# PCMagazine: The DVR DirecTV Customers Hate to Love



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2097242,00.asp

Article over at pcmag.com. Link on extremetech.com also.


----------



## Supervolcano (Jan 23, 2007)

Pretty good article.
Make sure you check out all 3 pages of it, not just the 1st.


----------



## say-what (Dec 14, 2006)

Thanks, good article.


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

I wish they would do a similar report on the R15.


----------



## oakwcj (Sep 28, 2006)

The article says "the box includes a USB connection and a flash card reader." Huh?


----------



## Paul Secic (Dec 16, 2003)

Tom_S said:


> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2097242,00.asp
> 
> Article over at pcmag.com. Link on extremetech.com also.


Cable giant?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

oakwcj said:


> The article says "the box includes a USB connection and a flash card reader." Huh?


I found that kind of odd too... 
Unless maybe he was just looking at a photo of it, and thought the access card port was a flash card reader.


----------



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

Obviously researched thoroughly.


----------



## mtnagel (Sep 18, 2006)

Damn, why didn't he contact me for comment? That would have been cool to see my name on their site 

Overall, good article.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

WOW - a fair & balanced article on the HR20. Good reading.


----------



## jasonblair (Sep 5, 2006)

"Kalister said that one bug he experienced, now fixed, caused the unit to shut off access to his _Sunday Night Ticket _NFL channel after the games were completed, convincing the HR20 that he didn't have legitimate access to the content and deleting the recordings."

Maybe he missed the games because the games are shown during the day on NFL Sunday Ticket?


----------



## eatswodo (Nov 20, 2005)

Quoting from the article:

"As with the launch of any new, sophisticated consumer electronics product (particularly software-related products like the HR20) there have been some software issues to deal with," Ekstedt added. "It is not unusual to make software adjustments and updates once a complex technical product like this is in the field. But, we believe the issues have been largely addressed at this point and *as people become more familiar with the user interface of the HR20, their satisfaction with the box increases."*

So it's all our fault because we don't know how to use it?

Apart from that, pretty good overall.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

eatswodo said:


> So it's all our fault because we don't know how to use it?


I don't think that is what he is trying to say at all....

In the early months of the unit, and especially anyone comming from a LONG period of use with another DVR... the significantly different UI from what they are used to, adds a level of frustration to it.

But as you get past that, and learn the new/different UI. That "aspect" of the frustration diminishes


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Yep, good article.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

I would dispute the idea that Mr. Beauhaven puts forward that the HR20 wasn't released (loosed) on the public for beta testing. In fact, I would go so far as to say that since key features aren't yet fully enabled, it is still in alpha testing.

Beta testing, by the non-Microsoft definition, is the stage at which all features are implemented and thought to be ready for prime time. Gamma testing is a distant memory. The HR20 obviously wasn't at the beta stage when it was released sans OTA support. eSATA and Viiv could be considered add-on features but they have also been added as works in progress.

I'm growing a little weary of elements of the press trying to condense what is contained here at DBSTalk. There is just too much information here to try and take a one or two page summary and the tenor of the forums changes, sometimes radically, with each general availability software release.

It is comforting to know that DirecTV hasn't changed their public perception of how wonderful the HR20 is. You have to wonder what "issues have been largely addressed" means.

I did appreciate the apologists versus exaggerationists nod.


----------



## markrubi (Oct 12, 2006)

From the magazine article.. "Ever since the cable giant launched the HD DVR last August,"

I wondered what that long black thing was connected to my dish going straight up into the sky.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

My concern with the article is that once too many people know what goes on here with the CE and all, it might stop.


----------



## eatswodo (Nov 20, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I don't think that is what he is trying to say at all....
> 
> In the early months of the unit, and especially anyone comming from a LONG period of use with another DVR... the significantly different UI from what they are used to, adds a level of frustration to it.
> 
> But as you get past that, and learn the new/different UI. That "aspect" of the frustration diminishes


Oh, I agree - it just struck me that way when I first read it. I should have included a smiley.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

Also, the article didn't mention that the HR20 is a lease, not a purchase.


----------



## fjcastro (Jan 29, 2007)

Too bad that they didn't touch on the issue of the crappy contracted installers. (But I guess that goes beyond the scope of the article when they were only dealing with the hardware)


----------



## Pink Fairy (Dec 28, 2006)

That was definately an interesting read. It will be a while before I get one of the HR20's, but I thought the article was well written.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

harsh said:


> I would dispute the idea that Mr. Beauhaven puts forward that the HR20 wasn't released (loosed) on the public for beta testing. In fact, I would go so far as to say that since key features aren't yet fully enabled, it is still in alpha testing.
> 
> Beta testing, by the non-Microsoft definition, is the stage at which all features are implemented and thought to be ready for prime time. Gamma testing is a distant memory. The HR20 obviously wasn't at the beta stage when it was released sans OTA support. eSATA and Viiv could be considered add-on features but they have also been added as works in progress.
> 
> ...


Agree on the Directv comments. Usual spin, especially the "vocal minority" comment. So they are going through all these hoops to appease a vocal minority? Highly doubtful. They have their story (first spun way back in November with their official response to the negative user reviews on CNET) and they are sticking to it. Funny, but a "vocal minority" doesn't really sync up with Chase Carey saying "numerous" HR20s had to be replaced a couple of weeks ago.

The story did use the "blow chunks" quote early on. All in all, Directv got off pretty easy on this one, but as you said, things are way too complex at this point, especially for someone who isn't a Directv subscriber. He tried to use the basic "balanced" approach by using sources who hate it, love it and give Directv credit for trying to fix it. But once again, Directv put on its happy face.

Meantime, Directv keeps trying to appease those of us in the very vocal minority. Glad to know they care so much.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

:beatdeadhorse:


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

:beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

ScoBuck said:


> :beatdeadhorse:





tstarn said:


> :beatdeadhorse: :beatdeadhorse:


Children! 

(Apologies for putting the smilie in way too late.)


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

:bang :bang :bang


----------



## kaz (Sep 18, 2006)

> "To answer your questions about the HR20, there have been some issues but they have indeed come from a vocal minority," said Jade Ekstedt, a DirecTV spokeswoman, via an email.


Not everyone knows how to post to a forum, or what a computer is. And do you really think they will tally up the complaints called in? Theres no public proof of said complaints.

The mouthpeices need to do a reality check. And to tell this to PCmag readers, they will just respond the same way I did "B.S."

*this is not a complaint of my system, mine has had its hiccups, but is fine now, sans the features its needs to be a real tivo replacement*


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

Hey--this is cool. I got the closing quote at the end of the article. (Yup--my real name is Dave.)


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

tstarn said:


> Agree on the Directv comments. Usual spin, especially the "vocal minority" comment. So they are going through all these hoops to appease a vocal minority? Highly doubtful. They have their story (first spun way back in November with their official response to the negative user reviews on CNET) and they are sticking to it. Funny, but a "vocal minority" doesn't really sync up with Chase Carey saying "numerous" HR20s had to be replaced a couple of weeks ago.
> 
> The story did use the "blow chunks" quote early on. All in all, Directv got off pretty easy on this one, but as you said, things are way too complex at this point, especially for someone who isn't a Directv subscriber. He tried to use the basic "balanced" approach by using sources who hate it, love it and give Directv credit for trying to fix it. But once again, Directv put on its happy face.
> 
> Meantime, Directv keeps trying to appease those of us in the very vocal minority. Glad to know they care so much.


What did you expect? They claim to have never heard of HD-Lite either.


----------



## Lags (Jan 31, 2007)

markrubi said:


> From the magazine article.. "Ever since the cable giant launched the HD DVR last August,"
> 
> I wondered what that long black thing was connected to my dish going straight up into the sky.


LOL!! Looks now like they changed the article to say "satellite giant" instead of "cable giant". D'OH! :lol:


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

I've called satellite "cable" before by accident. If you grew up with either cable or antenna as the distinction, you sometimes call anything NOT antenna as cable.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

raott said:


> What did you expect? They claim to have never heard of HD-Lite either.


True. Guess I expect them to get off that talking point already. Doh!


----------



## chef8181 (Jan 25, 2007)

"Although cables – including HDMI, which can cost up to $100 from manufacturers like Monster Cable – are not included, the box includes a USB connection and a flash card reader. "

Wrong. I got my HR-20 installed 3 weeks ago and it came with a HDMI cable which the installer used to hook it up to the TV. He said he switched over to using the HDMI cable instead of the component cable in January. Of course the D* CSR told me it wouldn't be coming with a HDMI cable so i went out and bought one before the installation.


----------



## Kapeman (Dec 22, 2003)

harsh said:


> I did appreciate the apologists versus exaggerationists nod.


I agree with you, but if you notice the author listed the person with complaints as an HR20 "customer" while the pro viewpoint was from a "retired telcom software engineer".

The difference is subtle, but powerful.

I am not complaining about the HR20 as I have had pretty good luck with it and I REALLY appreciate D*'s commitment to the device and this community.

I just wanted to make note of the interesting terms used by the author and what they may convey.


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

Kapeman said:


> I agree with you, but if you notice the author listed the person with complaints as an HR20 "customer" while the pro viewpoint was from a "retired telcom software engineer".
> 
> The difference is subtle, but powerful.
> 
> ...


Mine was a positive set of quotes and I was called just a customer. Eh. He may have just mentioned his line to give what he said more heft.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Hey, they link the Survey results  Very cool!

The article certainly gave a nod to this group. Kudos to all.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Yep. An article in a Ziff Davis publication written by a Ziff Davis staff member, one that has written many many articles published in that mag, on many topics and from various companies. Just do your homework and there are links to OVER 150 articles he has written in that space.

He contacts various people and also DirecTV for their comments. He presents arguments from the full spectrum of satisfaction. His take on it is that it has some issues but generally is well-received by users, and that DirecTv seems to be doing the right thing.

Well of course that doesn't sit well in the vocal minority, no one would ever think it would. Of course, articles written by people clearly IN the vocal minority have far less bias I suppose.

Edit: here is a link to add'l articles writtien by this author in this mag:
http://www.pcmag.com/search_results/0,1208,,00.asp?qry=mark+hachman&site=3


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> Yep. An article in a Ziff Davis publication written by a Ziff Davis staff member, one that has written many many articles published in that mag, on many topics and from various companies. Just do your homework and there are links to OVER 150 articles he has written in that space.
> 
> He contacts various people and also DirecTV for their comments. He presents arguments from the full spectrum of satisfaction. His take on it is that it has some issues but generally is well-received by users, and that DirecTv seems to be doing the right thing.
> 
> ...


You are perfectly within your rights to keep believing in the myth of fair, balanced reporting, because that's just what it is, a myth. Every decision a reporter/writer/editor makes affects the so-called "balance" of a story. Not that it means a story can't be informative, but just because it's "balanced," doesn't make it the truth. It's something you would learn in Journalism 101.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

To say that no reporters/writers, etc ever go into a story without bias is ABSURD. To say that people are unable to judge the evidence and THEN make a decision is ridiculous. But to try and come off as unbiased when you aren't - now that's the sham IMO.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

Geez, never said I was unbiased. Not at all. In fact, if you read my story, I definitely had a point of view on the entire situation. Guilty as charged.

Again, you can believe what you want. I suppose you also believe everything you read in the newspapers or see on national network news too, as long as the source of that news is a respected news organization like Ziff-Davis.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Nope - I don't believe everything I read (note: Your article for example). I read, and ask questions, and formulate my OWN opinion based on that. Like asking people where their numbers come from (like your guesstimates that are way over the top IMO). 

I am merely stating here that I believe all sides were equally presented in this article, and that the authors opinion is that overwhelmingly most are satisfied, and that DirecTV is properly addressing whatever issues there are.

It doesn't jive with your 'keep a list', get concessions, be prepared to go after D* approach, I expected you to knock what was written - no big deal really.

Seems by far most of the people responding here agree that it is a fair and representative article.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> Nope - I don't believe everything I read (note: Your article for example). I read, and ask questions, and formulate my OWN opinion based on that. Like asking people where their numbers come from (like your guesstimates that are way over the top IMO).
> 
> I am merely stating here that I believe all sides were equally presented in this article, and that the authors opinion is that overwhelmingly most are satisfied, and that DirecTV is properly addressing whatever issues there are.
> 
> ...


The author's opinion? I thought this was a fair, unbiased piece of writing. His opinion is based on talking to three people, and one PR flak who basically handed him the company line? No, I think you are mixing up Directv's opinion with the writer's.

Anyway, the truth is always elusive. And no single article is going to necessarily get at it.

As you noted, an article is just a piece of information that can help people make up their minds. There have been posts on DBSTalk that say, "After seeing this, I'll wait." and there have been posts that say "Looks like it's time to make the move." So it cuts both ways.

On your other point, I guess keeping a list of problems when you buy a product that gives you trouble isn't a good idea, then. Seems to me, keeping lists is exactly the way to present your case and use facts when asking a company why they delivered a shaky product, even if they are trying to fix it now. Nothing nefarious about keeping a list of issues, in my view. Without one, you have no leg to stand on if you decide to call the company to task.

In fact, building lists of issues is exactly how the people on the CE threads are trying to help Directv get this situation resolved once and for all, no?


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

Capmeister said:


> Hey--this is cool. I got the closing quote at the end of the article. (Yup--my real name is Dave.)


Congratulations, Dave! Nice quotes.

I had no idea you were a "retired telcom software engineer". Now that I know how important you are, I will have to treat you with more awe.

- Craig


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> Nope - I don't believe everything I read (note: Your article for example). I read, and ask questions, and formulate my OWN opinion based on that. Like asking people where their numbers come from (like your guesstimates that are way over the top IMO).
> 
> I am merely stating here that I believe all sides were equally presented in this article, and that the authors opinion is that *overwhelmingly most are satisfied, and that DirecTV is properly addressing whatever issues there are*.
> 
> ...


OK smart guy. This author has no numbers or quantifiable sources to cite to support this opinion but you can't act fast enough to accept his perspective as factual and accurate while dismissing other opposite but equally unsupported opinions.

You, like many, are only too willing to adopt that which supports what you want to believe and dismiss that which does not.

Don't sweat it though. You could grow up to be Vice President with that approach.

:nono2:


----------



## cbaker (Dec 20, 2006)

Article - good job Mr. Hachman. DirecTV's continual denial is crazy though .... 

"To answer your questions about the HR20, there have been some issues but they have indeed come from a vocal minority," said Jade Ekstedt, a DirecTV spokeswoman, via an email.

So it must only be the "few" hundred people on this board having problems. I guess we don't know how to use our HR20, or maybe our units are just bad, and the rest of the world is working fine.

Then please send me one of those "working" boxes with the software that the other thousands of people have. Please, can I have Mrs. Ekstedt's email so I can find out how to get one.

Spare me the spin DirecTV. Man up.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

cbaker said:


> Article - good job Mr. Hachman. DirecTV's continual denial is crazy though ....
> 
> "To answer your questions about the HR20, there have been some issues but they have indeed come from a vocal minority," said Jade Ekstedt, a DirecTV spokeswoman, via an email.
> 
> ...


I want one too. If they just took the names of all of us out in the "vocal minority" on DBSTalk and sent us one of the good HR20s, Earl could go back to his day job. Very funny idea.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

As just another forum member, I want to ask, please don't use this as another time to argue.

:backtotop

This was a great article with quotes from users who were happy and unhappy. The company was also given the chance to speak as well. I did not see any preference given to anyone.

Is this article just online or will it be in the newstand print version?

- Craig

_EDIT: I was never contacted for this article and do not know the author. How you know you have written a fair article is when no one likes it._


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

HarleyD said:


> OK smart guy. This author has no numbers or quantifiable sources to cite to support this opinion but you can't act fast enough to accept his perspective as factual and accurate while dismissing other opposite but equally unsupported opinions.
> 
> You, like many, are only too willing to adopt that which supports what you want to believe and dismiss that which does not.
> 
> ...


What I DID say was that I feel that the author presented all sides, I have never said that I agreed with any part of it. I thought it was a fair and balanced article. I guess that would include the comments that were negative to the HR 20 also, wouldn't it? Or is that too much for you to fathom?


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

Not too bad of an article, but he still buys the company line that the HR20 is basically great, and there are a few whiners out there. He also drops the notion that since they fixed part of the problem with the sports packages, then everything is just fine. I would recommend the HR20 only to a non-sports fan. Until they fix CIR/autorecord, this thing just ain't ready for prime time. I like it more every day, but that issue is the killer one!


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

Milominderbinder2 said:


> As just another forum member, I want to ask, please don't use this as another time to argue.
> 
> :backtotop
> 
> ...


Ask the author. You can email him directly.


----------



## jcdUCLA (Oct 30, 2006)

tibber said:


> Children!
> 
> (Apologies for putting the smilie in way too late.)


The article does a good job on describing what our forum is all about.
Keep up the good work and keep the threads going.

JC


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

islesfan said:


> Not too bad of an article, but he still buys the company line that the HR20 is basically great, and there are a few whiners out there. He also drops the notion that since they fixed part of the problem with the sports packages, then everything is just fine. I would recommend the HR20 only to a non-sports fan. Until they fix CIR/autorecord, this thing just ain't ready for prime time. I like it more every day, but that issue is the killer one!


He is entitled to his opinion, just like you yours. And he is certainly not nearly the only person that believes that the HR20 fall well within expectations. You don't - ok, and that's not good, but you shouldn't be put down for what you believe either. I also didn't see anything about whiners (that is for sure a slur), he did relay DirecTV's assertion of a 'vocal minority'. Don't tell me that those two things do not present two entirely different meanings.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> What I DID say was that I feel that the author presented all sides, I have never said that I agreed with any part of it. I thought it was a fair and balanced article. I guess that would include the comments that were negative to the HR 20 also, wouldn't it? Or is that too much for you to fathom?


OK maybe I should have said fair and balanced rather than factual and accurate.

By a peculiar coinicidence the author came up with an opinion you agree with and you don't demand to know where he came up with his numbers for "overwheliming" and you feel he presented a balanced piece.

Funny, the tstarn article that you take such exception to had balance and included positive comments about the HR20 but the author ended up with an opinion you didn't agree with and you demand to know where he comes up with his numbers.

I'm just sayin...


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

HarleyD said:


> OK maybe I should have said fair and balanced rather than factual and accurate.
> 
> By a peculiar coinicidence the author came up with an opinion you agree with and you don't demand to know where he came up with his numbers for "overwheliming" and you feel he presented a balanced piece.
> 
> ...


Overwhelming was MY word not the author of the article - Greater than 15-20% was the other AUTHOR's words. I only questioned where those numbers came from not his opinion or right to it. I for one would not have article published with info that could not be backed up.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Let's try not to jump too far one way or another Re: this article. The article came across to me as pro-DBSTalk.com. That being said, one could infer that it came across as being pro-DirecTV just because of the atmosphere we all know and love.

Tom's article, BTW, was written some time ago. I'm sure Tom will continue to stand by his words as he should. But things have changed since that time and will continue to change. I think even Tom has stated that his HR20 is working much better but even today it's not where he wants it to be. (Tom: please correct me if I'm putting words in your mouth.)

The bottom line is, we can all be happy in the knowledge that this Forum (DBSTalk.com) and our participation are being recognized.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Before this thread gets closed because someone might start arguing with someone else, I'll add my $.02 worth.

The author states:


> DirecTV declined to answer questions submitted to the company by PC Magazine. Instead, the company said the issues were being experienced by a "vocal minority."


My response is that if any company refuses to answer questions posed to them for an upcoming article, I would refuse to quote any of their comments such as "vocal minority". Unless that is the company is willing to provide numbers.

The article is a farce. What DTV really said is we're not answering anything and we're not giving any numbers. But "believe us" that the problems effect a minority. Fine, the term "minority" is < 50%. So a vocal minority could represent 40% of HR20 users and still be accurate.

If DTV wasn't giving numbers or answering questions, then why print their unverified comments? That's no different that quoting ME and ME saying the complaint rate is "huge". If I said that the author of this article would ask for figures verifying that before publication. But DTV makes a statement that there's a "vocal minority" and it's published without question. Hummm.

Again, very weak reporting.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

brott said:


> Let's try not to jump too far one way or another Re: this article. The article came across to me as pro-DBSTalk.com. That being said, one could infer that it came across as being pro-DirecTV just because of the atmosphere we all know and love.
> 
> Tom's article, BTW, was written some time ago. I'm sure Tom will continue to stand by his words as he should. But things have changed since that time and will continue to change. I think even Tom has stated that his HR20 is working much better but even today it's not where he wants it to be. (Tom: please correct me if I'm putting words in your mouth.)
> 
> The bottom line is, we can all be happy in the knowledge that this Forum (DBSTalk.com) and our participation are being recognized.


Perfectly said, Doug. At this point, the actual number of problem HR20s appears to be diminishing, as are the problems with mine (especially since I removed the BBCs, moved to component, etc., but that's another issue). My contention in terms of the press, my story included, is that Directv hasn't been honest about its HR20 woes, more than anything else, and that does bother me (as it would if any company I liked pulled that type of move).

Apart from that, the CE on DBSTalk work is clearly starting to have an impact in that the POS/POC posts are down. It would have been better had it taken a lot less than seven months (in my specific case) to get even this far in reducing the problems, but so be it. And I do take exception to the "vocal minority" language used by the Directv PR flak, because that simply could not be true or they wouldn't have turned to DBSTalk in the first place to try and bail them out of the mess they created by releasing the HR20 prematurely. It just doesn't add up logically.

Be that as it may, there is still a long way to go before the HR20 is working as it should, because we still have a situation where workarounds are the rule, not the exception (re: the 7-8 things to avoid if you want your HR20 to perform). And that's not good. I am sure we can all agree on that, and try to move ahead.

The PC Magazine article is what it is, a simple, straightforward piece on the current state of events.

No one has mentioned the related HR20 review, whereby the PC Magazine reviewer gives the HR20 3 out of 5 stars, hardly a glowing endorsement (though he did say some nice things). In fact, he rates the Tivo S3 as the better piece of DVR hardware. I know, just his opinion, but since we are using PC Magazine as the fair and balanced news outlet, their reviewer should get the same courtesy.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Before this thread gets closed because someone might start arguing with someone else, I'll add my $.02 worth.
> 
> The author states:
> My response is that if any company refuses to answer questions posed to them for an upcoming article, I would refuse to quote any of their comments such as "vocal minority". Unless that is the company is willing to provide numbers.
> ...


I too am going to agree and try to move on after this last comment. You state unverified comments are weak reporting, frankly that is the basis of my 'complaint' in the other authors piece and always has been. If its weak reporting here, than that also was weak reporting and needs to be so noted.

The facts are what they are and we will never know them. Obviously stating numbers for either point of view have proved to be real bones of contention - but that goes both ways. To say that the numbers in the first article had any merit would be just as much of a wild goose chase - wouldn't they?

OK I too am done.


----------



## Marcia_Brady (Nov 25, 2005)

What about the _non vocal_ minority?

We've gotten to the point of frustration over these _many_ months and have since _given up_ calling D* about the HR20. All the times on hold, all the clueless CSR's; add up the total minutes spent on the phone with some of these geniuses, and it would amount to a decent paycheck.

I'm certain there are quite a few out there in the same boat who have absolutely thrown in the towel and don't pick up the phone any longer. Takes up too much of our time, and we have other dependable DVR's in the house.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

Whether or not the article is "fair and balanced", it does tell the story about how the users of DBSTalk.Com are very much involved in the development of the HR20. I personally think it's great that DirecTV has taken the initiative to reach out. They have been extremely tight lipped for a lot of years. 

I know many of you don't like what DirecTV is doing, but you must understand that we have broken through some barriers here. We have been doing this sort of thing with Dish Network receivers for many years in our Dish Network support forums. It's good to see DirecTV jumping on board. You also must understand that the end result will be a better product for everyone. 

I think the article in PC Mag shows that large scale involvement in product deployment can be a good thing. IHMO, if you don't like it, speak your mind and get out of the way and let the rest of us do our work. There is no reason for you to visit this site if you think continual bashing will get your point across. 

Earl, myself and the rest of the mods want to help make the HR20 the best it can be. We also wish to provide the best place for discussion and help about the HR20. So before you start typing your next "DirecTV sucks" or "The HR20 Sucks" post, think before you type. Will your post really align itself with the goals of the forum.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> I too am going to agree and try to move on after this last comment. You state unverified comments are weak reporting, frankly that is the basis of my 'complaint' in the other authors piece and always has been. If its weak reporting here, than that also was weak reporting and needs to be so noted.


I agree, making comments about numbers one doesn't know is....."not good". 

DTV has the numbers. If they want to clear the slate and shut everyone up, post/release the numbers. This was the perfect chance for their PR department to pull numbers out of their collective butts and show us all they for the great majority the HR20 is working. Now, since they picked the "no comment" route, yet stated the problem units were a "vocal minority"......what can one think?


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

Chris Blount said:


> Whether or not the article is "fair and balanced", it does tell the story about how the users of DBSTalk.Com are very much involved in the development of the HR20. I personally think it's great that DirecTV has taken the initiative to reach out. They have been extremely tight lipped for a lot of years.
> 
> I know many of you don't like what DirecTV is doing, but you must understand that we have broken through some barriers here. We have been doing this sort of thing with Dish Network receivers for many years in our Dish Network support forums. It's good to see DirecTV jumping on board. You also must understand that the end result will be a better product for everyone.
> 
> ...


Agreed. DBSTalk got some VERY well deserved PR in that article. The work Earl has done getting the CE process started and even before is stellar. Kudos all around.

I'm also happy to see less of the POS/POC posts.

There's still work to be done, I have some problems with that article, but on the whole it highlights the talent/professionalism here at DBSTalk.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> I agree, making comments about numbers one doesn't know is....."not good".
> 
> DTV has the numbers. If they want to clear the slate and shut everyone up, post/release the numbers. This was the perfect chance for their PR department to pull numbers out of their collective butts and show us all they for the great majority the HR20 is working. Now, since they picked the "no comment" route, yet stated the problem units were a "vocal minority"......what can one think?


Ok - thanks for the even-handedness.

On your second point, the only reason I wouldn't make anything out of it is I never would expect them to give out those kind of numbers. Frankly, even if they did, I suspect that would only begin new threads saying they were false. I don't know what the real numbers were, but suppose they said 4% - you could never convince me that this place wouldn't have a real bout start. If they said they were 20%, then we would have the I told you so threads (they would believe a high number but NEVER a low number). People (myself included) have staked our ground, based on our own belief and experience.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Chris Blount said:


> Whether or not the article is "fair and balanced", it does tell the story about how the users of DBSTalk.Com are very much involved in the development of the HR20. I personally think it's great that DirecTV has taken the initiative to reach out. They have been extremely tight lipped for a lot of years.
> 
> I know many of you don't like what DirecTV is doing, but you must understand that we have broken through some barriers here. We have been doing this sort of thing with Dish Network receivers for many years in our Dish Network support forums. It's good to see DirecTV jumping on board. You also must understand that the end result will be a better product for everyone.
> 
> ...


KUDOS TO DBSTALK


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> He is entitled to his opinion, just like you yours. And he is certainly not nearly the only person that believes that the HR20 fall well within expectations. You don't - ok, and that's not good, but you shouldn't be put down for what you believe either. I also didn't see anything about whiners (that is for sure a slur), he did relay DirecTV's assertion of a 'vocal minority'. Don't tell me that those two things do not present two entirely different meanings.


All I meant was that when asked about the number of complaints, D* responded by pulling a statistic out of their collective a**. It is a time-honored tradition. And reporters buy it hook line and sinker. Remember the 3 million homeless? How bout the 10% of the population that is homosexual? Remember about the spike in wife/girlfriend abuse on SuperBowl Sunday? Don't get me started on "global warming..."

All I mean is that a good reporter should not just buy what a source says without something to back it up. I know they do it, and I tend to point it out. In the article, DirecTV says that the dissatisfied customers are a "vocal minority." That means "whiners," or "people who are NEVER satisfied." Since no statistics are given to back this up, it should never have been printed.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I do have one small comment. Some people condemn D* for turning to the members of DBSTalk for help.

But isn't it really the other way around? Didn't we OFFER our help to D*? Weren't most members elated when D* began accepting our reports and comments?

That's how I remember it, and unless I'm wrong, we need to stop criticizing D* for accepting our offer. Please.


----------



## jabbertrack (Feb 2, 2007)

Chris Blount said:


> Whether or not the article is "fair and balanced", it does tell the story about how the users of DBSTalk.Com are very much involved in the development of the HR20. I personally think it's great that DirecTV has taken the initiative to reach out. They have been extremely tight lipped for a lot of years.
> 
> I know many of you don't like what DirecTV is doing, but you must understand that we have broken through some barriers here. We have been doing this sort of thing with Dish Network receivers for many years in our Dish Network support forums. It's good to see DirecTV jumping on board. You also must understand that the end result will be a better product for everyone.
> 
> ...


With respect sir,

All I did was visit Directv.com and see an offer to have an HD-DVR in my home, and if you would have told me that I would be on my 4th BROKEN DVR in 3 weeks with a sneaky "24 consecutive month contract" preventing me from getting due process from the "#1 in customer satisfaction" Directv. I would have never clicked "order".

I'm glad you're so interested in participating in some public hardware experiment but I did not sign up for this.

Sure my situation is an absolute fluke... 4 DVRs with actual real hardware problems arrived at my house... lightning has struck. But I believe this gives me the right to type "DirecTV sucks" and also "The HR20 Sucks" because if this can happen to anyone... even a single customer then it does "SUCK" and if it didn't "SUCK" your website would be a great enthusiest gathering but instead it's a place where people go to BARELY squeeze basic functionality from an expensive unit that comes with a programming commitment.

I'm in between calls right now with some level of account retention... being dicked around with the "no managers are available right now" line. I'm trying to just get everything reset to ZERO.... have them pick up their dish, let me return the HR20 and call it a day but these folks in "customer service" seem to think that sending a FIFTH HR20 to my house is perfectly reasonable...

I can appreciate your goals, your enthusiasm, and part of your point... but when a real person who works for their money says the "HR20 sucks" and many other people also agree... it just might be true. From my perspective it most certainly is true.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

paulman182 said:


> I do have one small comment. Some people condemn D* for turning to the members of DBSTalk for help.
> 
> But isn't it really the other way around? Didn't we OFFER our help to D*? Weren't most members elated when D* began accepting our reports and comments?
> 
> That's how I remember it, and unless I'm wrong, we need to stop criticizing D* for accepting our offer. Please.


Amen. 


jabbertrack said:


> I can appreciate your goals, your enthusiasm, and part of your point... but when a real person who works for their money says the "HR20 sucks" and many other people also agree... it just might be true. From my perspective it most certainly is true.


Likewise your opinion is respected. That said, your experience is also in the minority.

Many of us here (who also work for our money) have had terrific success using our HR20's for some time. It's unfortunate you have had an alternative usage.


----------



## jabbertrack (Feb 2, 2007)

I didn't mean that anyone didn't work for their money... sorry

it's been a trying day and the convorsations with DirecTV have just left me with a feeling that they really could care less about me as a customer... I've even mentioned how it would be great if they handled my situation with care because I'd love to come back some day but now isn't the time... but then whoever I'm talking to starts in with the song and dance about sending me another unit


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

Nothing is wrong, just perform a full format, and then we'll send you a new unit, becuase nothing is wrong... 

We're at war with East Asia, we've always been at war with East Asia.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

islesfan said:


> All I meant was that when asked about the number of complaints, D* responded by pulling a statistic out of their collective a**. It is a time-honored tradition. And reporters buy it hook line and sinker. Remember the 3 million homeless? How bout the 10% of the population that is homosexual? Remember about the spike in wife/girlfriend abuse on SuperBowl Sunday? Don't get me started on "global warming..."
> 
> All I mean is that a good reporter should not just buy what a source says without something to back it up. I know they do it, and I tend to point it out. In the article, DirecTV says that the dissatisfied customers are a "vocal minority." That means "whiners," or "people who are NEVER satisfied." Since no statistics are given to back this up, it should never have been printed.


I buy into that 100% - but remember, and you can look back at my posts - my biggest complaint is that numbers were 'thrown-out' without any backing in a previous article. For both sides of this 'discussion' the number is really key. For someone to say higher than 20% is no different than saying vocal minority.

No matter what we say, the scope of the issue IS determined by the number (that none of us know). If its low, its one level of problem, if its high its quite the opposite. Good jounalists would never put an unsubstantiated number in an article. I learned that in journalism 101 BTW.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

jabbertrack said:


> I didn't mean that anyone didn't work for their money... sorry
> 
> it's been a trying day and the convorsations with DirecTV have just left me with a feeling that they really could care less about me as a customer... I've even mentioned how it would be great if they handled my situation with care because I'd love to come back some day but now isn't the time... but then whoever I'm talking to starts in with the song and dance about sending me another unit


Perhaps you should consider getting one more unit, and then getting the latest firmware update that's being sent our national within a week or so. Based on the testing and feedback, even a number of those who have had issues in the past report this latest beta version is clean. It might be worth one more try so that you can get a solid HR20 and get to enjoy it like many of us already have.

Good luck to you either way.


----------



## Milominderbinder2 (Oct 8, 2006)

The story is spreading:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,253881,00.html

http://www.tvpredictions.com/bugshugs022107.htm

- Craig


----------



## Bajanjack (Oct 22, 2006)

The article refers to "30 hrs of HD recording.....s/b 50.....right?


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

I thought the Review was pretty well balanced. But does contain several factual errors that the author could have avoided with a bit more research here ....

* "_A standard phone jack is used to deliver software updates _..." Not true. Updates delivered via satellite feed.

* "_Ethernet port is reserved for future use _...." Well, sort of. It works now for sharing music and photo files, but only as a "beta" feature.

* "_Unfortunately you'll have to provide your own HDMI cable _....". I think that the newer units provide this cable. Either way, the installer is supposed to provide one if your TV supports it (although they don't always provide it).


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

As an IT pro, I subscribe to Ziff-Davis' regular email of "Whats New Now" by Jim Louderback.

Today's #1 subject: "The Painful New DirecTV DVR" with links to their article and their review (3 of 5 starts, "Good"). Ouch!

Tom


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Bajanjack said:


> The article refers to "30 hrs of HD recording.....s/b 50.....right?


30 MPEG-2
50 MPEG-4


----------



## oldpianos (Jan 16, 2007)

Pretty good article, and the forum certainly was portrayed in a positive light. We seem like we're part of the team. I did find the metion of a memory card reader and no cables included to be interesting. My HR20 came with a full set of cables in the box - HDMI, Component, Composite, etc.


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

tibber said:


> As an IT pro, I subscribe to Ziff-Davis' regular email of "Whats New Now" by Jim Louderback.
> 
> Today's #1 subject: "The Painful New DirecTV DVR" with links to their article and their review (3 of 5 starts, "Good"). Ouch!
> 
> Tom


Link? Or is it only available via email?


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

We have the power.


----------



## dhaakenson (Jan 14, 2007)

Wolffpack said:


> My response is that if any company refuses to answer questions posed to them for an upcoming article, I would refuse to quote any of their comments such as "vocal minority". Unless that is the company is willing to provide numbers.


Precisely. I sent email to the reporter last night, asking that he post the questions he posed to D* that D* declined to answer, and chastised him for including any comment from D* as a substitute with no data to back up the comment.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

tstarn said:


> Link? Or is it only available via email?


Tom,

I think Tom (tibber) was just pointing out that he received notification of the links via E-mail. He may have to post the entire message if there is more than that.

The Review (of course) is at: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2096897,00.asp


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

Chris Blount said:


> Whether or not the article is "fair and balanced", it does tell the story about how the users of DBSTalk.Com are very much involved in the development of the HR20. I personally think it's great that DirecTV has taken the initiative to reach out. They have been extremely tight lipped for a lot of years.
> 
> I know many of you don't like what DirecTV is doing, but you must understand that we have broken through some barriers here. We have been doing this sort of thing with Dish Network receivers for many years in our Dish Network support forums. It's good to see DirecTV jumping on board. You also must understand that the end result will be a better product for everyone.
> 
> ...


Maybe I misread your comment, but I thought that apart from helping Directv fix the HR20 (by offering to help, as you said), another reason for this forum was robust debate over satellite providers and their products and services. If someone enters that sphere by being critical of said companies, is it fair to tell them to "get out of the way" (when they start out venting about the company or a product)? At this point, is the sole reason for DBSTalk to exist only about helping make Directv's HR20 a fully functioning HD DVR? It's a worthy cause, but should it overwhelm debate and discussion?

In fact, I didn't see anyone using the POS/POC acronym in this thread until an obviously upset sub (4 HR20s already, and still not a good one?) asserted his right to vent about it.

As that poster said, being part of a "large-scale involvement in product deployment" is not what he signed on for when he plunked down his money and signed on for a 24-month commitment. He has a valid point, no?


----------



## tstarn (Oct 1, 2006)

brott said:


> Tom,
> 
> I think Tom (tibber) was just pointing out that he received notification of the links via E-mail. He may have to post the entire message if there is more than that.
> 
> The Review (of course) is at: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2096897,00.asp


Gotcha. I thought Louderback had written more about it.


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

tstarn said:


> You are perfectly within your rights to keep believing in the myth of fair, balanced reporting, because that's just what it is, a myth. Every decision a reporter/writer/editor makes affects the so-called "balance" of a story. Not that it means a story can't be informative, but just because it's "balanced," doesn't make it the truth. It's something you would learn in Journalism 101.


I actually have a degree in Journalism. It's possible to be objective in reporting. That doesn't mean many people do it. It might not be in the story itself, but often what is and isn't reported. I had a prof tell me "we have to remember to give both sides of every issue." It always bothered me--because who's to say there are only two sides?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Capmeister said:


> I actually have a degree in Journalism. It's possible to be objective in reporting. That doesn't mean many people do it. It might not be in the story itself, but often what is and isn't reported. I had a prof tell me "we have to remember to give both sides of every issue." It always bothered me--because who's to say there are only two sides?


I also have such a degree and you are correct (as usual) - well said. 

A myth is subjective in and of itself.


----------



## Marcia_Brady (Nov 25, 2005)

Ooh, can I play? I_ too _have a degree.

Anybody else?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Marcia_Brady said:


> Ooh, can I play? I_ too _have a degree.


Sure....by the way...how is your consecutive positive days/trek coming along?


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Count me in for a mass communications degree. Thought the article was reasonable, fair, and especially favorable to DBSTalk.com and its subscribers. 

I think the point is not to avoid honest debate, but to avoid falling back on thoughtless positions like "mine works" and "this is a POS" which to my way of thinking are equally unnecessary.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

brott said:


> Tom,
> 
> I think Tom (tibber) was just pointing out that he received notification of the links via E-mail. He may have to post the entire message if there is more than that.
> 
> The Review (of course) is at: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2096897,00.asp


Doug,

You are correct, aside from a short summary paragraph (that is mostly the opening of the article itself), all I got was links to both the article and the review. Thanks for posting the review link for everyone.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> Ok - thanks for the even-handedness.
> 
> On your second point, the only reason I wouldn't make anything out of it is I never would expect them to give out those kind of numbers. Frankly, even if they did, I suspect that would only begin new threads saying they were false. I don't know what the real numbers were, but suppose they said 4% - you could never convince me that this place wouldn't have a real bout start. If they said they were 20%, then we would have the I told you so threads (they would believe a high number but NEVER a low number). People (myself included) have staked our ground, based on our own belief and experience.


I would expect DTV to give out those numbers either.....unless they were good numbers. :lol:

My point being is if DTV doesn't provide credible numbers to backup a statement such as "vocal minority" I am surprised a publication such as PCMAG would print that unsubstantiated quote. That's all.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Likewise your opinion is respected. That said, your experience is also in the minority.


Again, someone speaking of numbers she/he cannot share. That seems to be getting easier to do lately.


----------



## dhaakenson (Jan 14, 2007)

Chris Blount said:


> IHMO, if you don't like it, speak your mind and get out of the way and let the rest of us do our work. There is no reason for you to visit this site if you think continual bashing will get your point across.
> 
> Earl, myself and the rest of the mods want to help make the HR20 the best it can be.


No offense meant, and by nature, creators and mods like protecting themselves so you may kick me off this site, but you opened the door by your comments.

I'm truly confused, and seek clarification. Are these boards merely for you to do your work? If so, please eliminate the public nature of this board and make it fully private, by invitation only.

Is part of the good work offering illogical, unsubstantiated comments to persuade new HD customers to purchase DBS products? Or to offer accurate information?

Also, can you offer examples of what you see as bashing? If I'm an HR20 customer and have downloaded CE updates, and posted my results, which are quite negative so far, is that bashing? If I see apologists and mods continually pouncing on people seeking valid advice on whether the HR20 is troublefree now, and offering sweeping, unsubstantiated assessments that "the vast majority are working fine now" or "things are getting much better", am I bashing by pointing out the insipid illogic of these statements?

I too want to make the HR20 the best it can be. If that means dissuading some from leasing it, that is a valid tactic in the marketplace. If you see the only valid tactic as being a yes-man to the mods, then again, please take this entire board private. That's your choice. I think you'll actually accomplish your good work without the rest of us intruding on the vast quantity of illogic passed off as advice on this site.

I've read this site for years, and have been with D* since the 1994 test market days. To suggest that your tactics are good work and offer the most potential for a solution, and are the sole purpose of posting on this board is your opinion. If you don't value mine, either take the board private or cancel my account.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

jabbertrack said:


> I can appreciate your goals, your enthusiasm, and part of your point... but when a real person who works for their money says the "HR20 sucks" and many other people also agree... it just might be true. From my perspective it most certainly is true.





dhaakenson said:


> I've read this site for years, and have been with D* since the 1994 test market days. To suggest that your tactics are good work and offer the most potential for a solution, and are the sole purpose of posting on this board is your opinion. If you don't value mine, either take the board private or cancel my account.


I think you guys misunderstood the real meaning of my post. The problem we have seen in the past is that we have disgruntled users posting the same negative comments over and over again. It doesn't sound like a big deal but if we have 10 unhappy users each posting 10 times that the HR20 sucks because DirecTV can't develop a good DVR, that's 100 posts of the same issue!

We don't mind negative comments or trouble reports. As a matter of fact we welcome them. There is also nothing wrong with a healthy debate. Just don't post the same same thing several times. If you read my post it said, "speak your mind and get out of the way". It didn't say don't speak your mind at all. Just say what you need to say and move on. I guess what I really should have said is "speak your mind and move on" so I apologize if that statement came across as being a little harsh.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> I would expect DTV to give out those numbers either.....unless they were good numbers. :lol:
> 
> My point being is if DTV doesn't provide credible numbers to backup a statement such as "vocal minority" I am surprised a publication such as PCMAG would print that unsubstantiated quote. That's all.


I've been thinking about this a while, and honestly don't think there is a 'set of numbers' that they could give out, here's why.

Are we looking for the number of units returned/swapped out? If so, there is some inherent danger because the fact is that some number of those units have NO problem really - how are those accounted for?

Are we looking for the number of people that have called in because of black screen? Are we looking for those that have called in simply because they made an operator error or such?

Honestly, what criteria would be accepted for this? There are calls because it doesn't have dual buffers, there are calls because the interface is different, in ADDITION to the calls that come from the legitimate problems. Do we trust a CSR to code this properly?

Also, even if the numbers are low, they won't give them out, it creates a precedent that could only be hurtful in the future. This info will more than likely NEVER be made public.

Answer me this also. If DirecTV published today that the number was 2% - in you opinion how long would it take for this and other forums to be delulged with posts and threads about that number? They couldn't win even if it was true IMO.

Wolff - consider this also. If a thread was opened asking for ideas as to what would be considered appropriate to be listed or counted as a 'problem' unit, IMO if 25 people posted you would get 25 different opinions. In those, there would be just MORE disagreement some saying certain thinkgs would count, others saying things shouldn't be included - don't you agree with that? Who would set this criteria that ALL would accept?


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

Marcia_Brady said:


> Ooh, can I play? I_ too _have a degree.
> 
> Anybody else?


Heh. I didn't mean it to sound snotty, just as a way of explaining I know how to be a reporter and therefore know one CAN be objective. (Which doesn't mean balanced, necessarily. Opinions can be balanced, but objective truth just IS.)

But I admit, it's hard to find objectivity in the news. It's one of the reasons I didn't go into the news game.


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

dhaakenson said:


> I'm truly confused, and seek clarification. Are these boards merely for you to do your work? If so, please eliminate the public nature of this board and make it fully private, by invitation only.


These boards are privately owned, but opened to the public with agreement of certain rules and a registration.

I can't speak for this site, but I own message boards (ComicBoards.com and TVShowBoards.com) and our purpose isn't to allow anyone to say whatever they want, but to provide a place for relatively mature discussion of the topics related to each particular board. We allow "This Spider-Man comic sucked and here is why" but we don't allow "This sucked!" as a stand alone comment. And we moderate for overall tone. If people are crabbing too much, and the board becomes a crabfest, we tell them to knock it off. If not, our boards and boards like them become a place where one must wade through a lot of posts that offer nothing but "this sucked" and that's a waste of time, money, and bandwidth.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Marcia_Brady (Nov 25, 2005)

Chris Blount said:


> I think you guys misunderstood the real meaning of my post. The problem we have seen in the past is that we have disgruntled users posting the same negative comments over and over again. It doesn't sound like a big deal but if we have 10 unhappy users each posting 10 times that the HR20 sucks because DirecTV can't develop a good DVR, that's 100 posts of the same issue!


Same thing with 10 _happy _users that find it necessary to counter-respond with the same _positive_ comments over and over again. It becomes a vicious circle.



hdtvfan0001 said:


> Sure....by the way...how is your consecutive positive days/trek coming along?


Ended at about 7 days. Unfortunately for us, the HR20 is right back to missing SL's with a few unwatchables thrown in for good measure.



Capmeister said:


> Heh. I didn't mean it to sound snotty, just as a way of explaining I know how to be a reporter and therefore know one CAN be objective. (Which doesn't mean balanced, necessarily. Opinions can be balanced, but objective truth just IS.)


I didn't take it as being snotty......I was just playing.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> I've been thinking about this a while, and honestly don't think there is a 'set of numbers' that they could give out, here's why.
> 
> Are we looking for the number of units returned/swapped out? If so, there is some inherent danger because the fact is that some number of those units have NO problem really - how are those accounted for?


I think swapouts and number of units currently deployed would be the best barometer.

And you are right, there is a margin of error in even that figure but it would eliminate the broadly speculative estimates that run the gamut from very high to insignificantly low and seem to have done nothing but cause problems and arguments among the different camps.

Having an electronics manufacturing background I do know that in my experience you have to have better than 90% of a lot pass QA for the lot to be accepted. I've been in environments where that acceptance threshhold goes as high as 97%.

I don't know what the percentage of problem HR20s is, which makes me the same as everybody else.

In the past I have casually tossed out a 1 in 10 figure based on a lot of assumptions and my own opinion. It is not a supported figure so much as an opinion and guesstimate extrapolated from the number of problem units reported here by a tech savvy community, as well as the potental number of problem units we would never hear about from D* subscribers who are less technical and don't frequent internet forums. But at the end of the day it is a guess. I may have also arrived at that figure because it falls within the standards of unacceptability I have based on my experience. I'll cop to a potential bias but I "think" 1 in 10 is a fair guess.

My *opinion* is that there are an unacceptable number (a subjective term) of HR20s that are problematic based on the information that is available to me.

"Vocal Minority" is another dangerously subjective term because a minority can be as little as 1% or as much as 49%.

I don't think the problem HR20s come anywhere close to 49%. I do think it is more than 1%.

I think that making public the number HR20s in service and the number swapped out to date would end a lot of rampant speculation as to the scope of the problem, even with the inherent margin of error. I am quite confident that D* has the raw data for this and have probably compiled these numbers internally already.

D*'s refusal to give those numbers and de-fuse the tide of negative sentiment makes me suspect that this number may in fact be unfavorable to D*, but again that is only my opinion. I just think that if the numbers are as insignificant as the PR line would infer, supporting it with something factual would only benefit D*.

This is all only my opinion, and each of you are of course entitled to your own.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Fair enough Harley - how would you reconcile this:

since it appears that the issues are reduced now, it would seem that # of problem units would be going down, correct? this at the same time that the overall number of units is constantly increasing, correct?

well, right now the # would be WAY lower than perhaps in December, correct? that being said, the number overall would represent what?

Its possible that a 'new' owner today has a 95% chance of good, its possible that a owner in December had a 85% chance of good. But since the number of units out in December would be way lower than the nimber out today, the % wouldn't really tell you anything - you would have to get a number on a month by month basis of units out vs units swapped.


----------



## Tiger Tony (Dec 16, 2006)

Tom_S said:


> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2097242,00.asp
> 
> Article over at pcmag.com. Link on extremetech.com also.


 Mark Hachman, If you are reading this, I think you nailed it. Nice article, well written.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> Also, even if the numbers are low, they won't give them out, it creates a precedent that could only be hurtful in the future. This info will more than likely NEVER be made public.


DTV is a publicly traded organization. Their shareholders are entitled to various figures to help assess the stock's value. DTV is also subject to audits so that statements and/or claims can be verified.

Making a public statement that the problems the HR20 is experiencing are from a "vocal minority" gives the impression that these problems are not as severe as one would think. Effecting stock ratings and prices. If this statement is nothing more than a PR spin with no backup data, DTV management could be accused of misleading it's shareholders and subject to further investigation by the SEC. Making a "no comment" statement is fully within DTVs rights. But then following that with undocumented PR spin is irresponsible.

I'm sure that's why DTV has never made statements like this in the past. Why they chose to now is confusing.


----------



## Capmeister (Sep 16, 2003)

Tiger Tony said:


> Mark Hachman, If you are reading this, I think you nailed it. Nice article, well written.


I think it did what it set out to do which was encapsulate, for those who don't know what's going on here, what the "word on the street" is (the street being the interwebs). Did it go in depth? No. Did it hit the highpoints? I think so.


----------



## islesfan (Oct 18, 2006)

dhaakenson said:


> Precisely. I sent email to the reporter last night, asking that he post the questions he posed to D* that D* declined to answer, and chastised him for including any comment from D* as a substitute with no data to back up the comment.


How did you email the reporter? He won't take emails. He just emails you to complain about your daring to question him, then does not accept return emails.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> - you would have to get a number on a month by month basis of units out vs units swapped.


That would be a start, but we'll never see it and should all stop speculating on it.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> DTV is a publicly traded organization. Their shareholders are entitled to various figures to help assess the stock's value. DTV is also subject to audits so that statements and/or claims can be verified.
> 
> Making a public statement that the problems the HR20 is experiencing are from a "vocal minority" gives the impression that these problems are not as severe as one would think. Effecting stock ratings and prices. If this statement is nothing more than a PR spin with no backup data, DTV management could be accused of misleading it's shareholders and subject to further investigation by the SEC. Making a "no comment" statement is fully within DTVs rights. But then following that with undocumented PR spin is irresponsible.
> 
> I'm sure that's why DTV has never made statements like this in the past. Why they chose to now is confusing.


Wolff - here we go round and round again. I still have no reason not to believe personally that this is not an accurate representation. When I go back over the threads of members discussing issues I see lots of the same people reporting the same problems over and over. This counts as 1 unit no matter how many times they report the same issue doesn't it? There seem to be fewer than 300 DIFFERENT members that have reported issues. Now - I didn't say 300 is a GOOD number, but I have no way of translating that to a real percentage of overall owners.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> Fair enough Harley - how would you reconcile this:
> 
> since it appears that the issues are reduced now, it would seem that # of problem units would be going down, correct? this at the same time that the overall number of units is constantly increasing, correct?
> 
> ...


Good point. Raw figures spanning from September to date would be unfailry skewed and not give an accurate picture of the HR20 as of today. Given the rate at which updated releases are coming out it is definitely a dynamic thing. It's tough to hit a moving target.

Although, I would "assume" that D* also has the data on when a unit goes into service as well as how long a unit was in service before it had to be replaced. They would need to have that data for internal metrics and profitability analysis if nothing else. I would think they should be able to say that X units were deployed in January and Y% of those units have been replaced and Z number of units were replaced in January that were in service more than 30 days _if they wanted to_ but maybe not.

Or maybe compiling that data is more work than they want to do but again I really believe that they would want this data to analyze their own performance internally if nothing else.

However, if D* hasn't quantified the performance or failure rate for the general public, then they are probably satisfied with the current perception and rate of adoption.

If they were bleeding very badly from the perceived problems and it was really hurting the rate at which subscribers were adopting HR20s I have to believe they would be doing something more to paint a better picture. No matter how large the vocal minority may be, D* seems OK with it. They must be in the black regardless

If people are still signing up for the HR20, there really isn't much incentive for D* to speak to the problems being reported at any length.

Unfortunately I think the HR20 could still be profitable for D* while having an above average to unacceptable failure rate for the general public.

Either that or the numbers are SOOO bad that they are keeping a tight lid on it.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> Wolff - here we go round and round again. I still have no reason not to believe personally that this is not an accurate representation. When I go back over the threads of members discussing issues I see lots of the same people reporting the same problems over and over. This counts as 1 unit no matter how many times they report the same issue doesn't it? There seem to be fewer than 300 DIFFERENT members that have reported issues. Now - I didn't say 300 is a GOOD number, but I have no way of translating that to a real percentage of overall owners.


And I think it's an accurate representation also. So we agree. Where we disagree is in our definition of "minority". A range of 1% - <50%. You no doubt lean towards the lower end of that range, I to the higher. I'm confident with my figure I keep in my little brain. :grin:


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> And I think it's an accurate representation also. So we agree. Where we disagree is in our definition of "minority". A range of 1% - <50%. You no doubt lean towards the lower end of that range, I to the higher. I'm confident with my figure I keep in my little brain. :grin:


No - I think I understand that minority can mean 49.999999999%. Where we disagree is in the actual magnitude of the problem. I understand that there are people with estimates over the entire range, and without any of the numbers which we will never see, ALL of us stay confident with our figures I suppose.


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

ScoBuck said:


> No - I think I understand that minority can mean 49.999999999%. Where we disagree is in the actual magnitude of the problem. I understand that there are people with estimates over the entire range, and without any of the numbers which we will never see, ALL of us stay confident with our figures I suppose.


Therein lies the source of much internal friction on these boards.

We all tend to color our figures based on our own biases.

I'd like hard figures, even if they contradict my own opinions, if for no other reason than to stop the sniping and bickering.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

HarleyD said:


> Therein lies the source of much internal friction on these boards.
> 
> We all tend to color our figures based on our own biases.
> 
> I'd like hard figures, even if they contradict my own opinions, if for no other reason than to stop the sniping and bickering.


I'd like them also, but I don't think they would end this bickering anyhow. No matter what numbers they gave, there would be complaints about the 'rating' system; if the number given was a low one, that would lead to MORE bickering, etc.

Truth is, there is no real solution IMO, and they will NOT be giving out any numbers any time soon. This doesn't mean that honest presentation of personal opinion needs to lead to friction.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

ScoBuck said:


> No - I think I understand that minority can mean 49.999999999%. Where we disagree is in the actual magnitude of the problem. I understand that there are people with estimates over the entire range, and without any of the numbers which we will never see, ALL of us stay confident with our figures I suppose.


Very true. Plus another factor is ones definition of "problems". Some see "problems" as a missed recording or a freeze or BSOD while others view problems as not being able to use HDMI or the unit needing weekly RBRs (that was my standard on the R15).

One side effect of the degree of problems that were experienced in the beginning is a sense of lowered expectations. I'm sure there are some that now view 1 missed or unplayable recording every week or two as acceptable whereas they would not have back in the beginning.

People on the R15 side have been complaining about the SL and TDL limits for 14-15 months now. Add to that DLBs and the ability to setup SLs for the same series on different channels. Nothing has been seen on those issues and workarounds have been devised. Does that mean these issues are not problems any longer? It all depends on your personal perspective. No one here is going to convince anyone else to change their views. Kinda like the uselessness of religious arguments. Discussions are one thing but arguments don't get anyone anywhere.


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Very true. Plus another factor is ones definition of "problems". Some see "problems" as a missed recording or a freeze or BSOD while others view problems as not being able to use HDMI or the unit needing weekly RBRs (that was my standard on the R15).
> 
> One side effect of the degree of problems that were experienced in the beginning is a sense of lowered expectations. I'm sure there are some that now view 1 missed or unplayable recording every week or two as acceptable whereas they would not have back in the beginning.
> 
> People on the R15 side have been complaining about the SL and TDL limits for 14-15 months now. Add to that DLBs and the ability to setup SLs for the same series on different channels. Nothing has been seen on those issues and workarounds have been devised. Does that mean these issues are not problems any longer? It all depends on your personal perspective. No one here is going to convince anyone else to change their views. Kinda like the uselessness of religious arguments. Discussions are one thing but arguments don't get anyone anywhere.


The good news (I think it is) is that it seems that the software updates have made real headway, and if it stays in this pattern, maybe within 30-45 days we won't have THIS topic to argue over. I am certain of one thing, some NEW topic will take over - doesn't it always work that way?


----------



## dhaakenson (Jan 14, 2007)

ScoBuck said:


> The good news (I think it is) is that it seems that the software updates have made real headway...


I question the assessment that software updates have made real headway. Based on what information? Again, we could argue forever about numbers, but I'm glad you added "it seems" as a qualifier. It isn't as good as "I think" but it'll do.


----------



## dhaakenson (Jan 14, 2007)

islesfan said:


> How did you email the reporter? He won't take emails. He just emails you to complain about your daring to question him, then does not accept return emails.


I just emailed the addressed linked to his byline. I've heard from him twice. Not sure why he's selectively replying, but in my case, I emailed immediately after the story was posted, wrote a kind and respectful email, and yes, I too went to journalism school (as many others have revealed here; wow, why are there so many journalists hanging around this forum!) and work at a major metro daily, so we were able to debate reporting methods. I suspect those 3 things favored my emails...


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

dhaakenson said:


> I question the assessment that software updates have made real headway. Based on what information? Again, we could argue forever about numbers, but I'm glad you added "it seems" as a qualifier. It isn't as good as "I think" but it'll do.


My assessment comes from many factors - the CE threads in here, the reduction in number of 'complaints', the positive trends I have been reading in reviews, etc.

Yeah, its my opinion, obviously stated as such.


----------



## BreezeCJ (Jan 8, 2007)

Tiger Tony said:


> Mark Hachman, If you are reading this, I think you nailed it. Nice article, well written.


I don't know if it's been mentioned here, but the only error in the article was the fact that the HR20 box DOES contain an HDMI cable. This is kind of a big error since they are so expensive.


----------



## Wolffpack (Jul 29, 2003)

BreezeCJ said:


> I don't know if it's been mentioned here, but the only error in the article was the fact that the HR20 box DOES contain an HDMI cable. This is kind of a big error since they are so expensive.


Correct, but to get your HR20 working properly, the recommended connection is to not use HDMI but instead use Component. That's along with not putting it into standby and other such work arounds.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

Wolffpack said:


> Correct, but to get your HR20 working properly, the recommended connection is to not use HDMI but instead use Component. That's along with not putting it into standby and other such work arounds.


The funny thing for me. Back in Sept. 06 when I got mine. I used HDMI to set them up and I haven't looked back.
Go figure.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Correct, but to get your HR20 working properly, the recommended connection is to not use HDMI but instead use Component. That's along with not putting it into standby and other such work arounds.


Yes, but the recommendation is also ... If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Many folks are happy using HDMI and have questioned the need to go to component. The response has always been ... If it's working, then there is no need to change your setup. The recommendations are for the folks that are having issues.


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

BreezeCJ said:


> I don't know if it's been mentioned here, but the only error in the article was the fact that the HR20 box DOES contain an HDMI cable. This is kind of a big error since they are so expensive.


There are still boxes in the retail channel without the cable included.


----------



## macEarl (Jan 2, 2007)

HarleyD said:


> Therein lies the source of much internal friction on these boards.
> 
> We all tend to color our figures based on our own biases.
> 
> I'd like hard figures, even if they contradict my own opinions, if for no other reason than to stop the sniping and bickering.


<homer>Mmmmmmm ... figures .... SWISH! What? DOH!</homer>

So here's a simple idea for a poll. It has to be just like this to answer to what Der Wolff et al are questioning, imo:

Have you had any problems with build xxx? Or - Has your HR20 experienced defective behavior with build xxx?

You can only vote once. Do not waste time turning it into a mixmaster thread by talking about what the problems were. Do not allow it. Do not allow threepeats that the problem isn't fixed yet. Ask for real problems, not it doesn't have the feature so _desparately needed_ - problems only, like defective behavior. (Yeah. I know. I dreaming. Utopias are like that.) This would be a thread just to get this one statistic - how many people are voting that they have problems with build xxx. That's it. En toto. The whole thing. Not why, not how, not how many defects/user. One equation, one unknown - a simple scalar.

FWIW, I think this has been tried - but after an 18 hour day at work with occassional breaks to post here - I CFR, so apologies in advance if this is a rant instead of an obviously good idea to settle the question.

Thanks for the bandwidth. I had to quote HarleyD for the straight line, and like the man said, I've always been with Buffalo Springfield.


----------



## NFLnut (Sep 29, 2006)

> "Instead, the company said the issues were being experienced by a "vocal minority."


Wow! 100,001 posts in this forum, and a "majority" of them are positive, slap-DirecTV-on -the-back-for-such-a-fine-DVR posts! :nono2:

Obviously, DirecTV really knows what they are talking about! :lol:


----------



## Guindalf (Nov 19, 2005)

This is neither an unbiased or good review. All I see is a collection of quotes from users and information based on things taken from this forum. It does NOT present a fair an unbalanced view of the HR20, IMHO.

IF I was writing this, (and I AM a journalist), I would at least try to find someone who is not a member of the "vocal minority" and get their opinion. I would also at least try to get a hold of a box and find out some of the complaints/praises for myself, rather than writing about other people's views alone.

For me, it's almost like going to a white supremist forum and getting their views on the Holocaust!


----------



## ScoBuck (Mar 5, 2006)

Guindalf said:


> This is neither an unbiased or good review. All I see is a collection of quotes from users and information based on things taken from this forum. It does NOT present a fair an unbalanced view of the HR20, IMHO.
> 
> IF I was writing this, (and I AM a journalist), I would at least try to find someone who is not a member of the "vocal minority" and get their opinion. I would also at least try to get a hold of a box and find out some of the complaints/praises for myself, rather than writing about other people's views alone.
> 
> For me, it's almost like going to a white supremist forum and getting their views on the Holocaust!


Not saying your wrong, bit one thing is certain. no matter what you did to write your article, it would be dissected and skewered here. Someone else would certainly say you did it wrong, didn't check everything, etc.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Guindalf said:


> This is neither an unbiased or good review. All I see is a collection of quotes from users and information based on things taken from this forum. It does NOT present a fair an unbalanced view of the HR20, IMHO.
> 
> IF I was writing this, (and I AM a journalist), I would at least try to find someone who is not a member of the "vocal minority" and get their opinion. I would also at least try to get a hold of a box and find out some of the complaints/praises for myself, rather than writing about other people's views alone.
> 
> For me, it's almost like going to a white supremist forum and getting their views on the Holocaust!


I agree that someone from the "vocal minority" should have been contacted. There are a few candidates on this board that would have been perfect to hear from.

I don't think your reference was appropriate, though.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

Wolffpack said:


> Correct, but to get your HR20 working properly, the recommended connection is to not use HDMI but instead use Component. That's along with not putting it into standby and other such work arounds.


These recommendations are based on correlations that are just as likely to be coincidence as causation. My HR20 has had no problems other than lockups requiring reboots, and that ceased with the last nationwide download. But when it was locking up, nothing I tried made the slightest difference, not even a cooling fan.

If the fix were this easy for everyone, everyone's would be fixed.:grin:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

paulman182 said:


> These recommendations are based on correlations that are just as likely to be coincidence as causation. My HR20 has had no problems other than lockups requiring reboots, and that ceased with the last nationwide download. But when it was locking up, nothing I tried made the slightest difference, not even a cooling fan.
> 
> If the fix were this easy for everyone, everyone's would be fixed.:grin:


The recommendations were also directed at DirecTV so that would have areas of the code to concentrate on. I'm glad to hear that your RBRs have reduced to zero. I'd like to see that happen to everyone on the forum.


----------



## SuperTech1 (Jan 9, 2007)

I found the article to be Fair (pick your choice of definitions  )

I'm not a journalist. I have been educated to a "degree".


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

BreezeCJ said:


> I don't know if it's been mentioned here, but the only error in the article was the fact that the HR20 box DOES contain an HDMI cable. This is kind of a big error since they are so expensive.


I was 0 HDMI cables for 5 HR20s. All were in sealed boxes that I opened for the installer. So the article wasn't too wrong.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Jim and Patrick talked about this on the lastest "What's New Now" podcast that ZDNet does once a week. Talked about 5 minutes on the HR20 and some DirecTV in general.

Jim pretty much got on DirecTV's case but did say that it was getting better and that DirecTV recruited the users to do beta testing. Both Jim and Patrick went off on DirecTV about still needing a phone line (technically anyway) instead of allowing the eithernet port to make the call. Roger suspected it was probably not enough capacity on the other end to handle it (which is probably right).


----------



## HarleyD (Aug 31, 2006)

paulman182 said:


> These recommendations are based on correlations that are just as likely to be coincidence as causation. My HR20 has had no problems other than lockups requiring reboots, and that ceased with the last nationwide download. But when it was locking up, nothing I tried made the slightest difference, not even a cooling fan.
> 
> If the fix were this easy for everyone, everyone's would be fixed.:grin:


Maybe yes, maybe no.

I've been doing some studying of HDMI and it does so much more than just transport a digital audio and video signal over 1 wire that I wouldn't discount the possibility that a combination of HDMI based elements could play a role.

The whole CEC funciton of HDMI (Consumer Electronics Control) is pretty wild. That allows you to turn on the DVD player and with the "right" equipment hooked to it it tells the AVR to turn on, and switch to that input and then the TV gets told to power up...all merely by virtue of turning on the DVD player connected via HDMI. Panasonic's HDAVI branded technology is a function of CEC capability.

There is also the exchange of EDID (Extended Display Identification Data) which is a VESA standard so your source device knows what display you are using and what the display's characteristics, capabilities and current settings are.

Then you get into HDCP which is a mandatory component of any HDMI interface that may carry protected content. Since the HR20 carries pay per view it falls into that category. A home camcorder with an HDMI connection would not.

But HDCP requires the exchange of secret encrypted authentication keys so the souce device knows that the device it is transmitting to is legit before it sends content. Th encryption keys change randomly and at random intervals just to mix things up and "keep it real". There is a function called "authenticate forever" that if it is not enabled can cause a device to stop sending HDMI data because it forgets or loses track of whether or not it is communicating with an authentic HDMI capable device. Sometimes something as simple as changing a channel, a resolution/aspect setting or switching AVR inputs can hose the authentication and handshake.

Different versions of HDMI on devices that are hooked together can be a potential issue. Sure the new versions are backward compatible but are old versions forward compatible? I don't know. If you have an old HDMI capable DVD player connected to a brand new AVR or TV is the authenticate forever function on the DVD player going to be reliable or will it lose it's autheniticaion data because of version differences between units. Again, I don't know but I haven't been able to find someone who claims to know either

There is a lot more to HDMI than I originally knew. I went to HDMI.org and took an online training course on HDMI that they offer there. It is free and they email you a spiffy little certificate if you pass the test at the end of course. I did and I am now a "certified" HDMI CE installer. I would suggest anyone with a real interest do the same.

And I still have a lot of questions, I just know a lot more about how much of what type of data it shares between devices, how it is sharing it, the purpose and where it could potentially fail. The "why" part is still a mystery on many levels.

HDMI is a very complex technology and most folks making use of it actually know very, very little about what it is actually doing.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

HarleyD, Thanks. Nice insight.


----------



## mitchelljd (Aug 16, 2006)

i really dont love my hr20. this is such pr spin.


----------

