# I think D* has done a good job of fixing the R15.



## saleen351 (Mar 28, 2006)

I know you guys will scream at me, but it's been over a year since I've done a red button reset and over all my box works great. 

Here are my tiny issues. 

Jump back dies sometimes.
When there is a conflict, the system locks up for 5 minutes. 
The other day, I couldn't change the channel, so I had to unplug her but this is ultra rare..

I keep her about 70 full, but not with too many SL. Sure D* dropped the ball when it 1st came out, but they have done a pretty good job in a year of fixing it. I'd give my box a B+ grade right now. Still sluggish with occasional hiccups, but life is pretty good with my D* dvr.

I'm not going near the HR20 for a very long time, that board is a zoo.


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

saleen351 said:


> ...
> Jump back dies sometimes....
> 
> ...The other day, I couldn't change the channel, so I had to unplug her but this is ultra rare...


The "jumpback" dies if you start watching a recording before the recording is finished. The jumpback will work as long as the show is still recording. The instant the recording is done the jumpback function is queued to fail. The next time you try to use it once the recording has finished it won't work. If you "stop" the playback, and then go back in jumpback will work, but you will probably start at the beginning. When the jumpback stops working, I just use RW for the rest of the show. If the recording of a show you want to watch is nearly complete just wait at bit for it to finish. Jumpback will work throughout the playback.

Unplugging [and plugging back in] is the same thing as doing a Red Button Reset.


----------



## ISWIZ (Nov 18, 2005)

saleen351 said:


> I know you guys will scream at me, but it's been over a year since I've done a red button reset and over all my box works great.
> 
> I'm not going near the HR20 for a very long time, that board is a zoo.


I agree. The R15 does very well with the fixes provided, it took over a year but it is now quite stable. This board does much better now that the mods are busy peddling excuses for "the cutting edge" problems and leaving those of us that wanted just a working DVR alone. At least most of the problem children went with them.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

I too agree, most seem to be on the HR20 board as that seems to be what DirecTV is pushing. I still think eventually there will only be "1" DVR just like cable companies have. No more one for SD and one for HD, there will be one for everything. I think DISH is even going this route if they have not already.

After using this new update a while mine seems to have settled down with few issues. I had one black screen freeze and a couple other small issues once but thats it. Nothing really repeatable that I noticed.

The SL's which I thought were not much improved do seem to be better after checking for repeats over a couple weeks. I get less repeats now but still get some.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

saleen351 said:


> I'm not going near the HR20 for a very long time, that board is a zoo.


I have an R15-300, an R15-500, and an HR20.

I fully agree that DirecTV has made significant progress on the R15 problems, and also agree it is not perfect yet.

However, in my own experience, the HR20 is a better box than the R15. It is very stable and has few problems. Yes, there is an enormous amount of activity on the HR20 forums - but if you look back prior to the release of the HR20, the same level of activity, and level of criticism, was present on the R15 forums. I believe, as people have upgraded to the HR20 (even if they still have an R15), their attention and focus is there. I don't use my R15's anywhere near as much as I used to since I got the HR20.

I guess what I'm saying is, don't avoid the HR20 just because "that board is a zoo". If you are seriously considered hi-def, the HR20 is a good choice.

Carl


----------



## boogiebear64 (Apr 19, 2005)

I am new to the direct side of this board. I just got the r-15 yesterday and I have not had time to lock it up or blow it up yet, but I had dish and a 510 and two other dvrs. 
One of the reasons I left was because back in jan '05 Charlie on charlie chat said that we would be getting a software upgrade for the 510, that included name based recording, and other basic tivo like upgrades. Then I had a customer service problem with them on Tuesday so I said enough is enough. I was with Dish for over 8 years.
The R-15 dances around the dish dvr I had. Two tuners, search functions, logs 25 caller id, quick response, the remote is simple, easy to understand, and I like the menus. Even though it has many new functions, and the setup is quite different I understood it immediately. I am sure I will find things I would like changed(color of the menus and font change on the menu would be nice but I am sure I will get used to it), but I am really impressed.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

This whole thread makes me feel I've entered an alternate universe. I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

ISWIZ said:


> I agree. The R15 does very well with the fixes provided, it took over a year but it is now quite stable. This board does much better now that the mods are busy peddling excuses for "the cutting edge" problems and leaving those of us that wanted just a working DVR alone. At least most of the problem children went with them.


I took a month and switched to cable and came back and got the latest software for the 300 aswell and it seems a lot better than when I went to cable..... And yeah I see better opinions since the "cutting edge" crowd is well not here! Oh and it actually works on Sundays too now that ST has ended, and I won't get it again! I don't have the Nascar thing and i hope they don't whack game lounge just for in car cameras on guys that can't turn right. If D*'s service is going to suffer on Sundays then they should credit accounts for free Sundays all year!


----------



## Larry Daughtrey (Feb 14, 2006)

"This whole thread makes me feel I've entered an alternate universe. I'll just leave it at that."
Ditto!


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

rlambert7 said:


> The "jumpback" dies if you start watching a recording before the recording is finished. The jumpback will work as long as the show is still recording. The instant the recording is done the jumpback function is queued to fail.


And that was a step forward. That started last summer when they "fixed" the bug where hitting jumpback after the recording ended would jump you to the end and bring up the keep/delete box. Very annoying!


----------



## rlambert7 (Feb 7, 2006)

qwerty said:


> And that was a step forward. That started last summer when they "fixed" the bug where hitting jumpback after the recording ended would jump you to the end and bring up the keep/delete box. Very annoying!


The lesser of two(?) evils.


----------



## qwerty (Feb 19, 2006)

rlambert7 said:


> The lesser of two(?) evils.


You got it!


----------



## Button Pusher (Jan 19, 2007)

I agree. After my automatic download of 106c to my R15-300 my glitches have settled down. I haven't had any problems with recording or playback of recordings. I thought I had better post my positive experiences since I had listed my problems on another thread before I got the download. Thanks D* for sticking with it!


----------



## PlanetBill (May 8, 2006)

carl6 said:


> I have an R15-300, an R15-500, and an HR20.
> 
> I fully agree that DirecTV has made significant progress on the R15 problems, and also agree it is not perfect yet.
> 
> ...


I wish my HR20 worked as well as my R15-500. Yes the HR20 has much more potential, but in terms of true DVR functionality, I trust the R15 more.

I think the HR20 will get fixed (or replaced), and I'll be happy with it too.


----------



## saleen351 (Mar 28, 2006)

My point is, that outside of a small percentage the problems now with the R15 are blown out of proportion. Someone who buys an R15 6 months from now, will more than likely never have significant problems like we did. And I don't thin unplugging the box was the same as red button reset. Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

It took them a full year after release to fix it to where it is stable. I'm not sure if I'd be willing to call it a "good job".


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

This is pretty funny. Now a unit that doesn't reboot on it's own is considered "fixed"?

It still doesn't have First Run/Repeats on all networks. It still doesn't have a TDL thats of sufficient size so that it can properly schedule programs and record them when they're suppose to be recorded. Trick play can work on one show just fine and be completely terrible on the next show. Loading it up with > 40 SLs or letting MyPlayList fill up causes the unit to be so slow you can almost fall asleep. It still will recod a partial show when it could record the entire show on a later airing. Autorecord is useless. Using the Search function cripples the unit. The history screen is useless. And there are still times when the GUI stops working all together requiring a RBR.

Instead of saying the R15 is fixed, I'd say the R15 is now in the state is should have been when it was released. It still needs alot of work which I'm not sure it's getting.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Instead of saying the R15 is fixed, I'd say the R15 is now in the state is should have been when it was released. It still needs alot of work which I'm not sure it's getting.


My R-15 missed _24_ again last week. I couldn't babysit it, because I had to work.

Given that, and other persistent nonsense, I can't really agree that the current state of the R-15, as I experience it, is good enough to be characterized as where it "should have been when it was released." I know that many others have more satisfactory experience. But, if those of us who don't have satisfactory experience fail to speak up regularly, ....

Hmm, just what is it I suppose would happen? Or, not happen?

I suppose there really isn't any point in speaking up, other than to relieve the personal frustration experienced when some generalize their satisfactory experience to apply to us less fortunate (less meritorious?) folk. The world would probably be a better place if I'd simply continue to complain privately. I suppose this is merely a reminder that's what a lot of us are doing.

Please don't misinterpret silence for assent or satisfaction, as members sometimes do. Otherwise, We unlucky ones fell obliged to write. And, you lucky ones either become unlucky in having to read our rants or learn how to use a kill file. 

P.S. I realize you're aware of the full spectrum, WP. This is merely a general-purpose comment. I plan to develop a template in order to reduce the effort entailed in making future comments.

Cheers,


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

I understand completely. In fact most of my silence is because I don't have an R15 active. It's still not an acceptable DVR. Mine was performing ok, but I was resetting it weekly and doing a reformat every month or two. It was also in my office without too much of a load. Now one of my trusty Tivos is sitting in that spot.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

dodge boy said:


> I don't have the Nascar thing and i hope they don't whack game lounge just for in car cameras on guys that can't turn right.


Nice Avatar, is that the Dodge entry for the Grand-Am or the LeMans Series?


----------



## donm (Aug 19, 2003)

I just switched from Dish about 1 1/2 months ago (I think). It was the day Dish dropped Court TV. It's my wife's favorite channel and she just was feed up with Dish especially after having Lifetime being pulled a while ago. Anyway we have two R15-100 and I have been sort of scared to respond about the R15's because I didn't want to jinks them. I haven't had one problem with either one. I had a 501 and a 508 with dish and had a ton of problems but the last 6 months they were fairly stable. I still had to reset it maybe once a month just to keep them working correctly. I had a hard time at first getting use to the Directv interface but now I really like it compared to Dish. I sure hope I haven't jinks my R15's.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

I think people can check my posts over the past year and I have loved the R-15, stopped using it and blasted it when it needed.

I want to say that it is still not perfect BUT wanted to add that if people read around other forums and boards neither is the Dish DVR, Comcasts, TW's, etc.... I know the problems with Comcasts and Dishes DVR's also go back approx./over a year.

My one R-15 work well but lacks a few features I would like to see in it but I am overall satisified. I do think after being released over a year now that a little more should have been done by now or being at the point it is now maybe should have happened a few months sooner.

I have 49 SL's and this new release seems better able to handle 45+ SL's although it can get slow doing some things. I have not seen any partial recordings after the last update and it has been recording fine. The repeat issue is much better but still there and I think will always be there in some form.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Bobman said:


> I think people can check my posts over the past year and I have loved the R-15, stopped using it and blasted it when it needed.
> 
> I want to say that it is still not perfect BUT wanted to add that if people read around other forums and boards neither is the Dish DVR, Comcasts, TW's, etc.... I know the problems with Comcasts and Dishes DVR's also go back approx./over a year.
> 
> ...


And that's exactly where we've gone. Now DTV has a couple of DVRs that are just as good, no better, no worse, than Dish or any cable company. Whereas a little over a year ago that was not true. DTV had what was considered by many a step above all other DVRs, the Tivo. I guess DTVs goal was to level the playing field.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

I did have DTiVo for 3 years, then the unit died. It ran unattended and without a reset for those 3 years. It was, quite simply, so reliable that trouble free DVR life became and afterthought. So much so, that when it died, I did not even consider the fact that the R15 may not be just as reliable when I bought it to replace the DTiVo. It said it did all the same things, even had more disk space, so what the hell. 
Now, 7 months later, the R15 appears to finally be to the point where it's just quirky. I have had to reset the unit for 2 problems that I never had before the great 10FA update.

Have they done things to make it better? Yes. Have they done a 'Good Job' fixing it? Not by any stretch of the imagination. It's not 'Fixed' yet...


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

I am still trying to keep an open mind as I have been really harsh about the R-15 over the last couple months and this was supposed to be the fix all BIG update but I need to amend my above post  as this morning I checked my TDL and with 49 SL's it only had 66 shows listed. I applied the "usual fix" :eek2: and did a reset.

I thought something strange was happening last night as things were getting slower and slower, even pressing List took 5++ seconds to appear. Now I know if that starts happening to just do a reset and not wait. It was so slow that I kept thinking I must not have pressed it so I kept pressing it.

 I guess its back to the manual weekly resets to keep it working properly. Either that or cutting back on the number of SL's but I hate to do that as I loaded up so I can "maybe" return my one leased R-15.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

I have to agree that DirecTV has done a good job updating/upgrading the R15. First off, I actually found my R15s to be more reliable than my old DirecTivo. I've only had to reset my R15s a couple times since getting both. My Tivo used to freeze all the time - I was doing daily unplugs at times. Yeah, there are some features I would like to see baked into the unit, and I would still like to see a more streamlined, consistent interface, but overall I can't complain. I also love the fact (and I've spelled this out before) that the live TV and DVR functionality is so integrated. I hated that aspect of my old TiVo. Don't get me wrong - I loved my TiVo, and I was very sad when it died, but to be totally honest, I've had better luck with my R15s (particularly my 500). Granted, I'm no power user - I only have about 15 SLs on each machine - but I'm very happy with what they've done.

Also, and this ties into one of the other threads I've read, I think there's a misunderstanding of the penetration of HD. Folks on these types of forums tend to be more technically inclined than most folks, and so there's an impression that the whole world has already moved to HD. That's nowhere near true. Most folks I know (and I work in a very technical field) are still in the SD world - including me. The notion that DirecTV would just stop making SD a priority doesn't make sense to me. It's still the largest source of their income, and will be even after they launch all those new channels. Yeah, HD will eventually become the norm, and I'm currently in the market for an HD TV, but not for a few years yet. All that being said, I see DirecTV supporting, and updating, the R15 for some time to come. 

Most folks just want to watch tv. It would floor most folks on here to know how many people out there are still unfamiliar with the DVR. Personally I couldn't live without one at this point, but I can't tell you how many people tell me "why do I need a DVR? I have a VCR?" And remember, these are computer folks - not technophobes.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

jpl said:


> I have to agree that DirecTV has done a good job updating/upgrading the R15. First off, I actually found my R15s to be more reliable than my old DirecTivo. I've only had to reset my R15s a couple times since getting both. My Tivo used to freeze all the time - I was doing daily unplugs at times.


Then you sir are one of the few. Reading back through your posts in August it seems that the unreliability of your Tivo unit was due to a failing unit. Would you agree? RBRs on the R15 are not due to any failure other than the software it's running. Making a comment that the R15 is better than your Tivo that "used to freeze all the time" without mentioning that was just before it died, is a tad misleading isn't it? Maybe you should clarify that just before my Tivo died it was freezing all the time and I was going daily unplugs.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

jpl said:


> I have to agree that DirecTV has done a good job updating/upgrading the R15. First off, I actually found my R15s to be more reliable than my old DirecTivo. I've only had to reset my R15s a couple times since getting both. My Tivo used to freeze all the time - I was doing daily unplugs at times. Yeah, there are some features I would like to see baked into the unit, and I would still like to see a more streamlined, consistent interface, but overall I can't complain. ... Granted, I'm no power user - I only have about 15 SLs on each machine - but I'm very happy with what they've done.


The evidence you adduce, if true, might reasonably support a claim that the R-15 is a superior DVR. But, it does not seem to me to support your claim with respect to updates or upgrades. How does a positive evaluation of intrinsic qualities such as reliability and functionality support a claim respecting the results of software changes? :scratch:

Cheers,


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Then you sir are one of the few. Reading back through your posts in August it seems that the unreliability of your Tivo unit was due to a failing unit. Would you agree? RBRs on the R15 are not due to any failure other than the software it's running. Making a comment that the R15 is better than your Tivo that "used to freeze all the time" without mentioning that was just before it died, is a tad misleading isn't it? Maybe you should clarify that just before my Tivo died it was freezing all the time and I was going daily unplugs.


Sorry, but no. It started freezing almost right off the bat. The first one happened probably within a month of me getting the TiVo. There were periods where it would increase in frequency (peaking at one unplug a day), and this happened long before it died (6 - 12 months). In fact, just before it died, I thought I was through the worst of it, because it wasn't freezing quite as much (although it was still freezing fairly frequently - once every few days as opposed to once a day).

Was it a faulty unit that caused all those freezes? I don't think so, but I don't know. I'm not misrepresenting anything - my Tivo froze all the time, and my R15s don't. Hard as it is for some to believe, my R15s are actually more reliable at recording stuff, too. For some unforseen reason, e.g., I couldn't get my Tivo to record Monk for me. It would just skip it, no matter what I did.

I'm not saying my Tivo was crap. It certainly wasn't. I loved that box. But I'm saying, in MY personal experience (others differ) MY R15s are more reliable than MY old Tivo was.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> The evidence you adduce, if true, might reasonably support a claim that the R-15 is a superior DVR. But, it does not seem to me to support your claim with respect to updates or upgrades. How does a positive evaluation of intrinsic qualities such as reliability and functionality support a claim respecting the results of software changes? :scratch:
> 
> Cheers,


Very good question. I think the R15 has become better at things like filtering out repeats. I also think that they've done a better job of streamlining some stuff (e.g. now that the Record Once and Record Series are separate options, it makes setting up recordings a tad easier). I've also seen improvements in some of the quirks - the progress bar no longer gets stuck, e.g. So, you're right - my initial posting had nothing to do with improvements of the R15, per se.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

I could object that your assessment that such actions can be fairly characterized as "good" is subjective. But, that's the very nature of opinions. So, your point is made. I only wish that I could share it. Unfortunately, it does not generalize all that well.

Cheers,


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> I could object that your assessment that such actions can be fairly characterized as "good" is subjective. But, that's the very nature of opinions. So, your point is made. I only wish that I could share it. Unfortunately, it does not generalize all that well.
> 
> Cheers,


Fair enough. I never claimed that I spoke for everyone. I just gave my own personal experience. And the "good" applies to the upgrading - whether the DVR itself is good really depends on what you're looking for it to do, in addition to whether it does what it's designed to do. That is, if one's major requirement is dual live buffers, then clearly the DVR isn't "good". In my experience, I really like the R15. It's been reliable for me, til now, and I like the features it offers (PIG, one-touch recording, quick menu). As I stated before, I would really like to see improvements in overall consistency of functionality (how about a mark and delete on the to do list?), and a more streamlined interface (e.g. why we don't have a SL manager off the main menu is beyond me - yeah you can get to the prioritizer off the main quick menu, but to check on your SLs still takes more button pushes than I care for) - even before other enhancements (e.g. the dual live buffer, while a nice feature, isn't a show-stopper for me).

I tend to agree with your assessment of the deficiencies of the R15. I think its problems, and I've stated this from the get-go, just smack of memory management issues. The fact that it works just fine for someone and not for someone else... the fact that the same person will have the exact same issues with multiple machines... There is some sequence of events that cause some folks, in my opinion to exploit the problems that are baked into the code. Talk to folks who examine catastophic failures for a living, and they'll tell you that there never is a "smoking gun" that causes a problem. When a system just has a catastrophic failure, it's always due to a bug in the design. Under most circumstances, that bug is dormant - but hit it with the right sequence of events, and that bug comes alive and eats your lunch -- one example that I put out there is what happened with Apollo 13 - as spelled out in the book. The last chapter lays out, in great detail, the unfortunate sequence of events that caused a design problem to come to light (a problem in the capsule from the get-go) resulting in a real catastrophic failure. In s/w systems those types of bugs tend to be memory-related (at least that's what I've seen in my own experience).


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

I strongly agree with your assessment. I'll add that memory management problems are not generally solved by field testing and program maintenance. Ideally, they're avoided rather than fixed. Fixing them is hard work--really hard work. Hence, my pessimism concerning whether DTV will _ever_ achieve satisfactory reliability. More generally, they're unlikely to significantly change the code quality as measured by defect density (almost no one does succeed in doing so). At best, they may succeed in moving defects from code that's executed often to code that's executed seldom and thereby somewhat improve reliability. I doubt that the result will be sufficient to satisfy most of us.

But, to subject my own argument to due scrutiny, I concede that my claims are based on general principles and guesswork. I'm pretty confident in pessimistically assessing DYV's odds of success. But, some folks are lucky. And, DTV may hit the jackpot despite the odds.

Cheers,


----------



## Cerus (Feb 8, 2007)

While everyone is entitled to their opinions, I do not agree at all that DTV has done a "good job" of fixing the R15. A good job would have meant that the big issues (first run/repeats, series record, add chans I get) would have never made it to customers or would have been fixed within a month.

As large of a company DTV is, they should have the resources to release updates faster than this. I've found posts and complaints over a year old complaining about the series record problem. That is just unacceptable. I'm lucky to have just recently gotten an R15 so close to the next update that will fix the above issues (except "chans I get") but others are not so fortunate.

Being able to auto record an entire season is one of the main features of the R15 and it does not work the way it should. It cripples what could have been a great piece of hardware. Why release a DVR that functions so poorly when past models work better? While I'm no expert on the programming aspect of the unit, I do not believe it is very complicated or difficult to fix. I think DTV just needs to get off their @ss and fix what's broke before they worry about adding more to their system.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Cerus said:


> While everyone is entitled to their opinions, I do not agree at all that DTV has done a "good job" of fixing the R15. A good job would have meant that the big issues (first run/repeats, series record, add chans I get) would have never made it to customers or would have been fixed within a month.
> 
> As large of a company DTV is, they should have the resources to release updates faster than this. I've found posts and complaints over a year old complaining about the series record problem. That is just unacceptable. I'm lucky to have just recently gotten an R15 so close to the next update that will fix the above issues (except "chans I get") but others are not so fortunate.
> 
> Being able to auto record an entire season is one of the main features of the R15 and it does not work the way it should. It cripples what could have been a great piece of hardware. Why release a DVR that functions so poorly when past models work better? While I'm no expert on the programming aspect of the unit, I do not believe it is very complicated or difficult to fix. I think DTV just needs to get off their @ss and fix what's broke before they worry about adding more to their system.


I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment that a big company should be able to easily fix these types of problems. First, this DVR, in my opinion, isn't a step backward when compared to others on the market. I have no experience with UTV, but with Tivo, the main focus was on the DVR functionality. Yeah, there are features in Tivo that don't exist in the R15, but the converse is true as well. The integration, I thought, with base DirecTV receiver functionality was aweful, e.g. Tivo is a much more specific machine. This one is much more integrated. I'm not trying to excuse shoddy coding (and I've posted before that I think DirecTV's testing regimen sucks - some of these issues that crop up with new s/w releases should be shaken out alot earlier than they are, which speaks of a bad test plan). But this is a complex piece of s/w.

And in the s/w world, faster isn't necessarily better. I would like resolutions to these issues as much as anyone, but I also understand that quick s/w fixes aren't anything of the sort. Any time you touch code, you introduce the potential for more bugs. And that is used in the calculus when deciding if a bug is worth fixing in the first place (at least it is in most s/w shops). If the problem, many times, isn't deemed as being a show-stopper, many times a shop will let it go if the risk of introducing a new bug outweighs the benefit of making the fix. And pushing out fixes fast and furious just compounds the possibility that you get more bugs.

Also, what wbmcarty said is absolutely correct (although I'm not as pessimistic as he is) - memory corruption problems are an absolute bear to find, much less fix. The problem is in consistently reproducing them, and narrowing them down. Analyzing these types of problems can be like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Put in a stub to give you some information on what's going on in the code that's crapping out, and you cause the problem to move - it manefests itself in a totally different place. That's why, in a totally different thread (talking about an issue I found with the new release) I was optimistic when I said that a problem was reproducible. Reproducing a problem, consistently, is the first step in solving it. Unfortunately, memory problems are notorious for being hard to pin down.


----------



## bearymore (Sep 1, 2006)

jpl said:


> IThe integration, I thought, with base DirecTV receiver functionality was aweful, e.g. Tivo is a much more specific machine. This one is much more integrated. I'm not trying to excuse shoddy coding (and I've posted before that I think DirecTV's testing regimen sucks - some of these issues that crop up with new s/w releases should be shaken out alot earlier than they are, which speaks of a bad test plan). But this is a complex piece of s/w.


Let me speak as a simple customer. I had a D-Tivo. It died. I called DTV and was sold on a new machine that according to the CSR does everything the D-Tivo did only better. "Fat city," I thought, "and its free." Along comes the R-15 and it has a snazzy new interface and some nice features. I'm happy. Then I start using it. I can't FF through commercials because using FF is a crapshoot as is RW. I create an autorecord wishlist and get an hour of black screen because it tried to record from CBS-E rather than my local. I can't put in SLs for "Mystery!" on channel 28 and "Mystery!" on channel 50. Now I'm po'ed at DTV. They lied to me. They replaced a perfectly functional unit with a piece of cr*p. I've been a customer since the early days when a simple satellite receiver cost $500 (and that's when $500 was really $500), and now I'm contemplating my local cable company. My friends ask me how I like satellite. I tell them don't bother, go with cable.

I don't care about coding, memory management, software complexity, or anything else. I just want a unit that works. When I bought my TV, I set it up and it worked. When I bought my stereo receiver, I set it up and it worked. That's what I expect from a consumer product.

Now imagine another scenario. DTV sticks with Tivo until they produce a fully functional product of their own. Then they switch. The CSR tells me he'll get me this wonderful new machine. I get it, it works great, I keep DTV and tell all my friends how wonderful their product is.


----------



## jal (Mar 3, 2005)

I fixed my R15's freezes, locks, and missed recordings. I replaced it with a TIVO R10. Now the problems are gone.


----------



## cawall (Sep 30, 2006)

I went through 3 R10's in a relatively short amount of time plus one that failed right out of the box before I was forced to take the R15. The R10's would freeze more and more frequently until they would not start up at all. I have been pretty happy with the R15. It has many features that I really like and now with the new software it doesn't do so many of the weird things it did before. I still have my original 35 hour Phillips DTiVo that keeps plugging away and has never had an issue. It amazes me that it still works.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

bearymore said:


> Let me speak as a simple customer....


I had to look at the signature to see if I'd written this posting. :eek2: You've expressed my experience and thoughts quite exactly. 

Cheers,


----------



## Cerus (Feb 8, 2007)

jpl said:


> I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment that a big company should be able to easily fix these types of problems. First, this DVR, in my opinion, isn't a step backward when compared to others on the market. I have no experience with UTV, but with Tivo, the main focus was on the DVR functionality. Yeah, there are features in Tivo that don't exist in the R15, but the converse is true as well. The integration, I thought, with base DirecTV receiver functionality was aweful, e.g. Tivo is a much more specific machine. This one is much more integrated. I'm not trying to excuse shoddy coding (and I've posted before that I think DirecTV's testing regimen sucks - some of these issues that crop up with new s/w releases should be shaken out alot earlier than they are, which speaks of a bad test plan). But this is a complex piece of s/w.
> 
> And in the s/w world, faster isn't necessarily better. I would like resolutions to these issues as much as anyone, but I also understand that quick s/w fixes aren't anything of the sort. Any time you touch code, you introduce the potential for more bugs. And that is used in the calculus when deciding if a bug is worth fixing in the first place (at least it is in most s/w shops). If the problem, many times, isn't deemed as being a show-stopper, many times a shop will let it go if the risk of introducing a new bug outweighs the benefit of making the fix. And pushing out fixes fast and furious just compounds the possibility that you get more bugs.
> 
> Also, what wbmcarty said is absolutely correct (although I'm not as pessimistic as he is) - memory corruption problems are an absolute bear to find, much less fix. The problem is in consistently reproducing them, and narrowing them down. Analyzing these types of problems can be like the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Put in a stub to give you some information on what's going on in the code that's crapping out, and you cause the problem to move - it manefests itself in a totally different place. That's why, in a totally different thread (talking about an issue I found with the new release) I was optimistic when I said that a problem was reproducible. Reproducing a problem, consistently, is the first step in solving it. Unfortunately, memory problems are notorious for being hard to pin down.


By no means do I wish to start some big argument but I have to say that your logic is a bit flawed. The larger the company, the more resources they have, the more resources, the quicker they can identify and fix problems. Obviously a company has to decide where they want to spend their resources. Maybe DTV puts very little money into troubleshooting and more into R&D. That would certainly seem to be the case with DTV since more new things come out than do fixes for old things. Either way, there are some bugs that can't be found until the product reaches the masses but there are some that should never be allowed to hit the market. If this is how long it's taking them to get a fix out, then they need to devote more resources to that particular area.

The software in DVR's is by no means as sophisticated or complicated as other software programs out there. Video games are much more complicated and they typically have bug fixes weeks after being released. Tracking down the specific cause and fixing it is not as grueling of a task as you might think. Having to go through each line of code by hand is nearly a thing of the past. There are software programs designed to fix bugs in other software programs and programs to fix the bugs in the programs that fix other programs...so forth and so on. It might require some amount of time and several attempts, but thats where the resources come in.

DTV has these resources available but they seem to focus them on new features rather than fixing those features that do not function properly. But whether or not it's easy to fix, the point of this thread was that the OP believed DTV does a good job at fixing and upgrading. They do not. It should not take an entire year, 365 days, to fix something that should not have been broke to begin with.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

It's not the amount of software development/maintenance resources that's at issue. It's the process whereby those resources are employed. The problems with the R-15 strongly suggest that it is the product of a deeply flawed software process.

Therein lies the reason for my pessimism. Unless the process is improved, there's little hope of fixing the product. The rate of bad fixes will probably exceed the threshold above which net quality does not improve.

This is all textbook software engineering management stuff. It's just that not all that many software developers outside government (DoD) contracting understand these principles.

Featurism is a symptom, rather than a cause, of the real problems.

Cheers,


----------



## Cerus (Feb 8, 2007)

I've been looking through the software release forum and unless I'm missing something...it seems like the HR20 has received far more updates and additions than the R15. Maybe the HR20 had more initial problems but it seems to me that DTV is focusing more on the HD aspect of their service rather than the service in general.

Again, maybe I'm way off but it also seems as though they've stuck the SD receivers on the back burner while they perfect their HD receivers. Now maybe they are wanting to continue in the HD direction but that leaves millions of customers out in the cold. Maybe they should focus equally on all their current models and maybe then I would agree with the OP's opinion.


----------



## TexasJames (Oct 22, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> It's not the amount of software development/maintenance resources that's at issue. It's the process whereby those resources are employed. The problems with the R-15 strongly suggest that it is the product of a deeply flawed software process ...


I wholeheartedly agree.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

wbmccarty said:


> It's not the amount of software development/maintenance resources that's at issue. It's the process whereby those resources are employed. The problems with the R-15 strongly suggest that it is the product of a deeply flawed software process.
> 
> Therein lies the reason for my pessimism. Unless the process is improved, there's little hope of fixing the product. The rate of bad fixes will probably exceed the threshold above which net quality does not improve.
> 
> ...


Ding Ding Ding. Give that man a CIGAR! :allthumbs


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Cerus said:


> I've been looking through the software release forum and unless I'm missing something...it seems like the HR20 has received far more updates and additions than the R15. Maybe the HR20 had more initial problems but it seems to me that DTV is focusing more on the HD aspect of their service rather than the service in general.
> 
> Again, maybe I'm way off but it also seems as though they've stuck the SD receivers on the back burner while they perfect their HD receivers. Now maybe they are wanting to continue in the HD direction but that leaves millions of customers out in the cold. Maybe they should focus equally on all their current models and maybe then I would agree with the OP's opinion.


Here's the problem. The R15 was coded by NDS. NDS has the code, DTV doesn't. NDS is responsible for all fixes, DTV isn't. The HR20 was coded by DTV. DTV has the code, has the development staff and is responsible for all fixes. All of this equates to the R15 being the ******* step brother of the HR20.

There are many problems that still exist on the R15 which were fixed on the HR20 long ago.


----------



## Cerus (Feb 8, 2007)

Wolffpack said:


> Here's the problem. The R15 was coded by NDS. NDS has the code, DTV doesn't. NDS is responsible for all fixes, DTV isn't. The HR20 was coded by DTV. DTV has the code, has the development staff and is responsible for all fixes. All of this equates to the R15 being the ******* step brother of the HR20.
> 
> There are many problems that still exist on the R15 which were fixed on the HR20 long ago.


Ahh...that makes sense. It's too bad DTV doesn't control the R15. Hopefully I'll be able to get a good deal on an HR20 upgrade and cut my R15 problems in half.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> It's not the amount of software development/maintenance resources that's at issue. It's the process whereby those resources are employed. The problems with the R-15 strongly suggest that it is the product of a deeply flawed software process.
> 
> Therein lies the reason for my pessimism. Unless the process is improved, there's little hope of fixing the product. The rate of bad fixes will probably exceed the threshold above which net quality does not improve.
> 
> ...


Bingo! That's exactly right (except, like I posted earlier, I don't share your pessimism). There's a notion, and sadly this exists in industry as well, that if you have a problem - just throw resources at it. That'll fix it! No - it doesn't work like that. One resource that addresses this, is a book called "The Mythical Man-Month." Since schedules are written in man-months (or person-months, for the politically correct out there, although most don't call it that because it doesn't flow off the tongue right) - so the idea is, if you have a crunch period, you can speed things up just by increasing the "man" side of that equation. Yeah, you need to devote SOME resources to the problem, and you need to make fixing particular bugs a priority, and you need to raise the visibility of a problem at times, but just pouring more folks at an issue doesn't help. In fact, many times it's a hinderance. You get into meetings to discuss what the problem could possibly be, and instead of a good working discussion, you have folks that feel the need to inject SOMETHING and you waste gobs of time listening to analysis that you know isn't correct.

I've found, through personal experience, that small teams, involving the right people (correct skill-set) is about the best arrangement for solving these types of problem - what many companies call "tiger teams". Wbmccarty is exactly right - the problems with the R15 are symptomatic of bad processes, not a lack of resources.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Here's the problem. The R15 was coded by NDS. NDS has the code, DTV doesn't. NDS is responsible for all fixes, DTV isn't. The HR20 was coded by DTV. DTV has the code, has the development staff and is responsible for all fixes. All of this equates to the R15 being the ******* step brother of the HR20.
> 
> There are many problems that still exist on the R15 which were fixed on the HR20 long ago.


Yep - I would categorize that as a bad process. Another bad process (and one that still makes me scratch my head) - why in the world did they introduce three models of the same stinking machine? Dual maintenance of s/w is bad enough - but TRIPLE maintenance? The only reason I can think of for needing to go to multiple companies to make the machine is that no one of those companies had the capacity to produce all of the R15s for DirecTV. I seriously doubt that was the case, but assuming it was, then you can still arrange it such that the machines themselves are all essentially identical. If I buy Windows Vista, I shouldn't have to care whether I have a Dell, or a Gateway, or an IBM. The guts of those machines (the CPU) are all the same (or equivalent). In this case DirecTV made a major blunder in allowing the manufacturers pretty much free reign in determining which hardware they use. The notion of having 3 different s/w baselines ALL doing the same thing - and making them machine-specific, is about the dumbest decision I've seen involving a consumer electronic product in a long time.


----------



## walters (Nov 18, 2005)

Nobody knows for sure, but it's believed that the difference between, for example, 1029 and 106C and 10FA is analogous to the different device drivers you'd have on that Dell, Gateway, or IBM (or even different models of those manufacturers). This is not new to the R15. Going all the way back to the first DirecTiVos there were multiple models with slightly different software version numbers (e.g. Philips DSR6000, Hughes GXCEBOT, Sony T60).


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

walters said:


> Nobody knows for sure, but it's believed that the difference between, for example, 1029 and 106C and 10FA is analogous to the different device drivers you'd have on that Dell, Gateway, or IBM (or even different models of those manufacturers). This is not new to the R15. Going all the way back to the first DirecTiVos there were multiple models with slightly different software version numbers (e.g. Philips DSR6000, Hughes GXCEBOT, Sony T60).


It just seems to me that the differences are much larger with the R15. I have both a 500 and a 300, and they appear very different to me (not just the size difference). For example, the 300 runs cooler than the 500. The layout of the inputs on the back is very different. Also, when I see s/w updates come out for just one of the two versions (as was the case in the fall for the 500 - where they released, I think it was, 10E8, as a precursor to 10FA), and when I see different performance characteristics (e.g. bugs that affect one, but not the other - as is the case with the looping problem I'm now seeing on the 300), that tells me that the platforms are significantly different.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the drivers for an o/s are different between manufacturers of the computers. That is, Dell doesn't use different drivers than Gateway. Granted, that's definitely the case with some peripherals you add on (printers and the like), but in terms of the "standard" peripherals - monitor/keyboard, I don't think the drivers are machine specific. I don't work in that type of environment, so I don't know for sure. Besides drivers are really separate from the core o/s. Say you have two different printers - they would use two different print drivers. But the print drivers themselves are just extra pieces of s/w put on top of the o/s to allow for communication between the cpu and the peripheral. The core o/s doesn't change. That's not really dual maintenance in my book. If MS were to make a Dell-specific version of Vista, and then make one Gateway-specific, THAT would be dual maintenance.

I really hope that's not what DirecTV is doing, because it's a real bad practice, and you're probably right - the differences in the s/w version numbers may just be more cosmetic than anything. At least that's what I hope.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

jpl said:


> That's exactly right (except, like I posted earlier, I don't share your pessimism).


When I first shared these ideas, last April just after I received my R-15, I was ignored, rebutted, or mocked. Today, folks tend to agree with the analysis but not the conclusions. What do you suppose will be the situation one year from now? 

On a more level playing field, to believe that DTV _will_ solve the problem, one must accept either of two theses:


DTV will succeed despite failure to improve its software processes.
DTV will improve its software processes and thereby lay the foundation for success.

It seems to me that you can't accept my analysis and concurrently hold that DTV will succeed in spite of their process problems. That leaves only the possibility that DTV will come to understand software processes and establish processes that can support the antecedents of success.

But, even companies that are subject to formal, external audit of their software processes find software process improvement a very difficult task. And, shifting resources from software maintenance to process improvement is a decision that DTV is very unlikely to make in the context of the current software-quality crisis.

So, I believe that it's reasonable to expect nothing other than more of what we've seen: ad hoc attempts to search out and destroy software defects. This has to be costly with respect to the morale of project staff. What do you suppose the turnover rate among software developers has been recently? Whom do you suppose management has blamed for what is, after all, really a managerial, rather than technical, failing? What is the effect on morale, and hence turnover, of such fault finding?

I believe that the likelihood that substantial software-quality improvement can issue from this configuration to be on a par with that associated with monkeys and keyboards (for a relevant analysis of the characteristics of such species, configurations, and processes, please see the website of Primate Programming, Inc.). However, I do not claim to be ominiscient--merely informed and rational. So, YMMV.

Cheers,

P.S. I am aware that the software appears to be the product of NDS. I am, however, unsure of the details of the relationship between DTV and NDS. In particular, I'm unsure how much, if any, hands-on authority over software processes DTV wields. So, it may be that I should refer to NDS, rather than DTV, as the software developer/maintainer. I suggest that my argument is valid irrespective of the actual identity of the software process owner. If you prefer, mentally substitute "NDS" for every reference to "DTV." I believe that it doesn't really matter.

Cheers,


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

wbmccarty said:


> On a more level playing field, to believe that DTV _will_ solve the problem, one must accept either of two theses:
> 
> 
> DTV will succeed despite failure to improve its software processes.
> DTV will improve its software processes and thereby lay the foundation for success.


Precisely. I believe the latter to be true - that they'll improve their processes. Right now DirecTV is in the business of doing something that they've really never done before - coding for their receivers. It's a new thing for them. Like all new things there's a learning curve. Not just in the actual work of development, but also in the definition, and implementation, of processes. I believe (I have no knowledge to back this up) that they can, and will, improve the processes that they follow, that they'll learn from the bad processes that they've followed in the past, and improve on them. As they get more experience at doing more mainstream s/w development (development for a consumer electronic product-line), they'll get more experience at developing, and improving upon, and FOLLOWING their processes (ISO 9001, anyone?). At least that's my hope. I guess time will tell.


----------



## bearymore (Sep 1, 2006)

jpl said:


> Precisely. I believe the latter to be true - that they'll improve their processes. Right now DirecTV is in the business of doing something that they've really never done before - coding for their receivers. It's a new thing for them. Like all new things there's a learning curve. Not just in the actual work of development, but also in the definition, and implementation, of processes. I believe (I have no knowledge to back this up) that they can, and will, improve the processes that they follow, that they'll learn from the bad processes that they've followed in the past, and improve on them. As they get more experience at doing more mainstream s/w development (development for a consumer electronic product-line), they'll get more experience at developing, and improving upon, and FOLLOWING their processes (ISO 9001, anyone?). At least that's my hope. I guess time will tell.


But the fact that they released these machines before they were ready makes one wonder about the intentions of their management. DVR's are an established consumer product. The R-15, especially at release, did not offer any significant new features that others hadn't already developed. In fact, it came with a slew of bugs and limitations that the competition had already transcended. What kind of rational company would expect such a product to catch on?

Only one that did not see itself in the DVR business. DTV sees itself as a satellite provider. The DVR represents a minor profit center that was developed primarily to keep up with the competition. They bet that any DVR functionality would be seen by average customers as a plus, no matter how buggy the machine it came with -- and their bet was probably right. As long as that remains the case, they have no incentive to make major, expensive, changes to their software practices. It will be a different story when DVR's come to be seen as an integral feature of video services, but that isn't today. If usual American corporate practice comes into play, they'll forego the investment in software practices in order to keep quarterly profit statements looking healthy. So don't expect a spiffy R-15 replacement any time soon.


----------



## jpl (Jul 9, 2006)

bearymore said:


> But the fact that they released these machines before they were ready makes one wonder about the intentions of their management. DVR's are an established consumer product. The R-15, especially at release, did not offer any significant new features that others hadn't already developed. In fact, it came with a slew of bugs and limitations that the competition had already transcended. What kind of rational company would expect such a product to catch on?
> 
> Only one that did not see itself in the DVR business. DTV sees itself as a satellite provider. The DVR represents a minor profit center that was developed primarily to keep up with the competition. They bet that any DVR functionality would be seen by average customers as a plus, no matter how buggy the machine it came with -- and their bet was probably right. As long as that remains the case, they have no incentive to make major, expensive, changes to their software practices. It will be a different story when DVR's come to be seen as an integral feature of video services, but that isn't today. If usual American corporate practice comes into play, they'll forego the investment in software practices in order to keep quarterly profit statements looking healthy. So don't expect a spiffy R-15 replacement any time soon.


All very valid points. But that whole integration of video services is exactly what I think DirecTV was after. I keep seeing the question "why did DTV develop their own DVR when they had TiVo?" The reason, I believe, is in where they want to go, not where they are now. The R15 allows DirecTV to integrate the DVR into its future architecture better than what Tivo could. In other words I don't believe DirecTV set out to build a better DVR. I think they set out to build a new architecture, and they needed a DVR that fit that architecture.

As to why I think they'll improve their processes... well, that's more of a gut feel than anything. Like I said, I have no knowledge of this. But they're still relatively new in the whole s/w development arena. Let me give an analogy. For many years Intel went along making microprocessors. Then one day, a flaw was discovered in one model (either the 486 or the Pentium, I forget which). It was really a minor bug - one that affected some math processing under very specific circumstances. The company decided that it really wasn't worth fixing. The firestorm they got was something they didn't expect. In the past they didn't hit any such firestorm with bugs that were far worse than that one. What happened? What happened is that Intel made a concerted effort to raise its profile - from being a supporting player to a first stringer. Remember the whole "Intel Inside" campaign, aimed at getting people to buy machines made with Intel processors instead of AMD. It worked. But it also raised awareness in people's minds of issues that the company had. The company was unprepared for the firestorm and responded in a flatfooted way. But they learned. It was a new position for them, and they eventually learned from that mistake and improved their processes.

Yes, improving processes is difficult. It is expensive. But it's also a key to business success. It's why many companies now take things like ISO 9001 and SEI level 5 certification so seriously. And at the end of the day, if DTV continues to have a reputation of making crappy products, it's going to eventually lose market share. I believe they're going to turn that around out of necessity. They're going to do some soul-searching and figure out how to improve for the future. That's my belief anyway.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

I agree with a lot of what everyone is saying but the R-15 has come leaps and bounds from a little over a year ago when it was released and I dont think anyone can deny that.

Was it rushed and released to soon ? Yes and again I dont think anyone can deny that. I think, and this is just a guess, they just released what they had ready back then expecting it to be good enough for the casual mom and pop user (not considering the needs or the use-ability of us TV addicts) , they were also going to a leased format and to try to stop or at least slow the DirecTiVo activations as they eventually want everyone on their own equipment like Dish does.

DirecTV practically just gave away R-15's, I got both of mine for zero cost with zero cost installation, and is pretty loose with the $5 credits if you call and complain enough. Updates were very frequent, almost like clock work, until the HR-20 was released then they just about stopped. I dont know if I completely buy the separate programming crews as it seems more than coincidence that we had regular R-15 updates almost to the day the HR-20 was released. Then the HR-20 started getting all the updates and we received I think 2 in all these months.

I agree the R-15 still does need work, many features added, major speed enhancements. I am guessing they will come eventually but maybe not all on this version of the SD DVR.


----------



## Larry Daughtrey (Feb 14, 2006)

Bobman, I can deny it. I PAID for my two boxes. I own two POS boxes..PERIOD


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

I think people can find a better way of describing something. From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed. We are adults lets act like it. Telling someone you have hardware you don't trust is perfectly acceptable calling it names like a school child isn't.


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

Larry Daughtrey said:


> Bobman, I can deny it.


Deny what ? You didnt quote anything.

If you mean deny that is has come leaps and bounds from when first released, then either you must not have used it 15 months ago OR you have one of the R-15s that need to do a reformat. I reformattted both my R-15's in the last few months and they seem to be working well. Still not perfect like you can see from some of my problem posts but way better than 15 month ago.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Clint Lamor said:


> I think people can find a better way of describing something. From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed. We are adults lets act like it. Telling someone you have hardware you don't trust is perfectly acceptable calling it names like a school child isn't.


Applying that to people is fine, but not for the hardware. If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck...
Saying 'I have hardware that I don't trust' does not convey the same level of disatisfaction or opinion of the hardware that the above mentioned acronyms do.


----------



## Larry Daughtrey (Feb 14, 2006)

I've read many posts lately about how there aren't as many people complaining about the R-15. I believe a lot of people are simply fed up with the excuses put out such as "my unit works perfect therefore you must be exaggerating/lying about your problems. If you have a box that works, great! But that is not an excuse to belittle people who do not. So what I'm saying is I feel a lot of people have simply decided not to post here anymore. Now I'm being told not to use a description "pos" that absolutely fits my experiences with my machines. (which is a cleaned up version of what I really think)
The saying " If it ain't broke don't fix it" does not apply to the R-15.

Bobman, I have absolutely had my units for over a year and I have done many reformat's and countless RBR's and talked to many csr's and been given basically the same ol " hmm we haven't heard of that being a problem type answers so your assumptions of my situation are incorrect.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Larry Daughtrey said:


> I've read many posts lately about how there aren't as many people complaining about the R-15. I believe a lot of people are simply fed up with the excuses put out such as "my unit works perfect therefore you must be exaggerating/lying about your problems. If you have a box that works, great! But that is not an excuse to belittle people who do not. So what I'm saying is I feel a lot of people have simply decided not to post here anymore. Now I'm being told not to use a description "pos" that absolutely fits my experiences with my machines. (which is a cleaned up version of what I really think)
> The saying " If it ain't broke don't fix it" does not apply to the R-15.
> 
> Bobman, I have absolutely had my units for over a year and I have done many reformat's and countless RBR's and talked to many csr's and been given basically the same ol " hmm we haven't heard of that being a problem type answers so your assumptions of my situation are incorrect.


Yes I am telling you not to use those sort of terms. There are many far better ways to get your points across. I have no issuses with people posting their displeasure with the equipment and have no intentions on stopping that. What my intentions are is to clean this up and stop terms like this.


----------



## saleen351 (Mar 28, 2006)

Clint Lamor said:


> I think people can find a better way of describing something. From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed. We are adults lets act like it. Telling someone you have hardware you don't trust is perfectly acceptable calling it names like a school child isn't.


Relax Francis...


----------



## bearymore (Sep 1, 2006)

Clint Lamor said:


> I think people can find a better way of describing something. From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed. We are adults lets act like it. Telling someone you have hardware you don't trust is perfectly acceptable calling it names like a school child isn't.


Is detritus or electronic flotsam acceptable? How about excellent piece of electronic equipment that fails to perform as advertised? Calling an inanimate piece of equipment the terms you delineated does not constitute an ad hominem attack on anyone, does not use profanity, or violate netiquette in any way that I can see. It also posits a very subjective standard as to when a post will or will not be deleted. I don't think anyone would consider it childish or crude to describe, say, a Yugo in the terms you list. Why not something else about which some people may feel the same way?


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Clint Lamor said:


> I think people can find a better way of describing something. From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed. We are adults lets act like it. Telling someone you have hardware you don't trust is perfectly acceptable calling it names like a school child isn't.


So no one will be allowed to call their {insert model here} a piece of junk? Are you serious? We can get that attitude over at forums.directv.com.


----------



## irmolars (Mar 12, 2006)

Don't call it what it really is.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Clint Lamor said:


> Yes I am telling you not to use those sort of terms. There are many far better ways to get your points across. I have no issuses with people posting their displeasure with the equipment and have no intentions on stopping that. What my intentions are is to clean this up and stop terms like this.


That is a very silly policy. The way some of you guys get offended when D* gets beat on you'd think it was directed at your sister.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

I myself rarely use profanity. One reason for this choice is that frequent use of profanity cheapens its impact. Specifically because I rarely use profanity, it has significant impact when I do so. The R-15 is one of those few objects that I feel to be deserving of profanity.

Nevertheless, I find myself seeing Clint's point. If we were to express ourselves fully and accurately with even minimal regularity, this forum would become a very depressing place and a place unwelcome to new users. In deference to ourselves and to those newly arrived, we need to be more creative in choosing our insults, precisely because they're so well deserved in such abundant number. 

I first thought to suggest that the phrase RFU, "really fine unit," be used as a code for whatever profanity the user has in mind. But, then it hit me that comparing the R-15 to other objects of scorn and contempt is unfair and inaccurate, because I'd rather have most of the objects mentioned than have another R-15.

Therefore, I suggest we adopt two new word usages:

R-15, noun. An electronic unit that works so unreliably for many users/owners that its true purpose has not yet been determined.

R-15-like, adjective. 1. An electronic unit sharing many negative characteristics of the DTV R-15 DVR. 2. An electronic unit having many serious, negative characteristics. 3. Of, or pertaining to, the DTV R-15 DVR itself.

If we use these words consistently, our communication will be more polite and courteous. Moreover, doing so avoids comparing the R-15 with objects that are not nearly so detestable and contemptuous--not to mention useless--as the R-15. Finally, this new usage enables us to mine many existing postings for a second, deeper level of meaning.

Agree?

Cheers,


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

I find nothing wrong with referring to any device as a piece of junk.

If the mods of this forum intend on deleting posts with those references in it I would then suggest a huge warning being displayed to new members to avoid any confusion. Most times when we see a POS or POC (I don't have any problems with that last one either) it's coming from a very frustrated new user. If this forum's response to new members venting will be to delete their posts we will no doubt soon be seen as a bunch of old church ladies that don't want their virtues destroyed by "bad language" (or bad acronyms).

Taking the approach that any post with abc or xyz in it will be deleted is rigid and short sighted, IMO. Instead take every post as it's intended. There are times when the use of these terms are appropriate. OTOH if member continues to use these terms in every post a mod can address that behaviour with that member.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Good point, WP! Moreover, if this prohibition is now policy, the FAQ should be amended so that folks know what's what from the beginning. I tend to become upset when rules appear to be arbitrarily adopted _ad hoc_. I could hardly blame someone else who feels similarly.

But, you know this fight had to happen. Recall the book _Games People Play_ and, in particular, the game "Let's Him and You Fight?" The OP seems to have been more or less deliberately waving insult in the face of those who continue to have problems with their units. Anyone arriving at the forum and seeing the title of this thread would be sorely tempted to express him/herself quite bluntly.

Of course, my own preference would be to amend the rules to define the terms _R-15_ and _R-15-like_ consistently with my previous posting in this thread. 

Cheers,


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Are you guys serious you can't come up with better words to use then POS or POC or things of this nature? Sorry but that makes me laugh. This is not the other mods talking this is ME not me as a mod but me as an adult. I deal with software and hardware on a daily basis from MANY companies that have many issues many of which are far more serious then any issue anyone on this forum has ever had.

So you mean to tell me it would be proper or appropriate for me to walk into a CEO office and tell him this piece of software or hardware is a POS? ABSOLUTELY not. If I did something of that nature I would be looking for new work the next day. Instead I explain things in a far more mature way and still get my point across and you know what my opinions aren't dismissed as childish.

The whole point of this isn't to stop people from expressing their frustration with the DVR, it's to have it done in a way that name calling is avoided. I see people report posts all the time because they are tired of seeing the term POS and others in posts. Not because they are tired of seeing legitimate posts of frustrations but because they are tired of the antics.


----------



## Larry Daughtrey (Feb 14, 2006)

The whole point of a discussion forum is for everyone to be heard, no matter how repugnant anyone finds the expression pos or god forbid -junk, and we all use our common sense and life experience and values and morals to reach individual conclusions. What you are advocating is censorship and groupthink.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Larry Daughtrey said:


> The whole point of a discussion forum is for everyone to be heard, no matter how repugnant anyone finds the expression pos or god forbid -junk, and we all use our common sense and life experience and values and morals to reach individual conclusions. What you are advocating is censorship and groupthink.


No what I am advocating is acting in a manner that gets people to pay attention to you, not dismiss the point you're trying to get across.

I don't want people to stop relaying their experienes good or bad I just want them to do it in a way that doesn't resort to name calling.

I didn't mean to start a huge war here but we need to do something. I see reported posts about these terms, it makes me and many others not want to read threads. If you all think I'm (not anyone else) trying to sensor you then i'm sorry you feel this way. I don't want to sensor your feelings I would just like for you to find a more creative way to express these feelings.

I don't want people to not say that they have issues because if we don't talk about these problems then no one will know they need to be fixed. I just hope we can do things in a manner that doesn't cause problems across the board.


----------



## sxrxrnr1 (Feb 10, 2007)

wbmccarty said:


> I myself rarely use profanity. One reason for this choice is that frequent use of profanity cheapens its impact. Specifically because I rarely use profanity, it has significant impact when I do so. The R-15 is one of those few objects that I feel to be deserving of profanity.
> 
> Nevertheless, I find myself seeing Clint's point. If we were to express ourselves fully and accurately with even minimal regularity, this forum would become a very depressing place and a place unwelcome to new users. In deference to ourselves and to those newly arrived, we need to be more creative in choosing our insults, precisely because they're so well deserved in such abundant number.
> 
> ...


As an old time IBM mainframe systems tech user the saying went as this: "It is not a known IBM bug until every user has reported it twice".


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Clint Lamor said:


> If you all think I'm (not anyone else) trying to sensor you then i'm sorry you feel this way. I don't want to sensor your feelings I would just like for you to find a more creative way to express these feelings.


Clint, I don't like being _censored_ but wouldn't make a big deal about it. OTOH, if you propose to _sensor_ me, I think we'd have to get a blood test and license first. :eek2:

Cheers,


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

wbmccarty said:


> Clint, I don't like being _censored_ but wouldn't make a big deal about it. OTOH, if you propose to _sensor_ me, I think we'd have to get a blood test and license first. :eek2:
> 
> Cheers,


I don't want to censor you or anyone else. Heaven knows I have FAR better things to do with my time. I would just like more people to use better choice in terms they use. Hopefully this isn't asking too much.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

Regardless of what the mods ultimately decide to do, I can say personally that when I start reading a post if the person is having serious problems, but attempts to reasonably explain what those problems are, I am not only inclined to read the entire post, but to offer whatever help I can.

On the other hand, when I start reading a post that is nothing but a rant, regardless of the language used I generally don't get past the first, or maybe second, sentence. I have no problem with them ranting, I just don't need to read it. That person is not seeking help, they are venting. That's fine, let them vent. I can easily ignore the posts that don't serve me a purpose in reading them.

The more profane the venting or ranting, the lower esteem I tend to hold that poster, in most cases. As wbmccarty notes, when a well spoken person carefully inserts an expletive for emphasis, it is much more effective than seeing repetitive "POS" , "POC", or similar entries.

I would expect the moderators to either delete or edit posts that contain profane words spelled out. They don't bother me, but they have no place in a public forum that anyone, of any age, can access. On the other hand, I truly don't care if an angry rant is deleted or not. Maybe after the person vents, they can look at other posts a bit more objectively, and in time participate in the forum in a constructive manner.

Carl


----------



## TigersFanJJ (Feb 17, 2006)

I personally agree with Clint. Not that POS bothers me. It just gets really old reading these type of posts over and over and over again. Another term that I feel is used way too much here is HD-lite. 

I've got a great idea. Lets have a POS and HD-lite thread where that is the only place anyone can post those rants so it will make it easier for everyone else to ignore. :lol:


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Clint Lamor said:


> So you mean to tell me it would be proper or appropriate for me to walk into a CEO office and tell him this piece of software or hardware is a POS?


If I paid good $$$ for electronic gear or a software program, and after 14 months of updates/fixes that gear/software still did not work as was (and currently is) advertised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with telling the CEO his gear/software was a POS/POC/POJ. Is the CEO of any organization some type of god or king that should be spoken to with some care simply due to his title? If the CEO can't handle the truth regarding an inferior product his company produces then he shouldn't be in that position.



Clint Lamor said:


> The whole point of this isn't to stop people from expressing their frustration with the DVR, it's to have it done in a way that name calling is avoided.


Did you just say you're worried about someone calling the R15 a name? WOW!!! I'm truly sorry if I've hurt the R15s feelings by referring to it as junk or some other equally as meaningful adjective.


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> If I paid good $$$ for electronic gear or a software program, and after 14 months of updates/fixes that gear/software still did not work as was (and currently is) advertised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with telling the CEO his gear/software was a POS/POC/POJ. Is the CEO of any organization some type of god or king that should be spoken to with some care simply due to his title? If the CEO can't handle the truth regarding an inferior product his company produces then he shouldn't be in that position.


Writing as a student of management, I can offer assurance that any CEO worth his/'her salt would want to be told a message as concisely as possible. Profanity would definitely be in order when warranted by the subject of discussion.

However, subordinates tend to prefer to take ambiguous stands, to avoid being on the wrong side of an issue. So, behavior of the sort that I argue CEOs prefer is not often in evidence. It's possible that some misinterpret the scarcity as resulting from deference. Some subordinates might even justify their lukewarm responses by reference to courtesy. However, that's not the actual dynamic. Having said that, I will at the same time concede that, at the executive level, it's more common to employ polysyllabic euphemisms than those terms that tend to appear on Internet forums.

An exception would appear to be President Nixon. His tapes disclose that about 1 in 60 words he used was a profanity of the ordinary sort. The phrase "expletive deleted" seems to have entered common usage as a result of his limited command of euphemisms.

However, here's an interesting piece of data that goes to the heart of this discussion. The anonymous authors and editors of the Wikipedia article titled "Ephemism" write, "Excretory profanity such as p--- and s--- may be acceptable in adult conversation...." In their opinion, it seems, our sensitivities appear to be overly refined.

Please note that those members seeking a euphemism for the term s--- may choose from many available in the Wikipedia article titled "S---."

Cheers,

Please note that the second URL given above has been bowlderized by the forum software, not by me. Please use a capital _S_ when typing the URL.


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

TigersFanJJ said:


> I've got a great idea. Lets have a POS and HD-lite thread where that is the only place anyone can post those rants so it will make it easier for everyone else to ignore. :lol:


Maybe there should be a "Rant Forum" for that very purpose. Posts in other threads/forums would be moved to that one, as opposed to being deleted. It would let those that need to vent do so, and the rest of us could politely ignore it.

Carl


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Wolffpack said:


> If I paid good $$$ for electronic gear or a software program, and after 14 months of updates/fixes that gear/software still did not work as was (and currently is) advertised, I see absolutely nothing wrong with telling the CEO his gear/software was a POS/POC/POJ. Is the CEO of any organization some type of god or king that should be spoken to with some care simply due to his title? If the CEO can't handle the truth regarding an inferior product his company produces then he shouldn't be in that position.
> 
> Did you just say you're worried about someone calling the R15 a name? WOW!!! I'm truly sorry if I've hurt the R15s feelings by referring to it as junk or some other equally as meaningful adjective.


You know what this conversation is done. I have stated my point of view on the subject. I think you are all far better people then people that have to stoop to the level of name calling and I had hoped you coud all be a little more adult and creative then using terms such as you did.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

carl6 said:


> Maybe there should be a "Rant Forum" for that very purpose. Posts in other threads/forums would be moved to that one, as opposed to being deleted. It would let those that need to vent do so, and the rest of us could politely ignore it.
> 
> Carl


I couldn't agree more, I am just tired of seeing the term floating around. If anyone cares to notice NEVER did I mention I didn't want people speaking their mind or that there where no complaints allowed. I just said I would like those terms dropped.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Clint,

If those terms bother you that much why not add them to the banned word list? Problem solved.


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

Clint Lamor said:


> I couldn't agree more, I am just tired of seeing the term floating around. If anyone cares to notice NEVER did I mention I didn't want people speaking their mind or that there where no complaints allowed. I just said I would like those terms dropped.


You didn't just say that you "would like those terms dropped".

You said "From this point forward if I see the term POS or Crap or Junk or any such thing the post will be removed."

That is what people had a problem with

In my opinion, there should be room for all opinions (excluding anything vulgar or personal attacks) and that should include rants of people completely frustrated by being locked into a two year contract for a piece of equipment that isn't working. for them.

If there isn't room for all opinions, including rants, then this forum is pointless and no better than the heavily moderated directv forums.

Isn't this a part of the avsforum family? I have seen many similar posts using terms like POS in the avsforum and have never seen mods have issues with it.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Sorry guys I shouldn't have been so hard in my point of view I should have stated please don't use the terms, if I see the terms I will edit out the terms. I don't want anyone to not express your opinions I just would rather it be done in a better manner.

If it where not for many of the opinions in this forum MANY things on the R15/HR20 would never have been known or fixed.

If we where trying to stop opinions well then I think probably a very high percentage of every post here would be gone. That servers no purpose.

I would just like everyone to please watch the words you use. Instead of saying its a POS (which actually one of the words that it means is not allowed here) can't you just say you think is rubbish or a bad unit or horrible or something a little more tactful?


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

I don't disagree with you that the better and more constructive approach is to avoid inflammatory language but I guess I can just empathize with those that get that frustrated because of my own experiences. 

My current R15 has been solid, and other than lacking DLB's, I really like it and prefer it over my R10.

However, my first R15 was horrible. I'm talking daily reboots, reformats, missed shows etc etc. Reformating didn't help a bit.

That first R15 was on the exact same hookups and had the exact same SLs as the new one, yet failed miserably in all aspects while my second unit is solid.

I just know how frustrating it can be to have to babysit a unit and then fight with Directv for a new one.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

raott said:


> I don't disagree with you that the better and more constructive approach is to avoid inflammatory language but I guess I can just empathize with those that get that frustrated because of my own experiences.
> 
> My current R15 has been solid, and other than lacking DLB's, I really like it and prefer it over my R10.
> 
> ...


I feel for them also, luckily mine has been pretty reliable from the start, I have had small problems here and there but have never had it lock up. On the other hand I just had to reboot my HR20 the other day because it wouldn't display anything but the menu. I had been out of town so I thought all my shows where toast. I was mad but I still kept it in check.

I know it can be frustrating at times (some time way more then others) I would rather people use decent terms and speak from knowledge not frustration, this way everyone pays attention to what you say and can't dismiss it as merely a rant.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Wolffpack said:


> If the CEO can't handle the truth regarding an inferior product his company produces then he shouldn't be in that position.


Based on the statements that have been made about the stability of some of the D* receivers and the PQ thereon, Mr. Carey clearly needs an executive update of the cattle prod variety.


----------



## Larry Daughtrey (Feb 14, 2006)

Clint, you had to reboot your HR20 one time and it made you mad, but you were able to keep it in check. So if one mishap made you mad, I wonder what level of anger you would achieve after say.. oh I don't know.. how about a minimum of a RBR and or a Reformat once a week and then just to top it off, your csr tells you he/she is amazed at your dilemma and has never heard of such a problem.. 
Hmmm...


----------



## mikewolf13 (Jan 31, 2006)

Can we also banish threads praising the R-15, especially the ones that say how "that should be fixed in the next upgrade!"? I have literally be reading htat for 14 months

Serioulsy this is a support forum, people...many people are going to believe it is interminable inefective digital video recording device (hope i offended noone).

I have no issue with "POS"..maybe if you use the words and not initials, but please...

If you don't like a thread..don't read and for goodness sake..DON'T RESPOND to it..otherwise it stays up top.

Send the OP a polite PM if you must register your disgust. 

Without profanity or personal attacks, comments within the Directv DVR domain which reflect the opinions of a sizable population here should not be censored


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Larry Daughtrey said:


> Clint, you had to reboot your HR20 one time and it made you mad, but you were able to keep it in check. So if one mishap made you mad, I wonder what level of anger you would achieve after say.. oh I don't know.. how about a minimum of a RBR and or a Reformat once a week and then just to top it off, your csr tells you he/she is amazed at your dilemma and has never heard of such a problem..
> Hmmm...


I have said many times here many of the CSRs are useless. Stands for many technical companies. No just the lockup didn't make me mad the thought of losing an entire weeks worth of shows did.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

mikewolf13 said:


> Can we also banish threads praising the R-15, especially the ones that say how "that should be fixed in the next upgrade!"? I have literally be reading htat for 14 months
> 
> Serioulsy this is a support forum, people...many people are going to believe it is interminable inefective digital video recording device (hope i offended noone).
> 
> ...


Actually if it matters when we see complaints about any type of message even the ones where people are always praising the units we deal with them.

If you care to look up the meaning of POS in this aspect you will notice that it does use profanity.

As for me registering my opinion much like the rest of you I have all the right to do so. When it comes to terms and such that multiple people have reported I have even more right to talk about it.

I am not trying to sensor the point that people are upset about equipment having issues just trying to get people to refrain from using what can be deemed as vulgar terms.


----------



## Sneezy (Dec 18, 2006)

I'll argue against them doing a good job. I've had other DVR;s that were damn near flawless for years (not Tivo). I gave my sister my old Replay TV (when I ditched cable) and she loves it because it works every time without fail. We have yet to EVER have it malfunction. My Dish harware lost 1 show in 18 months.

I have had more problems with my R15 since it was installed in December. The software update (that took forever to get) did help but I still have problems with playback of recorded shows. if I skip back it freezes for over a minute. I have about 8 shows stored at the moment. I've lost shows, had partial recorings....and I PAY for this crap?

The experience of this crap for a new D customer makes me want to just cancel everything like I did when I had a ton of problems with TWC. They can't get me a decent signal to my house at all.

I Loved my Dish but they could no longer offer me distant locals....so I jumped to DTV. I regret it except that I can get the big networks now (I have a waiver for them).

DTV CSR's tell me to format it....the damn thing is brand freaking new, I'm not even at 2 months yet with it and Ill lose my programed channels I get (since they can't provide me with that like they should) and I will lose my saved shows and my set recordings (which always record stupid re-runs and I have no control over it). All I get told is they will send me another R15 if the format does not work. WTF? Come on, what is this crap? All I get on the phone is sorry sir.....we can't help you.

As far as I'm concerned DTV is barely one step above cable.

Now for those that want to criticize me, go ahead. I write custom computer softwrae for a living and I know that if I put out crap like DTV I would be out of business so fast it wouldn't be funny. We have 5 people that support about 300 customers (compared to my comptitors that have about 19 staff for 600 customers) and we keep getting more business that belonged to the other guys simply because we respond and do things for them. We have managed to set the standard for service and quality in our work.

DTV has a lot to learn. Microsoft Media Center is more relaible than my R15, I just can't use it witout the damn box!

Every time I talk about going back to cable my WIFE reminds me how bad it was. Even she complains about the R15 and she's very tolerant of things. I know it's bad when she complains.

JUST MAKE THE DAMN THING WORK!


----------



## wbmccarty (Apr 28, 2006)

Sneezy said:


> IThe software update (that took forever to get) did help but I still have problems with playback of recorded shows.


I suspect that the greater part of the reliability improvement often attributed to software updates is actually the result of the reboot performed as the last step of the update. Rebooting rebuilds memory-resident structures and therefore temporarily eliminates problems due to data corruption. Of course, soon thereafter, memory corruption once again begins to accumulate.

I have no hard data on this--merely a hunch. 

Cheers,

P.S.

R-15! R-15! R-15! [I couldn't resist throwing in a bit of proanity. ]

Cheers,


----------



## Cerus (Feb 8, 2007)

I stopped reading this thread several days ago simply because I had a good idea of what everyone's opinions are. But I decided to catch up on it today and to my dismay, I find an open argument between a Mod and the members here. I don't believe this needs to go off topic more than it already has but this has gotten ridiculous.

My first impression (no offense) is that the Mod in question has gotten on a power trip. Using profanity is one thing, using descriptive words like "junk" is another. If this were a matter offensive terms directed at people, I would have to agree with the Mod. But it is not about people, it's about a piece of technology. Junk is not profanity, I do not find it to be offensive and I doubt anyone else does. Calling something a piece of junk is used all the time...even at a big CEO meeting. Maybe they don't use POS, maybe they do. But that point is moot as this is not a meeting between CEO's and their employees.

This is a place for people to discuss and express their experiences, opinions, thoughts on all things related whether good or bad. You can no more expect someone to express their dissatisfaction with a product by only using words like bad or horrible than you can except someone to only say good or nice when they like it.

If people are no longer allowed to use overly powerful negative words like junk or crap, or terms like POS then you also need to censor those who use positive terms that are too powerful. Words like wonderful, terrific, awesome incredible etc should not be allowed either. Only good, nice etc.

You did a lot of backtracking in subsequent posts but I think we all know your actual feelings and intent. To simply delete any post that contains any term you don't particularly agree with. Honestly, I think you are being way too sensitive and I've never heard of any forum being or attempting to be so heavily moderated. I've never read one post where someone took their language too far in this thread...certainly not even close to justifying those threats.

If I come across a thread with every other word being crap, junk, POS etc then I just don't read it. But using those terms in a well thought out, intelligent and concise post is a completely different thing. They add impact and power to the posters feelings... after all... we are reading text. We rely on words to convey our feelings, thoughts and moods...not tone of voice, facial expression and body language.

PS. What I find more offensive than any word a person could use is a Moderator engaging in an argument/debate in an open, public thread.

*Edit* Odd that there is an acronyms page here on dbstalk.com listing POS, ROTFLMAO and RTFM...all contain profane words


----------



## pentium101 (Nov 19, 2005)

This whole argument over the use of certain acronyms is just ridiculous.  

I'm not trying to disrespect the mods decision, but it seems to become very clear that with DTV reps reading these forums that you have to walk on eggshells in order to keep them happy.

I'm sure that most of the complaints reported are coming from DTV reps because they are tired of reading all of the negative terms describing a product that they are trying their best to improve.

Would it make DTV happier if the terms POS, POC, or POJ were replaced by something like: "state-of-the-art piece of equipment which currently fails to meet most customers expectations"?

An example would read like, "I went out to dinner last night and had set my R15 to record Desperate Housewives. When I had arrived home a short time later, not surprisingly I had discovered that it had failed to record. I was so mad that I wanted to throw this (state-of-the-art piece of equipment which currently fails to meet most customers expectations) down a flight of stairs."


----------



## Tgrim1 (Aug 18, 2006)

Maybe we could make a politically correct term for the R15.....

"Functionally Challenged"


----------



## Bobman (Jan 3, 2006)

Not sure what all the fuss is except showing lack of respect for this forum and/or the Moderators. It has nothing to do with censoring and even if it did, its not anyone heres board/group and being a member here entitles you to nothing. I am on some Yahoo and Google groups where your messages have to be approved before they even show up.

The Moderator asked for people to do/not do something and that is what they are in charge for. Its not an issue to debate or a I'll think about it, he said dont do it so start acting like adults and just move on. If you have problems making a simple post without profanity, blotted out profanity, nasty wording, sarcastic comments, putdowns and jabs, maybe your posts should be censored and I would have no problem with that.


----------



## Clint Lamor (Nov 15, 2005)

Ok one more time this conversation is over, bring the thread back to topic. If you don't like what I asked you to do then take up with me in private or with another MOD in private. You want to call it a power trip go right ahead. I call it being respectful of other users. If it where a power trip I would have gone much further.

So back on topic please.


----------

