
> I have 35 series links on one HR20, and 27 on the other. If it wasn't for having two HR20s, I would clearly be over the limit.


Me too, but still 49 on one and 46 on the other. (Each one only records certain channels.)


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

As much as I'm obsessed with HDTV, and as with having 3 HD DVRs and 2 HD receivers...I just don't see the 50 number as a limitation. 

IMHO, there just aren't that many quality regular HD programs warranting me to add them to the Series Link list. 

I do record tons of HD, but much of that is one-time or limited-time content.

I also cannot fathom watching more than 50 Series Link programs each week.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I also cannot fathom watching more than 50 Series Link programs each week.


It's not that there are 50 shows on per week that I want to watch. There are many many shows that are seasonal. I should not have to remove the shows that are not currently airing to make room for ones that are.

Does it sound right to anyone that I should have to remove my series Links for Weeds and Californication so that I can add links Survivor and Big Brother. (hey, no comments on the shows themselves - that's not the point here )


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I also cannot fathom watching more than 50 Series Link programs each week.


I think this may be a common perception, that series links have to all be "current", but it's far from the case.

*I have series links for shows that ended prematurely due to the writers' strike:*

Desperate Housewives
Pushing Daisies
Back to You
My Name is Earl
The Office
30 Rock
etc.

*I have series links for shows that haven't started their new seasons:*

Weeds
Californication
The Tudors
Lost
Dancing with the Stars
Battlestar Galactica
24
Mad men
Greek
Eureka
Torchwood
Doctor Who
etc.

Because only the networks have stuck with the traditional TV seasons, that second list is MUCH longer than the first, and many of those shows are NOT on the big-4 broadcast networks.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> Does it sound right to anyone that I should have to remove my series Links for Weeds and Californication so that I can add links Survivor and Big Brother. (hey, no comments on the shows themselves - that's not the point here )


Well, I type slow, but take a look at the shows in my response ...

And NO . we should NOT have to remove series links at the end of seasons to make room for others!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> As much as I'm obsessed with HDTV, and as with having 3 HD DVRs and 2 HD receivers...I just don't see the 50 number as a limitation.
> 
> IMHO, there just aren't that many quality regular HD programs warranting me to add them to the Series Link list.
> 
> ...


If DirecTV ever decides to care about the customer enough to fix this, feel free to stay at 30 SLs as long as you want.  The rest of us will be very glad.

I am happy (well not really because it sucks) to see others hitting this. Maybe eventually someone will care.


----------



## azarby (Dec 15, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> I have 42 SL's (Series Links) currently and I'm sure I will have a few more with the new shows coming up in January, so I'm afraid that I will soon hit the 50 SL limit and get to a point where I have to make a decision instead of just being able to add what I want.
> 
> Does anyone (especially Earl) know why this limit is there? I see that you (Earl) posted previously that you had no idea why there was the limit. I wonder if that's still the case? Anyway you can ask your contacts?
> 
> ...


To me the 50 limit doesn't matter. I just go to one of the other 3 HRs and program it there. 4 HRs allow mee200 SLs.
Bob

Bob


----------



## rsblaski (Jul 6, 2003)

azarby said:


> To me the 50 limit doesn't matter. I just go to one of the other 3 HRs and program it there. 4 HRs allow mee200 SLs.
> Bob
> 
> Bob


That would be a great solution if we ever get MRV! But unless all of your 4 are connected to one tv, I don't really see that you have a great solution.
I have two hr20s connected to my main tv, and between the two I have around 70 SLs. Obviously, if I only had one dvr, I would be SOL.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

azarby said:


> To me the 50 limit doesn't matter. I just go to one of the other 3 HRs and program it there. 4 HRs allow mee200 SLs.
> Bob
> 
> Bob


If only we had MRV this might be acceptable.


----------



## YoungMan (Sep 23, 2007)

Add me to the over the 50 limit list!!! It's on the survey, I've voted for it (Twice..hehe). Problem is no one is reading down that far on the survey to notice.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

MRV should fix this. Everyone that is at 50 SL's, can you please tell me if your unit seems to run a little slower than when it had only 30 SL's? I think that is why the limit... I noticed a major slow down when my unit had 3% available and had 50 SL's. Went to 40 SL's and the unit immediately sped up...


----------



## mikbro (Nov 9, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> MRV should fix this. Everyone that is at 50 SL's, can you please tell me if your unit seems to run a little slower than when it had only 30 SL's? I think that is why the limit... I noticed a major slow down when my unit had 3% available and had 50 SL's. Went to 40 SL's and the unit immediately sped up...


I typically flirt wtih 47-48 sl's and have not experienced a slow down attributable to the number of SL's.

My guess it is both a memory and CPU usage issue... The more SL's you have the longer running the process is to schedule you TDL.

Still, I would like to find that constant and set it to something higher:

private const int seriesLinkLimit=100;


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I have had anywhere from 40 to 49 SLs at a time on one box and maybe 25 typically on the other and they seem to perform more or less the same at all times. I have never really noticed a speed issue with these boxes, unlike the HR10-250, which did have its issues in that department prior to the 6.3 software.

THe haeavier use box has a 750 eSATA drive and the most we have had that filled up was maybe 50% but are usually around 75% these days with the lack of shows on. We are really killing off some backlog.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> MRV should fix this. Everyone that is at 50 SL's, can you please tell me if your unit seems to run a little slower than when it had only 30 SL's? I think that is why the limit... I noticed a major slow down when my unit had 3% available and had 50 SL's. Went to 40 SL's and the unit immediately sped up...


I replaced my HR10 that had more than 100 season passes with two HR20's and still had to loose some shows. So my receivers have never had fewer series links.


----------



## upnorth (Jun 21, 2006)

Do you people do anything other than watch TV? 
Where do you find the time to watch all the series link material?
I am not being a smart a$$ just wondering.
I guess everyones situation is different and it depends on how many are in the household.
It is just the two of us now and we have maybe 10 series links but when our kids were still at home they were not allowed to be glued to the TV hour after hour.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

upnorth said:


> Do you people do anything other than watch TV?
> Where do you find the time to watch all the series link material?
> I am not being a smart a$$ just wondering.
> I guess everyones situation is different and it depends on how many are in the household.
> It is just the two of us now and we have maybe 10 series links but when our kids were still at home they were not allowed to be glued to the TV hour after hour.


See my reply from earlier in the thread, reposted below ... The count of series links does not directly correlate to the number of programs recorded weekly. 



Drew2k said:


> I think this may be a common perception, that series links have to all be "current", but it's far from the case.
> 
> *I have series links for shows that ended prematurely due to the writers' strike:*
> 
> ...


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

upnorth said:


> Do you people do anything other than watch TV?
> Where do you find the time to watch all the series link material?


In my house, we record a LOT of stuff that we never watch (or sometimes watch just the beginning and then toss it out). Due to the SL limit, my kids are mainly stuck on the TiVo with their season passes, but my wife and I definitely have almost completely different lists of "just in case" shows.

And, as others have said, currently a lot of my SLs have no upcoming episodes (most of my SLs are "first run only").


----------



## upnorth (Jun 21, 2006)

wjcarpenter said:


> In my house, we record a LOT of stuff that we never watch (or sometimes watch just the beginning and then toss it out). Due to the SL limit, my kids are mainly stuck on the TiVo with their season passes, but my wife and I definitely have almost completely different lists of "just in case" shows.
> 
> And, as others have said, currently a lot of my SLs have no upcoming episodes (most of my SLs are "first run only").


Ok I can understand that Thanks


----------



## cadet502 (Jun 17, 2005)

I sent an email to Directv complaining about this limit today, and the response was as follows....



> Dear Mr. Cadet,
> 
> Thank you for writing.
> 
> There is no indicated limit on the number of series that you can record in the series link. We've found simply resetting your receiver will often restore your service. There are two ways to reset your receiver, pick the option below that fits your situation.


:lol: :hurah: :nono:

So that's it then, just reset and the limit goes away?


----------



## JayB (Mar 19, 2007)

Cool! So, that's the secret of software bliss - just reset the system enough and you'll get what you want. So, if we extend that analogy out, if I reset my computer enough, I can get Crysis to run at more than 18 FPS, right?


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I assume you will be responding back to them to please check further?


----------



## cadet502 (Jun 17, 2005)

Lee L said:


> I assume you will be responding back to them to please check further?


Indeed. I think I'm at 48, and I need to add a couple so that I can report the exact wording, then ask to have the request escalated.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Clearly the person who responded to you is in error. Unfortunate.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

upnorth said:


> Do you people do anything other than watch TV?
> Where do you find the time to watch all the series link material?
> I am not being a smart a$$ just wondering.
> I guess everyones situation is different and it depends on how many are in the household.
> It is just the two of us now and we have maybe 10 series links but when our kids were still at home they were not allowed to be glued to the TV hour after hour.


THAT'S THE PROBLEM! I DON'T have enough time to watch all that TV... only on weekends (then it's game on) so I let it record enough that I can sift through and watch only the best stuff.. I certainly don't watch all I record.. and many things I watch one segment only (Like "How It's Made" etc)... and of course 1/2 my SLs have "None scheduled" by them to boot!... but are still searching for the return of the shows..

I have been stuck at 50SL since I first got the box going on 2 years ago now.. and have to have a notebook to temperaroly 'store' series links.. how dumb is that.. and, like I always say, we went to the MOON almost 40 YEARS ago! Unreal.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

If you happen to record all 6 CSI/L&O shows each week, you might be able to free up 4 slots in the PRIORITIZER by creating these two AUTORECORDS:

AALL LAW ORDER & High-Def
CSI & High-Def

The new "save 10 episodes" option (still in beta) works well for this type of AUTORECORD.

Also still in beta and not quite working just yet, but if you want to limit the channels you record from, you'll soon be able to further refine the SEARCH to:

AALL LAW ORDER CCHAN (your local NBC affiliate channel #) & High-Def

Just a thought. /steve


----------



## cadet502 (Jun 17, 2005)

Steve said:


> If you happen to record all 6 CSI/L&O shows each week, you might be able to free up 4 slots in the PRIORITIZER by creating these two AUTORECORDS:
> 
> AALL LAW ORDER & High-Def
> CSI & High-Def
> ...


I've thought about doing that, but to tell you the truth, I'm not sure which I'm more afraid of, filling up my hard drive with a poorly executed AUTORECORD or missing the show I want for the same reason. Until I can see the results of an AUTORECORD in TODO as soon as I request it, I think I'll shy away from it. I'm sure I'm capable of screwing up some Boolean just enough to cause havoc.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

cadet502 said:


> Until I can see the results of an AUTORECORD in TODO as soon as I request it...


From your mouth...  /steve


----------



## dyker (Feb 27, 2008)

Slyster said:


> ...I have been stuck at 50SL since I first got the box going on 2 years ago now.. and have to have a notebook to temperaroly 'store' series links.. how dumb is that.. and, like I always say, we went to the MOON almost 40 YEARS ago! Unreal.


Is it just a pipedream that this will be bumped some day? An issue 2 years and no indication from D* if it will ever change? :nono2:


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

Maybe when we finally send humans to Mars they will up the SL limit to 100.


----------



## Bergthold (May 30, 2007)

I'm seriously considering adding a second DVR on my main TV to get around the 50 series limit AND because it seems like my wife always has two things recording at one time. Then if I want to record a third program I have to go into my other room and record on my other DVR.


----------



## sciberpunkt (May 30, 2007)

I mentioned it in another thread, but the 50 SL limit would be livable if there were a way to store unused SLs during off-seasons. Like an "Active SL" list with 50 max and an "Inactive SL" list with unlimited storage. That way, there's no slowdown and one could keep programming lists stored without resorting to keeping a "Series Link scratch pad" to maintain a programming list when something has to be deleted to make room.

A screen with two columns (active and inactive) or check boxes to mark the active SLs is what I invision. Having to permanently delete an SL to make room for another is what kills me. It requires me to keep track of programs once they return, which typically doesn't work out and the result is missed season premiers because I forgot to add something I had to delete a few weeks before.


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

Yep, this has been on my wishlist since day one. I know the rule that if they allowed 60 I'd want 70... But 60 would make my life a lot easier 

I'd buy a second one if they integrated some of the ReplayTV stuff they bought out: ability to stream shows from DVR 1 on DVR 2, ability to schedule recordings on the second box from the first when recordings overlap, etc.

Until then I'll just keep my ReplayTV as the overflow recorder. I'm assuming DTV doesn't really care because they get a receiver fee from me either way.


----------



## jksacto (Apr 14, 2007)

This has been on my wishlist since day one also. I am not educated enough to understand WHY they did this, but I'm certainly PO'd about it. To the person that asked about watching all that TV. I'm disabled and can't get around very well, so playing video games, surfing the internet and WATCHING TV is about all I can do, so yes I watch almost all of the programs I record. The advent of a "Summer Season" on a lot of cable channels, all of the premium channels doing "Original" programs etc. etc. etc. really makes an increase almost a necessity for some of us.


----------



## JayB (Mar 19, 2007)

jksacto said:


> The advent of a "Summer Season" on a lot of cable channels, all of the premium channels doing "Original" programs etc. etc. etc. really makes an increase almost a necessity for some of us.


Yup, that's what's got me at 47 to 50 all the time. For example, right now, Burn Notice isn't playing - but I keep an SL because it will be back and I shouldn't need to study the guide each week to see if it's back that week. That's the machines job and it's better at it than me. The same is true with Battlestar Galactica, Eureka, Heroes, Psych (there's an odd one, with 2 mini-seasons each year), Robin Hood, House, Bones, etc. etc. About half of all the SLs I have.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

JayB said:


> Yup, that's what's got me at 47 to 50 all the time. For example, right now, Burn Notice isn't playing - but I keep an SL because it will be back and I shouldn't need to study the guide each week to see if it's back that week. That's the machines job and it's better at it than me. The same is true with Battlestar Galactica, Eureka, Heroes, Psych (there's an odd one, with 2 mini-seasons each year), Robin Hood, House, Bones, etc. etc. About half of all the SLs I have.


Exactly! A DVR is a luxury, convenience based product. Sure, I can set a VCR and use that to record manually just like I did in 1989, but instead, they have this cool machine that does it for you. Why not make it as convenient as possible?


----------



## rposly (Aug 10, 2007)

Just to add to the discussion about how folks like us could possibly need more than 50 SLs... 

In addition to having inactive series on there (between seasons, as has already been mentioned), I have a good number of SLs that are shows I don't watch all the time, but like to have a few episodes on there in case I'm in the mood. Shows like Jeopardy!, Modern Marvels, Good Eats, House Hunters, etc. If D* had a decent OnDemand service, then maybe this wouldn't be necessary. But since they don't, I rely on these SLs to keep a handful of these shows for when the mood strikes. 

Also, keep in mind that any AutoRecord Searches you have are also counted against the 50 SL limit. I, for instance, am a Michigan Wolverines fan, so I have a handful of SLs along the lines of "Michigan" & Football, "Michigan" & Basketball, etc. Yes, I know I could just do "Michigan" & Sports, but that ends up recording all sorts of fishing and hunting shows and all kinds of random things. 

At any rate, the 50 SL limit has been my #1 issue with the HR20 since the day I got it over a year ago. I had more than 70 Season Passes and AutoRecord WishLists on the old Tivo, so this has taken some serious getting used to.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

sciberpunkt said:


> I mentioned it in another thread, but the 50 SL limit would be livable if there were a way to store unused SLs during off-seasons. Like an "Active SL" list with 50 max and an "Inactive SL" list with unlimited storage. That way, there's no slowdown and one could keep programming lists stored without resorting to keeping a "Series Link scratch pad" to maintain a programming list when something has to be deleted to make room.
> 
> A screen with two columns (active and inactive) or check boxes to mark the active SLs is what I invision. Having to permanently delete an SL to make room for another is what kills me. It requires me to keep track of programs once they return, which typically doesn't work out and the result is missed season premiers because I forgot to add something I had to delete a few weeks before.


Then add some low priority process that checks the inactive SL's periodically to see if any would trigger a recording if they were at position #1 in the active list and let the user know so that they can decide if the want to move from inactive to active.


----------



## PittCaleb (Nov 2, 2007)

rposly said:


> If D* had a decent OnDemand service, then maybe this wouldn't be necessary. But since they don't, I rely on these SLs to keep a handful of these shows for when the mood strikes.


I don't think having or having a poor OD service has anything to do with my season passes. I've never been a fan of ondemand - you have no control over what is stored or for how long. My sister has Comcast and I've never liked it.

And I don't think I should have to apologize or feel guilty that I want a season pass for The Shield, Rescue Me and Damages as well as my network shows on top of my "in case I'm in the mood" stuff like Modern Marvels, How It's Made, etc.

Isn't it DirecTV that has given us these hundreds of channels? How dare they tell us "we're giving you more channels every day and this ultra cool HD-DVR, but how dare you expect to be able to record things!"

I mean for posters here or elsewhere to suggest we watch "too much" TV, hey, that may be so, but the sheer point that we're DirecTV subscribers, HR2x owners (lessee's?) and on the cutting edge should tell you we watch our fair share of TV in the first place. If we didn't, we probably wouldn't have $2k, $5k and some much more invested in home theater set-ups.

FYI, I am over 50 SPs on my HR21 and don't record a single kids show. On the upstairs DirecTiVo, I have mostly only kids shows - with 2 kids 4 years apart, I probably have another 50+ shows up there - 2 episodes of a ton of shows so they can watch whatever they're in the mood for without having to find something on live-tv. They're restricted in the number of shows per day, but not in what they can watch with that time.

Simply put, 50 is unacceptable, especially for early adopters and DTV high-end programming subscribers.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, make some phone calls!


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Well, make some phone calls!


Or if you haven't already, make sure you vote our request up higher on the Wish List!  You can do so here. /steve

*"Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS up from the current 50."*


----------



## Indiana627 (Nov 18, 2005)

Steve said:


> *"Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS up from the current 50."*


Not to be picky (but I will), does the "up" need to be included in that statement? Doesn't "Increase" make "up" redundant?

"Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS from the current 50." That's sounds grammatically correct to me. Actually "Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS from the current limit of 50" sounds even better.

No biggie either way. Just my anal-retentive side coming out a little.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Indiana627 said:


> Not to be picky (but I will), does the "up" need to be included in that statement? Doesn't "Increase" make "up" redundant?
> 
> "Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS from the current 50." That's sounds grammatically correct to me. Actually "Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS from the current limit of 50" sounds even better.
> 
> No biggie either way. Just my anal-retentive side coming out a little.


Yes, professor, you're right!  I left out a comma ("Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS, up from the current 50.").

But it does sound cumbersome, now that you point it out.

How about: *"Increase the SERIES LINK limit to more than 50."*

That should work, no?  /steve


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

Steve said:


> Yes, professor, you're right!  I left out a comma ("Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS, up from the current 50.").
> 
> But it does sound cumbersome, now that you point it out.
> 
> ...


Not quite. Since "increase" subsumes "more than," just say "Increase the SERIES LINK limit."

Wait! I've got it! "Remove the Series Link Limit."


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

Has DirecTV ever made any statement at all as to the reason for this limit? I've heard speculation that the scheduler doesn't scale well, and so on, but this seems a severe enough limitation that we are at the least entitled to an explanation if not a fix.


----------



## nerbe (Oct 22, 2007)

My question & their responses:

Details: Why did you limit the HR20-700 to 50 season passes? Unlimited season passes like my HR10-250 is needed. What are your plans to resolve this problem?


Thanks for writing. Please allow me to assist you with your concern.

I understand your concern about the limited number of season passes allowed on our new HD DVR receivers. We're always looking for ways to enhance our services, and customer feedback is very important to us. I have forwarded your comments on to DIRECTV Management. 

We often make changes to our service based on customer requests, and we conduct customer surveys on a regular basis to get feedback and new ideas.

Thanks again for writing, we appreciate your patience and understanding.
_____________________________________________________________

So you are saying that after having this device in production for more than a year there are no plans to resolve this issue?

Thanks for writing about your DIRECTV service. I just wanted to let you know that we received your email and I have forwarded it to a specialist who will research your email and follow up with you within the next 48 hours. For immediate assistance, please call us at 1-800-531-5000. 

Thanks again for writing, we appreciate your patience and understanding.
_______________________________________________________

And finally:

Thank you for taking the time to write,

we have escalated your request and suggestion to DIRECTV top management. Equipment features are dependant on many factors; the features have to fit within the hard drive capability. When you expand one feature you use hardrive space for another. We frequently enable and expand features through software downloads. However, as you may have heard, we're preparing to launch a new advanced technology system called the DIRECTV Home Media Center. Our new Home Media Center will allow you to share, move and view content from room to room, throughout the house. It will also have DVR functionality and the capability to support both standard-and high-definition signals. We expect to have more information about this new advanced receiver soon, so please stay tuned to DIRECTV.com for the latest updates. 

Our goal is to continue to expand our programming and technology offerings, in order to bring you the best television entertainment experience available. 

I hope you find this information helpful and thank you again for writing.
____________________________________________________________

Nothing above makes me think the 50 season pass limit will be resolved any time soon.


----------



## jsr (Feb 4, 2008)

nerbe said:


> Nothing above makes me think the 50 season pass limit will be resolved any time soon.


Yeah, their sales pitch for a new unavailable receiver makes me think that they have quit caring about fixing their current line of receivers. The weekly CE releases show that they are still at least putting some effort into fixes though, so who knows.

For the record, I emailed them also. I got the standard "we'll send your request to management" response.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

jsr said:


> Yeah, their sales pitch for a new unavailable receiver makes me think that they have quit caring about fixing their current line of receivers. The weekly CE releases show that they are still at least putting some effort into fixes though, so who knows.
> 
> For the record, I emailed them also. I got the standard "we'll send your request to management" response.


I'm hopeful they're considering a major overhaul of the whole "scheduling" part of the system that will address, among other things:

the 50 limit.
 more elegant handling of last-minute show start/stop time changes (IOW, record "partials" if necessary).
an option to force a rebuild of the TODO list using the current GUIDE data as soon as you schedule a new SL or AUTORECORD or re-order the PRIORITIZER, instead of having to wait for days to see the result of your actions.
 Hope I'm right.  /steve


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Wow, if that text is to be beleived (and of course, that is taken with a whole container of slat grains) the ability to do MRV is in another reciever yet to come and does not use the current hardware?!?


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

Wow, that's a lot of words to say nothing at all. I've never understood why corporations aren't willing to offer a straightforward explanation for such things. There has to be a reason, and I suspect people would be a lot calmer if they knew what it was.


----------



## grins (Nov 17, 2005)

Unless the answer is that there's no real reason, it just seemed like enough to the person that wrote the code...who clearly did other things with their time than watch TV. 

50 is woefully inadequate for me


----------



## Indiana627 (Nov 18, 2005)

Steve said:


> Yes, professor, you're right!  I left out a comma ("Increase the maximum number of SERIES LINKS, up from the current 50.").
> 
> But it does sound cumbersome, now that you point it out.


Thanks for not taking my comment the wrong way.


TigerDriver said:


> Wait! I've got it! "Remove the Series Link Limit."


+1 That's the best wording yet!


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

TigerDriver said:


> Wait! I've got it! "Remove the Series Link Limit."





Indiana627 said:


> +1 That's the best wording yet!


I thought about Joe's suggestion, but I[m afraid a newcomer to the Wish List might think it refers to the EPISODE limit instead of the PRIORITIZER limit. /steve


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

grins said:


> Unless the answer is that there's no real reason, it just seemed like enough to the person that wrote the code...who clearly did other things with their time than watch TV.
> 
> 50 is woefully inadequate for me


I agree. I think the people who did hte software design and coding were used to doing receivers for Live TV and not DVR's.


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

Steve said:


> I'm hopeful they're considering a major overhaul of the whole "scheduling" part of the system ...


I'm hoping so, too. That's why I consistently vote against polls that ask for band-aid solutions to most problems. The problems that folks complain about most are not bugs or oversights, but side-effect of poor design choices.

Two engineering maxims come to mind:


_You can pile s**t only so high before it falls on you._ Hacking on iatrogenic problems inevitable destabilizes an already fragile construct whose problems become both more numerous and more subtle--a dangerous combination.

 Early engineering prototypes have an odd way of becoming products, so: _Plan to throw the first design away_. Otherwise, you'll be forced to do so when it's least convenient.

My hope is that the incremental releases we are getting for the current product line are originating from "Sustaining Engineering," and that elsewhere a crack team of architects, designers, engineers, and product managers is building the next generation of product.


----------



## jjmmcc (Aug 15, 2007)

As to why anyone could want or need more than 50 season passes is not so much the question as much as why D* feels the need to control our viewing and recording options. 
But being asked why, I'd like to point out, not only do we have hundreds of channels to choose from but D* requires a season pass for each channel a program is on. For instance, Top Chef was on two cable channels, hence, two season passes. Same with Challenge on the Food Network and Food Network/HD, which has two different programs running at the same time(anyone notice that?)
Why isn't D* addressing this issue? Seems to me that in itself tells the tale.


----------



## ulbonado (Nov 29, 2007)

If a show is on two different channels you can usually hit them both with an autorecord title search, so you don't need to waste multiple slots of your 50. Not that this excuses the limit, which is a sign of poor design, but maybe it will help you limp along a little better until (!) they fix it.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

The problem I have had is that the Autorecord Title is not very reliable. I have some that I have had in there looking for shows I wanted to get at some point and stumbled upon the match in the guide yet it was not being picked up. Given that, I am not about to trust it to actually record a regular show just yet.

I just had to delete a couple because of Tudors staring back up and The Riches coming up soon.


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

I would like to re-add to this, as this is probably my biggest issue with the device now and has been since I got my first one. I used to carry around 150 plus Season passes on my largest TiVo... and right now I manage the list with 3 different Hr20s, 3 back up TiVos, and never recording any primetime network programs via List.

So every day I go through the Major Networks and see what shows I watch and record them individually. This is probably 50% of my viewing, so I could easily double to 100 right now with no problem.

All that being said, I realize that at 150+ on the TiVo, Season passes were virtually unusuable. You could spend days trying to rearrange them, so once you got to a certain point, there was simply no way to reorder them to make them more useful, and I found myself doing the same thing I do now, just because without proper order conflict resolution was not very good.

So I don't want a huge list if it is going to make managing the list ridiculously slow that it is not even feasible.

So instead I would like a moderate increase to the limits where it does not cause a big slow down in list management... And MRV. With those two things I think I would be very happy and capable of managing the situation much better as I would get the most out of my 6 tuners and potentially 225 or so list entries I could have.

Of course if you want to tie a master list into MRV that would work across multiple units, I would love that as well.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Decision time again. With Deadliest catch starting soon, I have to eliminate something. What will it be? God forbid I find a one time show I want to record, since that would take up a slot too! 


I know TiVo was slow with lots of SP's, but man, surely it is possible to improve upon a product without drastically limiting its usefulness.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Decision time again. With Deadliest catch starting soon, I have to eliminate something. What will it be? God forbid I find a one time show I want to record, since that would take up a slot too!
> 
> I know TiVo was slow with lots of SP's, but man, surely it is possible to improve upon a product without drastically limiting its usefulness.


If you have two or more shows with the same KEYWORDS in the TITLE, like "Law & Order" or "CSI", try making one KEYWORD AUTORECORD to catch them all. That could free up a slot or two in the PRIORITIZER for the time being.

E.g., Here in NY, I record all 3 of each shows, so I use the following KEYWORD AUTORECORDS, with max episodes set to "10":

*CSI CCHAN 2 & Category HIGH-DEF

LAW ORDER CCHAN 4*

Saves me 4 PRIORITIZER slots.

/steve


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Steve has hit the nail on the head about the power, convenience and flexibility of Auto Record Series Links. I'm not saying this as an excuse for DIRECTV to NOT change the current limit of 50 series links, but I just think more people need to know about ARSL and take advantage of them ... They are probably one of the most underutilized features - maybe a little bit to do with the clunky interface and inconsistent results - but the more people use them, the more feedback DIRECTV gets through DBSTalk, the more improvements they will make.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I said a couple of posts up that I am not ready to trust Autorecords on teh HR20 just yet. I had several that I did set up and I find that I either stumble upon matches to teh them in teh guide that are not recording or the Hr10 that I still have hooked up picks them up just fine.

This is both a title (we set up a keyword autorecord for South Park Closet to get the Trapped in The Closet episode because every DVR should have that on it IMO  and one day just happened to see it was on and not being recorded) and people's names (we have some set up for Sedaris because both Amy and David are hilarious when they are on Letterman, etc and also Eddie Izzard and they will not work either) . Let me know what I am doing wrong and I will change. Now, this was before the new boolean searches so maybe this stuff will work now, but man, it should just work the way it was.

Of course, while we used to record L&O CI and original flavor, we do not do either anymore and we also stopped recording CSI NY and Miami.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Let me know what I am doing wrong and I will change. Now, this was before the new boolean searches so maybe this stuff will work now, but man, it should just work the way it was.


I think you just asked and answered the question. 

*AALL South Park Closet

Sedaris NNAME* (will find any show where she is listed as an "actor, director or writer".

*AALL Sedaris Letterman* (will just find shows with the two of them together)

Any of those KEYWORD AUTORECORDS should now work.

/steve


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

I just wanted to say that I have now been burned by this. I had deleted the SL for the Riches last year to make room for new SL's and I totally missed that it started like a month ago. I've already missed 4 episodes. Oh well, maybe someday they'll remove the limit.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Ouch, that sucks. What a stupid limit.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> I just wanted to say that I have now been burned by this. I had deleted the SL for the Riches last year to make room for new SL's and I totally missed that it started like a month ago. I've already missed 4 episodes. Oh well, maybe someday they'll remove the limit.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

There's really no reason users should have to micro-manage Series Links to remove and add them as shows come and go seasonally ... DIRECTV needs to remove this limitation and permit users to "set it and forget it".


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

AFAIK, we've never really heard why DirecTV hasn't addressed this limitation. As more and more shows go to a mini-season format, the 50 SL limit becomes a bigger problem.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

gpg said:


> AFAIK, we've never really heard why DirecTV hasn't addressed this limitation..


I bet it is the same reason we don't have DLB.


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

btmoore said:


> I bet it is the same reason we don't have DLB.


With DLB we've been told there's some killer feature on the way that puts DLB on the back burner. I've never heard that about the 50 SL limit.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

gpg said:


> With DLB we've been told there's some killer feature on the way that puts DLB on the back burner. I've never heard that about the 50 SL limit.


Where'd you hear that?!?

- Merg


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

gpg said:


> With DLB we've been told there's some killer feature on the way that puts DLB on the back burner. I've never heard that about the 50 SL limit.


Oh yeah, I see that bantered around as the "pardon me, I know more than you do because I have secret inside access, but I cant tell you" excuse, but I am working under the belief that the product market requirement team doesn't have a clue, that is how DLB and the 50 SL limits are linked.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I think that is a pretty accurate assesment.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

The Merg said:


> gpg said:
> 
> 
> > With DLB we've been told there's some killer feature on the way that puts DLB on the back burner. I've never heard that about the 50 SL limit.
> ...


It was in the two DLB threads. Not in a specific post, but from several "read between the lines" statements made by those in the know ...


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

btmoore said:


> Oh yeah, I see that bantered around as the "pardon me, I know more than you do because I have secret inside access, but I cant tell you" excuse


Why is it an excuse? If you had inside access and were given privileged information, would you go out of your way to violate the trust placed in you, and publicly reveal that information when you were not supposed to? And then promptly get cut off - no more inside information? Let's be realistic. The insiders gained the trust they have earned through hard work in the forums and through keeping their promises to DIRECTV, and the community is better for having these insiders here.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Drew2k said:


> The insiders gained the trust they have earned through hard work in the forums and through keeping their promises to DIRECTV, and the community is better for having these insiders here.


Keep your friends close and your threats under NDA.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

btmoore said:


> I bet it is the same reason we don't have DLB.


DLB probably has more to do with missing overlay capability (PIP, side-by-side) than it does with something that is largely database driven like series links. More series links doesn't require additional technology because the hardware is there to process up to 50. They just need to fix the database so it doesn't buckle under the load of more. DLB likely requires hardware that isn't present in the HR2x.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> Why is it an excuse? If you had inside access and were given privileged information, would you go out of your way to violate the trust placed in you, and publicly reveal that information when you were not supposed to? And then promptly get cut off - no more inside information? Let's be realistic. The insiders gained the trust they have earned through hard work in the forums and through keeping their promises to DIRECTV, and the community is better for having these insiders here.


Cause when I have my tin foil hat on, I see D* using this as a guerrilla marketing scheme to try to keep people retained, that is why I see it is an excuse. Apparently we are allowed to hear some secrete info but other secret information, like if we will ever see DLB, or a lifting of the 50 SL cap, is just too secret to be shared. But they will tell the insiders and it is ok for the insiders to say they know and tell us that they know but cant tell us why. It comes off as just a stupid silly game and an ongoing tease. I think if you have inside info, protect your source and tell what you know assuming you want to share, and if you work in D* or you are under NDA keep your mouth shut or accept the risks associated to leaking info you shouldn't, but this insider buddy wink wink nod nod thing IMO comes off a bit like a D* proxy marketing program.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

btmoore said:


> Cause when I have my tin foil hat on, I see D* using this as a guerrilla marketing scheme to try to keep people retained, that is why I see it is an excuse. Apparently we are allowed to hear some secrete info but other secret information, like if we will ever see DLB, or a lifting of the 50 SL cap, is just too secret to be shared. But they will tell the insiders and it is ok for the insiders to say they know and tell us that they know but cant tell us why. It comes off as just a stupid silly game and an ongoing tease. I think if you have inside info, protect your source and tell what you know assuming you want to share, and if you work in D* or you are under NDA keep your mouth shut or accept the risks associated to leaking info you shouldn't, but this insider buddy wink wink nod nod thing IMO comes off a bit like a D* proxy marketing program.


I just don't see it that way at all. The insiders have explicitly told us that there is a limit on how much they can reveal, and Earl has implicitly told us the reason we don't have DLB: there is another planned feature that prohibits DLB or interferes with DLB. So ... Earl could have stayed silent and done nothing, watching us all foam from the mouth that DIRECTV is ignoring our requests, or he could tell us what he knows, that he DOES know something about the reason there is no DLB, and he can go so far as to say that what he does know and can't tell us, he understands why there's no DLB. Yes - it's walking a fine line, one some see as being a tease, but for me, he's being honest and forthright, honoring his commitment to DIRECTV not to tell us what the feature is, but also not leaving us completely in the dark. There will then be those, like you apparently, who think DIRECTV is just stringing Earl - and by extension all of us - along with "false stories" or "delay tactics" to keep us from defecting. I don't buy that. Earl has been so right so many times on the information he revealed before a feature or product went public, that I accept what he is saying is true, and that what DIRECTV is telling HIM is true. Just as Earl has a commitment to DIRECTV, I think it's reasonable to assume DIRECTV also has a commitment to Earl - they're not just going to tell him a lie and hope he passes it on - that's where things get silly.

Anyway, there is another thread for DLB - this one is about the limit of 50 series links. Why do we have it? Still don't know. And no - no insider has ever hinted that they know the reason.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

harsh said:


> DLB probably has more to do with missing overlay capability (PIP, side-by-side) than it does with something that is largely database driven like series links. More series links doesn't require additional technology because the hardware is there to process up to 50. They just need to fix the database so it doesn't buckle under the load of more. DLB likely requires hardware that isn't present in the HR2x.


Don't think I can agree with ya ,but I can see the logic behind your thinking.

PIP and overlay are display technology issues there shouldn't be any intrinsic links between those things and DLB, clearly there are working examples of this on multiple platforms like the old DTiVos where there is no PIP or PIG type capabilities and the overlaying technology was limited to putting content on top of the displaying video.

Purely talking as an ex CS guy who use to design crazy search, sort and what not type widgets, back in the olden days, algorithmically it is hard to see how a 50 series links limit needs to be there, a scheduling algorithm like what would be required by this application is not that complex of an application particularly if you had experience working with temporal data sets. One could argue that they are bounding to hardware limitations but that is hard to accept to, because the problem like I said is not that complex and we have examples of it working well on even smaller older systems again such as the original DTiVos. One would think that the basic concepts behind Moore's law would also apply to DVR technology, as we move forward in time, we should see basic capabilities like how many SL or passes you can have, should increase not decrease.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> I just don't see it that way at all. The insiders have explicitly told us that there is a limit on how much they can reveal, and Earl has implicitly told us the reason we don't have DLB: there is another planned feature that prohibits DLB or interferes with DLB. So ... Earl could have stayed silent and done nothing, watching us all foam from the mouth that DIRECTV is ignoring our requests, or he could tell us what he knows, that he DOES know something about the reason there is no DLB, and he can go so far as to say that what he does know and can't tell us, he understands why there's no DLB. Yes - it's walking a fine line, one some see as being a tease, but for me, he's being honest and forthright, honoring his commitment to DIRECTV not to tell us what the feature is, but also not leaving us completely in the dark. There will then be those, like you apparently, who think DIRECTV is just stringing Earl - and by extension all of us - along with "false stories" or "delay tactics" to keep us from defecting. I don't buy that. Earl has been so right so many times on the information he revealed before a feature or product went public, that I accept what he is saying is true, and that what DIRECTV is telling HIM is true. Just as Earl has a commitment to DIRECTV, I think it's reasonable to assume DIRECTV also has a commitment to Earl - they're not just going to tell him a lie and hope he passes it on - that's where things get silly.
> 
> Anyway, there is another thread for DLB - this one is about the limit of 50 series links. Why do we have it? Still don't know. And no - no insider has ever hinted that they know the reason.


I understand your thinking, it is nice to be so optimistic, perhaps I am cut from darker cloth based on my life experiences. Generally corporations do things because it benefits them, if there is no benefit they don't do it, and I never questioned the truth, rather how the "truth" is spun and the plan behind that spin. I didn't call out Earl, but since you did, I am sure that Earl is giving us the "true" information as DirecTV wants us to hear it.


----------



## JohnDG (Aug 16, 2006)

Drew2k said:


> Steve has hit the nail on the head about the power, convenience and flexibility of Auto Record Series Links. I'm not saying this as an excuse for DIRECTV to NOT change the current limit of 50 series links, but I just think more people need to know about ARSL and take advantage of them ... They are probably one of the most underutilized features - maybe a little bit to do with the clunky interface and inconsistent results - but the more people use them, the more feedback DIRECTV gets through DBSTalk, the more improvements they will make.


I'd agree with one caveat: they don't populate in the ToDo list until the last minute. This makes it very difficult to manage conflicts.

Any word on when this is going to be fixed?

jdg


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

JohnDG said:


> I'd agree with one caveat: they don't populate in the ToDo list until the last minute. This makes it very difficult to manage conflicts.
> 
> Any word on when this is going to be fixed?
> 
> jdg


You're exactly right about that, and it's an issue I've been reporting religiously in each software release - I referred to this as "inconsistent results" above. No idea when DIRECTV will fix it ....


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

JohnDG said:


> I'd agree with one caveat: they don't populate in the ToDo list until the last minute. This makes it very difficult to manage conflicts.
> 
> Any word on when this is going to be fixed?


*
'An "UPDATE NOW" option to immediately populate the TO DO LIST with all matching programs in the GUIDE, after scheduling a SL, AUTORECORD, or re-ordering the PRIORITIZER' *currently ranks 9th out of about 75 requests on the Wish List. I'd love to see it get to #1. 

If you haven't yet voted to let DirecTV know how you value this request, please do so here! TIA. /steve


----------



## mvaneps (Nov 19, 2005)

The 50 series link limit sucks! C'mon DTV, up it already.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

mvaneps said:


> The 50 series link limit sucks! C'mon DTV, up it already.


If you haven't already voted for it, you can move this request up on the list as well by giving it a THUMBS UP!

*"Increase the SERIES LINK limit to more than 50"*

/steve


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

ok... ive changed my mind on how important this will be once mrv is implemented... I want it increased no matter what....

wow.... this was my 1,000 th post....


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

inkahauts said:


> ok... ive changed my mind on how important this will be once mrv is implemented... I want it increased no matter what....
> 
> wow.... this was my 1,000 th post....


Congrats on 1000.

I still have not even flirted with the 50 limit yet.

WOW - that was my 5022nd post...


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Congrats on 1000.
> 
> I still have not even flirted with the 50 limit yet.
> 
> WOW - that was my 5022nd post...


Hey. There's a 5000 post limit! You'll have to delete 22 of your older posts. :lol: /steve


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve said:


> Hey. There's a 5000 post limit! You'll have to delete 22 of your older posts. :lol: /steve


:eek2: :eek2: :eek2: :lol: :lol:


----------



## ShapeGSX (Sep 17, 2006)

I've had to continually remove SLs from my prioritizer as new shows come on.

Basically, it is due to having a lot of kids shows recorder for my son. People with kids will know my pain. Up the limit!


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Congrats on 1000.
> 
> I still have not even flirted with the 50 limit yet.
> 
> WOW - that was my 5022nd post...


Are you a picky sports nut that loves the boolean search ARSLs that allow me to set up individual ARSLs for every channel all my teams are on, so that I can get every game for every team, but always have my home team broadcasters, if they are broadcasting the game rather than some of the stupid national commentators? Boolean and CCHAN capability just put me over the top with the baseball season starting.....


----------



## gully_foyle (Jan 18, 2007)

Now that I have 1TB on my HR21, I see the logic of this complaint more. Bigger disks and widespread use of eSATA will mean more users running up against the 50 SL limit. Assuming that any kind of reasonable coding practices were used, making the table 100 or 200 entries can't be all that hard.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

The increase in this limit is probably not coming. It has been said by the CTO of Directv that the limit will not increase unless they can figure out how to do it without hampering the performance of the machine. I took that to mean that they tried it out, and after 50, it starts slowing the machine way down because of how it looks for programs to record. So I am guessing that unless they completely revamp the way the machine selects and checks for programs to record, this limit isn't going to change.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

So is there a hard wall at 50? Even 60 would be better if say 75 or 100 is not possible.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

he didn't say... I have noticed that when my Hard drive is full and I have 50 Sls set that the unit is extremely slower...


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> The increase in this limit is probably not coming. It has been said by the CTO of Directv that the limit will not increase unless they can figure out how to do it without hampering the performance of the machine. I took that to mean that they tried it out, and after 50, it starts slowing the machine way down because of how it looks for programs to record. So I am guessing that unless they completely revamp the way the machine selects and checks for programs to record, this limit isn't going to change.


This is an odd topic for a CTO to be commenting on, since performance is a just an engineering issue.

Where/when did the CTO make these comments?


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

TigerDriver said:


> This is an odd topic for a CTO to be commenting on, since performance is a just an engineering issue.
> 
> Where/when did the CTO make these comments?


Mr. Pontual answered questions in an open-format chat room last Friday night. If someone asked a question, Mr. Pontual tried to answer it, and believe me, there were MANY questions quickly popping up from the participants, and he did a great job maybe only missing one or two questions that probably scrolled by too quickly ...


----------



## mrshermanoaks (Aug 27, 2006)

Lee L said:


> So is there a hard wall at 50? Even 60 would be better if say 75 or 100 is not possible.


This is my worst complaint about the machine. However, if they allow me to seamlessly connect two units, I'd consider just getting a second one and not complaining about it anymore.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

mrshermanoaks said:


> This is my worst complaint about the machine. However, if they allow me to seamlessly connect two units, I'd consider just getting a second one and not complaining about it anymore.


coming soon....


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

TigerDriver said:


> This is an odd topic for a CTO to be commenting on, since performance is a just an engineering issue.
> 
> Where/when did the CTO make these comments?


And why isn't the CTO competent enough to demand that the incompetent software engineers who gave that excuse be fired and replaced with competent software engineers?

With the infrequency that the series link list has to be processed, it's absurd to have a performance issue with a list so small, especially in light of the fact that they don't even completely process an addition to the list until long after it is added.

Yet again I am flabbergasted at some of the garbage that passes for acceptable in the DirecTV DVR software development organization. Sometimes it's absolutely unbelievable.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, if they do offer MRV, I will be less concerned with the limit, but only if I can truly watch a show on one DVR that is recorded on another one without some weird machinations. Assuming the DVR's are already hooked to a network, something like, select a folder titled <name of other DVR>, then a select from a list of shows, hit play, watch is about as complicated as it needs to be.

Still, this is silly as they had plenty of slow DVRs to use as an exapmple of how not to make one, yet evidently they did it anyway.


----------



## HighVoltage (Nov 27, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> With the infrequency that the series link list has to be processed, it's absurd to have a performance issue with a list so small, especially in light of the fact that they don't even completely process an addition to the list until long after it is added.


At what frequency is the series link processed? Are you referring to frequency in which the user accesses the series link data via the GUI?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

cartrivision said:


> And why isn't the CTO competent enough to demand that the incompetent software engineers who gave that excuse be fired and replaced with competent software engineers?
> 
> With the infrequency that the series link list has to be processed, it's absurd to have a performance issue with a list so small, especially in light of the fact that they don't even completely process an addition to the list until long after it is added.
> 
> Yet again I am flabbergasted at some of the garbage that passes for acceptable in the DirecTV DVR software development organization. Sometimes it's absolutely unbelievable.


I love backseat programmers..

So you know the in's and out's of the platform... and can definitive... denouce the reason as false, or as an excuse from an incompetent software engineer.

So the "infrequency"... so you also know how often it processes it...
2 times a day? 50 times a day? 100 times a day? 1000 times a day?

Every time there is a guide data upate? Which is streamed into the box all day long? Which is it, since you seem to know... as I would like that piece of info.

But you don't know... but yet tout that you know it... and that it all incompetance... or an excuse.

So how would you go about... without having a full blown database engine in the system... with limited resources that have to shared amoungst how many different aspects of the unit (playback, recording, tuning, monitoring data streams, scheduling, hard drive maintenance, UI, ect)...

How woud you parse through about 6,000 channels worth of guide data (yes.. I said 6,000 as it is not just the nationals, or just your locals in that data stream... but also the locals for every other DMA that is in the system both HD and SD... could be up to 50 locals for a single DMA)... and then that data having break down by the time segments (30 minutes, sometimes even smaller).

So yah... there is a performance thing there...
Why do you think on TiVo when you have 100 series links, it takes it almost 30 minutes to move one Season Pass up just one spot... it isn't a "trival" task..

But it is a trival task to throw out slander and nonsense at people, when you don't have the facts of the situation.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, in TiVo's defense, while it used to take 30 minutes on my HR10-250, since the 6.2 software when they re-did the database programming, it was many times faster, often completing in well under 1 minute (which still is not great mind you).

I wonder exactly what they did and is it possible for DirecTV to make a similar change.

Personally, I would just hope that at some point, we can have devices like this that are not bound by the slow access to the database. Not sure if processor speed is the issue, but since the box already costs $300, why not have it be $325 instead with something decent under the hood?

I do appreciate the exec acknowleging the issue though as it is so nice to hear they have at least thought about it.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> So yah... there is a performance thing there...
> Why do you think on TiVo when you have 100 series links, it takes it almost 30 minutes to move one Season Pass up just one spot... it isn't a "trival" task..


Earl, while I agree with just about all of your post we know that the Tivo rebuilds the entire ToDo list when making changes in the prioritizer and the HR20 does not. In this case it's at least understandable why the Tivo is slow in this instance. I had over 100 Series links on my Tivo when I switched to the HR20 and the ONLY time it was slow was when moving things around in the series links.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Sirshagg said:


> Earl, while I agree with just about all of your post we know that the Tivo rebuilds the entire ToDo list when making changes in the prioritizer and the HR20 does not. In this case it's at least understandable why the Tivo is slow in this instance. I had over 100 Series links on my Tivo when I switched to the HR20 and the ONLY time it was slow was when moving things around in the series links.


I wasn't trying to take a swing at TiVo... because of the length of time.
Just using it as an example, that something that "seems" trivial... really isn't.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Why do you think on TiVo when you have 100 series links, it takes it almost 30 minutes to move one Season Pass up just one spot... it isn't a "trival" task..


It is trivial and doesn't have to take forever if you're using the right approach. Trivial doesn't mean that it isn't computationally intensive, but the HR2x has quite a bit more horsepower, memory and storage space to work with than the TiVos of yore. It is all a matter of applying the correct database methodology.

Just as dissing the programmers without knowing precisely what is involved is a bad idea, so too is blindly defending them.

The biggest problem is that DIRECTV seems to be ignoring the primary purpose of a satellite DVR and forsaking reliable DVR operation for network and media center functionality. Creeping featuritis reigns supreme.

http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2005/06/featuritis_vs_t.html


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

harsh said:


> Just as dissing the programmers without knowing precisely what is involved is a bad idea, so too is blindly defending them.


:up: :up: :up:



harsh said:


> The biggest problem is that DIRECTV seems to be ignoring the primary purpose of a satellite DVR and forsaking reliable DVR operation for network and media center functionality. Creeping featuritis reigns supreme.


I must say that I find myself really wondering if the general user will ever stream content from their DVR to watch on their their PC. I have no doubt that many, many people here will but lets face it - we're not really the average user.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

harsh said:


> It is trivial and doesn't have to take forever if you're using the right approach. Trivial doesn't mean that it isn't computationally intensive, but the HR2x has quite a bit more horsepower, memory and storage space to work with than the TiVos of yore. It is all a matter of applying the correct database methodology.
> 
> Just as dissing the programmers without knowing precisely what is involved is a bad idea, so too is blindly defending them.
> 
> ...


Where am I "blindly" defending them... And the reverse is true, for "blindy" attacking them.
Blind refers to the notion, that I have no idea of what is going on inside that box... or no basis for my opinion.

And all I said... it wasn't "trivial"... and yes... computationally intensive... does classify as non-trivial in my book... as if you let it go out of control... it impacts other aspects of the system.

And this isn't a PC.. where have dozens of different database engines and a lot of resources, to power that database engine. What would the correct database methodology be? As I have spent the last 12 years of my career... knee deep in databases... and would love to hear what the correct methodology would be for a dedicated unit like this...

Not like we can fire up MySQL, Oracle, or Sybase inside the HR2* without cranking up it's resource level (and thus it's cost), for what increase benefit level?

As to your last comment:

What is the primary purpose of a satellite DVR?
Is there a stated official definition of that?

Does the DVR:
-) Allow you to setup a recording... yes
-) Allow you to playback a recording... yes

What other primary purpose are they not offering?

So what if they are adding additional features...
That is what makes THEIR box... THEIR box.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Sirshagg said:


> I must say that I find myself really wondering if the general user will ever stream content from their DVR to watch on their their PC. I have no doubt that many, many people here will but lets face it - we're not really the average user.


Time will tell... but I know my neighboor is already geeked about it...
As he now doesn't have to purchase another TV, and DVR for his office.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I love backseat programmers..
> 
> So you know the in's and out's of the platform... and can definitive... denouce the reason as false, or as an excuse from an incompetent software engineer.
> 
> ...


Earl, parsing the incoming data should be no problem at all but if D* is searching through 6000 channels worth of data on every HR2X in their scheduler, it is no wonder they have issues. That would be about rock stupid. It they don't prefilter down the working data sets into what is some what relevant to the subscriber there is no helping these guys. You right about the lack of transparency to their system and it's limitations so there is much we don't know because the nature of the closed system, but in general while temporal data sets and scheduling can be a bit tricky they are not overly complex. BTW I don't see the slander, IMO the competency of the entire product team responsible for the HR2X is in question, I have never seen or owned a product with so many ongoing defects and issues. We are almost to the 2 year birthday of the HR20 and it still has many defects (unwatchable, 771, lockup, IKD, random screen saver, unlucky 13, etc etc bugs) many of which existed at the time the box was released. So yes I agree with the orignal poster and I question their competency and for that to be slander it would need to be a false claim. I think the claim has lots of evidence and validity unless their plan was to release a DVR where locking up (along with all the other things we think as of bugs) is a product feature, if that is the case then they are extreamly competent at creating a buggy product.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

btmoore said:


> So yes I agree with the orignal poster and I question their competency and for that to be slander it would need to be a false claim. I think the claim has lots of evidence and validity unless their plan was to release a DVR where locking up (along with all the other things we think as of bugs) is a product feature, if that is the case then they are extreamly competent at creating a buggy product.


But it that's the case then you could go down the false advertising road. :lol: :lol: :lol: _(It's a joke - no flames necessary)_


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

btmoore said:


> Earl, parsing the incoming data should be no problem at all but if D* is searching through 6000 channels worth of data on every HR2X in their scheduler, it is no wonder they have issues. That would be about rock stupid. It they don't prefilter down the working data sets into what is some what relevant to the subscriber there is no helping these guys. You right about the lack of transparency to their system and it's limitations so there is much we don't know because the nature of the closed system, but in general while temporal data sets and scheduling can be a bit tricky they are not overly complex. BTW I don't see the slander, IMO the competency of the entire product team responsible for the HR2X is in question, I have never seen or owned a product with so many ongoing defects and issues. We are almost to the 2 year birthday of the HR20 and it still has many defects (unwatchable, 771, lockup, IKD, random screen saver, unlucky 13, etc etc bugs) many of which existed at the time the box was released. So yes I agree with the orignal poster and I question their competency and for that to be slander it would need to be a false claim. I think the claim has lots of evidence and validity unless their plan was to release a DVR where locking up (along with all the other things we think as of bugs) is a product feature, if that is the case then they are extreamly competent at creating a buggy product.


Where do you think that pre-filtering has to occur...
On the HR2* as it is a single guide data stream to all customers.

So yes... that first parse through the data, is the pre-filtering... which still takes time and resources.

After you do that pre-filtering, then you can apply it to series links, todo list, update guide data, rebuild indexes, ect...

So fine, if it doesn't meet the official definition of slander... 
... you all call it what ever you all want to call it.
I just see the constant attacks on them, and constant calling them "incompetant" as nonsense and petty.

As for you never having a product with this many issues:
I guess you don't own a TiVo then...
What almost 10 years they have been doing it now... and even their product is not perfect, and still has it's many shares of flaws.

And what about those of us... which simply don't have any where near the level of issues... That always seems to be missed in these discussions...

The Dish DVRs have flaws... the Comcast DVRs have flaws... Fios, TimeWarner, ect.... Maybe it is just this particular technology... and the balance act between keeping resources/costs low, and functionality and feature sets high... which just doesn't mix well.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> The Dish DVRs have flaws... the Comcast DVRs have flaws... Fios, TimeWarner, ect.... Maybe it is just this particular technology... and the balance act between keeping resources/costs low, and functionality and feature sets high... which just doesn't mix well.


...and OMG do the Cox DVR's ever have flaws!!!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Not like we can fire up MySQL, Oracle, or Sybase inside the HR2* without cranking up it's resource level (and thus it's cost), for what increase benefit level?


I'm not advocating implementing a SQL database engine, just something that is sufficiently above the level of a 2D spreadsheet matrix to be able to index and handle the datatypes required without having to actually move the data around.


> Does the DVR:
> -) Allow you to setup a recording... yes
> -) Allow you to playback a recording... yes
> 
> What other primary purpose are they not offering?


Some of the missing elements include being able to execute these tasks reliably and without unreasonable or extraordinary limitations. There remain a number of wish list items for DVR functionality where users wish it worked "correctly" or at least according to the documentation.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

harsh said:


> I'm not advocating implementing a SQL database engine, just something that is sufficiently above the level of a 2D spreadsheet matrix to be able to index and handle the datatypes required without having to actually move the data around.


And we know the HR2* is using 2D spreadsheet matrix... how?
Last time I checked, no one has posted the database model for the DVR+ series.



harsh said:


> Some of the missing elements include being able to execute these tasks reliably and without unreasonable or extraordinary limitations. There remain a number of wish list items for DVR functionality where users wish it worked "correctly" or at least according to the documentation.


So... all of those that the unit does do that for... Are what... lucky?
50 Series Limit is now an "extraordinary" limitation... or what unreasonable or extraordinary limitation are you referring too?

And which documentation... you mean the two year old manual, that is completely out of date to the current software? (Which I will agree, a complete re-write of the manual is needed)


----------



## feschiver (Dec 19, 2006)

One thing that takes up so much of the staf time would be to test it on hdmi. That every tv make that only uses some of the standards. Let alone the other gadgets in play here. It's like going to the doc with a headake and him telling you to stop hitting your head on the wall. But you don't....


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

I don;t really wat to debate the competency of anyone here. I just think there should at least be some type of workaround for those of us that need more than 50 series links which still maintaining the performance of the system. It's really, really crazy that we need to keep a notebook by the DVR to keep track of the shows, currently not airing, that we remove from the prioritzer to make room for others that are.

I don;t know what that workaround might be but perhaps it would involve multiple prioritizers with only one active at a time or more than 50 item in the prioritizer list with only 50 of them active at any given time. I don't know, I just know the notebook solution is not good.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> I don;t know what that workaround might be but perhaps it would involve multiple prioritizers with only one active at a time or more than 50 item in the prioritizer list with only 50 of them active at any given time. I don't know, I just know the notebook solution is not good.


You know .. that might not be such a bad idea .. The inactive list would not have to be considered at all until it became active.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Where do you think that pre-filtering has to occur...
> On the HR2* as it is a single guide data stream to all customers.
> 
> So yes... that first parse through the data, is the pre-filtering... which still takes time and resources.
> ...


Just guessing but I think the pre filter would likely take place when you are moving data from the data fetch buffer and into the HR2x data model for the programming schedule, you know identify the data your concerned about vs the data you don't care about before you start doing any of the hard work. So I take it you agree with me we are only talking about the impact of SL on the subset of scheduling data that is relevant to that HR2x? And yes pre filtering takes time and resources but that is a very easy problem and not compute intensive and it saves you on the back end. So now the HR2x needs to only work on the data that is relevant a much smaller problem with only a 2 week sliding window data set. IMO this does not appear to be a very complex problem, I continue to believe that a 50 hard coded limit looks to be arbitrary, and is perhaps masking deeper issues around how the product is architected. Tell ya what, if it is compute power that is the 50 sl limit, they can turn off the DOD, guide spam, media player stuff and the ability to play games and give that compute resource over to giving me more SL.



Earl Bonovich said:


> So fine, if it doesn't meet the official definition of slander...
> ... you all call it what ever you all want to call it.
> I just see the constant attacks on them, and constant calling them "incompetant" as nonsense and petty.
> 
> ...


Yep I owned a DirecTV TiVo, and for the most part it worked well. every complex system has bugs, but the HR2X is riddled with bugs, it is a question of severity and frequency that develop into a pattern of defects that becomes absurd and DirecTV deserves any of the harsh critique they receive they have earned it. From my experience the DirecTV TiVo which ran for about 7 years, I had an occasional random reboot (I could likely count them on 1 hand maybe 2 but I didn't log them), maybe a few missed recordings that I think were likely scheduling data flaws, but never a continued pattern of problems like the HR2x. I would have to say it was a very positive experience it worked as a DVR. That the bugs are so frequent and common that we have named them and that one had to reboot the box so often that we have coined the term RBR points directly at the heart of the of the issue. I can't comment on the other DVR platforms you talk about, but I can talk about the experience of the HR2X and I think it is a very poor experience that is directly related to the quality of what D* produced.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> So yah... there is a performance thing there...
> Why do you think on TiVo when you have 100 series links, it takes it almost 30 minutes to move one Season Pass up just one spot... it isn't a "trival" task..


I'm pretty sure this is no longer true, but your point is well-taken, because it was true up until a year or so ago... some seven or eight years after the TiVo platform was first introduced.

I posted this earlier today in another thread, in response to similar criticism of the DirecTV programmers:



> Kind of harsh criticism, IMO. Don't forget, it was years before the vaunted TiVo programmers revamped the program database and scheduler. Prior to version 6.x, rebuilding the TO DO LIST after scheduling a new Season's Pass or re-ordering the Priority list could take up to 15 minutes with 30-40 Season's passes. To their credit, they got that down to about 15 seconds with the 6.x database re-write, but it was a long time coming.


----------



## HighVoltage (Nov 27, 2007)

btmoore said:


> Just guessing but I think the pre filter would likely take place when you are moving data from the data fetch buffer and into the HR2x data model for the programming schedule, you know identify the data your concerned about vs the data you don't care about before you start doing any of the hard work. So I take it you agree with me we are only talking about the impact of SL on the subset of scheduling data that is relevant to that HR2x? And yes pre filtering takes time and resources but that is a very easy problem and not compute intensive and it saves you on the back end. So now the HR2x needs to only work on the data that is relevant a much smaller problem with only a 2 week sliding window data set. IMO this does not appear to be a very complex problem, I continue to believe that a 50 hard coded limit looks to be arbitrary, and is perhaps masking deeper issues around how the product is architected. Tell ya what, if it is compute power that is the 50 sl limit, they can turn off the DOD, guide spam, media player stuff and the ability to play games and give that compute resource over to giving me more SL.
> .


Perhaps it is checking a larger set... Isnt "Channels I Receive/Get" the equivalent of the pre-filter everyone seems to be discussing? As I recall this feature (CIG/CIR) is not functioning or not functioning properly.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

HighVoltage said:


> Perhaps it is checking a larger set... Isnt "Channels I Receive/Get" the equivalent of the pre-filter everyone seems to be discussing? As I recall this feature (CIG/CIR) is not functioning or not functioning properly.


yep, but even if they just filtered out everything so it was just a nationals, even if you did not subscribe to it and only your DMAs, that would reduce the data set to a very manageable size. That is what I think they are doing anyways, the whole 6000 channel was one of those crazy red herrings Earl tossed out there to make it sound oh so complex and we shouldnt be so hard on them.


----------



## HighVoltage (Nov 27, 2007)

btmoore said:


> yep, but even if they just filtered out everything so it was just a nationals, even if you did not subscribe to it and only your DMAs, that would reduce the data set to a *very manageable size*.


Which would be about how many channels? I know service packages are going to effect this number but I am just looking for rough average. I honestly do not know even roughly how many I get. I think I only watch maybe 20....

That number, even at 100 may be more intensive to process than you might imagine.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> I don;t really wat to debate the competency of anyone here. I just think there should at least be some type of workaround for those of us that need more than 50 series links which still maintaining the performance of the system. It's really, really crazy that we need to keep a notebook by the DVR to keep track of the shows, currently not airing, that we remove from the prioritzer to make room for others that are.
> 
> I don;t know what that workaround might be but perhaps it would involve multiple prioritizers with only one active at a time or more than 50 item in the prioritizer list with only 50 of them active at any given time. I don't know, I just know the notebook solution is not good.





Doug Brott said:


> You know .. that might not be such a bad idea .. The inactive list would not have to be considered at all until it became active.


This is a great idea. We have Favorites for managing channels, why not have multiple Prioritizer lists for managing the limit of 50 Series Links?

I say go for it, and also provide a feature to move a SL from one Prioritizer list to another, for complete management.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

btmoore said:


> I have never seen or owned a product with so many ongoing defects and issues. We are almost to the 2 year birthday of the HR20 and it still has many defects many of which existed at the time the box was released. So yes I agree with the original poster and I question their competency and for that to be slander it would need to be a false claim. I think the claim has lots of evidence and validity unless their plan was to release a DVR where locking up (along with all the other things we think as of bugs) is a product feature, if that is the case then they are extreamly competent at creating a buggy product.


Wow!!! I knew someone out there had only used Apple computers throughout there life, and had never once used a computer running a Microsoft OS.....

We may have bugs that are creating the same result as ones from over a year ago, but they are generally in the ce's not the NR, (yes, the latest seems to have a few more issues than normal) but do you really think they have the same root causes? I don't, other wise, where did the KID bug introduced in the latest ce come from? It hasn't been around for a long time, if ever actually... Same cause after a year and a half would equal incompetence... different causes created by rewirting of software to add more features... NOT incompetence...

By the way, it was intimated that the ce's we get are generally untested when we get them.... That screams of extremely responsive software writers.....


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> You know .. that might not be such a bad idea .. The inactive list would not have to be considered at all until it became active.


Interesting idea... What if it searched your inactives only once every week, and if it found something then the system would send you a message letting you know that their was a program in your inactive list that has upcoming episodes and needed to be moved to the active list to record.....

Shall we come up with a detailed plan for this and add it to our wishlist?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> Well barring occasional changes to the first 24 hours of data (which will be rare), the changes don't have to be processed more than once a day, giving them a whole day to process the list against each new day's worth of program data, so I repeat.... it is absolutely absurd to have a performance issue with greater than 50 SLs. Tivo boxes reprocess the whole list whenever you reorder the priority of items within the list (and makes you wait until they finish before you can continue doing anything else), and they complete the whole process in a just few minutes for a list larger than 50, so DirecTV's inability to do in 24 hours what Tivo's competent software engineers can do in a matter of minutes, is way beyond absurd. Somebody should lose their job for accepting such incompetence.
> 
> It's no wonder these incompetent clowns gave us the current crippled SL function that doesn't fully process a new addition to the list immediately after it is added. Obviously their scheduler algorithm was designed by people who have absolutely no clue on how to do it properly. When you can't do in 24 hours what others are able to do in minutes, something is way wrong.


LMAO... Your kidding right? Only occasional guide data changes during a day... I'm guessing the entire guide data for the next 1 hour or more gets refreshed every hour, if not more often than that. I think you assume things that just aren't the case.... And there is evidence of that... I have never seen evidence of the entire guide only getting occasional updates and mainly being refreshed at a specific time....


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

inkahauts said:


> Wow!!! I knew someone out there had only used Apple computers throughout there life, and had never once used a computer running a Microsoft OS.....
> 
> We may have bugs that are creating the same result as ones from over a year ago, but they are generally in the ce's not the NR, (yes, the latest seems to have a few more issues than normal) but do you really think they have the same root causes? I don't, other wise, where did the KID bug introduced in the latest ce come from? It hasn't been around for a long time, if ever actually... Same cause after a year and a half would equal incompetence... different causes created by rewirting of software to add more features... NOT incompetence...
> 
> By the way, it was intimated that the ce's we get are generally untested when we get them.... That screams of extremely responsive software writers.....


Not sure where you are going with apples and windows, those are not CE devices, I was talking about CE devices in particular DVR and recording devices not general purpose compute devices.

I have no idea what the root cause of the latest rash of the old bugs, Unwatchable, IKD, 771, lockup, random screensaver, and yes they are basically the same, I know because I have experienced the old versions of those bugs and the new rash of the same bugs. AFAIK it could be the same as the old root cause or could be something new which hits on the same weak spots in the HR20, I don't know it is a closed system, I just know what the bugs are from a user interface perspective. You couldn't get me to touch the CE release with a 20 foot lead poll, I am not a unpaid beta tester for D*, in fact I think it is appalling that it looks like D* is using the CE model instead of improving rigor in their own unit, system, integration and regression testing before moving it out to a UAT, looks to me like they may have phase containment issues because of it, which is why we may be seeing old bugs return.

You might want to read up on the old history of bugs and compare for yourself Here is the link

and if you don't believe in the IKD bug here is the writeup from about 2 years ago:

*Bug Name:* _IKD Bug, AKA Instant Keep or Delete bug, unplayable bug, no play bug_

*Prognosis:* Possible loss of recording

*History/Status:* Currently active in 0x10b

*First Identified Report:* 09-27-06, 07:56 PM dervari "Recording problems still - Unable to playback"

*Symptoms:* Upon playing a recorded program you will instantly be prompted to Keep or Delete that program. A reboot may remove shows with the IKD bug. Some users have noted that repeated retires of playing a program with a IKD bug may result in successful playback.

*Treatment: * Attempt to replay the recording multiple times, this may result in a successful playback, rebooting may result in a recording that can be played back or it may be removed from the playlist.
*__________________________________________*


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

HighVoltage said:


> Perhaps it is checking a larger set... Isnt "Channels I Receive/Get" the equivalent of the pre-filter everyone seems to be discussing? As I recall this feature (CIG/CIR) is not functioning or not functioning properly.


There is now an issues thread for Channels I Get (or, Channels I don't Get but it thinks I do) Issues here:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=127642

Please post profusely, I understand that they are going to be monitoring this thread.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Please please please do not do multiple lists.

This is no better than writing down the stuff you have to delete and you are still just as likely to miss something. There are just too many issues with trying to keep track and remembering which list to keep active and when to switch over. Either make a real machine that can take care of annoyance items for me or don't. 

Rather than add multiple lists if 50 is the absolute limit, just leave it alone and concentrate on getting the itmse on the one list we have recording consistently and maybe have another group working on MRV. (hopefully this is almost done now anyway)


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

If they can't increase the limit, providing multiple prioritizer lists with a feature to move Series Links between lists would at least satisfy some customers because at the end of a "season" for a particular series, the temporarily useless SL could be shunted to a "backup" Prioritizer and stay there until the customer wants to move it back. It eliminates having to create and delete Series Links, as all that's done is moving them. Not a perfect solution, not an elegant solution, but it would permit retention of more than 50 series links at a time, even if only 50 are active.

Thinking of that ... Perhaps THAT is the feature we need. *Add a new STATUS setting to each SL with values of "Active" and "On Hold", and permit hundreds of "STORED" Series Links, but only permit a total of 50 "ACTIVE" Series Links.* Let the user deactivate Series Links as needed and keep them all in the Prioritizer, so the internal processing only looks at the ACTIVE Series Links to build the To Do List and manage conflicts.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

There's probably a max SL number that would satisfy the needs of 99.9% of the user base. What that number is, I'm not sure, but If I had to guess, I'd say it was probably around 75 or 80.

I think DirecTV should just try expanding the limit to 75, e.g., and see what happens. If CE testers notice performance problems, they can easily cure those problems by deleting links until the problems go away. Seems like a reasonable thing to test in beta.

Just my .02. /steve


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I wasn't trying to take a swing at TiVo... because of the length of time.
> Just using it as an example, that something that "seems" trivial... really isn't.


No it isn't trivial, but considering the fact that Tivo can re-process the entire list against the entire set of guide data in a matter of minutes (for a list considerably larger than 50 items), and that the HR2x development team can't figure out how to do a small subset of that processing in the background over the course of a day without creating "performance issues" tells you that the software that processes the SL list on the HR2x's is a complete mess that doesn't even come close to doing it efficiently.

The most disturbing part of it is that DirecTV's CTO doesn't seem to be knowledgeable enough to recognize how poorly his product's software performs compared competitors products doing the same type of function, and he accepts the horribly inefficient software's performance instead of insisting that it be done right.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

inkahauts said:


> LMAO... Your kidding right? Only occasional guide data changes during a day... I'm guessing the entire guide data for the next 1 hour or more gets refreshed every hour, if not more often than that. I think you assume things that just aren't the case.... And there is evidence of that... I have never seen evidence of the entire guide only getting occasional updates and mainly being refreshed at a specific time....


That's an absolutely ridiculous statement. There is no way that there are constant updates to the upcoming hour's guide data on a frequent basis. The schedules are for the most part set at least a week in advance, with perhaps a small amount that changes about a day in advance, and rarely with things changing just hours before the scheduled air times of the programs. It's completely absurd to suggest that the schedule for the immediate future (looking forward 1-3 hours) is constantly changing. Any constantly incoming guide data would be being adding on to the end of the data more than a week out into the future.

You can't seriously think that there are frequent and constant changes to the current hour's data. What do you think is happening? All the network programmers are sitting around constantly doing last minute changes on a whim and that those changes get fed up through the guide data providers to the end user on a constant real time basis? If you are going to try to sell that notion, you ought to go into the business of making up excuses for some of the poorly written HR2x software.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> That's an absolutely ridiculous statement. There is no way that there are constant updates to the upcoming hour's guide data on a frequent basis. The schedules are for the most part set at least a week in advance, with perhaps a small amount that changes about a day in advance, and rarely with things changing just hours before the scheduled air times of the programs. It's completely absurd to suggest that the schedule for the immediate future (looking forward 1-3 hours) is constantly changing. Any constantly incoming guide data would be being adding on to the end of the data more than a week out into the future.
> 
> You can't seriously think that there are frequent and constant changes to the current hour's data. What do you think is happening? All the network programmers are sitting around constantly doing last minute changes on a whim and that those changes get fed up through the guide data providers to the end user on a constant real time basis? If you are going to try to sell that notion, you ought to go into the business of making up excuses for some of the poorly written HR2x software.


I guess you don't check your history very often. There are guide data changes constantly, which are noted as canceled recordings for recordings it appears you actually have. Sometimes they don't even make it in time for a programs start. The NBA and NHL playoffs are a prime example. And yeah... Scheduling changes constantly, and its a marketing and ratings ploy. Why do you think so many programs start at :01 or :02... its marketing, advertising and ratings related. You should see how stupid Nielson is in terms of when you have to be tuned to a station for a program to be considered watched for the shows ratings.... I think you severely underestimate how desperate broadcasters on OTA networks are to maximize their revenue streams. Programmers at stations can make changes to commercials and show lengths at any point during a day a show airs. They may not do it to often, but because they can and do sometimes, the HR's have to be able to adapt at the last second... and that means searching multiple times a day because of what might happen. Look at what happened with the writers strike. Many stations didn't decided which exact episode to show until the day of....


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> The most disturbing part of it is that DirecTV's CTO doesn't seem to be knowledgeable enough to recognize how poorly his product's software performs compared competitors products doing the same type of function, and he accepts the horribly inefficient software's performance instead of insisting that it be done right.


What is your basis for such an outlandish claim that the CTO is not "knowledgeable enough"? You've seen paraphrased passages from an online chat. Maybe you're privy to internal memos that I don't know about, or you've sat in on meetings with the CTO so you have first hand knowledge of his lack of "enough knowledge"? You have no idea how much or how little the CTO or any other DIRECTV IT manager has pressed to improve performance and are just taking potshots. I find that disturbing.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> No it isn't trivial, but considering the fact that Tivo can re-process the entire list against the entire set of guide data in a matter of minutes (for a list considerably larger than 50 items), and that the HR2x development team can't figure out how to do a small subset of that processing in the background over the course of a day without creating "performance issues" tells you that the software that processes the SL list on the HR2x's is a complete mess that doesn't even come close to doing it efficiently.
> 
> The most disturbing part of it is that DirecTV's CTO doesn't seem to be knowledgeable enough to recognize how poorly his product's software performs compared competitors products doing the same type of function, and he accepts the horribly inefficient software's performance instead of insisting that it be done right.


I have to wonder how fast that guide data comes down the pipe. Seems when I reboot it it takes at least 24 hours just to populate .. I'd really hate it if HR20 waited until every single byte were downloaded to start processing .. With potential changes and new data (for 12 days out) is constantly coming in, I'd have to believe that the system is pretty much constantly checking the schedule to make sure there aren't new conflicts. Sure, there may be other ways to do it, but at what cost? Without having all of the information I don't see how anyone could make any claims of competency.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And we know the HR2* is using 2D spreadsheet matrix... how?


We don't. It is simply the slowest database methodology I could think of.


> Last time I checked, no one has posted the database model for the DVR+ series.


No one has posted one that I've seen, but they obviously aren't using a very efficient technique or they wouldn't need to impose the current limitations.


> 50 Series Limit is now an "extraordinary" limitation...


For the class of the machine, 50 is an extraordinarily small number.


> And which documentation... you mean the two year old manual, that is completely out of date to the current software? (Which I will agree, a complete re-write of the manual is needed)


I can't think of any other official documentation from DIRECTV. You may remember my rant about that earlier this year with regard to features that remain undocumented (and otherwise poorly supported) by DIRECTV.

The issue is software, so I didn't feel the need to shine a light on yet another gaping hole in the readiness of the HR2x series for public consumption.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> I have to wonder how fast that guide data comes down the pipe. Seems when I reboot it it takes at least 24 hours just to populate ..


I assume that DirecTV is allowing you to watch your choice of TV during this population?

The other way of doing it is to prevent you from using your receiver for five minutes or so and downloading the full guide for nine days in advance ... then updating that daily sometime in the middle of the night or morning when you're not using the receiver. Not too many people would notice that their guide only goes eight days out (or care) right before the refresh.

As far as last minute changes, that can be done via a separate short term EPG (present/next) that is part of the DBS standard. Of course, that requires the cooperation of programmers to actually get the changes into the pipeline.

When the EPG is matched against timers is important ... if it is done constantly to catch "last minute changes" it would take time. Perhaps a scan once every 15 or 30 minutes would be enough. Done right the receiver would only have to scan the ~300-400 channels that one subscriber can receive and only in the "present/next" EPG most recently updated. The long "full EPG" search would only be done immediately following a full EPG download when the receiver is at rest.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

James Long said:


> I assume that DirecTV is allowing you to watch your choice of TV during this population?
> 
> The other way of doing it is to prevent you from using your receiver for five minutes or so and downloading the full guide for nine days in advance ... then updating that daily sometime in the middle of the night or morning when you're not using the receiver. Not too many people would notice that their guide only goes eight days out (or care) right before the refresh.


didn't earlier units act this way? for some reason I'm thinking my older r10 was not usable unil a guide d/l was done.



> As far as last minute changes, that can be done via a separate short term EPG (present/next) that is part of the DBS standard. Of course, that requires the cooperation of programmers to actually get the changes into the pipeline.
> 
> When the EPG is matched against timers is important ... if it is done constantly to catch "last minute changes" it would take time. Perhaps a scan once every 15 or 30 minutes would be enough. Done right the receiver would only have to scan the ~300-400 channels that one subscriber can receive and only in the "present/next" EPG most recently updated. The long "full EPG" search would only be done immediately following a full EPG download when the receiver is at rest.


are you thinking of a second "invisible" guide that is updated at specific intervals them used to update the viewable guide at another specified interval? just trying to be clear on what your thinking, thanks.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Steve said:


> There's probably a max SL number that would satisfy the needs of 99.9% of the user base. What that number is, I'm not sure, but If I had to guess, I'd say it was probably around 75 or 80.
> 
> I think DirecTV should just try expanding the limit to 75, e.g., and see what happens. If CE testers notice performance problems, they can easily cure those problems by deleting links until the problems go away. Seems like a reasonable thing to test in beta.
> 
> Just my .02. /steve


I agree with this. We record a ton of shows (some nights we record twice as much on a time basis than there are hours that night.) I think that 75 would come a whole lot closer to satisfying 99.9% of people than 50 would.

Of course, if we go by past experience, if the CE has issues they will see that a sign that it is time to push it national.  I'm sorry, that was mean. I will try to stop. (if they give me less ammo to play with  )

Drew, I like your idea much better than having multiple lists as it would account for overlapping summer and spring schedules better, like say when American Gladiators starts this week but it is really part of a summer slate of shows. I

I still think they should find a way to make more than 50 work.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Doug Brott said:


> I have to wonder how fast that guide data comes down the pipe.


Basically... It works roughly like this.

Next 12 hours - repeated in the guide data stream very frequently..
12 - 24 hours - repeated in the guide just a bit less frequently then the next 12 hours.

24-48 hours - 
And then so on....

They staggered the guide data over the 14 days...
With the next 3 days being the most frequent (because that is what gets populated in the non-dvr STB's ) followed by 2 more days (Because that is what gets populated in the HD non-dvr STB's).

They don't stream all 14 days worth at a time... as the stuff on the extremes is very subject to change.

Guide data is streamed 24/7.
And yes, there are changes that occur all day long....

Sometimes in a few hours before air time...


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

cartrivision said:


> No it isn't trivial, but considering the fact that Tivo can re-process the entire list against the entire set of guide data in a matter of minutes (for a list considerably larger than 50 items),


And that took them almost 7 years to figure out how to do it...



cartrivision said:


> and that the HR2x development team can't figure out how to do a small subset of that processing in the background over the course of a day without creating "performance issues" tells you that the software that processes the SL list on the HR2x's is a complete mess that doesn't even come close to doing it efficiently.


Ahh... so you are seeing slowdowns in your unit when it is processing.... ?
Or are you making assumptions again, that it is not doing it efficiently.

Even with the statments that the limit right now is 50 because of concerns of performance... Right now... 50 isn't an issue for the larger portion of the user base.... So until the time comes when they have the time to revisit the method's that have done it... which could itself lead to issues.... it stays that way, instead of willy nilly just upping it and "be dammed" the results.



cartrivision said:


> The most disturbing part of it is that DirecTV's CTO doesn't seem to be knowledgeable enough to recognize how poorly his product's software performs compared competitors products doing the same type of function, and he accepts the horribly inefficient software's performance instead of insisting that it be done right.


I can guarantee you that you couldn't be more wrong about that statement.
You have absolutely no basis for that statement... have you sat and talked with the CTO... or are you just making an assumption again?

IMHO, it is just conjecture on your part to stir the pot, and continue down your path of disgust and dispise for DirecTV.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

What would work for me, and I think this was mentioned somewhere in this monster thread, would be the ability so set a SL to "Inactive" when I knew that the show was on hold for a while. Inactive SLs wouldn't count against the 50 limit and there would have to be a routine for forcing you to deactivate one if you were up to 50.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> What would work for me, and I think this was mentioned somewhere in this monster thread, would be the ability so set a SL to "Inactive" when I knew that the show was on hold for a while. Inactive SLs wouldn't count against the 50 limit and there would have to be a routine for forcing you to deactivate one if you were up to 50.


I agree this is one possible fix, _assuming something is broken_. What we still don't know is what the actual SL limit is before performance suffers noticeably.

IMO, DirecTV should raise the SL limit to some arbitrary number like 75 or 80 (in a CE release, of course) so we can report back to them what we find. If performance does suffer, it will be easy enough for us to delete SL's over 50 in a controlled fashion until performance is once again acceptable.

This will give us a truer picture of what the SL max is with the current architecture. And if we find out it is 75, and not 50, that # may turn out to be an acceptable maximum for the vast majority of users. OTOH, we may find out the limit is 55, and we need a plan "B", like the ability to "suspend" links.

/steve


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

dmacleo said:


> are you thinking of a second "invisible" guide that is updated at specific intervals them used to update the viewable guide at another specified interval? just trying to be clear on what your thinking, thanks.


I am thinking of a way another company does it ... and was offering my description as "another way that it can be done". Daily bulk downloads when the receiver is not in use with timers set at that point in time (early morning) based on what is in the guide at that time and a "trickle" update that shows what is on now and next on every channel on the system that is used for the "last minute update".

I'd trust Earl's description for how DirecTV is actually doing it (a 24/7 trickle with current day being sent more often than many days from now).

In the system I described (which is not DirecTV's) the "invisible" trickle guide immediately updates the stored EPG ... but it ONLY contains data for programs that are currently on the air and the next program that is scheduled - or "Present / Next" in the DVB standard. If you're watching half hour blocks the look ahead may be as little as 31 minutes (present show ending, next show is 30 minutes. Or if you're watching something longer you may see hours (Nascar Cup Series race for four hours with 30 minute news next - or two movies on a movie channel). It is "present" and "next" - and immediately affects the visible guide.

My proposal would be to use this tiny guide (# of channels times two programs) for any "on the fly" matching against the timer list or series links. The full guide would be scanned in early morning when the receiver doesn't have much else to do.

Of course, my proposal is a non-starter if the guide does not exist on DirecTV ...


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> What would work for me, and I think this was mentioned somewhere in this monster thread, would be the ability so set a SL to "Inactive" when I knew that the show was on hold for a while. Inactive SLs wouldn't count against the 50 limit and there would have to be a routine for forcing you to deactivate one if you were up to 50.


This was something I proposed a while back. This could also bring another interesting possibility in that DirecTv could then collect stats of how many SL's people have - both active and inactive. They may find 90% of people have no more than 70 and that raising the limit to this number would not too adversely affect performance.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> This was something I proposed a while back. This could also bring another interesting possibility in that DirecTv could then collect stats of how many SL's people have - both active and inactive. They may find 90% of people have no more than 70 and that raising the limit to this number would not too adversely affect performance.


They should be able to sort of determine this today .. I don't know if they are actually collecting that information or not, though. Still, it could be easily determined how many SLs are being used. They could know what the percentage of folks @ 50 is now and it may simply be that the percentage is so small that it doesn't warrant the effort. Just a guess, but it is plausible.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Doug Brott said:


> They should be able to sort of determine this today .. I don't know if they are actually collecting that information or not, though. Still, it could be easily determined how many SLs are being used. They could know what the percentage of folks @ 50 is now and it may simply be that the percentage is so small that it doesn't warrant the effort. Just a guess, but it is plausible.


True, but not everyone keeps theirs pegged at 50 all the time. Since I've got to use the notebook method anyway I try to keep one or two spots open in my prioritizer when I have to go make adjustments. If they just looked for people at 50 they wouldn't count someone like me. Also having a hard limit they can't see what the real upper limit is. Perhaps it's 55, but they won't know that since we can't add more than 50.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> True, but not everyone keeps theirs pegged at 50 all the time. Since I've got to use the notebook method anyway I try to keep one or two spots open in my prioritizer when I have to go make adjustments. If they just looked for people at 50 they wouldn't count someone like me. Also having a hard limit they can't see what the real upper limit is. Perhaps it's 55, but they won't know that since we can't add more than 50.


Ya, but DirecTV can assume that 45 really means >50, if you know what I mean. If they find out that 99% of the users have 45 or less links, that tells them that the 50 limit is probably fine and the 100 or so folks complaining on DBSTalk are statistical anomalies (i.e., bell-curve "outliers"). Or they could find out that 10-20% of their users have 45 or more SL's, in which case, there's probably a genuine need to increase the limit.

/steve


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> True, but not everyone keeps theirs pegged at 50 all the time. Since I've got to use the notebook method anyway I try to keep one or two spots open in my prioritizer when I have to go make adjustments. If they just looked for people at 50 they wouldn't count someone like me. Also having a hard limit they can't see what the real upper limit is. Perhaps it's 55, but they won't know that since we can't add more than 50.


Count me as another who needs more than 50, but keeps his list under that number deliberately.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Steve said:


> Ya, but DirecTV can assume that 45 really means >50, if you know what I mean. If they find out that 99% of the users have 45 or less links, that tells them that the 50 limit is probably fine and the 100 or so folks complaining on DBSTalk are statistical anomalies (i.e., bell-curve "outliers"). Or they could find out that 10-20% of their users have 45 or more SL's, in which case, there's probably a genuine need to increase the limit.
> 
> /steve


I wonder if they are doing this? I certainly could be one of the statistical anomalies and if I really am then I suppose I just need to suck it up and deal with it.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Sirshagg said:


> I wonder if they are doing this? I certainly could be one of the statistical anomalies and if I really am then I suppose I just need to suck it up and deal with it.


If you are, I'm one too.  I have no idea what the %'s are. Would be interesting to know. /steve


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

While the idea of having a dormant "list" is a fair idea...

Think about what it would take to implement:
1) First the list it's self, access to it, and where it is stored.
2) Movement from one list to another
3) Maintenance of either list (the current code is obviously look at one list, so those routines would have to be updated to be more dynamic to look at any list)

That is just on the surface... I am sure there is more.

Also don't forget "support" for that... Some users could be confused and think they have everything all set on that sub-list... and then complain on why something isn't recording... ect...

The time necessary to do all that... would be better spent doing what ever work is necessary to re-work the current system, to allow a larger series link in the first place... that is a permanent solution.

While I understand there are some that want more than 50... and some that would be way way above 50...

The 50 limit has been there now almost 3+ years (back to the R15).... and honestly... there really hasn't been that volume of outcry about it, if it was a critical issue accross the entire user base.


----------



## btmoore (Aug 28, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> The 50 limit has been there now almost 3+ years (back to the R15).... and honestly... there really hasn't been that volume of outcry about it, if it was a critical issue accross the entire user base.


That seems to be D*s mantra over the past few years, rather than delivering quality and excellences, it is more like manage the pain. Well only 20% are screaming and yelling, good job boys, we need a customer service award!


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

btmoore said:


> Well only 20% are screaming and yelling, good job boys, we need a customer service award!


Where did that % come from? Remember, 100 of us yelling in this thread may only represent 1/10 of 1% of the user base.  Or we could be the tip of an iceberg! :lol:

I think it's more likely we represent the former than the latter. /steve


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

btmoore said:


> That seems to be D*s mantra over the past few years, rather than delivering quality and excellences, it is more like manage the pain. Well only 20% are screaming and yelling, good job boys, we need a customer service award!


It's called appling resources where necessary...
And not to single out DirecTV... it is pretty the mantra for every company out there.

What if it is only 1% or 1/2 of 1%.... would it warrant the amount of time and resources to do it?

As we all know, there is no way to build a system that is 100% for all...


----------



## gpg (Aug 19, 2006)

I like the suggestion someone made about offering a CE in which the SL limit was increased somewhat (maybe to 60) and then seeing what happens to performance in a real-world environment. If performance really goes in the toilet, the limit can be moved back to 50. If it's still acceptable, fewer users will have reason to complain about the new limit.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Won't performance only "go in the toilet" if one actually has more than 50 SL's?

If that's the case then let us do it and just give a nice warning message on every one after 50.


----------



## gully_foyle (Jan 18, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> And why isn't the CTO competent enough to demand that the incompetent software engineers who gave that excuse be fired and replaced with competent software engineers?


There are things that can be solved with a few simple changes, and there are things that are cast in concrete in a design. What I hear is that it isn't just a number or list size, but a choice made early on that makes things get very slow very fast as you go further. If there were incompetent engineers, they did their damage in 2006.

So the questions for management are: Is it worth rewriting a fundamental part of the software to get this function? What else can you fix/upgrade in the process? What are the risks? What opportunity is lost for doing other things? Do enough users care?

Me, 50 SLs would be nice. But since I've never hit the barrier AND I have 3 DVRs hooked up AND I never use any autorecord search ever (see CIG issue), I'd rather they didn't tear out large pieces of otherwise working code to fix it.

My suggestion: If you really need this, you probably also need more disk space and more tuners, so get another box and double everything. You can control multiple DVRs at the same location.


----------



## Slyster (May 17, 2005)

Sirshagg said:


> Won't performance only "go in the toilet" if one actually has more than 50 SL's?
> 
> If that's the case then let us do it and just give a nice warning message on every one after 50.


NO! I notice no difference from 10 SL's to 50 SL's.... would it suddenly 'go in the toilet' if I added my 51st or 55th?

I REALLY don't think so.

I bet.. in real life... they COULD just change a number in the code to 60 and that's that. 60 SL's. They just aren't listening.


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

kcmurphy88 said:


> There are things that can be solved with a few simple changes, and there are things that are cast in concrete in a design. What I hear is that it isn't just a number or list size, but a choice made early on that makes things get very slow very fast as you go further. If there were incompetent engineers, they did their damage in 2006.
> 
> So the questions for management are: Is it worth rewriting a fundamental part of the software to get this function? What else can you fix/upgrade in the process? What are the risks? What opportunity is lost for doing other things? Do enough users care?
> 
> ...


My sentiments exactly.

In every _ab initio_ software engineering project, the development team inherits _at least_ one piece of code from the research team--code that nobody understands and that tends to explode when touched. There's is actually a term for such code: a blivet. (Definition here).

After being endlessly puzzled why D* would place such a low bound on the number of SLs, I've come to believe that the scheduler subsystem itself must be a blivet. Namely, it is so badly designed that beyond a relatively small number (we know it's more than 50) of SL's it becomes endlessly recursive, spawning more copies of itself to crunch on this tiny pair of data sets (SLs and guide data), leaving little processor time for other tasks. (I.E., it possesses n-squared properties.)

One doesn't fix such problems, one redesigns them from the ground up. Building real-time scheduling subsystems (of which this one is a trivially simple example) is a well-understood problem, but a smart engineering manager wouldn't dare introduce it in the middle of a product life cycle, but instead would wait for the next blank-page design. Proof again in the wisdom of the saying "Plan to throw the first one away--because sooner or later you'll have to."


----------



## HighVoltage (Nov 27, 2007)

TigerDriver said:


> My sentiments exactly.
> 
> In every _ab initio_ software engineering project, the development team inherits _at least_ one piece of code from the research team--code that nobody understands and that tends to explode when touched. There's is actually a term for such code: a blivet. (Definition here).
> 
> ...


I agree in that this seems the most likely scenario. At ~300Mhz core and about 4 nsec/instruction I have to wonder how much data they are trying to process or push around even in a multitasking scenario where that cannot be accomplished within a second. I am guessing one second to be the worst case periodicity for the schedular to meet.


----------



## SimonStern (Jan 29, 2008)

A year ago I looked into the HR20, and didn't buy one because the SL limit was too low. I check back in a year later, and the HR21 still has the same limit. 

I have been with DirecTV for about 7 years, but I guess I am going to have to explore different options now.  This limit, will cost D* at least one customer.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SimonStern said:


> A year ago I looked into the HR20, and didn't buy one because the SL limit was too low. I check back in a year later, and the HR21 still has the same limit.
> 
> I have been with DirecTV for about 7 years, but I guess I am going to have to explore different options now.  This limit, will cost D* at least one customer.


Speaking for myself, I find the 50 limit an annoyance, but certainly not a "deal-breaker".

I'm sure you understand what the limit is we're speaking of, but just in case... 50 is NOT the limit of how many shows can be in your TODO list, but rather it's the maximum # of shows for which you can simultaneously schedule automatically recurring recordings.

/steve


----------



## SimonStern (Jan 29, 2008)

Yeah, I have two Tivos. One has about 45 Season Passes and the other has about 85. I like to setup a season pass for EVERYTHING I watch. It means I never have to watch commercials or anything I don't WANT to watch. 

I like a LOT of 1/2 hr long car related shows on Spike, Speed, TLC and Discovery. They add up quickly.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SimonStern said:


> Yeah, I have two Tivos. One has about 45 Season Passes and the other has about 85.


Gotcha. With 85 SP's to manage, I guess you were real happy to get the 6.x update  /steve


----------



## rsblaski (Jul 6, 2003)

Stuart Sweet said:


> What would work for me, and I think this was mentioned somewhere in this monster thread, would be the ability so set a SL to "Inactive" when I knew that the show was on hold for a while. Inactive SLs wouldn't count against the 50 limit and there would have to be a routine for forcing you to deactivate one if you were up to 50.


I really can't agree with having "inactive" lists. While one list may contain "summer" shows and another "fall" shows, what do you do with those that overlap? When a network pulls a show but then uses it to replace a bomb during another "season" that show may not be on the list that is currently "active". This multi-list idea would still require us to constantly monitor what is currently being scheduled.

My top wish for D* is to get an interactive MRV with collaborative scheduling where we can use 2 (or more) dvrs to spread out our SL's. For most of us, this would kill two birds with one stone--additional storage with a 100 or more SL list.
I have two HD DVR's in one a/v cabinet and it is a minor pain to switch between the two to see what is scheduled or on the play list(s).


----------



## rsblaski (Jul 6, 2003)

Sirshagg said:


> True, but not everyone keeps theirs pegged at 50 all the time. Since I've got to use the notebook method anyway I try to keep one or two spots open in my prioritizer when I have to go make adjustments. If they just looked for people at 50 they wouldn't count someone like me. Also having a hard limit they can't see what the real upper limit is. Perhaps it's 55, but they won't know that since we can't add more than 50.


I agree. I use two dvrs in the same a/v cabinet and between the two I have about 70-80 SL's. I would definately not fall within the maximum limit. MRV is a solution.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

rsblaski said:


> I agree. I use two dvrs in the same a/v cabinet and between the two I have about 70-80 SL's. I would definately not fall within the maximum limit. MRV is a solution.


Add me to that list. With 5 HR's in the home, I've got 10 available HD tuners in my home. Wouldn't it be wonderful if I could schedule all my SL's on one machine and have a spare copy of each show recorded.

That would give me the capability to record 5 shows at any given time, with each show backed-up on another machine. Now we're talkin'!!! :lol: /steve


----------



## schneid (Aug 14, 2007)

SimonStern said:


> A year ago I looked into the HR20, and didn't buy one because the SL limit was too low. I check back in a year later, and the HR21 still has the same limit.
> 
> I have been with DirecTV for about 7 years, but I guess I am going to have to explore different options now.  This limit, will cost D* at least one customer.


I was a ten year customer when I got got miffed and went to E* for four months last summer. Came crawling back. The grass over there was not greener.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

MRV is only a solution if MRV includes *collaborative scheduling*, permitting idle DVRs with open slots to record programs from a shared scheduler. So far all we know is MRV will support playing content on supported receivers ... we don't know anything about collaborative scheduling.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

I would almost certainly say that MRV will not include collaborative scheduling. No one has ever even hinted about that.


The only real solution is to increase the limit.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

Lee L said:


> I would almost certainly say that MRV will not include collaborative scheduling. No one has ever even hinted about that.


Usually nobody other than us users hints at any details of any future features, so that's hardly any indication of what is or isn't coming, however DirecTV's announced plans to migrate towards the "Whole Home DVR" solution would likely require collaborative scheduling between multiple DVRs as a way to expand the number of tuners available to the Whole Home DVR network.

If DirecTV isn't currently planning on developing collaborative scheduling for networked DVRs, their DVRs will begin to look crippled when their competition starts rolling out advanced features such as that.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

i cant catch up with 17 pages but wanted to just say that I think directv had to do research on this. they arent that stupid. So they either have a population that didnt have 50 SLs and we are rare or they just wanted us to buy 2 or more dvrs. 

my wife is disabled and we have over 200 SPs over 2 hdtivos. Plus mpeg4 only SLs on the hr20. with new shows out there we are always rotating SLs on the hr20 for mpeg4 stuff

its very annoying. 

No she doesnt clean them out on the hr20, doesnt feel like adding them back later. I watch futon critic and do delete canceled shows but there's only so much you can do.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I don't think it is "rare" to need more than 50 SLs, but at one time, I did think so.

We have about 5 on each of our HR20s.

This forum has taught me that I am the abnormal one, not you guys!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

cartrivision said:


> Usually nobody other than us users hints at any details of any future features, so that's hardly any indication of what is or isn't coming, however DirecTV's announced plans to migrate towards the "Whole Home DVR" solution would likely require collaborative scheduling between multiple DVRs as a way to expand the number of tuners available to the Whole Home DVR network.
> 
> If DirecTV isn't currently planning on developing collaborative scheduling for networked DVRs, their DVRs will begin to look crippled when their competition starts rolling out advanced features such as that.


I can definitely see them doing collaborative scheduling on a new machine yet to be made, but all the baby steps they have taken so far regarding serving or receiving streamed content on the HR20x all lead to one thing, being able to stream from one box to another.

Nothing points to the machines being able to talk to each other in real time to decide what to record where. If the thing can't handle 60 series links without choking, there is no way it could handle 40 or 50 and chat with 2 other boxes with their own Series Links and figure all that out.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> I can definitely see them doing collaborative scheduling on a new machine yet to be made, but all the baby steps they have taken so far regarding serving or receiving streamed content on the HR20x all lead to one thing, being able to stream from one box to another.
> 
> Nothing points to the machines being able to talk to each other in real time to decide what to record where. If the thing can't handle 60 series links without choking, there is no way it could handle 40 or 50 and chat with 2 other boxes with their own Series Links and figure all that out.


Well another "baby step" they've taken is the ability to remotely schedule via the web, so the capability for an HR2x to receive external scheduling instructions may already be in place as well. While not a major piece of the puzzle, it would certainly be a helpful and needed one. /steve


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

I'd be curious if a separate "brain" box would be possible. It could serve as a central prioritizer, to-do, playlist, guide, etc. Without the burden of actually recording or playing back anything it could be entirely devoted to these types of functions and take that functionaly off of the individual receivers. The receivers would simply have an interface to this new box. It could even be something entirely optional.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

newsposter said:


> i cant catch up with 17 pages but wanted to just say that I think directv had to do research on this. they arent that stupid. So they either have a population that didnt have 50 SLs and we are rare or they just wanted us to buy 2 or more dvrs.


Unfortunately, it's not that well planned out. The 50 SL limit is because of their poorly written software that can't handle large SL lists. One of the heads of technology at DirecTV recently stated that the limit was in place because of performance issues, not because anyone thought that 50 was a good number to provide.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

Lee L said:


> I can definitely see them doing collaborative scheduling on a new machine yet to be made, but all the baby steps they have taken so far regarding serving or receiving streamed content on the HR20x all lead to one thing, being able to stream from one box to another.
> 
> Nothing points to the machines being able to talk to each other in real time to decide what to record where. If the thing can't handle 60 series links without choking, there is no way it could handle 40 or 50 and chat with 2 other boxes with their own Series Links and figure all that out.


Actually, as I just said in my previous post, DirecTVs future plans for networked DVRs and "Whole Home DVRs" strongly points to the need for such a capability.

There is no reason that it would have to be a new box instead of doing it on the current HR2x series boxes. It will just require better and more efficient scheduling routines. The processing power required for the communications between multiple networked DVRs is trivial, and if done right, the creation and maintenance of one master recording schedule is nothing beyond what the current box's processor can handle.


----------



## hfhlt004 (Nov 19, 2005)

I like to keep all my season passes, even shows on hiatus. That way I can remember them. Seasons have become so erratic for TV shows that this is a convenience. I hate to start deleting shows that I want to keep for the next season. It is NOT a matter of watching too much TV.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

hfhlt004 said:


> I like to keep all my season passes, even shows on hiatus. That way I can remember them. Seasons have become so erratic for TV shows that this is a convenience. I hate to start deleting shows that I want to keep for the next season. It is NOT a matter of watching too much TV.


IMHO, that is what a Series Link is for.

Alas, it isn't in the cards.

Mike


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Steve said:


> Speaking for myself,* I find the 50 limit an annoyance*, but certainly not a "deal-breaker".
> 
> I'm sure you understand what the limit is we're speaking of, but just in case... 50 is NOT the limit of how many shows can be in your TODO list, but rather it's the maximum # of shows for which you can simultaneously schedule automatically recurring recordings.
> 
> /steve


I so agree with that. I has been very annoying 

However, I wonder how big a problem it will be when we get MRV.

Mike


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

hfhlt004 said:


> I like to keep all my season passes, even shows on hiatus. That way I can remember them.


Ya. I'll bet many folks with more than 50 SL's have several "inactive" links sitting around waiting for a new season. If so, why not raise the limit, since those extra links are just placeholders anyway and not performance drags?

/steve


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, I would assume that the list still has to be checked against the guide database, so even if it returns nothing, it is still taking resources to do the search on that one item.


----------



## cadet502 (Jun 17, 2005)

If regular series links are tied to one channel (as it seems they are) it follows that autorecords would take more resourses to scan the guide data. 

If I can enable 50 autorecords that scan 500 channels, why can't I put 25,000 regular series links that scan 1 channel?

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmm............



.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Well, I would assume that the list still has to be checked against the guide database, so even if it returns nothing, it is still taking resources to do the search on that one item.


SL's are TITLE based. Should be a trivial task to check the index to see if the TITLE exists in the current data, or not.

What takes processor-cycles, I think, is when episodes are present in the data, and you need to resolve scheduling priorities when multiple requested episodes occupy the same recording slots. Like a chess-playing program trying to resolve all possible moves and counter-moves, if you know what I mean.

/steve


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

When I had my directivos and called in with a problem, the CSR's would often ask me how many SP's I had and a couple mentioned that the units might have problems if I had more than 50 SP's.

Indeed, the one with ~70 had more glitchy problems than the one with ~35.

So maybe the directv dvr developers put the limit in to curb any similar possible problems?

Between my wife, my 3 year old son and myself...we have rather different viewing tastes. We've been hitting our heads on the 50 limit with regularity and having to get together to discuss which one of the 50 has to go to make room for a new one.

Sort of our own reality show where a series link gets voted off the island...errr...dvr...

MRV would help a little bit, but that sort of puts the burden on me to figure out stuff that a modern consumer electronics product stuffed full of microprocessors, memory and storage ought to be able to figure out for me. 

Hmm?

I mean, my series 1 with its mighty 60mhz powerpc processor is currently pulling in more than 40 PBS shows with very little trouble...


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

cartrivision said:


> Unfortunately, it's not that well planned out. The 50 SL limit is because of their poorly written software that can't handle large SL lists. One of the heads of technology at DirecTV recently stated that the limit was in place because of performance issues, not because anyone thought that 50 was a good number to provide.


oh i stand corrected...directv sucks...the the tivo box rules! I cant believe they had a chance to start from scratched and messed up on something tivo already had down..except for speed issues. the tivo is superior with SPs


----------



## TigerDriver (Jul 27, 2007)

Steve said:


> Ya. I'll bet many folks with more than 50 SL's have several "inactive" links sitting around waiting for a new season. If so, why not raise the limit, since those extra links are just placeholders anyway and not performance drags?
> 
> /steve


I've thought the same thing. Recall that on the Tivo interface you are able 'deactivate' Wish Lists--but not Season Passes. I never understood this asymmetry...

At any rate, D* would help a lot of users by adding an on/off switch to SL entries, and showing the 'deactivated' ones with (e.g.) a ghosted typeface.


----------



## SimonStern (Jan 29, 2008)

SimonStern said:


> A year ago I looked into the HR20, and didn't buy one because the SL limit was too low. I check back in a year later, and the HR21 still has the same limit.
> 
> I have been with DirecTV for about 7 years, but I guess I am going to have to explore different options now.  This limit, will cost D* at least one customer.


Well, I guess I lied. I got my HR21 yesterday. I had a new roof put on the house, and they knocked the dish out of alignment. I checked into Comcast and getting some real TiVos, but the entry price was just too high ($1200 for two TivoS3HD boxes with lifetime subs.)

I am trying to get used to the HR21. and living with the 50 SL limit.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Glad to see people are still keeping this thread active even if I'm not very active around her anymore. Even living by myself now I still find I'm hovering right around the 50 mark. And I just went through and removed some SLs for shows that were cancelled. But then I added some summer shows.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

SimonStern said:


> Well, I guess I lied. I got my HR21 yesterday. I had a new roof put on the house, and they knocked the dish out of alignment. I checked into Comcast and getting some real TiVos, but the entry price was just too high ($1200 for two TivoS3HD boxes with lifetime subs.)
> 
> I am trying to get used to the HR21. and living with the 50 SL limit.


Not sure if you record all the CSI's and L&O's, but if you do, you can save 3-4 PRIORITIZER slots by using one KEYWORD AUTORECORD to catch them all. E.g., *csi CCHAN 2*, will record all three CSI's on my local WCBS MPEG-4 affiliate, which is channel 2 here in NY.

Same for sports teams. *yankees & events, live* catches all the Yankee games, whether they're on my local RSN, FOX, MY9 (in NY) or ESPN.

There's a discussion on constructing Boolean AUTORECORDS here.

/steve


----------



## ericlovestivo (Aug 31, 2006)

For the record, the 50 series limitation is the sole reason why I haven't upgraded my two remaining hr10-250's to HR-2x DVR's. I'm sure others are in this same camp. Come on, D*!!!


----------



## man_rob (Feb 21, 2007)

I'm not against upping the series link limit, but can someone type a list of 50 series they watch. I don't even have 20 on my list, and I can't find the time to watch all of those.


----------



## ericlovestivo (Aug 31, 2006)

Once you add 3 other TiVo-heavy users to your household, they add up quick. My daughter has 25 series in there all by herself. We've gotten to the point where we practically have to hold a little family meeting to vote on which SL gets the axe. (It's not as pathetic as it sounds.)


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

man_rob said:


> I'm not against upping the series link limit, but can someone type a list of 50 series they watch. I don't even have 20 on my list, and I can't find the time to watch all of those.


We are still watching some shows from this past season. It is nice to have some fresh stuff in the summer. Also, with summer only shows they are not running during the regular season, but they still take up a SL anyway. 
Don;t forget that Wishlists take up a slot in the list also, so if you have a few of them it hurts. Then add in things from Discovery, History, etc and it is very easy to get 50 SLs. Now, personally I can't see myself getting to 100 (though I am sure others can), but 75 is one heck of a lot more workable for me.


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

I watch lots of limited run series, like Life on Mars, The Shield, Rescue Me, and the Riches, and found it suprisingly easy to get to the 50 series links.

You should be able to leave that series list active, no matter how long, and let the box figure out when those limited run series return from time to time. That seems like a fairly basic DVR function.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

man_rob said:


> I'm not against upping the series link limit, but can someone type a list of 50 series they watch. I don't even have 20 on my list, and I can't find the time to watch all of those.


I know I missed some but this should give you some idea.

The Daily Show
The Colbert Report
Mind Of Mencia
Burn Notice
Law & Order: Criminal Intent
In Plain Site
The Starter Wife 
Eureka
Stargate Atlantis
Battlestar Galactica
Charlie Jade
Modern Marvels
Mega Disasters
The Universe
Mythbusters
Future Weapons
Dirty Jobs
Koppel on Discovery
Build it Bigger
How its Made
Smash Lab
Some Assembly Required
Trading Spaces
Ultimate Factories
Explorer
Naked Science
Damages
Nip / Tuck
Saving Grace
The Closer
Weeds
Californication
Secret Diary of a Call Girl
Bullsh_t
Big Brother After Dark
Late Show with David Letterman
CSI
CSI: Miami
Survivor
Big Brother
Amazing Race
Numb3rs
Ghost Whisperer
How I Met Your Mother
New Adventures of Old Christine
Rules of Engagement
The Unit 
Two and a Half Men
Swingtown
Shark
Million Dollar Password
Criminal Minds
Family Gug
American Dad
Prison Break
24
New Amsterdam
House
Bones
Back to You
Till Death
Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles
American Idol
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno
NBC Nightly News
The Today Show
Saturday Night Live
30 Rock
Scrubs
My Name is Earl
Law & Order
Law & Order: Special Victims Unit
Heroes
Medium
American Gladiators
Chuck
America's Got Talent
Life
The Apprentice
Meet the Press
Grey's Anatomy
Private Practice
Lost
The Mole
Desperate Housewives
Dirty Sexy Money
Boston Legal
Extreme Makeover: Home Edition
This week with George S
Wipeout
Smallville


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

sirshagg ur sig looks like a windows xp password ..what is it?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

man_rob said:


> I'm not against upping the series link limit, but can someone type a list of 50 series they watch. I don't even have 20 on my list, and I can't find the time to watch all of those.


Another thing to consider is different series schecules.

e.g. Monk, Psych, SG Atlantis

Here a few shows that run split seasons and are usually on while the networks are airing reruns.

My wife has a couple that she watches. I have several that I watch....my daughter....shows that we watch together.

You couple Scifi/USA-like split seasons, the regular network seasons, shows for individual family members and you can get close to that wall eaiser than you might think.

Even though BSG wasn't on for, what...10 months, it was a SL in Prioritizer.

Not counting _Jeopardy_ and _GH_, at any given time we have about 10ish shows in the ToDo list each week but still have 46 in the Prioritizer right now.

Mike


----------



## somekevinguy (Jan 7, 2008)

I am not about to sit here and type out all the shows I watch but I have been up against the 50 series limit for a long time and it sucks. Every time I want record a new series I have go through my list and spend 10 minutes trying to decide which series I am going to cut. I am pretty much down to where I will have to start recording shows manually every week now.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Wow, DirecTV, you rock! You are selling what is essentially a luxury service in an economy that we hear is "OMG we are all going to be eating bread and water in the streets!" every day and because you do not care enough to do some work, the service is not that convenient after all. You have customers manually programming a DVR!


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

Lee L said:


> Wow, DirecTV, you rock! You are selling what is essentially a luxury service in an economy that we hear is "OMG we are all going to be eating bread and water in the streets!" every day and because you do not care enough to do some work, the service is not that convenient after all. You have customers manually programming a DVR!


I recently emailed DTV regarding this 2 year old problem, and here's the response:

_"If you are able to have 50 series links set up the equipment is working as designed. Any proposed new equipment or enhancements to current equipment are subject to change until a formal announcement is made, so I don't have any information that I can share with you right now. I have, however, forwarded your email on to our management so that they can have a record of your request."_

Sounds like the standard BS...who know's when they will deal with this issue!


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

mjdavis87 said:


> Sounds like the standard BS...who know's when they will deal with this issue!


Unfortunately, I think they have already dealt with it - by ignoring it.


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

After a year with my HR20 I cannot believe that this is still and issue!!!
I don't hate this box, but this is just silly, this is the reason I miss my Tivo. 

Someone earlier, asked how you reach 50? 
1) My wife and I share the box, that takes it down a bunch, there are plenty of shows that we watch together but we each have shows, that the other doesn't like. 
2) I have a bunch of short (15 min) shows from Adult Swim that air once a week. 
3) Short subscription shows, I had 4 different subscriptions during the Olympic trials (one for each channel, that Tivo dealt with, by picking up the same show over multiple networks) 
4) Annual Occurrences. I watch the Tour De France and I have to subscribe and unsubscribe each year. 
5) Shows that are only broadcast occasionally, we love Treasures of the trust on HDTheater, but they only show it occasionally, so we like to set up a subscription for when they do show it. 
6) Short Seasons. The trend on cable is to show a "season" as 6-12 episodes. So if I want to watch Penn & Teller BS, they are only showing 6 episodes this year. I want to see them all. 
7) Shows we subscribe to and like to have on hand, but do not watch regularly, The Daily Show, Colbert Report, Etc.
It is a pain in the butt to be constantly taking stuff off and putting it on. When in I had unlimited subscriptions then I wouldn't have to deal with it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

With 50 Prioritization programs alone, that's 7+ hours a day of DVR viewing...not counting other scheduled content. Even *I* don't watch that much HD every day (close, but not quite). 

Perhaps the idea of the prioritizer to contain every conceivable thing one might watch *or seek *is the wrong execution of the concept. I also wonder how many people actually go in and update their list, as tastes and program availability change over time. :eek2:

My wife can testify that I record an watch tons of HD.....mentions it to me almost daily in that "are you watching stuff again?" voice....

Yet I have never come close to the 50 limit. Of course part of that is having more than one HD DVR.

Quite frankly, there are not enough *onging *quality shows out there to risk reaching or exceeding the 50 limit. Other stuff can be scheduled (which I guess is why they have the scheduler feature) with nominal risk of conflict, especially since these DVRs can record 2 channels at once.

I don't recall a single case where there were 3 programs conflicting at the same time as to need the "Prioritizer Referee", and only maybe 2-3 time where something scheduled conflicted with live viewing.

While I respect and admire the passion for folks wanting to record their favorite shows, I do not understand just why having 50 prioritized items is really any kind of "limit" at all.....but that's just me. Your mileage may vary.  :lol:


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

katzeye said:


> After a year with my HR20 I cannot believe that this is still and issue!!!
> I don't hate this box, but this is just silly, this is the reason I miss my Tivo.
> 
> Someone earlier, asked how you reach 50?
> ...


I totally understand but like HDTVfan my wife and I seem to watch too much tv sometimes and we share the DVR and have rarely gotten above 35 items. Then again since May I think we watch TV one night a week, maybe two so maybe we don't watch as much TV as we think, at least during the "off season".

As for your item #3, easily done on the HR20 with an autorecord search, works very much like the Tivo wishlist you refer to. Simply do the search, you can even used the advanced boolean operators to limit the search to a certain channel range, and then choose autorecord. Bam, will record across multiple channels. The only issue with it is that it might try to record something on a channel you don't get, however I doubt that would be the problem with the Olympics.

As a side note, if you really watch that much TV I'd suggest a second HD DVR. This will get you not only 4 tuners to handle more then 2 conflicts but also gets you 100 series links. We have 2 HD DVRs ourselves and while most series links are duplicated on both (we learned long ago to backup all important recordings when we lost nearly a whole season of Buffy when our Tivo crashed) there are times when there are triple conflicts where they both come in very handy. And I can dedicate one to sports and the other to movies to better manage disk space. Just an idea...

I do hope they raise the limit, but the CIO said in the last chat that they don't plan to do so and it was in there for performance reasons. My guess is that they haven't had all that many complaints about it to bother with putting resources on fixing it.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> With 50 Prioritization programs alone, that's 7+ hours a day of DVR viewing...not counting other scheduled content. Even *I* don't watch that much HD every day (close, but not quite).


But that doesn't mean OTHERS don't watch that much viewing, and you're assuming that all 50 series links are for programming currently available, so the math is wrong. Each household (yes, household - there may be more than one person using a DVR) has its own viewing habits, and in some cases, needs, for example for shut-ins or those medically incapacitated. There's more than one way to use the DVR. 



> Perhaps the idea of the prioritizer to contain every conceivable thing one might watch *or seek *is the wrong execution of the concept. I also wonder how many people actually go in and update their list, as tastes and program availability change over time. :eek2:


But where else should the DVR keep track of the viewing desires of the household if not the prioritizer? 

It's purpose is simple: Indicate what is to be recorded from what sources, whether it's a series link tied to a channel, or an auto record series link tied to search terms, and specify in the event of a conflict which recordings take priority. The limit is what's baffling - could be performance reasons, could be simply how it was architected, but the fact that there's a limit is, well, limiting to those who need more than 50 series links. Many other DVRs out there existing without such limits.

As far as updating the list, I'm sure most people cancel series links when a series is canceled or their specific ARSL search is fulfilled, but there's no reason any household should have to cancel a series link for the multitude of series that are on for 3 months at a time in both the spring and winter. That would be dumbing down the DVR to the VCR stage, where the user has to track program comings and goings manually, defeating the purpose and power of the DVR! 



> My wife can testify that I record an watch tons of HD.....mentions it to me almost daily in that "are you watching stuff again?" voice....
> 
> Yet I have never come close to the 50 limit. Of course part of that is having more than one HD DVR.


Ah, so if you don't need it, no one else does! 



> Quite frankly, there are not enough *onging *quality shows out there to risk reaching or exceeding the 50 limit. Other stuff can be scheduled (which I guess is why they have the scheduler feature) with nominal risk of conflict, especially since these DVRs can record 2 channels at once.


Quality is in the eye of the beholder, isn't it? One viewer's trash is another viewer's treasure, so who are any of us to judge what quality programming is available? 



> While I respect and admire the passion for folks wanting to record their favorite shows, I do not understand just why having 50 prioritized items is really any kind of "limit" at all.....but that's just me. Your mileage may vary.  :lol:


I think the post directly above yours explained very well how the need exists for more than 50 series links in a prioritizer, but to be blunt, it's the responses like this (paraphrasing, "it doesn't affect me, so it's not really an issue") that are one of the chief complaints by those on this forum who happen to fall just outside the norm, and I think we should be above that. Everyone has the right to use their DVR the way they see fit, and if it's not working for them, they have the right to document their complaints and ask for change. Obviously that's my take, so it's clear my mileage varies.


----------



## ShapeGSX (Sep 17, 2006)

If you don't have kids, then you likely wouldn't understand why you need more than 50 series links. It isn't my shows or my wife's shows that take up the most room in the list. It is my son's shows.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

ShapeGSX said:


> If you don't have kids, then you likely wouldn't understand why you need more than 50 series links. It isn't my shows or my wife's shows that take up the most room in the list. It is my son's shows.


I do have kids who watch plenty of TV, and I still don't see the urgency. There are 3 people here, and sometimes 4 ongoing users (of which 2 are kids) -* never *had a missed show, chance to view a show, or conflict in watching "their" show.


Drew2k said:


> But that doesn't mean OTHERS don't watch that much viewing, and you're assuming that all 50 series links are for programming currently available, so the math is wrong. Each household (yes, household - there may be more than one person using a DVR) has its own viewing habits, and in some cases, needs, for example for shut-ins or those medically incapacitated. There's more than one way to use the DVR.


Drew:

I understand all that, as well as the "kid factor"... but have to respectfully, but totally disagree with you.

I view the Prioritizer as the catch-all to assure capture programming of really-important stuff I want to see for sure - in particular, for a TV series, miniseries, or series of sporting events.

Using Prioritizer to assign every imaginable program that I may ever want to see is a mid-guided (I guess that's a pun) concept for the criminally lazy - that's what the scheduler is for. Prioritizer is not even a feature referenced in the User Manual.

IMHO there is just not that much *ongoing* quality series programmingminiseries, or sporting events that warrant the "critical" need to overload anyone's prioritizer. I can think of perhaps 5-6 programs that warrant the need to put in there. Everything else gets scheduled as usual. In years of viewing, no one here has ever missed anything they wanted to see.

If there is a need to make sure that so much "priority" programming and recording is assured...then I'm with Bonscott that those users should consider a second DVR. That, in effect, doubles the load.

Between the 50 priority availability, 2 tuners available concurrently, and 24 hours a day to watch, I just cannot share the "life threatening" urgency others have for the 50 limit expansion. I watch probably 3 X the amount of programming as most folks, and even have it on during work...and still don't come anywhere near needing 50 - and yes, that includes an avid teenage viewer (who quite frankly has her 2 favorite shows, and the rest of her taste in viewing changes daily).

I don't feel there's any harm or problem raising the number, but I just can't share any passion that it's "critical" or "urgent".


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I view the Prioritizer as the catch-all to assure capture programming of really-important stuff I want to see for sure - in particular, for a TV series, miniseries, or series of sporting events.
> 
> Using Prioritizer to assign every imaginable program that I may ever want to see is a mid-guided (I guess that's a pun) concept for the criminally lazy - that's what the scheduler is for. Prioritizer is not even a feature referenced in the User Manual.


The Scheduler is the service that manages the To Do List, History, and the Prioritizer - you can't just add a program to the scheduler without affecting everything else, and the Prioritzer *is* the repository for all new series links and ARSL - there's no other place to put it, and there shouldn't be. You can't separate the priority of a series from the scheduling of a series.

I completely disagree with your characterization of those who want the Prioritizer to do it's job as "criminally lazy", and actually find that quite disrespectful. Why slur those who want to take advantage of what the DVR can do? I watch multiple series on Sci-Fi, USA, ABC Family, Fox, and other channels where those networks split the series into two runs during the year, replacing those series with other programming in those same time slots during the other periods of the year. If I want to watch the replacement programs, I need two slots in the Prioritizer for each single time slot for the same network. If I don't want to watch the replacement programs, I want to keep the series link in the Prioritizer so when the program returns for it's next mini-season, the DVR automatically schedules it.



> IMHO there is just not that much *ongoing* quality series programmingminiseries, or sporting events that warrant the "critical" need to overload anyone's prioritizer. I can think of perhaps 5-6 programs that warrant the need to put in there. Everything else gets scheduled as usual. In years of viewing, no one here has ever missed anything they wanted to see.


What do YOUR viewing preferences have to do with anyone else's? Again, this is the trash-versus-treasure argument ... Also, not everyone is arguing it's critical. This request is on par with DLB - many want it, many don't see a need for it. I'm in the camp of supporting no limits, but I can get by because I have multiple DVRs balancing the series links. Others don't have that luxury, so they have to go out of their way to manage series links manually. They're doing it by necessity because they are up against a limit, and they are doing it for the programming they deem worthy of viewing. Trash versus treasure.



> If there is a need to make sure that so much "priority" programming and recording is assured...then I'm with Bonscott that those users should consider a second DVR. That, in effect, doubles the load.


And carries a cost of $60 per year.



> Between the 50 priority availability, 2 tuners available concurrently, and 24 hours a day to watch, I just cannot share the "life threatening" urgency others have for the 50 limit expansion.


Hmm, I don't think I've seen anyone else claim their life is in jeopardy if the limit isn't increased or eliminated, so the mis-characterization is misleading. You also have to accept that the number of series links in a prioritizer has no bearing on what programs are recorded for watching in a 24 hour day. Not all series links will be "active" at one time - many could be for programs that are on hiatus, returning the next season. Many could be for "wish lists" (in TiVo parlance) to find programs that the viewer may decide to not even record by canceling from the To Do List. My point is that each household will use their DVRs differently and we've already seen testimonials from people saying why and how the limit of 50 series links is not acceptable. Why should their needs be disregarded as invalid if we disagree with their viewing choices, or because they want the DVR to keep track of programs so they don't have to do it manually?



> I don't feel there's any harm or problem raising the number, but I just can't share any passion that it's "critical" or "urgent".


That's great, especially since you don't have to feel the same way others do. Welcome aboard.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Drew2k said:


> The Scheduler is the service that manages the To Do List, History, and the Prioritizer - you can't just add a program to the scheduler without affecting everything else, and the Prioritzer *is* the repository for all new series links and ARSL - there's no other place to put it, and there shouldn't be. You can't separate the priority of a series from the scheduling of a series.


Of course they're all interdependent. That still doesn't justify the need.


> I completely disagree with your characterization of those who want the Prioritizer to do it's job as "criminally lazy", and actually find that quite disrespectful. Why slur those who want to take advantage of what the DVR can do?


You misinterpreted my comment...its the Prioritizer that's lazy, not the person. It's a convenience feature over straight scheduling.

The DVR would work just fine even without *ANY* Prioritizer.


> What do YOUR viewing preferences have to do with anyone else's?


Drew...you clearly took all this waaaay wrong and waaaay too personal. I'm a bit surprised and taken aback.

Others have pointed out their "needs" on the basis of multiple viewers in the household, and with one poster specifically cited that I could not appreciate the need because I "must not have kids"....which is totally wrong. That was the reason I shared the viewing here.

Again, the issue is not right or wrong...my point was about this being a "critical or urgent" need, and I don't see it. Apparently neither does DirecTV, as they have not chosen to implement a change in several years now.

Just because we disagree on a DVR feature is neither the end of the world nor a problem. I really had no intention to lite you up on this. We just disagree on this item. Time to move on with a smile.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> The DVR would work just fine even without *ANY* Prioritizer.


I don't think it would work at all without a prioritizer... If you record two programs at 9 PM on Thursday, and another program you record is moved from a differnt night to 9 PM on Thursday, which of the three programs should the DVR record? It's up to the prioritizer to determine which 2 to record and which to cancel. Without the prioritizer, there would be no place to even document which series are to be recorded.



> Just because we disagree on a DVR feature is neither the end of the world nor a problem. I really had no intention to lite you up on this. We just disagree on this item. Time to move on with a smile.


Agreed. I think we disagree about more than just the prioritizer ... it goes a little deeper to quality being in the eye of the beholder, but we won't settle that here, and shouldn't even try. 

Moving on.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Drew2k said:


> I don't think it would work at all without a prioritizer... If you record two programs at 9 PM on Thursday, and another program you record is moved from a differnt night to 9 PM on Thursday, which of the three programs should the DVR record? It's up to the prioritizer to determine which 2 to record and which to cancel. Without the prioritizer, there would be no place to even document which series are to be recorded.


Brace yourself.......I agree.

It the quantity and not the plumbing that varies in our views.

Just for that......I hope they raise it to 100, cause you're a good guy and all.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Brace yourself.......I agree.
> 
> It the quantity and not the plumbing that varies in our views.
> 
> Just for that......I hope they raise it to 100, cause you're a good guy and all.


And all. 

Same back at ya - and hopefully others will benefit from this healthy debate, either to see a perspective from the other side or to accept or understand that the limiations are there for a reason or may not be simple to remove or extend ...


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Drew2k, I'd just liketo give you a big Thank You as your last several posts have exactly summed up my feelings on this matter and I would have never had the patience or desire to write it all myself.

As for me - I already have two DVR's in my primary viewing location and both prioritizers are full. One of the main reasons I'm so looking forward to MRV is so that I can start filling the prioritizers on my other DVR's and be able to watch the shows in the primary location.


----------



## somekevinguy (Jan 7, 2008)

I am at the 50 limit and still find myself without shows to watch sometimes. Not all shows are on everyday or every week. I find myself having to record shows manualy that I would like to record automaticly so it is a big deal to me.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

I think the point is that the HR20 is a DVR and right or wrong, we've come to expect that a DVR is looking out for our desires. It has elements of a computer and as such, it shouldn't have relatively low limits. If the HR2x can't do it by design, there's something wrong with the design.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> I don't think it would work at all without a prioritizer


How could it possibly work without a prioritizer? The TiVos and UTV DVRs had ways to prioritize recordings. You have to be able to prioritize the programs or how would the DVR know which program to record if they were on at the same time?

Rich


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Perhaps the idea of the prioritizer to contain every conceivable thing one might watch *or seek *is the wrong execution of the concept. I also wonder how many people actually go in and update their list, as tastes and program availability change over time. :eek2:


Ok I just got in so I haven't read all that this thread has developed, but I want to respond to this statement. 
Your presumptions are patently wrong. My application of the concept is exactly how I want to use it. There is no right or wrong. If I choose to use it the way I choose then that is the correct way. And the way I use it was dictated through many years of Tivo use, where I had subscriptions for shows I watched regularly and I had subscriptions for shows that only played in the middle of the night on a blue moon. If that is what I want to do as a customer, then that is what I should be able to do. If the only reason that I can't is because of a setting in the software, then that is silly.
What I am saying is that I don't want to have to actively manage my list. I do, because I am forced to but why is that required? 
Also the assumptions on how much I am watching is patently false. As I stated in my OP, I have a subscription for Penn & Teller BS, which is 6 1/2 hours a year. and we have tons of shows that have these short little seasons. and what I would like is to set up the subscriptions to that next year when the show comes back, it just records, instead of having to go into the guide, delete something and re-prioritize the whole list to make sure something does not get recorded inadvertently.
I also have to agree with Drew. Your assumption that people on watch TV the way you do (Or should) is wrong, and your dimissiveness to the concept that people could function in any other way, comes across as sort of condescending, and from having seen your posts around I know that you are not that guy.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Ok I just got in so I haven't read all that this thread has developed, but I want to respond to this statement.
> Your presumptions are patently wrong. My application of the concept is exactly how I want to use it. There is no right or wrong.


Just because someone uses something a certain way (to their liking) is not necessarily consistent with the way it was designed or intended to be used.

Without prolonging the debate...since you stated there is no right and wrong...then using your reasoning, neither of us is wrong.


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Just because someone uses something a certain way (to their liking) is not necessarily consistent with the way it was designed or intended to be used.
> 
> Without prolonging the debate...since you stated there is no right and wrong...then using your reasoning, neither of us is wrong.


Unfortunately I would like for this to be a productive debate, yet your logic is spurious. My argument was not that there was right and worng, it was challenging the fact that you declared my point to be invalid. As my argument is that we should have the freedom to do something and yours is that restrictions are satisfactory, then we cannot be both right. Only the lack of restrictions can be truly right. Any restriction is a contradiction. Since my positions envelops your needs, yes both points are inherently correct, but only mine is true.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Unfortunately I would like for this to be a productive debate, yet your logic is spurious. My argument was not that there was right and worng, it was challenging the fact that you declared my point to be invalid. As my argument is that we should have the freedom to do something and yours is that restrictions are satisfactory, then we cannot be both right. Only the lack of restrictions can be truly right. Any restriction is a contradiction. Since my positions envelops your needs, yes both points are inherently correct, but only mine is true.


OK lets "debate" (but it'll be the last time)...

#1 Specifically, you stated "my argument is that we should have the freedom to do something and yours is that restrictions are satisfactory".

My position was never about "the freedom to do something", rather, it was about the "need or choice to do something", namely, exceeding 50 favorites. Your position was there were plenty of good reasons, and mine was that there were not - both based on personal or household *preferences*. That doesn't make either one right or wrong - it makes them different. Personal preferences are just that - to each his own.

#2 Specifically you stated "Only the lack of restrictions can be truly right. Any restriction is a contradiction".

Based on that logic, there are "restrictions" everywhere...the number of days retained in advance for the guide, the storage capacity, and so on. They are only restrictions to those who view and feel the need to exceed those as "limits". To the rest, there are *no* such restrictions, as they never find the need to reach or exceed those as limits, so these folks don't feel restricted in any way.

#3 You stated "Since my positions envelops your needs, yes both points are inherently correct, but only mine is true."

OK...if you feel that *your* needs make *you* "right" in some way, I'll fully concede they are right for *you*....but not necessarily anyone else. Just like my needs on the Prioritizer are right for *me*. That's what prompted me to say "neither of us is wrong".

Going full circle...there is no debate. Different people have different views as to if and how they use the Prioritizer. Some find it limiting, others do not. You could make that kind of case about many, many features. In all those cases, however, they would still be opposing preference views, with no right and wrong.

For your sake, and for other folks who like the idea of expanding the Prioritizer limit upwards....if DirecTV does it....good for you. That would be just fine. Those of us who don't feel that same "need" will get along just fine either way, thank you.


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

Yes, but the problem is, as Drew and I have been addressing, is if that if it has no effect on you and you have no interest in it then why are you in this discussion telling us that our views are not valid? If what we desire has no effect on you, then why do you even care? All you are doing is coming into this forum to tell us that we are wrong and that our views are unimportant because they do not fit into your perception of how things do or should work. We are trying to help D* became the best service it can be, If what we want is not of interest to you, but does also not effect you, then why do you care?
Again; You seem like a nice guy, but you are coming across as condescending and unhelpful in this discussion.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Yes, but the problem is, as Drew and I have been addressing, is if that if it has no effect on you and you have no interest in it then why are you in this discussion telling us that our views are not valid?


No one says they are not valid - you are reading something there that isn't there.

They are your views...just like others have views....contrasting views are what discussion threads are all about. Your views are *no less value *than anyone elses, and no one said they were.

You may feel that having DirecTV spend time and resources on expanding Prioritizer to become "the best service it can be" is a good idea. Kudos... there's abosolutely nothing wrong with that. But I disagree, and feel there efforts are better served elsewhere on other things. We both have the same ultimate goal in mind.

...and to your last point...I am a nice guy, and so are you.


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

Ok, Kiss and make up! :kisscheek


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Ok, Kiss and make up! :kisscheek


I didn't see that coming...  :lol:

..and I like your bassett hound...


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I didn't see that coming...  :lol:
> 
> ..and I like your bassett hound...


Oh, I just like a good debate...and I want more Series Links...
Yeah, She's a cutie...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Oh, I just like a good debate...and I want more Series Links...
> Yeah, She's a cutie...


Mine is a bassett-beagle mix.

Thanks for sharing your views.


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Mine is a bassett-beagle mix.
> 
> Thanks for sharing your views.


Awwwww! That is one cute Bagel!


----------



## mikeluce (Apr 10, 2008)

Greater than 50 from my back-up Tivo:

This American Life
Battlestate Galactical
GONZAGA
Saturday Night Live
Boston Legal
CSI
Lost
The Soup
How I Met Your Mother
ER
Chuck
Top Gear
30 Rock
CSI: Miami
Best Week Ever
Top 20 Countdown
Formula 1
Design Star
30 Days
The Shield
the Closer
Nip/Tuck
Daily Show
Colbert
Girls Next Door
Anothony Bourdain: no Reservations
Kathy Griffin: My Life on the D List
Mad Men
Damages
South Park
SPEED Report
Frontline
Kenny vs SPenny
Life on Mars
Breaking Bad
Trading Spaces
Top Chef
Gene Simmons Family Jewels
Dirt
Az Men
Indy Car Racing
Lews Black's Root of All Evil
America's Port
America Chopper
Last Comic Standing
Lobstermen: Jepardy at Sea
Ice Road Truckers
RV Road Home
Denise Richerds: It's Complicated
Meerkat Manor
the Mole
Shes' Got the Look
Swingtown
The Bull Engvall Show
Penn & Teller: BullS..!
Weeds
The Next Food network Start
Iron Chef America
Biography
Dirty Jobs
American Masters


(Oh, by her obsession with reality TV looks bad here... )


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

I think Earl will save us all on this eventually... They need to speed up its indexing and sorting.. and I think that may be what he's working on... based on rumors around here of course.. Till then... MRV MRV MRV


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

This constant bickering over how any issue with this DVR that some beleive is absolutely infallible is gettign tiresome. This debate over the number of SL available is going just like any time someone says they have an issue. There are always plenty of people ready to jump in and say that they have never experienced the issue so therefore the poster is wrong and has their entire system hoocked up incorrectly or just stop doing what you are doing becasue it is outside the design basis of the machine.

First, unless you get an admin approved tag called HR2x lead designer or somethign, I assume you are just making stuff up if you say that you know what thought went into the design of these machines.

Second, just because something does not affect you personally, does not mean it is made up or the result of user error. Personally, I have never had some crazy disease that only affects 1 out of 500,000 peopel, but I will not deny it exists.


Third, If you are suggesting things like checking signal strengths and whatnot to clear up recroding issues, it can certainly be correct and good. However, it is all in how it is brought up. Catch more flies with honey you know.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

katzeye said:


> Awwwww! That is one cute Bagel!


Impressive....only a handful of folks know that "codeword"!

Anyway...looks like we're on track to resume discussion on the 50 limit. For those who want it, let's hope ya'll get it.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

they better keep the mpeg 2 stuff alive awhile, i'm constantly up against the 50SL and if i have to add just the few channels from my hdtivo, i'm gonna have issues


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Impressive....only a handful of folks know that "codeword"!
> 
> Anyway...looks like we're on track to resume discussion on the 50 limit. For those who want it, let's hope ya'll get it.


Well my two are practically part of the family...and we are raising then Jewish, so they love Bagels!


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Excuse me, but all this Beagle/Bagel lovin' is really interruptin' a good fight! :down:










:lol:

 Nice dogs. Carry on!


----------



## katzeye (May 1, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> Excuse me, but all this Beagle/Bagel lovin' is really interruptin' a good fight!


Beagle/Bagel/ Basset Hound!

I think this is proof that we can all get along.
Now, on to healing the middle east! All it will take is cute dogs!


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

Come on now guys! Why does it matter if one person needs more than 50 Series Links, and another doesn't. What does matter is that there has been a 2 year on going issue with this problem, and DTV is not fixing it. The solution shouldn't have to be "get another DVR". The solution should be "fix it because a lot of people are complaining". I think DTV is too busy making their software uniform across platforms, than trying to solve issues that we really care about!

Personally, I find it irritating that I every time I want to record a new series link, I have to figure out which program I am going to remove to make room for it. I shouldn't have to, and it really ticks me off.

So for those of you that don't have your series links filled up, I am happy for you, but don't try to make us that have all of our series links filled up seem like we are wasting space for needless shows, or watching too much tv!

nuff said...DTV, fix your stupid boxes!


----------



## dbronstein (Oct 21, 2002)

mjdavis87 said:


> Come on now guys! Why does it matter if one person needs more than 50 Series Links, and another doesn't. What does matter is that there has been a 2 year on going issue with this problem, and DTV is not fixing it. The solution shouldn't have to be "get another DVR". The solution should be "fix it because a lot of people are complaining". I think DTV is too busy making their software uniform across platforms, than trying to solve issues that we really care about!


In theory, this is the correct strategy for D* from a software development standpoint. If they can get the software standardized on all the platforms, it will make adding new features easier going forward. If they add new features for one platform, it makes it more difficult to get to the point of having standardized software.

From a customer standpoint, it's very frustrating because it means fewer new features in the short-term. And since a lot of people only have one type of receiver or one primary receiver, they don't care about the standardization because it doesn't affect them.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Drew2k said:


> Excuse me, but all this Beagle/Bagel lovin' is really interruptin' a good fight! :down:


I'm reading a book last night at about 10 o'clock and I have an epiphany.

BAsset + BeaGlE = Bagel! Nothing gets by me. Given enough time, that is.

Rich


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Forget Bassets, Beagles and Bagels, Basenjis are where it is at!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dbronstein said:


> In theory, this is the correct strategy for D* from a software development standpoint. If they can get the software standardized on all the platforms, it will make adding new features easier going forward. If they add new features for one platform, it makes it more difficult to get to the point of having standardized software.
> 
> From a customer standpoint, it's very frustrating because it means fewer new features in the short-term. And since a lot of people only have one type of receiver or one primary receiver, they don't care about the standardization because it doesn't affect them.


Nor do they care or realize the havoc "bells and whistles" such as a larger Priority list and DLBs will cause to the 20/21s.

If I can crash a 20/21 by changing remotes or by removing a light bulb from a socket, how will these obviously delicate DVRs respond to a massive change in software.

Most of the people posting on this thread must have only one or two 20/21s or they wouldn't be complaining. The simplest solution to their problem is to obtain another or a couple more 20/21s. Please don't tell me that you can't afford them, I have seven 20/21s and have paid an average cost of about $40 for each one.

Moan and groan all you want, folks. The path of least resistance is quite clear. I have the option of 350 series links. And I use the seven DVRs to back up each other. And still have plenty of room left for more programming.

Rich


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

rich584 said:


> Nor do they care or realize the havoc "bells and whistles" such as a larger Priority list and DLBs will cause to the 20/21s.
> 
> If I can crash a 20/21 by changing remotes or by removing a light bulb from a socket, how will these obviously delicate DVRs respond to a massive change in software.
> 
> ...


The thing is that I shouldn't have to buy seven 20/21's at $40 each...one box should be able to handle it! You take the easy way out, the way DTV wants you go to....spend money on something you shouldn't have to...I guess they got what they want from you!


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mjdavis87 said:


> The thing is that I shouldn't have to buy seven 20/21's at $40 each...one box should be able to handle it! You take the easy way out, the way DTV wants you go to....spend money on something you shouldn't have to...I guess they got what they want from you!


Think about that statement. With one DVR you have two tuners. With seven (eight by the end of the week) you have fourteen tuners. Show me a box that has that many tuners and I'll understand the MRV concept too. A multitude of tuners allows me to record everything I want, everything my son wants and everything my wife wants.

As for me taking the easy way out, I'm a great believer in the path of least resistance. You keep wishing for a box that does it all that D* is going to "give" you and I'll keep recording everything I can.

Rich


----------



## ShapeGSX (Sep 17, 2006)

Are you seriously arguing that a 50 series link limit should be enough for everyone when you have a combined series link limit of 350?

Why even post in this thread?


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ShapeGSX said:


> Are you seriously arguing that a 50 series link limit should be enough for everyone when you have a combined series link limit of 350?


No. But the easiest way to get more SLs is to get more DVRs.



> Why even post in this thread?


Why not? If I'm annoying you, put me on your "ignore list".


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

ShapeGSX said:


> Are you seriously arguing that a 50 series link limit should be enough for everyone when you have a combined series link limit of 350?


Be interesting to know how you managed to arrive at the conclusion that you did. The thing that really scares me is upgrades that will cause more malfunctions. I wish they would just leave the DVRs as they are now. They play and record well. Be careful what you wish for.

Rich


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

Dude!

Suggesting everyone run multiple DVRs to solve a minor software flaw is not a solution for our times. How much is your electric bill?


----------



## drakejb (Jul 7, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Nor do they care or realize the havoc "bells and whistles" such as a larger Priority list and DLBs will cause to the 20/21s.
> 
> If I can crash a 20/21 by changing remotes or by removing a light bulb from a socket, how will these obviously delicate DVRs respond to a massive change in software.
> 
> ...


that's ridiculous to think that we should all get extra DVRs to handle more than 50 SLs - what a waste of money, space, heat, energy and not to mention having to know which DVR you need to be using for a specific show. I can just imagine trying to explain to the wife "No your show is really there, you just have to go to the other DVR to watch it!"

They should just fix it - I never had this problem with old TIVO so it can't be that hard to fix.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

Nicholsen said:


> Dude!
> 
> Suggesting everyone run multiple DVRs to solve a minor software flaw is not a solution for our times. How much is your electric bill?


more importantly, how much is the UPS you have to keep the running? I have an 1100 va from belkin and 3 dvrs plus some video switches on it.

when we had a power outage it didnt last more then 15 minutes! thats nuts. I guess i could triple the time if i got a ups for each one but i really thought dvrs didnt use that much juice until this outage and we lost them that quickly


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

Nicholsen said:


> Dude!
> 
> Suggesting everyone run multiple DVRs to solve a minor software flaw is not a solution for our times. How much is your electric bill?


I'm more curious how you setup remote codes to control 8 DVR's in the same room. Or is rich584 also suggesting we get more TV's, sourround sound systems, family rooms too?


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

I *think* all he is suggesting is that there are several advantages to having multiple DVRs. Personally I have 3. 2 HD DVRs in the home theater and 1 in the patio room.

The 2 HD DVRs live just fine in the same room and gives us 4 HD tuners to be able to record 4 things at once which is critical during the TV season. Couldn't live with just 2 tuners.

A side effect of that is I could have 100 series links between the two. The reality is that we have maybe 30 on each and most are duplicates (I learned long ago after losing an entire season of Buffy on a DirecTV that crashed to always back up critical recordings on a 2nd DVR). But for someone else they might very well use all 100. There is someone else on this forum that has 3 of them. #1 is ABC/CBS, #2 is NBC/FOX and #3 is cable and sports. Or something similar. That's pretty easy for the wifey to get if you label them properly on the universal remote. I mean if I did that I could easily put a label on my MX-700 for that to make it real easy.

If you can live with just 1 DVR then great, nothing wrong with that. But DirecTV has already said that the 50 limit is there for a technical reason and they don't plan to raise it. Thus if you have to have more then you either get a 2nd DVR, live with just 50 or go to another provider that offers a DVR that has more then 50. No idea why this debate still rages when the answer is right there.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, at the very least we can encorage them to do a better job with the next receiver.

I am also holding out hope that they will someday have to rewrite the crappy database they have now to somethign modern so that it will work better, much like TiVo did with 6.3.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Nicholsen said:


> Dude!
> 
> Suggesting everyone run multiple DVRs to solve a minor software flaw is not a solution for our times. How much is your electric bill?


About $400 a month.

And I gotta admit that I still think the simplest thing to do NOW is get more DVRs. Suppose D* takes three or four years to fulfill everyone's desires?

To be honest, until I hit this thread, I had no idea there was a limit on the series links. I've never come close to 50 SLs on one DVR.

Now. How do you know it is a "minor software flaw"? That statement implies that all D* has to do to increase the size to, say, 100 SLs is make a simple, basic change in it's software. How can you know that? The DLB proponents make having them seem simple too. Why would D* hold back these concepts if it were that simple to implement them. I'll be the first to admit that D* has poor business models in an industry where every provider has poor business models because the technology is so new.

Obviously you and I think D* is the best provider. I see nothing evil in their approach to their customers. If they could give you what you want, they would.

In less than two years, they've gone from a putrid excuse for a high def DVR to a platform that is now quite stable. I find that fact amazing.

Give them their props and a little breathing room. I've read many of your threads and I know that, like my wife and my son, you seek "immediate gratification". Not a criticism, nothing to get upset about.

Six months ago my son wanted to buy a phone that cost $300. I've explained the price reductions that cell phones go thru and he was insistent. He had the money and was gonna buy it. Last weekend my wife and I and my son became eligible for upgraded phones. He picked out a much more interesting phone than the one he wanted so badly six months ago and it cost him less than a hundred dollars. As we were leaving the store, he thanked me for making him wait (damn near fell over). Small victories. Patience has it's rewards.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

drakejb said:


> that's ridiculous to think that we should all get extra DVRs to handle more than 50 SLs - what a waste of money, space, heat, energy


How are you going to solve that problem? At least I have a viable way around it. And my main concern is not the amount of series links. My concern is that one of the 20/21s is going to go bad and I will lose the programming one the attached eSATA. I use the multiple DVRs more as backups to each other than to increase the number of series links. I didn't even know about the 50 SL limit until this thread appeared.



> and not to mention having to know which DVR you need to be using for a specific show. I can just imagine trying to explain to the wife "No your show is really there, you just have to go to the other DVR to watch it!"


Each of my DVRs has a "Play List" feature. Just take a few seconds to see which DVR has what recordings on it. My wife has no problems finding shows.



> They should just fix it - I never had this problem with old TIVO so it can't be that hard to fix.


When I began to switch over to the 20/21s I had 12 TiVos running in the house. Now I'm down to seven (eighth one arrives Monday) 20/21s. And they are cheaper than SD TiVos were.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

newsposter said:


> more importantly, how much is the UPS you have to keep the running? I have an 1100 va from belkin and 3 dvrs plus some video switches on it.
> 
> when we had a power outage it didnt last more then 15 minutes! thats nuts. I guess i could triple the time if i got a ups for each one but i really thought dvrs didnt use that much juice until this outage and we lost them that quickly


I'm an electrician by trade. I don't know how to say this without getting flamed. I think that unless you pay an awful lot of money for a UPS you're wasting your money. Same thing with surge protectors.

I've explained my reasoning on the UPS and surge protectors on other threads and I don't feel like arguing about it again. This is just my opinion based on my experiences and the lessons we learned from the late 70s on.

We had recording volt meters in our sub-stations and we looked at years and years of those round paper discs and never saw anything but a small spike when we switched feeders. And those spikes never effected our computers. Damn, now I'm explaining this again. Anyhow, take it for what it's worth.

One other thing, I've had a volt meter mounted in my hidey hole for years. Never seen it go below 115VAC. A decent UPS for people who live in stormy states is a good idea. Not where I live.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Sirshagg said:


> I'm more curious how you setup remote codes to control 8 DVR's in the same room.


I can't believe you wrote that. RF mode, of course. Doesn't matter how many DVRs you have in the room, you could have twenty and each one would have it's own remote. You just put a label on the DVR and a matching label (sticker) on the mote and you're good to go.



> Or is rich584 also suggesting we get more TV's, sourround sound systems, family rooms too?


Shaggy, I thought I made that clear. If I only had one TV in one room, I would probably have four or five DVRs hooked up to it. But I do have five plasmas and two family rooms. For the first time since 1948 I don't have a TV in my living room. And there is no TV in the master bedroom. Most houses I've been in recently have TVs in the living room, all the bedrooms and in their family room. My wife and I only watch TV in the two family rooms, so most of the people who I visit are actually using more rooms to watch TV in than we do.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> I *think* all he is suggesting is that there are several advantages to having multiple DVRs.


Yup.



> Couldn't live with just 2 tuners.


The way I have it figured out, I need 8-10 tuners to record everything we want to watch. Factored into that figure are sporting events (watch every Yankees game and lots of football games) and movies. I don't think that is an excessive amount of tuners when you add in backing up each series on at least one DVR and sometimes three DVRs, 24 being a perfect example of a series that we watch when the series is over. Can't follow the plot any other way. Tragic to lose a season of that. I will record that on three DVRs.



> A side effect of that is I could have 100 series links between the two. The reality is that we have maybe 30 on each and most are duplicates (I learned long ago after losing an entire season of Buffy on a DirecTV that crashed to always back up critical recordings on a 2nd DVR).


Sounds like something I would have written. Ya just gotta back up if you care about some series. And who knows how good a series is gonna be? Watch the first few Seinfeld episodes. Nobody expected that show to survive and then to become a monster hit.



> If you can live with just 1 DVR then great, nothing wrong with that. But DirecTV has already said that the 50 limit is there for a technical reason and they don't plan to raise it. Thus if you have to have more then you either get a 2nd DVR, live with just 50 or go to another provider that offers a DVR that has more then 50. No idea why this debate still rages when the answer is right there.


Got something to do with the "squeaky wheel" thing. Same thing with that monster DLB thread.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Lee L said:


> Well, at the very least we can encorage them to do a better job with the next receiver.


Oh no. Not another one.



> I am also holding out hope that they will someday have to rewrite the crappy database they have now to somethign modern so that it will work better, much like TiVo did with 6.3.


I don't understand what you are trying to say, could you clarify?

Rich


----------



## marksman (Dec 23, 2006)

rich584 said:


> No. But the easiest way to get more SLs is to get more DVRs.
> 
> Why not? If I'm annoying you, put me on your "ignore list".


Marginally so, unless you live alone.

I have 3 HR-20s and I don't have anywhere close to 150 available passes to record. Other people also use these devices, so in some cases we have the same program recording 3 times.

Once MRV is implemented, this will be true, but until then or again if you live alone, it is only a marginally useful solution to the problem. Not to mention factoring in location and accessibilty.


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

rich584 said:


> How do you know it is a "minor software flaw"? That statement implies that all D* has to do to increase the size to, say, 100 SLs is make a simple, basic change in it's software. How can you know that?


Code is code and the SL should be limited only by code, cpu and memory or space. Obviously memory is not the issue if they are developing frivolous widgets. Same too cpu?

Sorry that argument isnt holding water for me. There are two features that seem to be the highest demanded items around her DLB and more SL. D* is doing a tremendous job with stability and HD lets see these two be the next major items tackled.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

rich584 said:


> I don't understand what you are trying to say, could you clarify?
> 
> Rich


The information that people in the know got from DirecTV was that the SL limit at 50 is due to problems with the box running correctly due to the database being too big when you get past that number.

TiVo also had issues with the database with lager numbers of Season Passes. THey did not put in a hard limit, but the machine would take a long time to do certain things when you got up there season pass wise, maybe in the 50s or 60s. In Software versions in the 6.x range, they rewrote their database structure that greatly sped these operations of for all users (like cut the wait time by a factor of 10), but especially the bxes with a larger number of SPs. If TiVo can do it, certainly DirecTV can as well.

I am not a softare developer or anything, but I guess my frustration with it is that it seems to me that something truly must be poorly designed if there is a brick wall out there at 51 SLs beyond which the box becomes totally unusable. Surely, the issue is not that the box hard locks at 51 SLs but gradually becomes slower. If so, why not just increase the limit to 60 or 75? Maybe the box will be a little slower, but a limit at even 60 would cut the complaints drastically, 75 would probably eliminate 99% of the complaints as you do get to a point where there are too many conflicts, even with the off-season shows not actively recording.

ALso, that you have 4 or more DVRs to assure you do not get hosed and miss something is a pretty stinging indicment of the box in general IMO.


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Lee L said:


> I am not a softare developer or anything


But I am, I develop front ends for enterprises level databases. And I have to say there must be something horribly wrong with the DB design if it cant handle even 200 Parent records (the SL) with its child records(the scheduled events). If you had;
200 SL
Each Daily
With 1 repeat a day
For 14 days
thats 200*2*14 child records. Thats 5600 Records that are related to the other 200. Even a PII450 should be able to manage a database that size with respectable speed. So that brings the rhetorical (cause D* will never answer) question..

What kind of DB is it and why on earth is it struggling in its handling of such a small dataset?


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

rahlquist said:


> What kind of DB is it and why on earth is it struggling in its handling of such a small dataset?


DirecTV recently licensed the Extreme DB Fusion database. Hopefully they are working on implementing it quickly.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=129043&highlight=database

/steve


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Steve said:


> DirecTV recently licensed the Extreme DB Fusion database. Hopefully they are working on implementing it quickly.


Thank you steve for that very informative post I missed.

So it seems likely that D* in trying to minimize the cost to themselves and consequently the end user may have implemented a 'it works' db and cpu and memory subsystem to be competitive and this may be their ace in the hole.


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

bonscott87 said:


> If you can live with just 1 DVR then great, nothing wrong with that. But DirecTV has already said that the 50 limit is there for a technical reason and they don't plan to raise it. Thus if you have to have more then you either get a 2nd DVR, live with just 50 or go to another provider that offers a DVR that has more then 50. No idea why this debate still rages when the answer is right there.


I have been all over the forums and sent an email to DTV, and have not found one shred of information that says that the 50 limit is a technical reason. I sent an email to them, and all they could say was that they will pass the request along.

I think the problem is that we lay down and go the "path of least" resistance. Well, I'm not willing to pay more for something that should already be there.

Now as for changing to a different provider. I would, but DTV did this little thing to me when I "upgraded" my tivo box to their DTV box...it's called a 2 year commitment! If I want to leave DTV, I have to pay. If I want more SL's, I have to pay. That's BS, they need to fix their boxes!


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

rich584 said:


> Think about that statement. With one DVR you have two tuners. With seven (eight by the end of the week) you have fourteen tuners. Show me a box that has that many tuners and I'll understand the MRV concept too. A multitude of tuners allows me to record everything I want, everything my son wants and everything my wife wants.
> 
> As for me taking the easy way out, I'm a great believer in the path of least resistance. You keep wishing for a box that does it all that D* is going to "give" you and I'll keep recording everything I can.
> 
> Rich


Why do I need 14 tuners when what I have is enough? Why should I have to pay more to get what should already be there?


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

mjdavis87 said:


> I have been all over the forums and sent an email to DTV, and have not found one shred of information that says that the 50 limit is a technical reason. I sent an email to them, and all they could say was that they will pass the request along.
> 
> I think the problem is that we lay down and go the "path of least" resistance. Well, I'm not willing to pay more for something that should already be there.
> 
> Now as for changing to a different provider. I would, but DTV did this little thing to me when I "upgraded" my tivo box to their DTV box...it's called a 2 year commitment! If I want to leave DTV, I have to pay. If I want more SL's, I have to pay. That's BS, they need to fix their boxes!


It has been hinted at here or there in some thread. Certainly not been publicised much, that is for sure, but I do remember Earl or one of the other people who should know passing that along.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

mjdavis87 said:


> I have been all over the forums and sent an email to DTV, and have not found one shred of information that says that the 50 limit is a technical reason. I sent an email to them, and all they could say was that they will pass the request along.


Well, contacting a CSR for anything technical is useless, don't do that again. 

As for the statement, Earl has hinted at it in the past and the CIO said it flat out in the last chat he was on with us a few months ago.


----------



## Vor (Jul 5, 2007)

rahlquist said:


> But I am, I develop front ends for enterprises level databases.
> 
> What kind of DB is it and why on earth is it struggling in its handling of such a small dataset?


I am, too. I develop code for embedded systems. Based on performance, I'm guessing the answer to your question is "doubly-linked list".


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

bonscott87 said:


> Well, contacting a CSR for anything technical is useless, don't do that again.


Kinda hard to argue with people who don't understand something as basic as "the CSRs know, literally, nothing". He'll learn, but arguing with someone who believes in the integrity of any large corporation is a senseless exercise. Look at Enron, there is an example of "corporate integrity".



> As for the statement, Earl has hinted at it in the past and the CIO said it flat out in the last chat he was on with us a few months ago.


They're not gonna believe you. My brothers a programmer, makes a lot of money and knows everything. Got an answer for everything. And he's never happy. I think I'll just knock this thread off my sub list. Too annoying. You're the only one who has made any sense on this thread and, of course, they think you're wrong because you don't agree with them.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

mjdavis87 said:


> Why do I need 14 tuners when what I have is enough? Why should I have to pay more to get what should already be there?


One more time: I don't NEED 14 tuners. I don't NEED 5 plasma TVs. I don't NEED my new Caddie. I don't NEED the big house that I live in. Do you understand what NEED means?

Why should you have to pay for anything? You should get what you want just by asking for it. Dream on.

Rich


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

Lee L said:


> It has been hinted at here or there in some thread. Certainly not been publicised much, that is for sure, but I do remember Earl or one of the other people who should know passing that along.


Ever hear the phrase, "Believe none of what you hear, and half of what you see"? Sounds like rumor to me, nothing in black in white.


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

rich584 said:


> One more time: I don't NEED 14 tuners. I don't NEED 5 plasma TVs. I don't NEED my new Caddie. I don't NEED the big house that I live in. Do you understand what NEED means?
> 
> Why should you have to pay for anything? You should get what you want just by asking for it. Dream on.
> 
> Rich


Exactly, we don't need to be like you. Some of us don't need to waste away money at something we don't need. Most of us don't have the money to waste away anyways.

By the way, its nice to know that apparently you can afford just about anything you want, but sad to say, most of us aren't in your position.

Pretty arrogant of you to be that way.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

rich584 said:


> I'm an electrician by trade. I don't know how to say this without getting flamed. I think that unless you pay an awful lot of money for a UPS you're wasting your money. Same thing with surge protectors.


so which UPS would run 3 dvrs for an hour?

and links to any of your old threads would be nice to have.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

newsposter said:


> so which UPS would run 3 dvrs for an hour?
> 
> and links to any of your old threads would be nice to have.


For me a UPS isn't to keep things going for an hour in a power outage (I'll fire up my generator for that) but it's to keep the DVRs from rebooting in a short power blip. Same as you would for a computer. Especially those that live in areas prone to brown outs. My UPS in my home theater can keep all my equipment running for 8-10 minutes during an outage but that's not it's purpose, it's to protect the DVRs from quick blips. Last thing I'm worried about during a long outage is keeping my DVRs running what with the fridge and freezer spoiling and all.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

newsposter said:


> so which UPS would run 3 dvrs for an hour?


+1 on bonscott87's perspective. You're trying to protect the device, not run it when nothing else is working.

It would require somewhere around a 1000VA UPS to keep it all going for 60 minutes. You'll need to review the specs as some units don't have a very long run-time even if the load is much less than the rating.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

mjdavis87 said:


> Ever hear the phrase, "Believe none of what you hear, and half of what you see"? Sounds like rumor to me, nothing in black in white.


Dude, you are new, so you just don't know the whole story.

Also, if you read the thread about 5 posts before yours you will see another poster who also is saying the same thing with the added benefit of saying that the Chief Information Officer of DirecTV also said it, but I am sure that guy knows nothing. http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1724157&postcount=509

Please do basic research and/or reading of the thread before calling people down. 

Now, as evidenced by my sig, I would love for this to be fixed and with work, hopefully it can as it is a major bug IMO, but I would say that you can take the info about performance being the reason why it was not done initially to the bank.


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

Lee L said:


> Dude, you are new, so you just don't know the whole story.
> 
> Also, if you read the thread about 5 posts before yours you will see another poster who also is saying the same thing with the added benefit of saying that the Chief Information Officer of DirecTV also said it, but I am sure that guy knows nothing. http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=1724157&postcount=509
> 
> ...


Again, believe none of what you hear, and half of what you see....there's not one word in writing by DTV on this subject. You don't think the corporations lie so they don't have to hear us complain?

I reiterate this again, I have not seen one word from DTV regarding this subject, other than the email that I received back from them. They must be afraid to make an "official" stand on this subject, because so far, they have officially said nothing!


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

If you think some canned response from what is probably an auto-reply system or at best a lackey means more than what the Chief Technology Officer stated in a chat where a few dozen people were listening you are crazy. 

I urge you to do some basic research into a forum and its members before coming in and posting like you started the place.


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

harsh said:


> +1 on bonscott87's perspective. You're trying to protect the device, not run it when nothing else is working.
> 
> It would require somewhere around a 1000VA UPS to keep it all going for 60 minutes. You'll need to review the specs as some units don't have a very long run-time even if the load is much less than the rating.


well my 1100va lasted 15 min so i guess i need a 4400va :grin:

the 1100 is rated for like 4 or 8 min on half load


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

I'm with the group that uses a UPS to prevent 5-10 minutes reboot sequences for a 10 second power drop. 

It's not a total backup solution to keep the DVR operating for an hour, but I will admit to an extreme: I have 5 DVRs in my TV cabinet and 3 UPS behind the cabinet, with 2 DVRs per UPS and one UPS having one DVR and the SWM5. The batteries are getting old so with a 5 hour power outage last weekend, they all shut down at different times. My strongest UPS lasted roughly 30 minutes before it shut down.

Anyway, we've gone off topic, so ...

:backtotop


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

bonscott87 said:


> Last thing I'm worried about during a long outage is keeping my DVRs running what with the fridge and freezer spoiling and all.


i have to disagree. 1 hour outage will be fine for fridge/freezer as long as you keep the door closed. But 1 hour with no tivo could be missing 6 different shows


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

Lee L said:


> If you think some canned response from what is probably an auto-reply system or at best a lackey means more than what the Chief Technology Officer stated in a chat where a few dozen people were listening you are crazy.
> 
> I urge you to do some basic research into a forum and its members before coming in and posting like you started the place.


So you actually believe something that someone else may or may not have heard from a Corporate Officer? So this must mean that the Corporation will never lie to you? Come on now...rule of thumb, if it's not in writing, it doesn't hold water. Why would we believe Corporate America, and not believe our politicians? Both are on the same level, greedy people with their own interests at hand!

BTW, why are people all of a sudden defending DTV? Just because I don't agree with you, it doesn't mean that I am wrong. It doesn't mean you are wrong either, we just have different positions on an issue. This whole thing started because one person's solution is to throw their hard earned money at the problem, and my solution is not to throw money at the issue (which just makes DTV more money) and for DTV to fix the issue.


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Dude, I am 100% on the same side as you and the last person to defend DirecTV. The 50 SL limit is stupid and I certainly do not beleive that having some ridiculous number of DVRs is a solution.

The only thing I am (and at least one other person who corroborates it in the post I linked, plus several more way back) saying is that there was a chat that was held at this site, the attendees of which included the *owners and moderators* of this forum as well as quite a few other long time psoters who seem pretty trustworthy, including one person who it has been 100% confirmed had inside contacts and helped start up a prgram where people here get to test out new software and worked directly with DirecTV engineers and now works *at DirecTV*.

At this chat, the Chief Technology Officer of DirecTV stated that the reason the 50 SL limit was put there to begin with was that the box had issues with performance related to the database. That is all I am saying. There is nothing for you to argue about this, unless you want to also start arguing that water is not wet, the sky is not blue during the day and granite rocks are soft like nerf balls.

Now, just because the reason the limit is there has to do with performance does not mean they cannot use a more efficent satabase in the future to take the limit away, much like TiVo completely redisigned their db a couple of years ago for much better performance. As I stated, maybe they could increase the limit some and sure the system might be a little slower, but maybe 75 SLs would still be workable.

The facts remain, DirecTV saw the box had issues with SL over a certain number. Due to that, they limited the number to 50. Many people would like a higher and or no limit and we should all get back to discussing that rather than focussing on who said what and the specific reason that the limit is there, unless one of us is a programmer at DirecTV.


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Now can we just move on everyone has had their say about whether they believe the whys and wherefores.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

I am getting close to 50 series links now. Didn't think I would, but I'm at around 47 or 48. I would like to see this limit lifted higher (maybe to 75) or removed totally.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

rahlquist said:


> Now can we just move on everyone has had their say about whether they believe the whys and wherefores.


Is DIRECTV's failure to address the problem a good reason to stop campaigning for a fix?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

mjdavis87 said:


> So you actually believe something that someone else may or may not have heard from a Corporate Officer? So this must mean that the Corporation will never lie to you? Come on now...rule of thumb, if it's not in writing, it doesn't hold water. Why would we believe Corporate America, and not believe our politicians? Both are on the same level, greedy people with their own interests at hand!
> 
> BTW, why are people all of a sudden defending DTV? Just because I don't agree with you, it doesn't mean that I am wrong. It doesn't mean you are wrong either, we just have different positions on an issue. This whole thing started because one person's solution is to throw their hard earned money at the problem, and my solution is not to throw money at the issue (which just makes DTV more money) and for DTV to fix the issue.


Nothing that the CTO said has been incorrect, and things he told us about are happening, so I have no reason not to believe him. He also didn't respond to anything that he couldn't or didn't want to, so for him to specifically give us that reason is probably good.... And IMHO he did hint that they were thinking of reworking how the DB works, and if they do that, things would probably change.

Most amazing though to me about your posts is that it is very easy to point out the opposite of what you keep repeating... Why is it you can't believe anything anyone says?

Also, 50 series link limit is not a bug or a flaw... Its a feature, one that you want changed... The unit is doing exactly what its supposed to in this regard...

With that said, I hope Earl is working the new DB and that we will have no SL limit within the next year, or sooner cause I hate it....


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

inkahauts said:


> Most amazing though to me about your posts is that it is very easy to point out the opposite of what you keep repeating... Why is it you can't believe anything anyone says?


If you really look hard at my posts, you will notice that I am very consistent in not believing a position that DTV has said, or what other people have said that DTV has said that cannot be backed up in writing.

The are not a non-profit organization, so our opinions should count. This problem can be tracked to the beginning of them making their own boxes (around 2 years, maybe more?) and have basically told us to get over it? Until recently, I saw a thread that alleges they are looking at a new DB, but who knows if that's reality or not.

The whole start of this thing was because someone suggested that we keep lining DTVs pockets by buying more boxes so we can get more than 50 SL's, which is absolutely ridiculous.


----------



## mjdavis87 (Jul 5, 2008)

harsh said:


> Is DIRECTV's failure to address the problem a good reason to stop campaigning for a fix?


Absolutely not! The more we campaign, the more likely the right person will listen and work on getting the job done!


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

As I mentioned in a previous post (see below), it appears DirecTV will soon be using a more robust database that should address the current limitations.

That said, it's difficult to type this message and keep my fingers crossed at the same time.  /steve



Steve said:


> DirecTV recently licensed the Extreme DB Fusion database. Hopefully they are working on implementing it quickly.
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=129043&highlight=database


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Steve said:


> As I mentioned in a previous post (see below), it appears DirecTV will soon be using a more robust database that should address the current limitations.
> 
> That said, it's difficult to type this message and keep my fingers crossed at the same time.  /steve


...and if they can couple that with the menu/guide accelerater software that they also licenced a few months back...this will all be really rockin and rollin...


----------



## newsposter (Nov 13, 2003)

i dont get it...i have zero issues with guides and menu speeds and they are so much faster than tivo..what more can they do?

heck last version i got on hr20 gave us 'ever updating' signal readings instead of static numbers in the grid..thats fantastic


----------



## Getteau (Dec 20, 2007)

newsposter said:


> i dont get it...i have zero issues with guides and menu speeds and they are so much faster than tivo..what more can they do?
> 
> heck last version i got on hr20 gave us 'ever updating' signal readings instead of static numbers in the grid..thats fantastic


The guides on my old RCA's from 1998 were screaming fast and I could repeatedly hit page down and they would never have issues keeping up. In 2001 or 2002, the access card in one of my RCA's died so I picked up one of the freebie DTV receivers. The thing was horrible slow. After about 2 weeks of suffering and spontaneous reboots, I yanked the card out of it and put it in my old RCA. When I picked up an R15 a couple of years ago, it was really slow as well. However, they must have made some serious improvements in the past 8 months or so because when I use it now, the guide seems really fast (it's in my daughters room so I rarely every use it). That or the HR21's are just so slow that the R15 seems really fast by comparison.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...and if they can couple that with the menu/guide accelerater software that they also licenced a few months back...this will all be really rockin and rollin...


I suspect that the items you and Steve refer to are one and the same. The way you refer to it sounds a lot more glamorous but that's what press releases are for.


----------



## d56alpine (Mar 18, 2007)

OMG-If people can't fill up their series links in 5 minutes, they are not using their directv as it should be. I have a family of 5 and we could use probably 200 if it was available. Here's why...We could fill about 100 with just series that we watch during the fall and summer seasons. Every season, we have to go through the prioritizer and remove shows that are finished for the season to make room for the shows about to start. I also like to record by keyword for some of my favorite music artists, that would use at least 10 more. I'm a fan of certain old movie stars, that would take 5-10 more. I love watching concerts in HD so keyword concert. My kids love shows about pandas-another keyword. You get the picture. I want the HR20 to find shows that I don't even know about based on my interest. I also watch many shows which air just a few episodes a year and I don't want to miss them just because my prioritizer didn't get whittled down enough.


----------



## Syzygy (Dec 5, 2005)

I had 140+ Season Passes on my HR10-250 just a week ago, before I disconnected it and replaced it with an HR21.

I maintained a copy of my SP list in plain text on my computer, and just now I tried trimming it down. After removing all the Wishlist items (because the HR21's Autorecord doesn't work well anyway) and also removing some not-so-important shows, I still had 64 items which are destined to become Series Links. Combining the 3 _Law & Order_s and the 3 _CSI_s -- if that'll work -- would reduce the number from 64 to 60. Maybe, if I assiduously prune currently inactive series, I can keep it below 50, but that would leave little or no room for more Autorecord entries.

According to the last info I saw in the *Advanced SEARCH & AUTORECORD Discussion* thread, Autorecord doesn't work at all. If it ever does, and if at that point it's still true that neither separate channel numbers nor quotation marks are allowed in searches, this might be the best one can do:

AALL CSI TTITLE HDTV CCHAN 4 [comment: CBS]
AALL LAW ORDER TTITLE HDTV [comment: NBC and USA]

Question: I'm not sure whether TTITLE would screw up the HDTV keyword. If so, maybe the search would work if a category choice were substituted for HDTV. But what if TTITLE screws up CCHAN as well? Ugh.

*Suggestions to DirecTV: 

1. Provide an option to extend the limit from 50 to 75, 100, or more, with a warning to the user that performance may be (further) degraded.

**2. [Unlikely?] Provide an on-line Autorecord capability that doesn't use (much) storage on the HR21; it might use some combination of the website's storage and my computer's hard drive instead.*


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Hmmm, autorecord works just fine for me. I have 2 of them, one for Chicago Bears and one for Red Wings and that one is a pretty complicated Boolean search. The only thing "wrong" with autorecord that I know of is that it still might record a channel you don't get. But that is more rare due to the channels I get list being pretty close for most people and the fact you can give it a range or channels now.

I'm not saying that's going to fix your issue with the 50 limit but it does work.


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

Syzygy said:


> According to the last info I saw in the *Advanced SEARCH & AUTORECORD Discussion* thread, Autorecord doesn't work at all. If it ever does, and if at that point it's still true that neither separate channel numbers nor quotation marks are allowed in searches, this might be the best one can do:


Doesn't work at all? Not sure why you say that. Just like Scott, it's working great for me as well. My only issue is that not all AUTORECORD matches in the GUIDE data are immediately shown in the TODO LIST.

""'s are not necessary. Any phrase not preceded by AANY or AALL is treated literally. So *law order* *& HIGH DEF, ALL* will only find shows where the words "Law" and "Order" are consecutive. (Punctuation is ignored, so no need for the "*&*".) I find I rarely need the TTITLE operator.

/steve


----------



## Steve (Aug 22, 2006)

For those who are struggling to keep their PRIORITIZER at 50 Series Links, I've been using this new work-around for the past week and it's been getting the job done. You just have to be patient when monitoring the TODO LIST, since it relies on AUTORECORD, which sometimes won't populate TODO with the expected shows until the day of the recording:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=142473

/steve


----------



## kbohip (Nov 19, 2005)

Holy cow! I come back to this forum after an absence of over a year only to see Directv has STILL not fixed this huge problem!? After the countless software updates over the last year this is inexcusable. Lucky for me I haven't hit the 50 limit yet, but that might soon change.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 30, 2006)

kbohip said:


> Holy cow! I come back to this forum after an absence of over a year only to see Directv has STILL not fixed this huge problem!? After the countless software updates over the last year this is inexcusable. Lucky for me I haven't hit the 50 limit yet, but that might soon change.


Welcome back

Yep, I can hardly believe it too.

Well, see ya in another year.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I wouldn't hit the limit if I left for 100 years.


----------



## Yoda-DBSguy (Nov 4, 2006)

paulman182 said:


> I wouldn't hit the limit if I left for 100 years.


GHittinh the limit is easier to do then you think. I have several series set to record for during the summer, winter and fall (corresponding to when they are actually displaying new shows). Reaching teh cap was fairly easy to do and I consider myself a normal user.

How hard would it be to simply remove this limit on the next firmware release/upgrade---->:nono2: *NOT hard*; but why they don't is beyond belief.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Yoda-DBSguy said:


> How hard would it be to simply remove this limit on the next firmware release/upgrade---->:nono2: *NOT hard*; but why they don't is beyond belief.


There wasn't a limit of 50 originally and the DVRs became unresponsive. Upping the limit more than incrementally would likely bring back those problems.

My pet theory is that the database engine used is not up to the task and until they replace it, they need to keep the load light or the overhead of the database becomes more than the DVR can bear.


----------



## Yoda-DBSguy (Nov 4, 2006)

harsh said:


> There wasn't a limit of 50 originally and the DVRs became unresponsive. Upping the limit more than incrementally would likely bring back those problems.
> 
> My pet theory is that the database engine used is not up to the task and until they replace it, they need to keep the load light or the overhead of the database becomes more than the DVR can bear.


I don't thik the unresponsiveness of the origional HRx issues was in whole or even in part to the series link limit or lack there of when origgionally released. The bottom line on the issues we saw uppon the units release and for almost a year there after was due to untested release of a product that just wasn't upto par fimeware wise as a whole. Some thigns I can deal with; but spending for a product and having to "beta test" it without them disclosing that fact was just wrong.

HDMI issues, mpeg 4 issues, local lipsync and audio dropping issues, trick play and normal fastfowd/rewind issues is what hindered it's usability from jump street. It now seems that those issues are primarily managed correctly for the most part at this point; but why not further improve from what's being reported as customer wanted changes based on recording use.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Came back to DBStalk for an issue with scheduling remotely with my phone and I decided to see what else I was talking about here and found this thread.

I'm kind of surprised the limit is still there (at least on my HR20 it is). I'm at 45 but haven't hit the limit because I've been cutting down on how much TV I'm watching. I know I used to hit it every new TV season as I'd put a lot of new shows on there, but I don't do that now.

Does the limit still bother anyone else?


----------



## peds48 (Jan 11, 2008)

With the Genie now the limit is 100


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

Still bugs the heck out of me on my HR20. We are constantly up against that limit.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

The limit doesn't limit me, but my total is 250 SLs spread out among several DVRs. None is even close to 50, and I suspect the total is less than 80.

But even with 50, deleting shows whose seasons have ended is one solution. Also, some have found ways to double or triple down with Macros.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Because of this, I went through and deleted series that ended after the 11/12 season. Oops 

I got it down to 35 now.


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

I guess you guys talking about deleting old series are still watching TV from the 90s or something. Uh, I mean, I guess you have different viewing habits than I do. 

When I was a kid, watching TV on the Philco in the electronics store window, all of the new shows started and ended their seasons at about the same time on something called "networks". That's no longer the case. We now have something called "cable channels" that are adopting what we call the British model. Shows come and go all the time. Even popular shows will show half a dozen episodes and then wander away for a couple of months to make new ones. Since we have a DVR, we tend to skip a lot of commercials, so we don't always get beat over the head when new episodes of those shows come around. It is for that sort of reason that we have many season passes for shows that we haven't seen in months.

Anyhow, the real point is that 50 is either an arbitrary limit or is a symptom of poor engineering. (And what do I care if some posters here only need 7 slots? This is about me, isn't it?  )


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Laxguy said:


> But even with 50, deleting shows whose seasons have ended is one solution.


With all of the starts and stops of some shows, who really knows how long a season lasts and when it will become the next season. Shows like Glee are on for a few weeks and off for a few weeks and on ABC, they seem to fancy dabbling in recaps and re-runs mid-season.

Having current shows pop up in syndication on other networks isn't adding to the utility of searches.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

You can also use booleans to get around the limit, but that can get messy. It's probably suggested in the thread, a few years back.

If I remember right, there was originally talk that the Genie was going to have the same limit, but it was increased.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

peds48 said:


> With the Genie now the limit is 100


Good to know.



wjcarpenter said:


> I guess you guys talking about deleting old series are still watching TV from the 90s or something. Uh, I mean, I guess you have different viewing habits than I do.
> 
> When I was a kid, watching TV on the Philco in the electronics store window, all of the new shows started and ended their seasons at about the same time on something called "networks". That's no longer the case. We now have something called "cable channels" that are adopting what we call the British model. Shows come and go all the time. Even popular shows will show half a dozen episodes and then wander away for a couple of months to make new ones. Since we have a DVR, we tend to skip a lot of commercials, so we don't always get beat over the head when new episodes of those shows come around. It is for that sort of reason that we have many season passes for shows that we haven't seen in months.
> 
> Anyhow, the real point is that 50 is either an arbitrary limit or is a symptom of poor engineering. (And what do I care if some posters here only need 7 slots? This is about me, isn't it?  )


Sure, but you know you can find out easily which shows have actually been canceled? And then you can delete the series link? Of course that's annoying to have to do and you really shouldn't have to, but it's possible. Futon Critic is one site that tells you what is returning and what has been canceled, but I'm sure there are others.



harsh said:


> With all of the starts and stops of some shows, who really knows how long a season lasts and when it will become the next season. Shows like Glee are on for a few weeks and off for a few weeks and on ABC, they seem to fancy dabbling in recaps and re-runs mid-season.
> 
> Having current shows pop up in syndication on other networks isn't adding to the utility of searches.


As I mentioned above, Futon Critic is what I use to tell me if a show is canceled.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> Because of this, I went through and deleted series that ended after the 11/12 season. Oops  I got it down to 35 now.


Yeah, you need to stay on top of things like that.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

mtnagel said:


> As I mentioned above, Futon Critic is what I use to tell me if a show is canceled.


Yup, same here. Very reliable source.


----------



## wjcarpenter (Jun 4, 2007)

Yes, I'm already weeding out dead shows. That doesn't really change the situation much.


----------

