# 922 TV Everywhere (MRV Discussion)



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> Its not to much different right now from what we 1st heard. So not that big of a let down. Big issue is to who many devices, and how many different streams can the ViP922 handle.
> 
> Really want to know if I can watch 1 tuner, sling out the 2nd tuner, and can a 3rd or 4th device watch a recording, or even seperate recordings?
> Depending on how things work, a ViP922 and a couple of ViP211's with harddrives could be a very good configuration.


The huge letdown is that it does not support the TV2 or multiple simultaneous Sling clients.

Dish does not have a whole-house DVR solution, and it appears they have no plans to release one. This could have been it, but they blew it.

If they had enabled the TV2 output over coax, and added the ability to stream to 3 or 4 TV's via the Slinging capability, it would have truly been a TV server for the whole house. The Sling capability built into this unit could have been the first one to support simultaneous multiple streams, since it has direct access to the unit's software, and thus, recordings. Plus, this unit has four tuners, so with 4 or more total outputs, and 4 tuners, this thing could have been a real powerhouse, but instead they crippled it.

TiVo has had a whole-house DVR solution available since the Series2, and DirecTV is just finally getting on board. Dish needs to do some sort of whole-house system as well.

All they really have to do is enable transferring shows over Ethernet. They already have the DRM in place to do it via EHD, they just need to make the boxes "see" each other on a switched Ethernet network. At least this would provide the ability to view shows in any room, even if it wouldn't allow a unified DVR solution.

It seems to me that they are still treating the DVR as secondary to watching TV live, like, in a way, DirecTV is as well. This is stupid thinking, as the DVR should be the focus of the system, not the actual TV viewing capabilities. I guess this is a hard move to make for a company who delivers the TV service, as it just treats it as backhaul for TV shows, not an actual service in and of itself, and once you move to a DVR model, what's stopping people from replacing that with an Apple or Netflix box if those platforms got a wider range of content in HD? Ok, sports, I guess, but it's still a scary thought to cable, IPTV, and satellite companies.



bruin95 said:


> Please explain.


Specifically, at a minimum, I was expecting:

TV1 over HDMI
TV2 over coax
2 simultaneous Sling streams

So that the unit could be a home server. Now, the only way to get true whole-house DVR functionality on Dish is still to throw a bunch of DVR's in a closet and switch them through a component or HDMI matrix. Either that or recapture analog video from a couple of 211's into a SageTV system, either through HD-PVR or R5000.



saberfly said:


> i want to be able to do it without having my network on. I dont leave my network on 24/7 nor do i want to.


Why on earth would you turn your network off? I am big into trying to save energy (I'm going to school for engineering in order to work in the renewable energy field), but there is a certain point where certain infrastructure really needs to stay up 24/7, and a router and switch aren't exactly the biggest power consumers around...



phrelin said:


> I think we all need to start being realistic. As I noted before:
> By "722k" I meant a 722k-like DVR wedded to a Slingbox and labeled a ViP922.
> 
> At this time, like every other signal provider Dish Network can't widely market equipment that delivers a digital ATSC signal over coax without fear of running afoul of the paranoid media production industries' Digital Rights Management issues.
> 
> And while there are millions of TV's with NTSC tuner capabilities, it is a "replaced" antique system for video/audio distribution. At some point, we have to recognize that just as nobody's supporting an 8-bit or 16-bit computer running some non-graphic DOS, the world has moved on from your old analog TV. Being a packrat, ultimately I will be storing my remaining analog TV with my Tandy Model II computers.
> 
> We need to visualize a future without NTSC coax signals just as Dish has. A 922 will provide an HD signal directly to your main TV and simultaneously will provide a separately controlled HD signal to one (at a time) other HD audio/video system via your computer network through a computer or the soon-to-be-released Dish Network HDTV Multi-Room Extender (Sling Receiver 300).
> 
> No, a 922 won't be in my home soon. I already have a Slingbox PRO HD allowing me to watch HD programming from my 722 on my computers.
> 
> I do have one puzzlement about Dish Network/Sling - releasing the 922 without the matching Dish Network HDTV Multi-Room Extender (Sling Receiver 300) will be one of those "Why???" laments that marketing strategists everywhere will be asking. Of course they haven't announced the 922 publicly via a general news release or marketing campaign but the rumor is that the 300 won't be available until June.


Ok, so Sling to 3 or 4 locations at the same time. However, they still should have kept the coax enabled, as there is really no point in getting an extender doohickey to get a 1080i signal to a 13" TV in the kitchen, laundry room, or workshop where you might want to watch recordings. There are certain applications where you just don't need HD, and probably aren't even watching the TV much anyways, just listening while you cook/ fold laundry/ build stuff.

The only advantage this thing has over a 722 is the ability to support two simultaneous HD users, but the downside is that the Sling user is tied to on location, whereas on the 722, either user can be anywhere for SD, and anywhere that is wired for HD component for the HD signal.

Plus, if you really don't like the modulated TV2, nothing is stopping you from running the composite signal over CAT-5e... it only takes a <$100 set of adapters.

Overall, this thing is a big snooze.

Oh, and on the whole placeshifting thing (outside the home), I still can't figure the point out. If I want to consume media while I am not in front of a TV, I probably don't want to watch some Discovery program that requires a big screen and full attention- that's what Podcasts, audiobooks, video podcasts, and everything else that's competing for my eyes is for. Save the good stuff for the big screen!


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> I am thinking the same thing. A couple of 722 or 622's, with a TV Everywhere adapter and MRE's could do the samething as a 922, and maybe cheaper in the long run.
> 
> I agree that not having multiple client support for the 922 is disappointing, but it was never talked about either way. TV2 over Coax works, its just not a Independant stream. I personally have no use TV over Coax, I haven't used a coax connection since since the 90's. Picture Quality from Coax is just awful, even in the SD world.


That has nothing to do with MRV... I am talking about Dish adding MRV to the boxes at a later time, since they already have 75% of the software there to do it.



mcss1985 said:


> I don't feel I need the HD model as I only have the one main HDTV connected to 722 via HDMI and I don't think I need to view it in HD on my computer or phone(I'm assuming the progressive stream to the laptop would look acceptable). Are there any other reason though that may make the Pro HD a better choice (its about $90 more on amazon) when paired with the 722.


The Solo can sling off of TV2 with the IR adapter kit for the 722 for control.

The Pro HD can stream HD. However, if you are just thinking of another TV, just use TV1 with component over CAT-5e, and save the Slingbox for remote viewing.

On the other hand, when away from home or not near a TV, laptop screens look STUNNING with HD content... If you are going to stream HD outside of your home, make sure you have a megabit or two upstream AT MINIMUM. It wouldn't work with DSL, it would have to be cable.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> The TV Everywhere Adapter is exactly how Dish will add MRV to the 622/722's.


TV everywhere is not MRV. Dish does not have MRV, other than sneaker-net with EHD, which doesn't count.

MRV is currently implemented in two flavors (other than server-client like MCE or Sage):

1. TiVo. They transfer the whole show over as fast the the TiVos can handle it. Limited by the number of cable cards the MSO will allow on one account. I don't *think* TiVo has an arbitrary limit.

2. DirecTV. They stream the content. Limited by the number of boxes that DirecTV will allow on one account.


----------



## P Smith

Bigg said:


> *TV everywhere is not MRV.* Dish does not have MRV, other than sneaker-net with EHD, which doesn't count.
> 
> MRV is currently implemented in two flavors (other than server-client like MCE or Sage):
> 
> 1. TiVo. They transfer the whole show over as fast the the TiVos can handle it. Limited by the number of cable cards the MSO will allow on one account. I don't *think* TiVo has an arbitrary limit.
> 
> 2. DirecTV. They stream the content. Limited by the number of boxes that DirecTV will allow on one account.


Before talking about implementation, you should establish a base for it.

How *you *define the "MRV" feature ?


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> TV everywhere is not MRV. Dish does not have MRV, other than sneaker-net with EHD, which doesn't count.
> 
> 2. DirecTV. They stream the content. Limited by the number of boxes that DirecTV will allow on one account.


The TV Everywhere adapter being discussed (and built in to the 922) WILL stream content to receivers elsewhere in the home (in HD) or anywhere there is an Internet connection (in SD). If streamed content counts as MRV for DirecTV it must count as MRV for DISH.

DISH's receiver for the stream can be the extender connected to a TV, personal computers or a wi-fi based TV that DISH is working on.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> TV everywhere is not MRV. Dish does not have MRV, other than sneaker-net with EHD, which doesn't count.
> 
> MRV is currently implemented in two flavors (other than server-client like MCE or Sage):
> 
> 1. TiVo. They transfer the whole show over as fast the the TiVos can handle it. Limited by the number of cable cards the MSO will allow on one account. I don't *think* TiVo has an arbitrary limit.
> 
> 2. DirecTV. They stream the content. Limited by the number of boxes that DirecTV will allow on one account.


Streaming (HD) Video to another TV or IP device, in a different room, IS MRV.
You can be upset that it only allows for 1 remote connection to stream to at a time, but its still streaming HD content to a remote device, on both the phyiscal network and to internet devices.

Dish only can do MRV/Sling, as MRV is streaming video to another source, currently to Computer type machines, at the moment. In the works are both the TV Everywhere adapater and the MultiRoom extender. 
TV Everywhere adapter turns a 622 and 722 into a Sling Box, minus the new interface. Mulitroom adapter allows a REMOTE TV, to access and stream video in HD quality.
You can be upset with Dish's only 1 remote client for streaming, but its still MRV.


----------



## DustoMan

Granted I've never seen a DirecTV DRV but can't you only stream recorded programs between DVRs or to PC? Wouldn't DISH's solution take it a step farther by allowing Live TV streaming to a Sling Receiver or PC?

And wouldn't it also be possible that the single stream limit be increased as the software matures?


----------



## RAD

DustoMan said:


> Granted I've never seen a DirecTV DRV but can't you only stream recorded programs between DVRs or to PC?


That used to be the case. You can now stream from any HR2X HD DVR to another HR2X or to a H21/23/24 non DVR HD receiver.


----------



## Bigg

P Smith said:


> Before talking about implementation, you should establish a base for it.
> 
> How *you *define the "MRV" feature ?


Alright, that's a good question, since the 722's coax could be called "MRV" by a highly lax definition. The 722 and 922 have no scalability.

MRV is the ability to do one of the following:

A) Have a central server that stores all content, allowing it to be streamed to any client in the house. The two examples of this that are commonly used (at least among the tech enthusiast community) are Windows MCE and Sage. MCE is sort-of unlimited in terms of clients, as you can have 5 extenders plus other PC's. Sage is unlimited, as long as your machine is powerful enough. A Quad i7 with 6GB+ of ram and a RAID 6 array on a GoC LAN shouldn't have an issue with 8+ concurrent HD streams, transcoding streams for other devices, recording 8+ HD streams, etc.

The 922 doesn't qualify for this scenario because it can't send out a whole house worth of streams (say, at least 4). The 722 doesn't qualify for the same reason, plus it doesn't do HD on TV2.

B) Transfer or stream peer-to-peer from any one box in the house to any one other box in the house. TiVo and DirecTV both have this method of MRV. It's not *quite* true MRV, since each DVR can only stream one stream out at a time, but it counts because it is scalable in the sense that the clients can all be DVRs, and if you have 8 HR-24's, you could get at least 4 streams going on the network, maybe 8. Apparently the whole system is scalable to 16(!!!) TV's.

In this scenario, each receiver *must* be a fully functioning receiver of the service, NOT just a thin client. Fios and U-Verse have systems that can sort of do this, but they just can't have DVRs transfer to each other (U-Verse is limited to one DVR per house).

The 922 doesn't qualify for this, as the thin client isn't a fully functioning Dish receiver.

C) Not have MRV but get the same functionality by assigning a DVR to each person in the household, have centralized IR control, and use a video matrix switcher to distribute to each room. Not any more cable-heavy than B, but a lot more $$$$ equipment.

In a shorter, non-technical definition, it's the ability to watch anything in any room, and support multiple simultaneous users (albeit with DirecTV and TiVo bottle-necking if everything's on one DVR).


----------



## DustoMan

Bigg said:


> The 922 doesn't qualify for this, as the thin client isn't a fully functioning Dish receiver.


Considering that we have no idea what the Sling Receiver UI looks like. We don't know enough information to make that statement. The Sling Receiver that Dish Network ends up selling could very well look exactly like what a TV2 output from any of Dish's receivers looks like but with the addition of HD because of how much bandwidth is available to it.

And really I think you are just splitting-hairs here. The first scenario you describe is something that's limited to the high-end tech enthusiast and no satellite or cable company is going to mass market a media server running software like SageTV. Cable especially, would rather you have 5 full feature boxes in your home so that you have 5 opportunities to purchase pay-per-view content. And they sure as hell don't want you having access to the raw video files letting you burn or stream video just anywhere in your home.

Secondly, if you want to define the "multi-" in MRV as the ability to have at least two video signals going into two separate remote rooms of a home then that's your prerogative. The more common definition of MRV is exactly that the little "Home Distribution" port on the back of almost all dual output receivers is. While it's not HD, technically your single receiver is supporting _multiple_ rooms. To me and most other posters here, we'll stick with what's common to avoid confusion.


----------



## DustoMan

RAD said:


> That used to be the case. You can now stream from any HR2X HD DVR to another HR2X or to a H21/23/24 non DVR HD receiver.


But only something that's recorded, not live?


----------



## RAD

DustoMan said:


> But only something that's recorded, not live?


Doesn't matter since you can watch live TV on those boxes, DirecTV2PC IS still limited to watching only recorded content.


----------



## James Long

I'd prefer to use the simplest definition possible ... if from there you want to say that some form of MRV is better than another that is fine, but to claim that a product does not have MRV at all for some technical reason reminds me of the arguments over DirecTV and DISH's use of HD Lite. At the end of the day you may have a technically correct argument that 99.99% of subscribers could care less about who won.

MRV is Multi-Room Viewing. If you can watch a program stored or live from a receiver in one room that is different than the content delivered to another room you have a receiver that supports multiple room viewing.

Technically this definition would make DISH's 222, 322, 522, 622, 722 and any other separate output receiver "MRV" ... just not HD MRV. The ability to watch the same channel in multiple rooms is good ... but the separate content is what makes MRV a more valuable feature. If MRV must be HD then you can eliminate more receivers - but those eliminated receivers still deliver content to multiple rooms.

Requiring the playback receiver to be a fully functional receiver seems to be an unneeded restriction. The benefit of having MRV is being able to watch in some other room without having multiple receivers. That is why DISH created their two room receivers (including the 322). Run a simple coax to another room and you have TV. To me the thinner the client the better. Run a simple Ethernet cable to another room or use Wi-Fi and you have TV.

DISH's implementation does not have the limitation of "no live TV". Any satellite channel can be watched live via the second output feed. An identical receiver at the playback end of the connection is redundant. All they need is a thin client box.

Every implementation of MRV DISH has done prior to the 922 (non-HD) has offered the same menus to the remote user as the main user. I don't see why the 922 would be any different. The connection between the 922 and the catching box is just video ... the menus are put on that video just like it was the live or recorded program being viewed. Why require the catching box be anything more? (Allow it to be more ... direct stream from the Internet without using resources on the 922 would be nice ... but don't require it.)


----------



## DustoMan

RAD said:


> Doesn't matter since you can watch live TV on those boxes, DirecTV2PC IS still limited to watching only recorded content.


Oh right, right, what was I thinking?  So there's a tick in E* column, you can do live streaming on a PC.


----------



## xzi

DustoMan said:


> Oh right, right, what was I thinking?  So there's a tick in E* column, you can do live streaming on a PC.


You can do it with DIRECTV2PC as well. You just hit REC first on the DVR


----------



## RAD

DustoMan said:


> Oh right, right, what was I thinking?  So there's a tick in E* column, you can do live streaming on a PC.





xzi said:


> You can do it with DIRECTV2PC as well. You just hit REC first on the DVR


As the man said, you can just start a recording on the DVR either on the box or via internet. But one thing you miss is that to use DirecTV2PC you don't need to buy anything, the software client is free and all HD DVR's support it as a server.

As for MRV, there will be a $3/month/account enabling fee, but if you've networked the receivers yourself all the HR2X's and H21/23/24 receivers will support it, you don't need to purchase a new receiver or another box for the client TV's.

Not wanting to start a D* vs. E* battle, just trying to make sure you have the information.


----------



## phrelin

Interesting discussion about whose MRV is better. In the discussion, let us not forget that as of the end of 2007, Echostar's ownership of Sling Media has made it possible for Charlie to offer MRV to you for any service provider and the Slingbox PRO HD was on the market in the fall of 2008. The Slingbox PRO HD is $246.54 at Amazon and has no monthly fees.


----------



## GrumpyBear

In a peer to Peer world,

Why does the remote client have to be a Dish reciever? If the samething can be accomplished through a superior user interface instead, to any client you want? 
I am holding out, until the Multi-room Extender comes out, as the idea of being able to stream to any TV, I want, plus any one of 4 Laptops in the house, is appealing, and the way I want to do it. The kids are already thinking of streaming to other houses, for Glee parties, and other shows. Everybody in the house is already talking about how flexible it will be when both TV's are in use or even if we add a 3rd tv, how easy it will be to just add an MRE on it, plus the laptops make for much more flexiblity. If I get a 922 now, I may have problems upgrading the Main TV like I want to next month, and really the only thing holding me back after yesterdays Demo.

I am already planning on a 922, on the Main TV, and TV Everywhere adapter on the 2nd TV with a 722. Both TV's will have a Multi-Room Extender as well.
Changing over from the 722 or 922 to the MRE, will be no different than switching over to play the xbox360 or BluRay Player, or DVD player depending on TV.

So with 2 DVR's I will be able to stream, to both TV's, or to any other TV or Laptop, or even a Ipad, as they tried that yesterday and it worked, that I want to. 
In a Peer-Peer setup, I just don't see how this isn't a MRV environment? Each DVR streaming a Single HD signal to any device on the network, that I want. Granted this is my biggest pet peeve, is the single client part, but its no more limiting that any other provider. You really need to play with SlingGuide and the New 922 UI.


If your network supports it, you can have 8-16 ViP DVR's each streaming to a single client, and the client can be a TV with a Dish reciever, without a reciever, or a Laptop, multiple ways of doing it. Why would a peer-peer system with fewer supported options be better?

Direct's can scale out, but has the same network bandwith requirements as Dish would with the same amount of DVR's streaming. If you don't have the bandwidth you have a entire house re-run with DECA support in the Direct world. This is also the only way to get Support from Direct is to use DECA. Home Networks with MRV, isn't supported by Direct, it works or it doesn't. 
Dish is actually supporting the home network environments. They wont help with the network, nor would I want them too, but the User Interface allows them to actually have some idea of whats wrong.


----------



## RAD

GrumpyBear said:


> Dish is actually supporting the home network environments. They wont help with the network, nor would I want them too, but the User Interface allows them to actually have some idea of whats wrong.


Could you expand on that a bit. If you're using the built in Home Plug for networking and you can't get a solid HD MRV stream what will Dish do to support that for you as an example?


----------



## GrumpyBear

RAD said:


> Could you expand on that a bit. If you're using the built in Home Plug for networking and you can't get a solid HD MRV stream what will Dish do to support that for you as an example?


I didn't say they were going to resolve Network issues, nor can they tell you that your bandwidth is your problem. They wont hang up on you when you tell them you are using a home network. But will be able to help troubleshoot the connectivity between the two devices.
Both Direct and Dish have good approach's. I am disappointed that Dish didn't have the Mulit-Room Extender in play at the time of launch.

Dish's PC support, has won me over only because of the my Family really, really, really likes this option. DirectTV2PC works, but isn't it really still beta software that Direct doesn't support? They give it to you for free, but you have to make it work, and if it doesn't you are on your own? Dish really seems to be making IP devices the focus and core of the product.

I do prefer, that Dish allows me to sling out a Live tuner to a remote device, without having to start a recording, that I can't delete after I am done from the remote device. This reminds me of the DLB work around Direct had for yrs, Record everything approach.

Tonight, is a good reason to have the 922, but I will continue to hold out, until the MRE is released. 
Thursday is the busy night here, 8PM Vampire Diaries, Survivor, Bones, all get recorded and at 9 we have Fringe, CSI:Vegas. How nice it would be to let somebody either via TV or PC let them watch thier preferred show from any room they wanted to be in. This is a FACT I have heard several times last nite and today.


----------



## RAD

GrumpyBear said:


> I didn't say they were going to resolve Network issues, nor can they tell you that your bandwidth is your problem. They wont hang up on you when you tell them you are using a home network. But will be able to help troubleshoot the connectivity between the two devices.


OK, thanks. Will be interesting to see reports from folks calling in with networking issues to see how that works out.


----------



## GrumpyBear

RAD said:


> OK, thanks. Will be interesting to see reports from folks calling in with networking issues to see how that works out.


OH I agree. I wouldn't let most of them touch my network. It will just be nice to at least have a support option.


----------



## GrumpyBear

phrelin said:


> Interesting discussion about whose MRV is better. In the discussion, let us not forget that as of the end of 2007, Echostar's ownership of Sling Media has made it possible for Charlie to offer MRV to you for any service provider and the Slingbox PRO HD was on the market in the fall of 2008. The Slingbox PRO HD is $246.54 at Amazon and has no monthly fees.


Only problem is the Catchers aren't HD. If I was going to just go with Laptops as clients I would go Slingbox Pro. I want to make it to my TV's in HD as well. Now if the SlingCatcher was HD, I would be all over it. 
Now if Sling Sells the 700u and the 3000 speratly.... I may forgo the 922 and just add onto my 622 and 722.


----------



## Bigg

DustoMan said:


> Considering that we have no idea what the Sling Receiver UI looks like. We don't know enough information to make that statement. The Sling Receiver that Dish Network ends up selling could very well look exactly like what a TV2 output from any of Dish's receivers looks like but with the addition of HD because of how much bandwidth is available to it.
> 
> And really I think you are just splitting-hairs here. The first scenario you describe is something that's limited to the high-end tech enthusiast and no satellite or cable company is going to mass market a media server running software like SageTV. Cable especially, would rather you have 5 full feature boxes in your home so that you have 5 opportunities to purchase pay-per-view content. And they sure as hell don't want you having access to the raw video files letting you burn or stream video just anywhere in your home.
> 
> Secondly, if you want to define the "multi-" in MRV as the ability to have at least two video signals going into two separate remote rooms of a home then that's your prerogative. The more common definition of MRV is exactly that the little "Home Distribution" port on the back of almost all dual output receivers is. While it's not HD, technically your single receiver is supporting _multiple_ rooms. To me and most other posters here, we'll stick with what's common to avoid confusion.


If it can't receive a signal over a coax cable from a dish, it's not a Dish receiver. It's a slave to a Dish receiver.

So what if no one mass markets Sage? If someone wants a whole house DVR with satellite, they can go get three or four H24's, the corresponding HD-PVRs and USB-UIRT's, and thin client out all of their TV's. There are setups out there that do just that. Some even use Dish 211's, some with HD-PVR, and some through R5000 with a direct digital stream from the Dish.

Why shouldn't they want you to have direct digital access to the files? You paid for the service, the heck as they care what you do with it once it crosses the demarc point. Ok, maybe they want extra $$ from boxes, but if you pay your bill, you're good.

A 722 doesn't have MRV. MRV is scalable, it doesn't limit you to only having two TV's. And no, a cable splitter to mirror them isn't MRV either. It's cool, don't get me wrong, but it's not MRV.



James Long said:


> I'd prefer to use the simplest definition possible ... if from there you want to say that some form of MRV is better than another that is fine, but to claim that a product does not have MRV at all for some technical reason reminds me of the arguments over DirecTV and DISH's use of HD Lite. At the end of the day you may have a technically correct argument that 99.99% of subscribers could care less about who won.


HD-Lite or 1080i with stereo audio IS NOT HD. If it works, then buy it, however, it IS NOT HD. HD is either 1920x1080i with 5.1 or 1280x720p with 5.1. 1900x1080i IS NOT HD. 1440x1080i IS NOT HD.

The 722 doesn't have MRV because it's not scalable. MCE scales to 6 (PC plus 5 extenders), DirecTV scales to 15 TVs, not sure about TiVo, but you'd need deep pockets to scale it much at all.



GrumpyBear said:


> In a Peer-Peer setup, I just don't see how this isn't a MRV environment? Each DVR streaming a Single HD signal to any device on the network, that I want. Granted this is my biggest pet peeve, is the single client part, but its no more limiting that any other provider. You really need to play with SlingGuide and the New 922 UI.
> 
> If your network supports it, you can have 8-16 ViP DVR's each streaming to a single client, and the client can be a TV with a Dish reciever, without a reciever, or a Laptop, multiple ways of doing it. Why would a peer-peer system with fewer supported options be better?
> 
> Direct's can scale out, but has the same network bandwith requirements as Dish would with the same amount of DVR's streaming. If you don't have the bandwidth you have a entire house re-run with DECA support in the Direct world. This is also the only way to get Support from Direct is to use DECA. Home Networks with MRV, isn't supported by Direct, it works or it doesn't.


If the 922 could SlingCatch, then it would have MRV, since that's just a fancy name for the same thing DirecTV does with the HR2x.

Part of Dish's problem is that they have absurd mirroring fees. DirecTV is $5/box/mo. Dish is $10 or $17, now they are jacking the DVR fee on the 922.

You don't have to re-run anything for DECA, it's just a new multiswitch and adapters. That's the whole point. It's supported in that you can turn it on. If you call customer support because something isn't working right, unless you know what they have to do on their end before you call, then you shouldn't be calling. RTFM and use forums.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

Bigg said:


> HD-Lite or 1080i with stereo audio IS NOT HD. If it works, then buy it, however, it IS NOT HD. HD is either 1920x1080i with 5.1 or 1280x720p with 5.1. 1900x1080i IS NOT HD. 1440x1080i IS NOT HD.


There are many different supported HD resolutions in the broadcast and satellite specifications, so the FCC recognizes quite a bit.

Also, 5.1 surround is NOT a requirement. I believe Dolby Digital is a requirement for broadcast HD... but that could be 1.0 mono or 2.0 Dolby Digital and still qualify. There is no mandate anywhere for 5.1 surround even though we all like it.


----------



## Bigg

Stewart Vernon said:


> There are many different supported HD resolutions in the broadcast and satellite specifications, so the FCC recognizes quite a bit.
> 
> Also, 5.1 surround is NOT a requirement. I believe Dolby Digital is a requirement for broadcast HD... but that could be 1.0 mono or 2.0 Dolby Digital and still qualify. There is no mandate anywhere for 5.1 surround even though we all like it.


If it's 2.0 audio, then it's an HD *picture*. HD is an HD picture plus 5.1 audio. Again, not to say it's undesirable, but it's not technically HD.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> If the 922 could SlingCatch, then it would have MRV, since that's just a fancy name for the same thing DirecTV does with the HR2x.
> 
> Part of Dish's problem is that they have absurd mirroring fees. DirecTV is $5/box/mo. Dish is $10 or $17, now they are jacking the DVR fee on the 922.
> 
> You don't have to re-run anything for DECA, it's just a new multiswitch and adapters. That's the whole point. It's supported in that you can turn it on. If you call customer support because something isn't working right, unless you know what they have to do on their end before you call, then you shouldn't be calling. RTFM and use forums.


So you are saying all Direct users already have SWM properly installed NOW, and wont require new cabling for DECA? There is a reason why DECA is being rolled out in Regions, and by Pro installers.

Dish doesn't require you to change your Home Network to get support like Direct does. Direct MRV, Home Network= no support, but please continue to pay the $3 a month for the feature, if it works or not. Want support please purchase new DECA equipment and Pay $3 a month. Direct doesn't give MRV away for fee either, it is an added price, just like Uverse, Dish and everybody else.

Right now, the 922 can't catch, May/June with the MRE it will be able to catch, Live or recorded content in HD. Just like every other reciever, or TV without a reciever. What a novelty, to be able to have a game room or garage TV, that instead of having a monthly service fee for a reciever that wouldn't be used on a regular basis, you could add a MRE for a single one time fee, and no reaccuring monthly fee for another reciever, for that part time TV. If you don't understand how the MRE and TV Everywhere work, time to do some reading.
http://slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300 MRE
http://slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u TV Everywhere

I only have 2 DVR's, pay $17 month in Hardware fee's, yes higher hardware fees than Direct if I only had 2 DVR's. 
Tonight is a perfect example of how its really cheaper. 
8pm, 3 shows recording, and at 9pm 2 shows and 1 movie and all this is happening on a single 722. All the shows are for other family members, and I still have a tuner all to myself to watch something else that I want. With Direct I would need to have 3 DVR's to do what I do with 1 single 722, and we wont even count the fact that I have a 622, were I record most of my shows and sports events, while still recording shows the wife likes to watch and catch up on in the evening. To accomplish just the recordings I would need 5-6 Direct DVR's, to make sure I alway have at least one free tuner to surf on. Now even if I could live with few tuners to record with, I would still need to double my DVR's with Direct for football season to jury rig a PiP system. So yes Dish's recievers are more expensive, and should be about *$5 less in my opinion*, I would have to spend more in hardware fees with Direct, as I would need many more DVR's with Direct, to do the same job.
We wont even go into all the other missing features of the Direct DVR's.

Dish's approach is to get Sling/MRV, in a supported fashion, all users, mom's pop's and grandparents, not just the tech heads, like most of here. I do find a failure fault in the launch, by not having the MRV available now.

Your view on MRV, having more than just one stream is a good one. NOBODY does it, so nobody offers MRV period then. Rather its a central system or peer-peer system. MRV by your standard doesn't exist from any provider.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> If it's 2.0 audio, then it's an HD *picture*. HD is an HD picture plus 5.1 audio. Again, not to say it's undesirable, but it's not technically HD.


Anything that falls into the Current spec is Technically HD. Rathers its the bottom of the Spec or the top end of the Spec. If its in the Range of spec, it does Technically qualify.


----------



## DustoMan

Bigg said:


> If it can't receive a signal over a coax cable from a dish, it's not a Dish receiver. It's a slave to a Dish receiver.


Well now you're just nitpicking. 



Bigg said:


> So what if no one mass markets Sage? If someone wants a whole house DVR with satellite, they can go get three or four H24's, the corresponding HD-PVRs and USB-UIRT's, and thin client out all of their TV's. There are setups out there that do just that. Some even use Dish 211's, some with HD-PVR, and some through R5000 with a direct digital stream from the Dish.


Oh I'd love something like that. If it was at all legal...



Bigg said:


> Why shouldn't they want you to have direct digital access to the files? You paid for the service, the heck as they care what you do with it once it crosses the demarc point. Ok, maybe they want extra $$ from boxes, but if you pay your bill, you're good.


One word: ReplayTV. Fantastic box that would let you do a lot of the things you're ranting about, but sued out of existence because the content creators didn't want a box on the market that makes it so easy to copy video and skip commercials. That's why they don't want you to have access to your recorded files, and why it's taken so long for E* and other companies to get as far as they have come already.



Bigg said:


> A 722 doesn't have MRV. MRV is scalable, it doesn't limit you to only having two TV's. And no, a cable splitter to mirror them isn't MRV either. It's cool, don't get me wrong, but it's not MRV.


Once again, it doesn't fit your definition of MRV which if you haven't figured it out yet. You're the only one that has that definition.

:beatdeadhorse:


----------



## RAD

GrumpyBear said:


> Direct MRV, Home Network= no support, but please continue to pay the $3 a month for the feature, if it works or not. Want support please purchase new DECA equipment and Pay $3 a month. Direct doesn't give MRV away for fee either, it is an added price, just like Uverse, Dish and everybody else.


Sorry, don't get your pay $3/month for MRV if it works or not, if it doesn't work you just get MRV disabled from the account. For the 922 from what I've seen, as soon as you add it to your account your DVR fee goes up $4/month even if you have no plan use the Sling capability,

Also I guess I'm still a bit confused when you say Dish will support your own network but DirecTV won't. For DirecTV we've been told that you can use your own network if you don't want DECA, so they will allow MRV over ethernet to be enable on the account but won't provide any problem resolution if it has problems. For Dish you say _"I didn't say they were going to resolve Network issues, nor can they tell you that your bandwidth is your problem. They wont hang up on you when you tell them you are using a home network. But will be able to help troubleshoot the connectivity between the two devices."_, I'm still curious how much they're going to do for that. Will they know how to get into all the various routers available to check settings or what all the indicator lights mean on all the brands of switchs folks might have? Do you have a link to show what support Dish will be providing to help me understand the limits of that support?


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> James Long said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd prefer to use the simplest definition possible ... if from there you want to say that some form of MRV is better than another that is fine, but to claim that a product does not have MRV at all for some technical reason reminds me of the arguments over DirecTV and DISH's use of HD Lite. At the end of the day you may have a technically correct argument that 99.99% of subscribers could care less about who won.
> 
> 
> 
> HD-Lite or 1080i with stereo audio IS NOT HD. If it works, then buy it, however, it IS NOT HD. HD is either 1920x1080i with 5.1 or 1280x720p with 5.1. 1900x1080i IS NOT HD. 1440x1080i IS NOT HD.
Click to expand...

Thanks for missing the point. The point was it doesn't matter how you redefine MRV to exclude one provider's service and include another ... or choose a high standard that no provider will ever use. 99.99% of subscribers could not care less about the standards. They just want a clear picture. (The 99.99% is probably a low estimate.)

If you have to whip out a calculator or a slide rule to prove your point you're working too hard. HD is whatever the market offers ... using industry standard compression via OTA and satellite and delivered to the customer's HD set. MRV is whatever the market offers. At the moment the satellite services are offering a limited MRV service but it is still MRV.

If one already has a house full of receivers being able to use one to see the content on the other is nice. Otherwise a "catching" device that moves the second output to another room is what DISH customers have been asking for since before the 622 came out years ago. The design is serving the customer. The need is met (including live viewing) by the 922 or TV Everywhere adapter. If you don't like the way DISH met the need then find another provider. This is the way DISH is going.


----------



## GrumpyBear

RAD said:


> Sorry, don't get your pay $3/month for MRV if it works or not, if it doesn't work you just get MRV disabled from the account. For the 922 from what I've seen, as soon as you add it to your account your DVR fee goes up $4/month even if you have no plan use the Sling capability,
> 
> Also I guess I'm still a bit confused when you say Dish will support your own network but DirecTV won't. For DirecTV we've been told that you can use your own network if you don't want DECA, so they will allow MRV over ethernet to be enable on the account but won't provide any problem resolution if it has problems. For Dish you say _"I didn't say they were going to resolve Network issues, nor can they tell you that your bandwidth is your problem. They wont hang up on you when you tell them you are using a home network. But will be able to help troubleshoot the connectivity between the two devices."_, I'm still curious how much they're going to do for that. Will they know how to get into all the various routers available to check settings or what all the indicator lights mean on all the brands of switchs folks might have? Do you have a link to show what support Dish will be providing to help me understand the limits of that support?


Lets say Cousin Bob is the family Network guy. Comes over gets MRV to work on Grandma's Home Network, he leaves and now MRV doesn't work, and Grandma can't fine him. She calls Direct and when she says home network is how MRV is working, does Direct talk to her? Try to help? Or do they explain that were MRV works, only the DECA environment is supported by Direct, and she now needs to find cousin Bob, or spend money on DECA equipment? Does Direct stop billing her for the $3 MRV, while its not working?

Yes with the 922, your bill goes up automaticly, rather you use sling or not. Granted why would you you step up to the 922 unless you wanted to use sling? Granted some may, just for the interface I guess.

Now lets say Cousin Bob, gets Sling to work over the home network, and when he is gone and grandma can't get ahold of him, she calls Dish. 
Dish isn't going to care what kind of environment and will work with her, to what fashion, I am not sure, I haven't played enough with the system, yet so see exactly how much support they can do, I only saw it for an hr. Difference is Dish wont tell her so sorry, no support for you, because you didn't spend money on our network equipment.

Dish is confident enough in the Sling setup to support it in any environment, and wont send grandma and the rest of the average users packing. Can I discribe in detail how Dish is going to support it? No. Can I say in various chats, that I will be supported with my Home Network. Yes. Still not sure what goes on when you do the online test, but its easy to do.

Now do I feel that Directs MRV is wrought with problems and going to have all sorts of issues, in a Home Network? *NO.*
My veiwpoint is very JADED after years as working as a Post Sales Support(nothing to do with DBS), and way to many clients without the hole story before jumping into a purchase. I personally feel that the VAST majority of users on this site, will have no problems supporting Directs MRV solution. Its the avg user with LITTLE computer skills, and there are WAY to many of out there, should be made aware of the support issue, and be guided into a DECA solution before the even get started.


----------



## william Bray

Thanks for the links explaining Slingbox. I have a 622 and didn't think I would use Slingbox because I have no interest in viewing my home tv on my computer away from home. Now I see it can send output to remote tv in another room when the necessary gadgets arrive, and without running wires around the house. That I like! 

I want the 922 already, but would really like to know if it has a better OTA tuner than my 622. Also, I cannot record one OTA channel and simultaneously watch another OTA channel now. Anyone know if that will be possible with the 922? Thanks.


----------



## BobaBird

DustoMan said:


> Considering that we have no idea what the Sling Receiver UI looks like.


See Sling 300 menu from http://www.dishuser.org/ces2010.php.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> So you are saying all Direct users already have SWM properly installed NOW, and wont require new cabling for DECA? There is a reason why DECA is being rolled out in Regions, and by Pro installers.
> 
> Dish doesn't require you to change your Home Network to get support like Direct does. Direct MRV, Home Network= no support, but please continue to pay the $3 a month for the feature, if it works or not. Want support please purchase new DECA equipment and Pay $3 a month. Direct doesn't give MRV away for fee either, it is an added price, just like Uverse, Dish and everybody else.
> 
> Right now, the 922 can't catch, May/June with the MRE it will be able to catch, Live or recorded content in HD. Just like every other reciever, or TV without a reciever. What a novelty, to be able to have a game room or garage TV, that instead of having a monthly service fee for a reciever that wouldn't be used on a regular basis, you could add a MRE for a single one time fee, and no reaccuring monthly fee for another reciever, for that part time TV. If you don't understand how the MRE and TV Everywhere work, time to do some reading.
> http://slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300 MRE
> http://slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u TV Everywhere
> 
> I only have 2 DVR's, pay $17 month in Hardware fee's, yes higher hardware fees than Direct if I only had 2 DVR's.
> Tonight is a perfect example of how its really cheaper.
> 8pm, 3 shows recording, and at 9pm 2 shows and 1 movie and all this is happening on a single 722. All the shows are for other family members, and I still have a tuner all to myself to watch something else that I want. With Direct I would need to have 3 DVR's to do what I do with 1 single 722, and we wont even count the fact that I have a 622, were I record most of my shows and sports events, while still recording shows the wife likes to watch and catch up on in the evening. To accomplish just the recordings I would need 5-6 Direct DVR's, to make sure I alway have at least one free tuner to surf on. Now even if I could live with few tuners to record with, I would still need to double my DVR's with Direct for football season to jury rig a PiP system. So yes Dish's recievers are more expensive, and should be about *$5 less in my opinion*, I would have to spend more in hardware fees with Direct, as I would need many more DVR's with Direct, to do the same job.
> We wont even go into all the other missing features of the Direct DVR's.
> 
> Dish's approach is to get Sling/MRV, in a supported fashion, all users, mom's pop's and grandparents, not just the tech heads, like most of here. I do find a failure fault in the launch, by not having the MRV available now.
> 
> Your view on MRV, having more than just one stream is a good one. NOBODY does it, so nobody offers MRV period then. Rather its a central system or peer-peer system.  MRV by your standard doesn't exist from any provider.


SWM is a multi-switch, NOT a cable. It uses 3GHZ RG-6 coax, just like older non-SWM installs. It requires a new switch and some changes on both ends of the cable.

My view is that you have to be able to watch anything from anywhere. DirecTV is damn close, a Sage setup has got it. And yes, that's all off-the-shelf stuff.

If a 722 and a 622 meet your needs now, a pair of HR24's, and an H24 would do the trick on D*. I don't know where you got your math. DirecTV has an external OTA tuner, the AM-21, I *think* it works with the HR24.



DustoMan said:


> Oh I'd love something like that. If it was at all legal...
> 
> Once again, it doesn't fit your definition of MRV which if you haven't figured it out yet. You're the only one that has that definition.


What's illegal about an HD-PVR? *Nothing*. It's called the analog hole, and now we have the chips to do it in HD. R5000 is pretty shady though, since it definitely violates Dish's TOS.

If it makes you happy, we can stop talking about MRV and move to talking about the whole house DVR if that makes it harder to stuff other technologies into the wrapper. Jeez.

DirecTV doesn't support your network because they need a very consistent bandwidth, Dish is using Sling, which adapts on the fly to whatever mess of bandwidth some customer might have, just like a real Slingbox.



James Long said:


> Thanks for missing the point. The point was it doesn't matter how you redefine MRV to exclude one provider's service and include another ... or choose a high standard that no provider will ever use. 99.99% of subscribers could not care less about the standards. They just want a clear picture. (The 99.99% is probably a low estimate.)
> 
> If you have to whip out a calculator or a slide rule to prove your point you're working too hard. HD is whatever the market offers ... using industry standard compression via OTA and satellite and delivered to the customer's HD set. MRV is whatever the market offers. At the moment the satellite services are offering a limited MRV service but it is still MRV.
> 
> If one already has a house full of receivers being able to use one to see the content on the other is nice. Otherwise a "catching" device that moves the second output to another room is what DISH customers have been asking for since before the 622 came out years ago. The design is serving the customer. The need is met (including live viewing) by the 922 or TV Everywhere adapter. If you don't like the way DISH met the need then find another provider. This is the way DISH is going.


You missed the point. If my 6-year-old TiVo had a twin, it would have had MRV from the day it was hooked up. We're talking USB1.1 ethernet adapters being top-of-the-line here. If a box with a sub-200mhz processor could do MRV why didn't the cable and satellite providers support it from day 1 with their DVRs? Why does Dish still not support it? AT&T and DirecTV do, Dish and Comcast don't.

HD has a very distinct definition, and I would like to see providers who chop pixels off be sued for not advertising HD-Lite, or an actual numerical resolution. I think a standard should be set for bitrate too, i.e. 19mbps (half-channel QAM) MPEG-2, and calculate the mathematical equivalent for MPEG-4.



GrumpyBear said:


> Lets say Cousin Bob is the family Network guy. Comes over gets MRV to work on Grandma's Home Network, he leaves and now MRV doesn't work, and Grandma can't fine him. She calls Direct and when she says home network is how MRV is working, does Direct talk to her? Try to help? Or do they explain that were MRV works, only the DECA environment is supported by Direct, and she now needs to find cousin Bob, or spend money on DECA equipment? Does Direct stop billing her for the $3 MRV, while its not working?


That's why it should be free without DECA. That way in that scenario if she calls DirecTV, the answer is that she doesn't have MRV so they aren't giving her any support for it. I understand they want to market it with DECA, but I really like the way it is now- in "beta" unsupported and free. I think that should stay the same way, but add in the fee for DECA users. Might be hard to control though, as the unit can't tell what physical layer its LAN is on.

I like the 500GB drives, but people are making a big deal about EHD and going bigger. Folks, a DVR is not a hoarding tool, it's to time-shift shows, if you're not abusing its functionality there is no way to get close to filling up a 500GB drive with MPEG-4.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> If a 722 and a 622 meet your needs now, a pair of HR24's, and an H24 would do the trick on D*. I don't know where you got your math. DirecTV has an external OTA tuner, the AM-21, I *think* it works with the HR24.


No reason for the AM-21 not to work with the HR24. You are saying with the AM21 connected, the HR24 will record 3-4 shows at the sametime? You sure about this? 
HR24 has PiP for Football season? You sure about this too?

As for support or no support for Home Networks. My view point is VERY jaded with to many years of Tech support work. Way to many problems would have been solved and many more happy users, if the Users would have known the full story going in. Setting up a supported group, and a unsupported group, from a Tech support point of view is a HUGE can of worms. Not saying Directs Solution is going to have problems, the supported vs unsupported puts Tech support into a bad spot, as they will be the ones that take the brunt of the calls and the brunt of the compliants, if and when there are problems.

When it comes to SWM, like I said you are expecting everybody to already have it installed and installed correctly, to update to a DECA environment. Thats a pipe dream, and the one of the reasons its being rolled out in regional stages, and done by Pro installers. As not everybody has SWM installed now, nor will everybody have a properly installed SWM system.

As for HD space, it must be nice to live in a world without 4-5 people in a house each recording shows, with plenty of leasure time to watch them all quickly. Granted you are missing out as well, but not being able to save off entire seasons, and movies as well, to enjoy at your leasure, or just to save off and not have to buy the DVD.
An example of why a EHD's and Larger Drives are useful is this weekend.
Kids are having a Glee Party(much to my displeasure) Sunday, to get ready for the Season Premiere. Everybody in the house has there own EHD, and the kids have the entire 1st season saved off, and will host a party so they can watch them all. Granted with a 500GB Drive, it would have been very hard to hold onto all those Episodes, from the end of last season to the beginning of this one.

Being able to have a larger HD or to have real working EHD system, allows me the leasure of recording a new series, like V, or Caprica, and wait until I have 4 episodes, and watch them all together to see if I really like the series or not. Lets the wife and kids do the same. 
Not sure why you think fewer options are better not just for Drive space, but on how and where you can vew recorded or Live TV, the More options the better. The more functionality the Better. Why limit yourself? A DVR is a timeshifting device to use anyway you want it too. Why strip it down? Why wouldn't you want it with more Features and Robust functions?


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> DirecTV doesn't support your network because they need a very consistent bandwidth, Dish is using Sling, which adapts on the fly to whatever mess of bandwidth some customer might have, just like a real Slingbox.


That's a good thing ... and will hopefully cut down on the need for support.



Bigg said:


> If my 6-year-old TiVo had a twin, it would have had MRV from the day it was hooked up. We're talking USB1.1 ethernet adapters being top-of-the-line here. If a box with a sub-200mhz processor could do MRV why didn't the cable and satellite providers support it from day 1 with their DVRs? Why does Dish still not support it? AT&T and DirecTV do, Dish and Comcast don't.


You're picking a definition that 99.99% of people don't accept. DISH's 922 has "MRV" ... the TV Everywhere adapter will add "MRV" to existing DISH receivers. It may not be your MRV but it serves the need.

And yes, I'd accept that networking TiVos to view content in another room qualifies as MRV ... even via USB 1.1 Ethernet adapters.



Bigg said:


> HD has a very distinct definition,


Yes. And it is usually ignored by those pushing the "HD Lite" agenda. The compression schemes used by DISH, DirecTV and Voom - including reduction in the number of bits on the screen - are acceptable as part of the ATSC standards for satellite transmission of HD.



Bigg said:


> Folks, a DVR is not a hoarding tool, it's to time-shift shows, if you're not abusing its functionality there is no way to get close to filling up a 500GB drive with MPEG-4.


That is your opinion. Filling the hard drive is virtually a challenge for many users. Make your own "movies on demand" collection. Keep years worth of broadcast TV shows (instead of buying the DVDs). DISH's external hard drives give you the ability to swap out archive drives and use them on any compatible DVR on your account without loss of timers and other settings.

If people want to keep TV forever then why not?


----------



## DustoMan

Bigg said:


> What's *illegal* about an HD-PVR? Nothing. It's called the analog hole, and now we have the chips to do it in HD. *R5000* is pretty shady though, since it definitely violates Dish's TOS.


I was talking about the R5000.  And analog hole means no HD when pretty much makes it useless to me.


----------



## Bigg

James Long said:


> That's a good thing ... and will hopefully cut down on the need for support.
> 
> You're picking a definition that 99.99% of people don't accept. DISH's 922 has "MRV" ... the TV Everywhere adapter will add "MRV" to existing DISH receivers. It may not be your MRV but it serves the need.
> 
> And yes, I'd accept that networking TiVos to view content in another room qualifies as MRV ... even via USB 1.1 Ethernet adapters.
> 
> Yes. And it is usually ignored by those pushing the "HD Lite" agenda. The compression schemes used by DISH, DirecTV and Voom - including reduction in the number of bits on the screen - are acceptable as part of the ATSC standards for satellite transmission of HD.
> 
> That is your opinion. Filling the hard drive is virtually a challenge for many users. Make your own "movies on demand" collection. Keep years worth of broadcast TV shows (instead of buying the DVDs). DISH's external hard drives give you the ability to swap out archive drives and use them on any compatible DVR on your account without loss of timers and other settings.
> 
> If people want to keep TV forever then why not?


I think having the EHD option is good, a more open platform is always better, I just don't see the direct use for it. DirecTV should have an EHD option, but their overall functionality is higher, as you can network together 8 HR24's for a combined 4TB of storage with 16 tuners.


----------



## Bigg

DustoMan said:


> I was talking about the R5000.  And analog hole means no HD when pretty much makes it useless to me.


So 1080i or 720 over component hardware encoded to 12mbps MPEG-4 AVC with 5.1 DD audio doesn't count as HD? Technically, most HD-PVR users don't have HD, since they are using stereo audio because of stability issues, but they still have an HD picture with stereo audio.


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> I think having the EHD option is good, a more open platform is always better, I just don't see the direct use for it. DirecTV should have an EHD option, but their overall functionality is higher, as you can network together 8 HR24's for a combined 4TB of storage with 16 tuners.


DISH's target market is to make TV affordable. 8 HR24s isn't exactly cheap.

Adding a library of 1TB USB drives to a 622 is cheap. Even with the 1TB limit going away and the 922 being the new "state of the art" offline storage is still a good option. I would like to see a multiple drive option (more than one single lun drive at a time),


----------



## GrumpyBear

Doug Brott said:


> I was browsing through this thread this morning hoping to find some pictures of the 922 in action. Does anyone have one yet? Seems like a few of you might. Anyone want to share some pictures so I can see what the final product looks like? I saw the 922 @ CES2009, but it'd be nice to see if anything has changed since then.
> 
> Thanks.





James Long said:


> DISH's target market is to make TV affordable. 8 HR24s isn't exactly cheap.
> 
> Adding a library of 1TB USB drives to a 622 is cheap. Even with the 1TB limit going away and the 922 being the new "state of the art" offline storage is still a good option. I would like to see a multiple drive option (more than one single lun drive at a time),


I would like to see this as well. It would be much better to have four 500GB drives to create the new 2TB External storage.

My problem now is, because of the Price point, and the extra flexiblity, we have a 1TB drive for each family member, for a current total of 4TB's for storage, and have for better or for worse, have learned to really enjoy it this way. It is just so easy to do, and it really saves on the accidental deletions. Its just to easy for the rest of the Family members to remove my drive, connect thier drive and archive off there shows, or I can do it as well if things start to back up. I am not sure if I want to complicate things.

I have already bought two 2TB drives and have already done the backup/restore of the DISHARC folder in anticipation. I will just add the 1TB's to the Movie/Picture/Music server. They wont go to waste.


----------



## Bigg

James Long said:


> DISH's target market is to make TV affordable. 8 HR24s isn't exactly cheap.
> 
> Adding a library of 1TB USB drives to a 622 is cheap. Even with the 1TB limit going away and the 922 being the new "state of the art" offline storage is still a good option. I would like to see a multiple drive option (more than one single lun drive at a time),


Fair enough. But that still doesn't give Dish an excuse for not setting up MRV on the 612, 722, and 922, especially considering the EHD's already have the copy protection to move files from one box to another. It can't be that hard to allow the boxes to see each other and copy the file over a LAN.


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> Fair enough. But that still doesn't give Dish an excuse for not setting up MRV on the 612, 722, and 922, especially considering the EHD's already have the copy protection to move files from one box to another. It can't be that hard to allow the boxes to see each other and copy the file over a LAN.


The forthcoming "TV Everywhere" adapter will take care of adding DISH's version of MRV on the other receivers. The 922 has it built in.

MRV doesn't have to meet your definition ... it just has to allow multiple room viewing. (Your new definition seems to be LAN file sharing.)


----------



## Bigg

James Long said:


> The forthcoming "TV Everywhere" adapter will take care of adding DISH's version of MRV on the other receivers. The 922 has it built in.
> 
> MRV doesn't have to meet your definition ... it just has to allow multiple room viewing. (Your new definition seems to be LAN file sharing.)


No my definition means that it is scalable out to at least 6 TV's, 8 in the case of DirecTV if you are using only DVRs. It's the original ReplayTV/TiVo definition. Dish's multiple-TV system leaves you SOL if have more than two TV's. DirecTV's supports 8 HD-DVRs on SWM-16. TiVo allows you to get 5 additional TiVos at a discount, I don't know what the actual upper limit on one account is.


----------



## phrelin

I kinda think that MRV is too television appliance oriented.

In addition to our "home theater," I still have one TV - a small one in the kitchen - on our 722's coax output.

On the other hand, using my Slingbox PRO HD, I can carry either of our HP notebooks (one is a 20" the other 15") to the outside deck or in the bathroom and watch an HD picture with decent sound from our wireless router. And either of us can watch TV in our office on our 25" monitors.

In other words, in our home I can view programming in 10 rooms (13 if I count the closets, 16 if I count decks).

I could add a Slingbox to my 612 and double the potential viewing options. And because I have a 722 and a 612 in my home theater hooked up to my A/V receiver using component/optical, I still have an HDMI on each available if I want to hardwire to other HD TV's in other rooms.

Finally, I really doubt that "the original ReplayTV/TiVo definition" of multiple room viewing considered watching what is available live and recorded on your home DVR from your DVR on a computer in a hotel room many miles from home.

Yes, if you run a boarding house or you and your wife have 8 kids and your mother-in-law in the home with all of you needing some kind of control over what's appearing on your individual TV, a 922 or a Slingbox isn't going to help much.

But the Slingbox concept is very 21st Century in that if you have a wireless router and a wireless notebook computer, you can watch TV most anywhere in your home without wiring or owning a second TV.

Now I wish they'd hurry up with that reported iPad App as it would be much easier to watch TV in the bathroom....


----------



## Bigg

phrelin said:


> I kinda think that MRV is too television appliance oriented.
> 
> In addition to our "home theater," I still have one TV - a small one in the kitchen - on our 722's coax output.
> 
> On the other hand, using my Slingbox PRO HD, I can carry either of our HP notebooks (one is a 20" the other 15") to the outside deck or in the bathroom and watch an HD picture with decent sound from our wireless router. And either of us can watch TV in our office on our 25" monitors.
> 
> In other words, in our home I can view programming in 10 rooms (13 if I count the closets, 16 if I count decks).
> 
> I could add a Slingbox to my 612 and double the potential viewing options. And because I have a 722 and a 612 in my home theater hooked up to my A/V receiver using component/optical, I still have an HDMI on each available if I want to hardwire to other HD TV's in other rooms.
> 
> Finally, I really doubt that "the original ReplayTV/TiVo definition" of multiple room viewing considered watching what is available live and recorded on your home DVR from your DVR on a computer in a hotel room many miles from home.
> 
> Yes, if you run a boarding house or you and your wife have 8 kids and your mother-in-law in the home with all of you needing some kind of control over what's appearing on your individual TV, a 922 or a Slingbox isn't going to help much.
> 
> But the Slingbox concept is very 21st Century in that if you have a wireless router and a wireless notebook computer, you can watch TV most anywhere in your home without wiring or owning a second TV.
> 
> Now I wish they'd hurry up with that reported iPad App as it would be much easier to watch TV in the bathroom....


Placeshifting is different from MRV. If you have true MRV, then you could do both at the same time if the DVR with the Slingbox isn't the one that has the stuff you want on it.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> No my definition means that it is scalable out to at least 6 TV's, 8 in the case of DirecTV if you are using only DVRs. It's the original ReplayTV/TiVo definition. Dish's multiple-TV system leaves you SOL if have more than two TV's. DirecTV's supports 8 HD-DVRs on SWM-16. TiVo allows you to get 5 additional TiVos at a discount, I don't know what the actual upper limit on one account is.


If you are using 8 DVR's Dish will do the exact samething. With Dish you could do both Live and recorded TV, why would you want a system that only does recored content or buffered TV? Why the limits?. Why not a system that would allow any DVR, talk to a DVR, or PC, to a TV that has a reciever, or even to a TV that doesn't have a reciever at all? And do it all in HD? You keep talking about a dream system and then putting in Hardcaps, that limit the system? 
Dish's internal Sling on the 922, and external Sling TV Everywhere adapters along with Mulitroom Extenders, will just give you more flexiblity. Add into the fact that ViP "k"s have 4 tuners and allow you to record all 4 tuners instead of just 2 tuners, gives you even more flexiblity in setting up recording's or viewing Live TV.

Now what really needs to happen, is for a service provider that gives us the ability to to beable to stream 2 or more independant streams.


----------



## phrelin

Bigg said:


> Placeshifting is different from MRV. If you have true MRV, then you could do both at the same time if the DVR with the Slingbox isn't the one that has the stuff you want on it.


In my setup, the "stuff I want" is always on the internal hard drive or on the EHD hooked to the 722. I almost never store anything on the 612. And there's only my wife and I anyway. I think that in the long term the Slingbox approach will make the most sense in many, many situations. I know people who "watch TV" streaming stuff on the internet. Having access to their receiver/DVR on their computer means they don't have to own another TV hooked to wires.

Nothing wrong with MRV, it's just so last decade.:sure:


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> If you are using 8 DVR's Dish will do the exact samething. With Dish you could do both Live and recorded TV, why would you want a system that only does recored content or buffered TV? Why the limits?. Why not a system that would allow any DVR, talk to a DVR, or PC, to a TV that has a reciever, or even to a TV that doesn't have a reciever at all? And do it all in HD? You keep talking about a dream system and then putting in Hardcaps, that limit the system?
> Dish's internal Sling on the 922, and external Sling TV Everywhere adapters along with Mulitroom Extenders, will just give you more flexiblity. Add into the fact that ViP "k"s have 4 tuners and allow you to record all 4 tuners instead of just 2 tuners, gives you even more flexiblity in setting up recording's or viewing Live TV.
> 
> Now what really needs to happen, is for a service provider that gives us the ability to to beable to stream 2 or more independant streams.


But the stuff is stuck on the DVR that you recorded it on. With 8 DirecTV HR24's, you can stream from any one to the other and have local DVR capabilities. Extreme, sure, but you probably don't need a DVR in the laundry room and kitchen, so a pair of HR24s and a pair of H24s would serve most houses well, with the H24s being able to stream from either HR24 through the DECA cloud. Dish does two TV's, and to scale beyond that you're SOL.

If you have a good cable provider (oxymoronic, I know), or Fios (which if you had access to you wouldn't be on this forum in the first place), you can build an MCE box with the quad Ceton tuner plus 4 clear QAM tuners and have 8 tuners for 6 locations, all simultaneously. Unfortunately, no such system exists for satellite, but the whole RVU thing gives us some hope if integrated with MCE's DRM system.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> But the stuff is stuck on the DVR that you recorded it on. With 8 DirecTV HR24's, you can stream from any one to the other and have local DVR capabilities. Extreme, sure, but you probably don't need a DVR in the laundry room and kitchen, so a pair of HR24s and a pair of H24s would serve most houses well, with the H24s being able to stream from either HR24 through the DECA cloud. Dish does two TV's, and to scale beyond that you're SOL.
> 
> If you have a good cable provider (oxymoronic, I know), or Fios (which if you had access to you wouldn't be on this forum in the first place), you can build an MCE box with the quad Ceton tuner plus 4 clear QAM tuners and have 8 tuners for 6 locations, all simultaneously. Unfortunately, no such system exists for satellite, but the whole RVU thing gives us some hope if integrated with MCE's DRM system.


You are totally missing the point of the TvEverywhere Adapter and the MultiRoom Extender. With the MRE, a 922 or a 622/722 with a TvEverwhere Adapter, ANY TV can watch a recording on any DVR on the house. The TV could have a plan reciever, a DVR, or No Reciever at all, just the MRE.
So in your scenerio, the TV in the Laundry room and the Kitchen would only need a MRE, no Reciever NEEDED, so you wouldn't have to have 2 extra recievers on your account just to watch a recording or Live TV, it can be streamed to it, using the MRE.

You do realize that the 922 can sling to any IP device on your network right now? Granted only 1 at a time, but to ANY on your network, not just one. With the MRE, the 922 will be able to sling to any TV on your network, not just 1 or 2, to any TV with a MRE, rather it has a reciver or not.

So you could have 8 recievers on your account a mix of DVR's and none DVR's or all DVRs, and any one of those 8 could watch content on any of the either DVR's. You could even add a couple of extra TV's heck you could add 10 more TV's in the house, for a total of 18 TV's, and instead of having Recievers on those extra TV's it would just need a MRE, to watch content on any DVR in the house. 
Please read here for the MRE
http://www.slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300

Please read here for the TV Everywhere Adapter
http://www.slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> You are totally missing the point of the TvEverywhere Adapter and the MultiRoom Extender. With the MRE, a 922 or a 622/722 with a TvEverwhere Adapter, ANY TV can watch a recording on any DVR on the house. The TV could have a plan reciever, a DVR, or No Reciever at all, just the MRE.
> So in your scenerio, the TV in the Laundry room and the Kitchen would only need a MRE, no Reciever NEEDED, so you wouldn't have to have 2 extra recievers on your account just to watch a recording or Live TV, it can be streamed to it, using the MRE.
> 
> You do realize that the 922 can sling to any IP device on your network right now? Granted only 1 at a time, but to ANY on your network, not just one. With the MRE, the 922 will be able to sling to any TV on your network, not just 1 or 2, to any TV with a MRE, rather it has a reciver or not.
> 
> So you could have 8 recievers on your account a mix of DVR's and none DVR's or all DVRs, and any one of those 8 could watch content on any of the either DVR's. You could even add a couple of extra TV's heck you could add 10 more TV's in the house, for a total of 18 TV's, and instead of having Recievers on those extra TV's it would just need a MRE, to watch content on any DVR in the house.
> Please read here for the MRE
> http://www.slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300
> 
> Please read here for the TV Everywhere Adapter
> http://www.slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u


Then you're bottlenecked with only two users in the entire house at any given time. DirecTV's system allows 8 DVR's, and then on occasion when something got recorded on the "wrong" one, you can just stream it over and it acts just like it's local. If you theoretically had two 922's, in addition to paying the same per month as having FIVE HR24's, you'd still need two more Sling receivers just to cross over from one 922's location to the other. It's ridiculous.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> Then you're bottlenecked with only two users in the entire house at any given time. DirecTV's system allows 8 DVR's, and then on occasion when something got recorded on the "wrong" one, you can just stream it over and it acts just like it's local. If you theoretically had two 922's, in addition to paying the same per month as having FIVE HR24's, you'd still need two more Sling receivers just to cross over from one 922's location to the other. It's ridiculous.


Tsk, tsk, tsk. No you are just being obtuse, going into Troll mode, not reading any of the info provided to you. Just how does $17 for 2 922's cost more than $25 for the 5 HR24's? 
Please read the info on the 922, and how the Multirooom Extender works, as well as how the TV Everywhere adapater works with the 722. Dish's solutions will have less bottlenecks than the Direct solution. Both only feed a single remote unit, at a time. Dish will feed any unit that has a MRE, or IP device, no reciever needed. Direct requires a Reciever of some sort at every TV. 
Direct still only allows you to record 2 shows at a time, even if you have 4 tuners, you can only record 2 shows on a DVR. Dish allows you to record as many programs as you have tuners so if you have the same OTA option as Direct with 2 OTA tuners, you can actually record 4 different channels. 
With Dish and 2 ViP DVR's you could record more, have more storage space, stream to a wider varitey of Devices, than you could with the 5 HR24's.

Only limitation to Dish and even to Direct is Network bandwidth, otherwise they both can scale out as far as the user really wanted to.


----------



## FarmerBob

GrumpyBear said:


> Dish will feed any unit that has a MRE, or IP device, no reciever needed. . . .


What DISH & IP devices are you referring to?


----------



## GrumpyBear

FarmerBob said:


> What DISH & IP devices are you referring to?


A Dish 922 can sling to PC's, Ipods, soon to be released Ipad app, as these are IP devices. The Multiroom Extender will allow 922 or 722 w/TV Everywhere adapter to sling live or recorded shows to any TV, rather it has a reciever or not.

May/June Dish will be releasing the TV Everywhere Adapter and the Mulitroom Extender. Find info on them below.

Read here to see how the 922 can sling to a TV
http://slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300

Read here to see how a 722 can sling to IP devices or to TV's equipped with MRE's.
http://slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u


----------



## FarmerBob

GrumpyBear said:


> A Dish 922 can sling to PC's, Ipods, soon to be released Ipad app, as these are IP devices. The Multiroom Extender will allow 922 or 722 w/TV Everywhere adapter to sling live or recorded shows to any TV, rather it has a reciever or not.
> 
> May/June Dish will be releasing the TV Everywhere Adapter and the Mulitroom Extender. Find info on them below.
> 
> Read here to see how the 922 can sling to a TV
> http://slingmedia.com/go/sling-receiver-300
> 
> Read here to see how a 722 can sling to IP devices or to TV's equipped with MRE's.
> http://slingmedia.com/go/slingbox-700u


OK, thanks. The way you posted it I thought it was Real World DLNA and not Sling. So you need a Sling device on each end. Unlike DLNA. I had my fingers crossed. Oh well.


----------



## GrumpyBear

FarmerBob said:


> OK, thanks. The way you posted it I thought it was Real World DLNA and not Sling. So you need a Sling device on each end. Unlike DLNA. I had my fingers crossed. Oh well.


Oh real world DLNA, would be great. I don't understand why its not happening, and why everybody is stuck with only a single remote stream as well.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> Tsk, tsk, tsk. No you are just being obtuse, going into Troll mode, not reading any of the info provided to you. Just how does $17 for 2 922's cost more than $25 for the 5 HR24's?
> Please read the info on the 922, and how the Multirooom Extender works, as well as how the TV Everywhere adapater works with the 722. Dish's solutions will have less bottlenecks than the Direct solution. Both only feed a single remote unit, at a time. Dish will feed any unit that has a MRE, or IP device, no reciever needed. Direct requires a Reciever of some sort at every TV.
> Direct still only allows you to record 2 shows at a time, even if you have 4 tuners, you can only record 2 shows on a DVR. Dish allows you to record as many programs as you have tuners so if you have the same OTA option as Direct with 2 OTA tuners, you can actually record 4 different channels.
> With Dish and 2 ViP DVR's you could record more, have more storage space, stream to a wider varitey of Devices, than you could with the 5 HR24's.
> 
> Only limitation to Dish and even to Direct is Network bandwidth, otherwise they both can scale out as far as the user really wanted to.


Right, Dish is great so long as you only own two TVs. What happens when you have:

TV1: 922
TV2: 922
TV 3: Slingcatcher thingy
TV 4: Slingcatcher thingy

and you want to watch a program recorded on TV1 on TV2??? Answer: either sneakernet it over or you're just plain screwed. Yeah, you could put them all on a matric switcher and send HDMI over CAT-5, but that's defeating the whole purpose on having MRV in the first place.

DirecTV's system scales out with a full DVR to 8 rooms, probably more if you don't have DVR's in every room. All Dish needs to do is add MRV to their existing boxes through a software update. The hardware is all there. They have the DRM in place because it works on the EHD's. That would be killer, and would beat DirecTV, as then each DVR could serve two TV's and still have a full MRV system.

The other thing that concerns me about the Sling thing is that it probably re-compresses the video, whereas DirecTV's system streams it at the same bitrate right off the dish, so it's only re-compressed once (and at a multi-mill dollar network head-end, not on a $500 box), not twice. The only way to have it not re-compressed is to live in an area with Fios and do TiVo or MCE.


----------



## mopee

Boys, Boys (at least I think you are boys) are you having fun yet. If I have a 922 and am recording 4 different shows/feeds at once can I then sling 4 different shows, using the MRE, to 4 different tv sets? Looks like it.

Moe


----------



## n0qcu

only to one at a time


----------



## Bigg

mopee said:


> Boys, Boys (at least I think you are boys) are you having fun yet. If I have a 922 and am recording 4 different shows/feeds at once can I then sling 4 different shows, using the MRE, to 4 different tv sets? Looks like it.
> 
> Moe


If you could do that to at least 5 other TV's, then it would be a true MRV solution, just in a server/client way. That's sort of what MCE does for those lucky enough to have a really good cableco or Fios.


----------



## mopee

Bigg said:


> If you could do that to at least 5 other TV's, then it would be a true MRV solution, just in a server/client way. That's sort of what MCE does for those lucky enough to have a really good cableco or Fios.


Ok after thinking over what youall/I said yesterday I realized, no, with the 922 and MRV I will have 2 feeds to 2 different sets/computers/Iphone, etc. And only one will have channel changing abilities. Right? The second feed can be changed by the 922 remote only. 
So if I add a 722k to the mix I will then be able to see 4 different feeds but only have independent changing ablities for 3 sets, but be able to save content from 8 different stations at once.

Moe


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> Right, Dish is great so long as you only own two TVs. What happens when you have:
> 
> TV1: 922
> TV2: 922
> TV 3: Slingcatcher thingy
> TV 4: Slingcatcher thingy
> 
> and you want to watch a program recorded on TV1 on TV2??? Answer: either sneakernet it over or you're just plain screwed. Yeah, you could put them all on a matric switcher and send HDMI over CAT-5, but that's defeating the whole purpose on having MRV in the first place.


See there you go again posting without reading.
What would happen if TV3 or TV4 with a MRE, Wanted to watch someting on TV1's 922 or TV2's 922? With the MRE, TV3 or TV4 would be watching either a live or recorded event in HD via the 922 TV2 output, the only time the TV2 output is is activated on the 922 is when a sling device, rather IP or MRE access's the 922. So no sneakernet needed. Granted we use Sneaker Net alot, as the the 4 family member each have there own EHD. No HDMI to CAT-5 needed, as this would still only show TV1 output and would have nothing to do with a TV2 independent signal. Please go to the referenced websites and read about the 700u and the 3000 reciever. When you have a understanding you may want to comeback and post with better info.


----------



## GrumpyBear

mopee said:


> Boys, Boys (at least I think you are boys) are you having fun yet. If I have a 922 and am recording 4 different shows/feeds at once can I then sling 4 different shows, using the MRE, to 4 different tv sets? Looks like it.
> 
> Moe


Just like everybody else right now, the 922 can only feed 1 remote indepenent viewing stream at a time. Were you can record 4 with the OTA module, you can only Sling to ONE remote TV2 output to just a single device.

Adding a 722k, would allow you to record 8 shows on just 2 DVR's, 4 Sat tuners and 4 OTA tuners. Pretty sure(thats the rumor from good sources) that the Multi-room extender will be released in the June timeframe, I haven't heard, or seen posted, if the TV Everywhere adapter for the 722 will be released at the sametime or not. In your case, the TV with the 722k could access the 922 via the MRE, and veiw live channel or a recorded event, granted any TV with a MRE could access the 922 with a MRE, rather it has a reciever or not. 
Now if the TVA is released as well in June, than your 722 could do the samething as the 922, without the new pretty interface, and without the larger internal harddrive. 
Only real drawback, and its with everybody so far, is Only ONE remote client at a time, to get seperate independent outputs. Now would I want a system that has 2-4 independent output streams, but nobody offers this at the moment. Sure hope somebody does SOON.


----------



## P Smith

Did you intentionally mix 722*k* and 722 in your speech ?


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> See there you go again posting without reading.
> What would happen if TV3 or TV4 with a MRE, Wanted to watch someting on TV1's 922 or TV2's 922? With the MRE, TV3 or TV4 would be watching either a live or recorded event in HD via the 922 TV2 output, the only time the TV2 output is is activated on the 922 is when a sling device, rather IP or MRE access's the 922. So no sneakernet needed. Granted we use Sneaker Net alot, as the the 4 family member each have there own EHD. No HDMI to CAT-5 needed, as this would still only show TV1 output and would have nothing to do with a TV2 independent signal. Please go to the referenced websites and read about the 700u and the 3000 reciever. When you have a understanding you may want to comeback and post with better info.


You didn't read. With that setup, you would have to sneaker-net from TV1 to TV2, since the 922's can't share with each other.


----------



## GrumpyBear

P Smith said:


> Did you intentionally mix 722*k* and 722 in your speech ?


No I didn't, I just picked up a 722k, and getting used to having one. The 2 OTA recordings is really helping out already.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> You didn't read. With that setup, you would have to sneaker-net from TV1 to TV2, since the 922's can't share with each other.


I did miss read you, but a 922 can talk to a MRE, just put a MRE on any TV you want, rather the TV has a reciever or doesn't have a reciever. If the TV has a reciever it doesn't matter if its a 922, a 622, 722, 222, 211, 510, 522, 625, it doesn't matter its the MRE that does the work. So TV1 and TV2 can view each others shows just like another TV.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> I did miss read you, but a 922 can talk to a MRE, just put a MRE on any TV you want, rather the TV has a reciever or doesn't have a reciever. If the TV has a reciever it doesn't matter if its a 922, a 622, 722, 222, 211, 510, 522, 625, it doesn't matter its the MRE that does the work. So TV1 and TV2 can view each others shows just like another TV.


Then you'd have to have FOUR MRE's and TWO 922's to do two TV's. It's nonsensical. Dish needs to get their act together and just write a simple piece of software to enable MRV between 612, 622, 722, and 922 boxes.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> Then you'd have to have FOUR MRE's and TWO 922's to do two TV's. It's nonsensical. Dish needs to get their act together and just write a simple piece of software to enable MRV between 612, 622, 722, and 922 boxes.


No, you would have two 922's and 4 MRE's for 4 TV's. 
I DO AGREE, that the 922's should be able to be both a server and a client to each other with nothing else needed.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> No, you would have two 922's and 4 MRE's for 4 TV's.
> I DO AGREE, that the 922's should be able to be both a server and a client to each other with nothing else needed.


And any other VIP DVR's on the LAN. They already have done the DRM for it, they just need to add an IP layer. They are 75% of the way there...


----------



## jacmyoung

GrumpyBear said:


> Its hard to believe that it has taken 2 years for Direct to finally add the Travel channel.


Not much a deal breaker.

What is critical is a robust MRV system at this stage, currently DirecTV, Verizon and Uverse beat DISH. Which was why I think having TiVo in the fold can solve the MRV issue soon, then with Sling and TiVo together DISH will have a clear edge over other providers in the next fight, which will be broadband based.


----------



## ShapeShifter

jacmyoung said:


> What is critical is a robust MRV system at this stage


Maybe critical for you, but not for everybody. I can think of several features that Dish currently supports that are more important for me.

Different strokes for different folks, everybody has different priorities. That's why I'm glad there is competition, so that we have a choice.

_____

_Note, this post was moved from another thread that did not specifically deal with MRV, but rather addressed it as an aside. Now that the post has been moved and put in an MRV thread, and has been taken out of the original context, it sounds like I'm dismissing the main topic of discussion. That is not my intent._


----------



## GrumpyBear

jacmyoung said:


> Not much a deal breaker.
> 
> What is critical is a robust MRV system at this stage, currently DirecTV, Verizon and Uverse beat DISH. Which was why I think having TiVo in the fold can solve the MRV issue soon, then with Sling and TiVo together DISH will have a clear edge over other providers in the next fight, which will be broadband based.


Didn't think it would be a deal breaker, just hard to believe that it took that long to add Travel Channel.

Deal breaker for me would be having to put up with slow moving DVR's while waiting 2 years a MRV solution. J
Just to end up with DVR's with 
No external Archive drive, 
No way to have an external drives for each member of the family with just a flick of a switch, 
No Autotune, 
No real slow motion, 
A work around for DLB, instead of real DLB, 
No Picture in Picture for football season, 
No way to safe guard a tuners buffer from accidental wipeouts, 
No way to get channels I get(Sub) to work unless I create a custom guide that I have to update everytime they add a channel or if I change my package, so I can see the channel.

I would have to have to double my DVR's, connected to the Living room TV, so I could have 4 active tuners, so I could record 3 shows and have an extra tuner to watch something else while the other 3 shows are recording. These are just some of the deal breakers for me.

I think MRV is a great feature, not worthwhile enough to give up features I use on a daily basis, and will wait to see how the MultiRoom extender works.


----------



## Paul Secic

GrumpyBear said:


> Its hard to believe that it has taken 2 years for Direct to finally add the Travel channel.


I was watching Travel Channel HD in November 2008 when I got my first HD set. Directv is way behind.


----------



## jacmyoung

ShapeShifter said:


> Maybe critical for you, but not for everybody. I can think of several features that Dish currently supports that are more important for me.
> 
> Different strokes for different folks, everybody has different priorities. That's why I'm glad there is competition, so that we have a choice.


Of course I did not mean this MRV thing was about you, me or GrumpyBear (though I had never seen a bear that was not grumpy).

This has to do with the competitiveness in the overall marketplace. A robust MRV is a major selling point, even DISH used its MRV in its ad in the past, you never read DISH using DLB, autotune, external HD in its ads, nor did DirecTV, Verizon or Uverse, but MRV has been a common selling point, except DISH's MRV is half baked and old.

The reason for that I suspect is this TiVo case. TiVo holds some type of MRV IP, which is in part why TiVo is suing Verizon and Uverse, but not the usual cablecos because they do not offer similar MRV systems. TiVo cannot sue DirecTV because they have a no-sue agreement.

Charlie needs to get TiVo in his fold, not only to end the uncertainty caused by this lawsuit, but once Sling and TiVo are in one family, or at least "working together," he can unleash a lot of new gigs without fear of litigations.


----------



## phrelin

Or perhaps Dish customers ultimately will embrace the Slingbox technology that seems much more 21st Century to this old guy.


----------



## GrumpyBear

phrelin said:


> Or perhaps Dish customers ultimately will embrace the Slingbox technology that seems much more 21st Century to this old guy.


My family is already looking to using the 922, and its sling to PC feature.
We all have laptops, we don't have TV's in the Kids room, and just 2 TV's in the house. The kids are looking forward to watching thier shows from anywere in the house, and so is the wife. Getting flack from everybody as I want to wait until the MRE(everytime I type that I get flashbacks) comes out, and may wait until the TVA is released.


----------



## TulsaOK

GrumpyBear said:


> ...MRE(everytime I type that I get flashbacks).


Oh come on, YUM!


----------



## Bigg

jacmyoung said:


> Not much a deal breaker.
> 
> What is critical is a robust MRV system at this stage, currently DirecTV, Verizon and Uverse beat DISH. Which was why I think having TiVo in the fold can solve the MRV issue soon, then with Sling and TiVo together DISH will have a clear edge over other providers in the next fight, which will be broadband based.


Definitely true, if you have a medium to large sized household. For small households, the current system works fine. The issue is that for larger households, it just doesn't. They also need to fix the mirroring fees.



phrelin said:


> Or perhaps Dish customers ultimately will embrace the Slingbox technology that seems much more 21st Century to this old guy.


If the thing could actually act as a server, maybe. If it could do an SDTV via RF, and 3 Sling clients, along with the main TV with it's four tuners, then they'd have something to compete with. The current system, you scale to two HDTV's, and after that you're SOL.

Either that or they could release the system to work with Windows MCE, they were using ethernet-enabled 222's a while back to do that, but they never made anything of it. That would scale to 6 TV's, a pair of 222's each with 2 HD tuners plus 3-4 ATSC tuners would make something very workable.

One other thing Dish has to their advantage is that they integrate locals a lot better, you just add the $30 card and you've got two local tuners and two sat.


----------



## phrelin

There is no question that others do classic MRV better. But the average household size in the U.S. is still between 2.5 and 2.75 people (the Census Bureau thinks that the number may increase from 2.53 to 2.63 because of the recession). But imagine a four person household with two 922s both located in the home theater each with a Slingbox PRO HD attached to the TV1 out.


----------



## Bigg

phrelin said:


> There is no question that others do classic MRV better. But the average household size in the U.S. is still between 2.5 and 2.75 people (the Census Bureau thinks that the number may increase from 2.53 to 2.63 because of the recession). But imagine a four person household with two 922s both located in the home theater each with a Slingbox PRO HD attached to the TV1 out.


That would cost a pretty penny. The issue there is that DISH needs something that the installers can plug in and it "just works" as opposed to hacking around with it like their current system. D*'s system is just that- plug and play, single cable. Dish right now needs a veritable plethora of cables running around to get everything done, and even then it's pretty kludgy of a system.


----------



## phrelin

Bigg said:


> That would cost a pretty penny. The issue there is that DISH needs something that the installers can plug in and it "just works" as opposed to hacking around with it like their current system. D*'s system is just that- plug and play, single cable. Dish right now needs a veritable plethora of cables running around to get everything done, and even then it's pretty kludgy of a system.


Yes, today there are upfront costs. And the 922, as I expected, appears to still be in Beta. But I don't understand your "plethora of cables" comment.

What I'm talking about is the concept of a "TV set" in a fixed location. In 1975 I had cable wired into three rooms in my house, feeding TV's I couldn't move around.

I just don't see many people wiring up a house for even 2 "TV sets" by 2015. We're well into the wireless world. Sure there will be one good "home theater" setup for 3D HD with a dedicated TV. Everything else will be multiuse network/internet devices. I could be wrong.

But somehow a DVR with OTA, cable, and premium channel recordings, live TV, Google TV, VOD movies, etc., all accessible without wires to the customer anywhere he/she is located seems pretty 21st Century.

My Slingbox PRO HD has enabled me watch recorded and live TV while sitting on any one of three decks outside my house. And by the way, you don't have to be a Dish customer to do this.


----------



## Ron Barry

Bigg said:


> That would cost a pretty penny. The issue there is that DISH needs something that the installers can plug in and it "just works" as opposed to hacking around with it like their current system. D*'s system is just that- plug and play, single cable. Dish right now needs a veritable plethora of cables running around to get everything done, and even then it's pretty kludgy of a system.


Let me see.. I have my Dish cable coming in from my Sat (One cable). I have my HDMI going from my Dish to TV (Don't have HDMI ready receiver). Optical going from DVR to receiver. I have my Ethernet connection. Have my USB connection for my EHD.

What plethora of cables are you talking about? Are you talking about What would be required to sling the content? If so, you still need some time of box with a internet connection on the other end to receive the signal right? It is either another DVR or some other device like a sling catcher to get the signal and display.

I personal don't see the plethera of cables between the two above. I do see a difference between this and the home distribution, but with that you only get SD out and thats cool for people that have that use case but it definitely is becoming less and less.

I have a HD set know in my living room without any cabling to work with. With HomeDistirubtion I don't have an option, but with this I definitely do and it will give me a much better picture on my 52" HD set than I would get with the SD options I previously had.

It would be nice to have both options available, but given the level of this DVR I could understand why both were provided.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I guess I still see MRV as a luxury convenience rather than a requirement at this point. While it is a neat concept, I don't see the majority of Dish (or DirecTV) really needing this "or else" for their service.


----------



## phrelin

Stewart Vernon said:


> I guess I still see MRV as a luxury convenience rather than a requirement at this point. While it is a neat concept, I don't see the majority of Dish (or DirecTV) really needing this "or else" for their service.


Gee, a "luxury?" Without my Slingbox I wouldn't be able to go out on the deck on a warm Summer night and still watch recorded HD TV. As of this year, it will be an absolute necessity.:sure:


----------



## GrumpyBear

phrelin said:


> Gee, a "luxury?" Without my Slingbox I wouldn't be able to go out on the deck on a warm Summer night and still watch recorded HD TV. As of this year, it will be an absolute necessity.:sure:


Would you be Quiet!!!!!
Wife and kids are already talking about doing this. Sitting outside watching the sunset, next to the fire, and after the sunset and it gets dark they can kick back and watch what ever show they want, while enjoying the cool breeze outside with the fire. I want to hold out on doing this until the Chicken-a-la King(MRE) comes out.


----------



## phrelin

GrumpyBear said:


> Would you be Quiet!!!!!
> Wife and kids are already talking about doing this. Sitting outside watching the sunset, next to the fire, and after the sunset and it gets dark they can kick back and watch what ever show they want, while enjoying the cool breeze outside with the fire. I want to hold out on doing this until the Chicken-a-la King(MRE) comes out.


Well, I have to tell you we haven't done that this Spring. It just hailed here in the Northern California Redwood Coast.


----------



## Stewart Vernon

I miss drive-in theaters for that experience... but I digress.


----------



## Bigg

phrelin said:


> Yes, today there are upfront costs. And the 922, as I expected, appears to still be in Beta. But I don't understand your "plethora of cables" comment.
> 
> What I'm talking about is the concept of a "TV set" in a fixed location. In 1975 I had cable wired into three rooms in my house, feeding TV's I couldn't move around.
> 
> I just don't see many people wiring up a house for even 2 "TV sets" by 2015. We're well into the wireless world. Sure there will be one good "home theater" setup for 3D HD with a dedicated TV. Everything else will be multiuse network/internet devices. I could be wrong.
> 
> But somehow a DVR with OTA, cable, and premium channel recordings, live TV, Google TV, VOD movies, etc., all accessible without wires to the customer anywhere he/she is located seems pretty 21st Century.
> 
> My Slingbox PRO HD has enabled me watch recorded and live TV while sitting on any one of three decks outside my house. And by the way, you don't have to be a Dish customer to do this.


"Plethora of cables". Ok, so you have to have an Ethernet connection for a 922, in addition to two coaxes, since Dish has only a couple of complete HD-LIL markets (most are missing PBS, so an antenna is still necessary). If you start adding in 722's with second TV's it just a plain mess.

DirecTV provides PBS and the CW in HD via satellite, and uses DECA for MRV and network connectivity, so it's a single RG-6 to each TV for everything.

People still want the big HDTVs, the small HDTV's and everything. I don't think the concept of a stationary TV is going away.

On DISH, if you want more than 1 HD viewer, and 1 SD viewer simultaneous, it's going to be one heck of a complicated setup, since they don't have MRV, as we've discussed before. DirecTV has a one cable system that uses splitters for up to 4 HD-DVRs. It's slick.



Ron Barry said:


> Let me see.. I have my Dish cable coming in from my Sat (One cable). I have my HDMI going from my Dish to TV (Don't have HDMI ready receiver). Optical going from DVR to receiver. I have my Ethernet connection. Have my USB connection for my EHD.
> 
> What plethora of cables are you talking about? Are you talking about What would be required to sling the content? If so, you still need some time of box with a internet connection on the other end to receive the signal right? It is either another DVR or some other device like a sling catcher to get the signal and display.
> 
> I personal don't see the plethera of cables between the two above. I do see a difference between this and the home distribution, but with that you only get SD out and thats cool for people that have that use case but it definitely is becoming less and less.
> 
> I have a HD set know in my living room without any cabling to work with. With HomeDistirubtion I don't have an option, but with this I definitely do and it will give me a much better picture on my 52" HD set than I would get with the SD options I previously had.
> 
> It would be nice to have both options available, but given the level of this DVR I could understand why both were provided.


You need OTA, and if you want to have multiple HD-DVR users, there is no good way to do it, whereas DirecTV has the single-cable system. Dish needs to at least launch full HD-LIL markets and support MRV by their DVRs if they want to support medium to large-sized households.


----------



## phrelin

Bigg said:


> "Plethora of cables". Ok, so you have to have an Ethernet connection for a 922, in addition to two coaxes, since Dish has only a couple of complete HD-LIL markets (most are missing PBS, so an antenna is still necessary). If you start adding in 722's with second TV's it just a plain mess.


 I have no quarrel with the MRV idea. In homes where actual different people simultaneously are watching different content in three or more rooms MRV is a good option.

But I don't need a plethora of wires!

I don't get OTA and with the Slingbox PRO HD connected to my 722 I don't need to wire another TV. I don't even need another TV any more. I can watch in any room and around the outside on the decks using notebook computers and even an iPad via our home wifi. And here in our office we have two desktops with 25" HD monitors connected to the network.

Now ask me if I'm grumpy about the fact that Dish doesn't provide PBS and The CW in HD and you'll get a loud, resounding "yes."


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> "Plethora of cables". Ok, so you have to have an Ethernet connection for a 922, in addition to two coaxes, since Dish has only a couple of complete HD-LIL markets (most are missing PBS, so an antenna is still necessary). If you start adding in 722's with second TV's it just a plain mess.
> 
> DirecTV provides PBS and the CW in HD via satellite, and uses DECA for MRV and network connectivity, so it's a single RG-6 to each TV for everything.
> 
> People still want the big HDTVs, the small HDTV's and everything. I don't think the concept of a stationary TV is going away.
> 
> On DISH, if you want more than 1 HD viewer, and 1 SD viewer simultaneous, it's going to be one heck of a complicated setup, since they don't have MRV, as we've discussed before. DirecTV has a one cable system that uses splitters for up to 4 HD-DVRs. It's slick.
> 
> You need OTA, and if you want to have multiple HD-DVR users, there is no good way to do it, whereas DirecTV has the single-cable system. Dish needs to at least launch full HD-LIL markets and support MRV by their DVRs if they want to support medium to large-sized households.


You seem to forget how many Direct Users refuse to pay the money to have DECA, as they already have a home Network that supports MRV, so no reason to pay for DECA. 
Most people already have Network drops at thier Entertainment Centers and this has nothing to do with a STB, has more to do with Game systems, Blu-Ray and Netflix, STB units are just one other item, in the Entertainment Center. We built and sold 39 houses last year, EVERY TV location was wired not just for Coax, but also had a Network drop, and this was an actual requirement in all 4 housing developments.

Were Dish doesn't have PBS or CW(San Diego is an exception for CW), using OTA device would add typically 1 extra cable. The advantage of this is the ability of recording 2 seperate OTA signals, as well as 2 Sat Signals, something you can't do with Direct or anybody else. So for an extra coax drop you can double your recording options, when dealing with Network TV, not a bad trade off at all.

I like MRV, and think MRV is a great feature. I still don't see how adding 1 extra cable when wanting OTA as the end of the world, and when you factor in the 2 extra tuners for a total of 4 recording tuners at the sametime makes up for it. Who else gives you 4 recording tuners?


----------



## GrumpyBear

phrelin said:


> Now ask me if I'm grumpy about the fact that Dish doesn't provide PBS and The CW in HD and you'll get a loud, resounding "yes."


You should come to San Diego, Dish has been carrying CW in HD for almost 2 years now.

Granted this is only because the Local CW and the Local FOX, swapped transponders.


----------



## Bigg

phrelin said:


> I have no quarrel with the MRV idea. In homes where actual different people simultaneously are watching different content in three or more rooms MRV is a good option.
> 
> But I don't need a plethora of wires!
> 
> I don't get OTA and with the Slingbox PRO HD connected to my 722 I don't need to wire another TV. I don't even need another TV any more. I can watch in any room and around the outside on the decks using notebook computers and even an iPad via our home wifi. And here in our office we have two desktops with 25" HD monitors connected to the network.
> 
> Now ask me if I'm grumpy about the fact that Dish doesn't provide PBS and The CW in HD and you'll get a loud, resounding "yes."


Well, you're in the unfortunate situation of not being able to get your locals via OTA, since you're so far north of SF. In your case, you only have one TV, so you're all set. Two is OK, three or four all running off of one 722 could work, depending on usage patterns (let's face it, Colbert, Stewart, Olberman, Maddow, and the like don't need HD no matter what they're being watched on).



GrumpyBear said:


> You seem to forget how many Direct Users refuse to pay the money to have DECA, as they already have a home Network that supports MRV, so no reason to pay for DECA.
> Most people already have Network drops at thier Entertainment Centers and this has nothing to do with a STB, has more to do with Game systems, Blu-Ray and Netflix, STB units are just one other item, in the Entertainment Center. We built and sold 39 houses last year, EVERY TV location was wired not just for Coax, but also had a Network drop, and this was an actual requirement in all 4 housing developments.
> 
> Were Dish doesn't have PBS or CW(San Diego is an exception for CW), using OTA device would add typically 1 extra cable. The advantage of this is the ability of recording 2 seperate OTA signals, as well as 2 Sat Signals, something you can't do with Direct or anybody else. So for an extra coax drop you can double your recording options, when dealing with Network TV, not a bad trade off at all.
> 
> I like MRV, and think MRV is a great feature. I still don't see how adding 1 extra cable when wanting OTA as the end of the world, and when you factor in the 2 extra tuners for a total of 4 recording tuners at the sametime makes up for it. Who else gives you 4 recording tuners?


If they have something that works, that's great. The game consoles and Blu-Ray and whatnot can run through Powerline, MoCA (if there's a second Coax), HPNA, Wifi N, etc. Stuff with LAN video streams really needs to be wired, although a Dish DVR could get away with one of these alternate approaches.

That's great for new houses, but the house I live in was built in 1999 with three RG-6 drops for a 3800 sq. ft. house, and 11 CAT-5 cables, but they are terminated as phone, and some hidden behind furniture now, so they are mostly unused. We've added CAT-5 and an RG-6 after the fact. All the other post-2000 houses I have seen have an insane amount of RG-6, but no Ethernet, and they only run one RG-6 to each room.

The one cable system D* uses allows the re-use of existing RG-6, so that new cables don't have to be pulled, which is huge. Once you have to pull one, however, you may as well run a bunch of CAT-5 and RG-6.

I agree and disagree on the 4-tuner thing. 4 tuners in one box is super cool, no debating that. However, if you are using a 722 to drive 3 TV's (2 simultaneous through RF), you need more tuners in one box than if you have 3 HR24's, each with 2 tuners.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> Well, you're in the unfortunate situation of not being able to get your locals via OTA, since you're so far north of SF. In your case, you only have one TV, so you're all set. Two is OK, three or four all running off of one 722 could work, depending on usage patterns (let's face it, Colbert, Stewart, Olberman, Maddow, and the like don't need HD no matter what they're being watched on).
> 
> If they have something that works, that's great. The game consoles and Blu-Ray and whatnot can run through Powerline, MoCA (if there's a second Coax), HPNA, Wifi N, etc. Stuff with LAN video streams really needs to be wired, although a Dish DVR could get away with one of these alternate approaches.
> 
> That's great for new houses, but the house I live in was built in 1999 with three RG-6 drops for a 3800 sq. ft. house, and 11 CAT-5 cables, but they are terminated as phone, and some hidden behind furniture now, so they are mostly unused. We've added CAT-5 and an RG-6 after the fact. All the other post-2000 houses I have seen have an insane amount of RG-6, but no Ethernet, and they only run one RG-6 to each room.
> 
> The one cable system D* uses allows the re-use of existing RG-6, so that new cables don't have to be pulled, which is huge. Once you have to pull one, however, you may as well run a bunch of CAT-5 and RG-6.
> 
> I agree and disagree on the 4-tuner thing. 4 tuners in one box is super cool, no debating that. However, if you are using a 722 to drive 3 TV's (2 simultaneous through RF), you need more tuners in one box than if you have 3 HR24's, each with 2 tuners.


My Townhouse I live in here in Carlsbad, was built in 1972. Cable, and computer networks, weren't even thought of for the home use. Wiring it for Cable and even 10baseT, has been pretty simple, sorry, adding 1 more cable to a run just isn't the end of the world.

Adding the extra cable with the extra benefits really outweighs the huge amounts of cable problem you are worried about. 
Use two 722k's if you want to run that many tv's, you would have 8 recordable tuners that way. Or add a 211k or a couple of 211k's, you can even make these DVR's as well.
With just 2 722k's you would need 4 HR24's, to equal recording capabilities. The 722k's would give you a better archive system as well, that can backup restore, and can customize to individual users in the house.

I like MRV, I think its a great feature. I am withholding overall judgement on Dish's TV Everywhere until the MRE and TVA come out, to either go along with the 922 or enhance current 722's.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> My Townhouse I live in here in Carlsbad, was built in 1972. Cable, and computer networks, weren't even thought of for the home use. Wiring it for Cable and even 10baseT, has been pretty simple, sorry, adding 1 more cable to a run just isn't the end of the world.
> 
> Adding the extra cable with the extra benefits really outweighs the huge amounts of cable problem you are worried about.
> Use two 722k's if you want to run that many tv's, you would have 8 recordable tuners that way. Or add a 211k or a couple of 211k's, you can even make these DVR's as well.
> With just 2 722k's you would need 4 HR24's, to equal recording capabilities. The 722k's would give you a better archive system as well, that can backup restore, and can customize to individual users in the house.
> 
> I like MRV, I think its a great feature. I am withholding overall judgement on Dish's TV Everywhere until the MRE and TVA come out, to either go along with the 922 or enhance current 722's.


It depends on how hard the wiring is. I've done 7 CAT-5 drops, and 1 RG-6 drop, but there are some locations in the house that would be nearly impossible to add cable to, or it would be very difficult to do so (involve ripping plywood up, crawling in tiny spaces, lots of drilling etc), and I've seen a lot of houses that are a LOT worse.


----------



## GrumpyBear

Bigg said:


> It depends on how hard the wiring is. I've done 7 CAT-5 drops, and 1 RG-6 drop, but there are some locations in the house that would be nearly impossible to add cable to, or it would be very difficult to do so (involve ripping plywood up, crawling in tiny spaces, lots of drilling etc), and I've seen a lot of houses that are a LOT worse.


Well in that case, even single wire DECA wouldn't do you any good, as you can't get a wire to those rooms.

Well lucky for you, and the rest of us, Wireless is getting better and better. Granted I am one of those, that believe that Video still needs to be wired for sometime to come, but there will be a day.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> Well in that case, even single wire DECA wouldn't do you any good, as you can't get a wire to those rooms.
> 
> Well lucky for you, and the rest of us, Wireless is getting better and better. Granted I am one of those, that believe that Video still needs to be wired for sometime to come, but there will be a day.


I agree wired ethernet is far superior to wireless streaming. No question about that. DECA and MoCA are pretty darn close though.

When I talk about DECA with single-cable, I am thinking about a house that was pre-wired with a single RG-6 drop to each location a TV would go, which is typical of what I see. Those installations can use the existing wiring, and find a spot for the broadband DECA, or bridge that on Powerline/wireless if needed, since it is limited by the WAN connection anyways.

That's the only part that would be tricky, since you'd likely need two Coaxes there, or do it right near the cable demarc point, or somewhere it's easy to drop RG-6, since you'd need one for the cable modem, and one for D*/DECA. Of course, some people have access to DSL. If they had access to Fios, they wouldn't be needing satellite in the first place.


----------



## GrumpyBear

You wont get any arguement out of me about MoCa at all. I started a MoCa thread over 2 years ago, right after the 922 was announced. Dish has the proper chipset, to support MoCa with the 922 right now. Rather that happens or not is a different story and Dish seems to be going the network route vs MoCa. 
Echostar had announced that they wanted to sell the 922, to other providers other than just Dish when the 922 was announced, and using MoCa would have been a perfect way to replace cable. Granted going the way of Home Networks, nowadays, isn't a bad way to go either.


----------



## Bigg

GrumpyBear said:


> You wont get any arguement out of me about MoCa at all. I started a MoCa thread over 2 years ago, right after the 922 was announced. Dish has the proper chipset, to support MoCa with the 922 right now. Rather that happens or not is a different story and Dish seems to be going the network route vs MoCa.
> Echostar had announced that they wanted to sell the 922, to other providers other than just Dish when the 922 was announced, and using MoCa would have been a perfect way to replace cable. Granted going the way of Home Networks, nowadays, isn't a bad way to go either.


If they could frequency re-align MoCA like DirecTV did (or if DishPlus doesn't need it to be re-aligned) then they could very easily implement MRV without the need for a home network, much in the same way DECA with SWiM do, the only difference being the need for a cable for each receiver from the dish to the RG-6 homerun point.


----------



## James Long

Bigg said:


> If they could frequency re-align MoCA like DirecTV did (or if DishPlus doesn't need it to be re-aligned) then they could very easily implement MRV without the need for a home network, much in the same way DECA with SWiM do, the only difference being the need for a cable for each receiver from the dish to the RG-6 homerun point.


DISH Pro and DISH Pro Plus consume the same amount of bandwidth on the coax, twice that of legacy. It is another one of those designs that works to fill DISH's needs. I wouldn't mind seeing a SWiM style system developed for larger installs. The design of DISHProPlus allows two tuners on one receiver per coax, with three coaxes being directly connected to the LNB on 1000.2 or 1000.4 dishes (the latest and greatest, so far).

There is plenty of space available on the coax below 950 MHz unless the customer wants to diplex with a cable system. Diplexing with an OTA antenna (common) would give around 150 MHz above the broadcast band (LPs exist up to channel 69). Or channels between OTA channels could be used to pass the signal around. Using coax as the connect could be possible.


----------



## Bigg

James Long said:


> DISH Pro and DISH Pro Plus consume the same amount of bandwidth on the coax, twice that of legacy. It is another one of those designs that works to fill DISH's needs. I wouldn't mind seeing a SWiM style system developed for larger installs. The design of DISHProPlus allows two tuners on one receiver per coax, with three coaxes being directly connected to the LNB on 1000.2 or 1000.4 dishes (the latest and greatest, so far).
> 
> There is plenty of space available on the coax below 950 MHz unless the customer wants to diplex with a cable system. Diplexing with an OTA antenna (common) would give around 150 MHz above the broadcast band (LPs exist up to channel 69). Or channels between OTA channels could be used to pass the signal around. Using coax as the connect could be possible.


I know that there's enough bandwidth there for MoCA, it's just a question of whether the existing chipsets can use the right frequencies? D*'s problem was that SWiM uses lower frequencies, so MoCA doesn't work with their system, and while DECA is the same as MoCA in terms of signalling, it runs several hundred mhz lower than MoCA proper.

What happens if someone tries to diplex DOCSIS 3 on a system that goes up to 1ghz with DP?

Because of the frequency re-alignment, D*'s DECA won't work with Diplexing OTA or CATV.


----------



## jgarveyATL

I am thinking about getting a slingbox pro this weekend, vs. waiting for sling 700U. I would think that for $50 more than a 922, I get the ability to sling multiple devices in HD (such as AppleTV) and tuner 1 and 2. 

The only reason I hesitate is because of the upcoming sling adapter (700U). I've read on the forum that this is "any day now", but I can't find any ballpark or anticipated pricing on the 700U. 

I am out of contract with Dish and want to pull the trigger once on an additional HD DVR (i have a ViP622 now) plus 1 700U and an MRE to get content between the 2 HD DVRs. I'd rather not sneakernet and pay the $40 for the DVR archiving fee (which for a 1TB drive ends up being about $150 including the cost of the drive).


----------

