# H20/21 and HR20/21



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Not sure if this has been reported before.

I recieved some BBCs that I ordered. On the instruction sheet it says that these are required for the H20/21 and the HR20/21. Any new info on new MPEG4 units coming out?

Another interesting statement: "In order to receive our complete HD programming later in 2007, and to avoid losing any current HD programming your are already receiving a BBC must be connected to your receiver." Could be some current HD programming will be moved to new sats.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

lwilli201 said:


> Another interesting statement: "In order to receive our complete HD programming later in 2007, and to avoid losing any current HD programming your are already receiving a BBC must be connected to your receiver." Could be some current HD programming will be moved to new sats.


ALL HD programming is going to be moved to the new sats, and converted to MPEG-4.

Just the timing of it is not known at this time.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> ALL HD programming is going to be moved to the new sats, and converted to MPEG-4.
> 
> Just the timing of it is not known at this time.


My take was that it could be more eminent because the BBCs are only sent to those that already have MPEG4receivers. This could mean some current MPEG4 programming could be moved from the current MPEG4 sats thus requiring the BBCs. They may have meant that without the BBCs, we would not be able to get the current MPEG2 HD programming if they go to the new sats.

I quess we are here to nit pick.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

No, it is because all NEW HD programing will require the BBCs and the only people who can get them are the new channels are those with MPEG4 equipment.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

tonyd79 said:


> No, it is because all NEW HD programing will require the BBCs and the only people who can get them are the new channels are those with MPEG4 equipment.


The key phrase was:
" avoid losing any current HD programming"

Referring to the MPEG-2 based content...


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

And........

To address the other part of the OP...

There is an H21 and an HR21 in development.

They are to the point that a model number has been assigned, but as for features, specs, differences, cost, and available.......

No information is available yet...


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

tonyd79 said:


> No, it is because all NEW HD programing will require the BBCs and the only people who can get them are the new channels are those with MPEG4 equipment.


These statements were on the installation instructions for the BBC. It is obvious that if you need BBCs you already have MPEG4 equipment.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And........
> 
> To address the other part of the OP...
> 
> ...


Thanks Earl. That was my assumption, but was wondering if there was more info out on them. I would think they are trying to develop less costly MPEG4 receivers without reducing features.

If D* needs beta testers for the new receivers, they know where to find them.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> If D* needs beta testers for the new receivers, they know where to find them.


+1000 (one for everyone on the cutting edge)


----------



## tfederov (Nov 18, 2005)

lamontcranston said:


> +1000 (one for everyone on the cutting edge)


I've been grounded from getting new TVs.... no playing for me.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

tfederov said:


> I've been grounded from getting new TVs.... no playing for me.


You could use an H21 for PIP.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

lamontcranston said:


> +1000 (one for everyone on the cutting edge)


Yes, the seed has been planted.


----------



## Dusty (Sep 21, 2006)

tfederov said:


> I've been grounded from getting new TVs.... no playing for me.


You are only banned on new TVs, not new DVRs, right?


----------



## carl6 (Nov 16, 2005)

tfederov said:


> I've been grounded from getting new TVs.... no playing for me.


That is why I have three DirecTV products connected to one TV right now.:lol:

Carl


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Look for the 21 series of receivers after Sept. So far they will be the same as current 20s minus the ATSC tuners seeing those are required in all new TVs. It will be hard recording ATSC channels without an ATSC tuner built in but D* figures we only want to record the 4 networks they offer.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

No chance it could include an actual 3rd or 4th tuner?
And why would they drop the ATSC tuner? That means having to get ANOTHER box to record OTA. I'd prefer everything all on 1 box.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

boba said:


> Look for the 21 series of receivers after Sept. So far they will be the same as current 20s minus the ATSC tuners seeing those are required in all new TVs. It will be hard recording ATSC channels without an ATSC tuner built in but D* figures we only want to record the 4 networks they offer.


Well that sucks I always had a feeling that these would go away someday I guess that day has arrived.


----------



## n-spring (Mar 6, 2007)

Pardon my ignorance, but what is a BBC?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

n-spring said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but what is a BBC?


B-Band Converter


----------



## cygnusloop (Jan 26, 2007)

Steve Robertson said:


> Well that sucks I always had a feeling that these would go away someday I guess that day has arrived.


Don't fret, folks, while the H/HR21 is _rumored _to be a stripped down version or the HR20, there are also _rumors _of an HR20P (or HR20Pro) in our future as well.

Note, key word in above sentence is _rumored_.

Any comments/updates you can share on the HR20P, Earl? Pretty please?


----------



## n-spring (Mar 6, 2007)

Earl Bonovich said:


> B-Band Converter


I take it that's the little box sitting behind my H20-600???


----------



## pman_jim (Jan 24, 2007)

You are correct.


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

n-spring said:


> I take it that's the little box sitting behind my H20-600???


Yes, it should hopefully be connected to your H20-600, H20-100, HR20-700 or HR20-100. If not, I highly suggest you find where you left it or have D* send you a replacement. *You'll need these when D10 starts broadcasting this September!*


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

cygnusloop said:


> Don't fret, folks, while the H/HR21 is _rumored _to be a stripped down version or the HR20, there are also _rumors _of an HR20P (or HR20Pro) in our future as well.
> 
> Note, key word in above sentence is _rumored_.
> 
> Any comments/updates you can share on the HR20P, Earl? Pretty please?


Aside from the $1500-$2000 it'll cost?


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

I can kinda see no ATSC tuner in an H21 since it's not a DVR. Still a pain to switch to the TV to watch OTA as I'd prefer it in one box.

As for an HR21, I just can't see no OTA in an HD-DVR. I mean counting on the TV to watch OTA doesn't do you any good if you want to record them.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

This would kill OTA for me. I do NOT watch Live Tv. Doesn't happen, won't happen. So I'd either have to get a second DVR for just ATSC, or not watch OTA.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

I just checked out Best Buy and Circuit city. Only DVRs they have that will record OTA ATSC are the HR20 and the Series 3 Tivo. I will NOT spend $800 to record OTA.


----------



## Bill Johnson (Apr 3, 2003)

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I wonder what makes D* think that in the next year or so they'll convince everyone to switch to MPEG4? There's millions of us and if we don't cave in, will we wake up one morning and (something like the analog cutoff) we'll have no sat. signal?? :eek2: :eek2:

Sounds like a nightmare and many of us have gotten use to our old dish and receiver. Just wondering!


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Bill Johnson said:


> Perhaps I'm missing something, but I wonder what makes D* think that in the next year or so they'll convince everyone to switch to MPEG4? There's millions of us and if we don't cave in, will we wake up one morning and (something like the analog cutoff) we'll have no sat. signal?? :eek2: :eek2:
> 
> Sounds like a nightmare and many of us have gotten use to our old dish and receiver. Just wondering!


Because probably in far less then a year from now, there will be no SAT Based MPEG-2 HD content.

So if you are happy with just what you get via OTA and SD programming, you will never have to switch.

And actually there are not millions, closer to just a single million or so (and that is all HD subscribers, not just those that don't have any MPEG-4 equipment)


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

Eventually, if you stick with your HR10 and/or H10, then yes, you will wake up one morning and not have any HD programming. Probably be longer than a year though. It will depend on how many HR10 and H10 receivers are still out there.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> Probably be longer than a year though.


I highly doubt that. They're going to shut off MPEG2 HD as soon as they can.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

I recant my "Probably be longer than a year" statement per Earl's comment. If anybody knows, Earl does. He could probably tell us don't worry cause Directv is going out of business next week anyway, and most people here would probably believe him lol


----------



## JLucPicard (Apr 27, 2004)

Besides sticking with the HR20s I've got and being able to record OTA on them (though I haven't enabled that yet because...), I still have 3 HR10-250s that will allow me to continue to record OTA into the forseeable future.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

kturcotte said:


> I recant my "Probably be longer than a year" statement per Earl's comment. If anybody knows, Earl does. He could probably tell us don't worry cause Directv is going out of business next week anyway, and most people here would probably believe him lol


Just for the record, for that particular time frame that I stated...
Came from no information I got from DirecTV.

Just my understanding and listening to the Quarterly Reports, and other public information.

They are going to AGGRESSIVELY replace the non-mpeg4 equipment and shutdown the MPEG-2 HD feeds.

It could take more then a year, but I personally.. doubt it.
IMHO, I would not be that shocked if comes March or so (After football season), that the swap is complete.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

At CES the whole point was the majority of HD users would be allowed to switch at their convenience, organically. The belief was that many will want to switch very soon after all the new HD channels are launched.

And the programming groups I talked to had no date given to them whatsoever. An internal group might have a target, but nothing had been whispered to them at all.

Am I going to bet as to less than a year or more than a year? Heck no.  I could easily see a large majority of customers switching in the next 6 months. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

"You still have to pay the HD Access fee, but you can't view any HD channels with your current receiver(s)" will go a long way to getting people to switch.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> "You still have to pay the HD Access fee, but you can't view any HD channels with your current receiver(s)" will go a long way to getting people to switch.


But they wouldn't have to pay the HD Access fee.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> But they wouldn't have to pay the HD Access fee.


Won't they though, since they have an HD receiver? I thought that was automatic now-you have an HD receiver, you pay for HD, whether or not you actually use/watch the HD channels.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

But will the HR10 be considered an HD receiver still? 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> Won't they though, since they have an HD receiver? I thought that was automatic now-you have an HD receiver, you pay for HD, whether or not you actually use/watch the HD channels.


It only applies to HD receivers activated after March of this year.


----------



## twistedT (Jan 11, 2007)

boba said:


> Look for the 21 series of receivers after Sept. So far they will be the same as current 20s minus the ATSC tuners seeing those are required in all new TVs. It will be hard recording ATSC channels without an ATSC tuner built in but D* figures we only want to record the 4 networks they offer.


Just a thought...

They would probably still offer the HR20 and H20 for those who wanted to pay extra for them. The HR21 and H21 would probably come at a highly reduced rate or perhaps free during special promos.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

I'd be HAPPY to give up the OTA tuner if they'd add in a 3rd or 4th sat tuner!!!


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> I'd be HAPPY to give up the OTA tuner if they'd add in a 3rd or 4th sat tuner!!!


They won't.


----------



## twistedT (Jan 11, 2007)

perhaps the HR20p would come with multiple sat tuners. Pure speculation on my part, don't want to start any false rumors.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

+1

OTA is a MUST HAVE in a DVR...in a plain HD receiver, it isn't as much an issue.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

twistedT said:



> perhaps the HR20p would come with multiple sat tuners.


It certainly will. It'll have two, just like the HR20.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

hasan said:


> OTA is a MUST HAVE in a DVR


I disagree. I've never recorded anything OTA, and I'd welcome a cheaper DVR without OTA.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> I disagree. I've never recorded anything OTA, and I'd welcome a cheaper DVR without OTA.


I do not get all my locals in HD from D*. They are missing three locals here in HD, so I think I would like to see OTA on everything. They can't be that expensive. But I guess that it is expense compared to thousands of them at a dollar a piece could be a lot of money.


----------



## twistedT (Jan 11, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> It certainly will. It'll have two, just like the HR20.


funny :lol: you know what I meant.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

We've had 2 tuners for at least 6 years now. I see NO reason why more can't be added.
Or maybe a way to network HR20s so if you schedule a 3rd or 4th show, it will automatically record on another HR20 that has a free tuner.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> Or maybe a way to network HR20s so if you schedule a 3rd or 4th show, it will automatically record on another HR20 that has a free tuner.


We need MRV before we can even start talking about stuff like that.


----------



## Bill Johnson (Apr 3, 2003)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And actually there are not millions, closer to just a single million or so (and that is all HD subscribers, not just those that don't have any MPEG-4 equipment)


I'm getting more and more confused here and I probably have not honed in on the coming transition to MPEG4 like I should. And I thought I was an early adopter in the elite top 2 or 3 percent that knows something!

From this, I assume there are more than 15 million D* subs having equip. for MPEG4. Well, despite HD Lite, there'll be war if D* wants my Sony HD200 with its tuner solidly pulling in digital stations in my mountainous terrain at double the distance conventional wisdom says should be possible. And I don't think the H20 or HR20 are up to this, if posters are correct!


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Bill Johnson said:


> there'll be war if D* wants my Sony HD200


They don't want it. You're free to keep it for as long as you like.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

This only effects HD receivers (For at least 5 or 6 years probably), and only if you want to receive the HD channels (Which, if you have an HD receiver, you probably will). I don't know how many HD receivers are out there, but I know all 15 million or so customers do not have one. For the majority of customers, they don't have a clue what's going on, and they really don't need to yet.


----------



## Bill Johnson (Apr 3, 2003)

> For the majority of customers, they don't have a clue what's going on, and they really don't need to yet.


This sounds somewhat like what's being said about Feb. 2009. We're going totally to MPEG4 in about a year and most D* customers don't need to know???


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

Only HD is going MPEG-4 for the time being. Eventually (5, 6, 7 years), most channels will have switched to HD so they'll be in MPEG-4 anyway. If there are a few stragglers that still only have an SD signal, Directv could put them in MPEG-4 format.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Bill Johnson said:


> I'm getting more and more confused here and I probably have not honed in on the coming transition to MPEG4 like I should. And I thought I was an early adopter in the elite top 2 or 3 percent that knows something!
> 
> From this, I assume there are more than 15 million D* subs having equip. for MPEG4. Well, despite HD Lite, there'll be war if D* wants my Sony HD200 with its tuner solidly pulling in digital stations in my mountainous terrain at double the distance conventional wisdom says should be possible. And I don't think the H20 or HR20 are up to this, if posters are correct!


The only people that need conversion are HD subs. And all they need to do is get one MPEG4 receiver in their hands, if they want one. At the time the H20 was introduced (2 years ago now) there was under 1 million HD subs total.
So for the past 2 years every new HD sub got an MPEG4 receiver anyway, unless they opted to get an HR10 for $600+. Now for the past 10 months only the HR20 has been available. So the vast majority of new HD subs in the past 2 years already have MPEG4 receiver(s).
Couple that with the number of people like us who have gotten MPEG4 receivers on our own, I think it's safe to say that well over 50% of their HD subs are already set for MPEG4.

HR10 owners are the only real holdouts in any number. And I believe there was an estimated 400-600K of them total. Not that many. And again, many of them as seen on this very forum have already gotten an HR20. All 3 of my friends that have an HR10 already got an HR20 and they didn't really know about the conversion other then they got the HR20 when our MPEG4 locals lit up.

Now couple that with 50-100 HD channels this fall in MPEG4 you are going to have a whole lot of people getting an MPEG4 receiver.

By the end of football season I don't think there will be all that many HD subs that don't have at least one MPEG4 receiver. Spend the first half of 2008 offering those subs free upgrades and if they refuse then too bad.

My prediction is that July 1st 2008 will be the MPEG2 HD shutdown, maybe sooner.


----------



## Bill Johnson (Apr 3, 2003)

OK, I got this wrong! I was thinking all MPEG2 was going to be shut down next year and it sounded nightmarish! That'll teach me to be a member of these HD forums and so easily go off half-cocked so to speak!

I would say, compared to FCC education about the analog shutdown, D* has an eternity on MPEG2 shutdown!


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

bonscott87 said:


> I can kinda see no ATSC tuner in an H21 since it's not a DVR. Still a pain to switch to the TV to watch OTA as I'd prefer it in one box.


If D* does end up carrying the all the local ATSC signals via satellite then it really doesn't require that the STB have an ATSC tuner in it. And if they do reach that point then they'll be saving $'s on every STB they need to get out there. Or maybe D*'s REALLY looking out in the future and will end up making this box the base STB and eliminate the MPEG2 boxes to position for the eventual conversion of the entire system to MPEG4?


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

What's really going to be fun is to see what Malone plans on doing once he takes over.


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

RAD said:


> If D* does end up carrying the all the local ATSC signals via satellite then it really doesn't require that the STB have an ATSC tuner in it. And if they do reach that point then they'll be saving $'s on every STB they need to get out there. Or maybe D*'s REALLY looking out in the future and will end up making this box the base STB and eliminate the MPEG2 boxes to position for the eventual conversion of the entire system to MPEG4?


Well spoken from a guy who lives in a big wide open state.

Many areas on the coasts have multiple markets they can get and DirecTV is still pretty much shackled to the one market concept on the satellite.

Right now, I can get digital channels from Washington and Baltimore but only 4 stations are on the satellites.

I think they are just offering choices for price and need.


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

RAD said:


> If D* does end up carrying the all the local ATSC signals via satellite then it really doesn't require that the STB have an ATSC tuner in it. And if they do reach that point then they'll be saving $'s on every STB they need to get out there. Or maybe D*'s REALLY looking out in the future and will end up making this box the base STB and eliminate the MPEG2 boxes to position for the eventual conversion of the entire system to MPEG4?


Yea, tell that to LIN who refuses to allow DirecTV (or Dish) to carry their HD channels.
If it weren't for ATSC I wouldn't be able to watch Heroes in HD.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

bonscott87 said:


> Yea, tell that to LIN who refuses to allow DirecTV (or Dish) to carry their HD channels.
> If it weren't for ATSC I wouldn't be able to watch Heroes in HD.


I know that, LIN has two stations (NBC and MyTV) down in Austin. A contact at the station said that a month or so ago LIN corporate had a new person in charge on retransmission rights and was hoping that there would be some progress on this. But on the other hand, LIN is seeing about selling their stations and may not do anything while that's in the works.


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

RAD come a little north to DFW only the 4 networks are offered in HD in MPEG4 8-1 ABC is available but 8-2 &8-3 are only OTA or 68 ION is available SD which is the same as 68-1 digital but 68-2/68-3 & 68-4 are not available period. With about 40 channels counting sub channels D* is a long way from serving the population with their Dallas/Fort Worth MPEG4 channels.


----------



## Kapeman (Dec 22, 2003)

Jeremy W said:


> I disagree. I've never recorded anything OTA, and I'd welcome a cheaper DVR without OTA.


I wonder just how much the OTA tuner would really add to the price.

I don't imagine it would be THAT much.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

It is a realitively simple circuit board, no patents involved and made in China, how expensive could it be? Under a buck, I'll bet. But that dollar times a few hundred thousand, never know what Wall Street will allow.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

OTA= a separate PWB, some LG chips, tin shielding, and mounted on to the main board.

While volume can keep the price down, I very much doubt "under a buck".


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

BTW, didn't I see somewhere that D* is going to start adding the rest of the HD channels in the launched markets once D10 is operational?


----------



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

Newshawk said:


> BTW, didn't I see somewhere that D* is going to start adding the rest of the HD channels in the launched markets once D10 is operational?


DIRECTV will add more with D10 and D11.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

boba said:


> RAD come a little north to DFW only the 4 networks are offered in HD in MPEG4 8-1 ABC is available but 8-2 &8-3 are only OTA or 68 ION is available SD which is the same as 68-1 digital but 68-2/68-3 & 68-4 are not available period. With about 40 channels counting sub channels D* is a long way from serving the population with their Dallas/Fort Worth MPEG4 channels.


Boba, I never said that D* was doing that now but the rumor was that they would, except for suchannels, which is an issue that both DBS and cable companies are not wanting to be forced to do. It's not really an issue in Ausin since except for KLRU (PBS) nobody's doing subchanels. But if they decide to all those subchannels are usually 480i which D* could carry at a reduced resolution to maybe fit them in.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

davring said:


> It is a realitively simple circuit board, no patents involved and made in China, how expensive could it be? Under a buck, I'll bet. But that dollar times a few hundred thousand, never know what Wall Street will allow.


If it was that cheap why would TV set manufactures want to delay adding them to all TV's until Washington set out dates for them?


----------



## Racer88 (Sep 13, 2006)

A new DVR without OTA tuners is just plain dumb.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

RAD said:


> If it was that cheap why would TV set manufactures want to delay adding them to all TV's until Washington set out dates for them?


To advertise a cheap TV, and to make money when they sold tuners.


----------



## Racer88 (Sep 13, 2006)

davring said:


> To advertise a cheap TV, and to make money when they sold tuners.


That and the fact the tuner technology wasn't nearly as finalized and robust as it is now so a potential buyer of then very, very expensive TV sets wouldn't be bound to a built in tuner that would soon be inferior to current tuner capabilities and have to buy a whole new TV just to take advantage of the latest advances in tuner technology.


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

Do the cable company HD DVRs have OTA ATSC tuners in them?


----------



## convem24 (Mar 11, 2007)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And........
> 
> To address the other part of the OP...
> 
> ...


Earl I heard from a little bird at D* that the H21 will be available this fall. I am wondering the wisdom of this only because if the H20 is interactive capable sooner than later what advances would D* make. I have heard however the HR21 will be a basic HD-DVR (not E-sata, no D* on demand). I have nothing to confirm this but it would not suprise me unless they make the HR21 a more advanced box and decrease the lease cost on the HR20. Again this is all speculation but the next few months will be exciting in my opinion.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

CCarncross said:


> Do the cable company HD DVRs have OTA ATSC tuners in them?


Nope.


----------



## MikeR (Oct 6, 2006)

convem24 said:


> Earl I heard from a little bird at D* that the H21 will be available this fall. I am wondering the wisdom of this only because if the H20 is interactive capable sooner than later what advances would D* make. I have heard however the HR21 will be a basic HD-DVR (not E-sata, no D* on demand). I have nothing to confirm this but it would not suprise me unless they make the HR21 a more advanced box and decrease the lease cost on the HR20. Again this is all speculation but the next few months will be exciting in my opinion.


Actually it would make sense to provide a "bare bones" H21 and HR21...with the new sats and more HD programming available - the demand will be high to transition. Should be easier to supply the demand with a low cost MPEG4 capable box for the masses. The HR21 would be the HD version of the H15. No ATSC/Network/E-sata/etc etc.

Then...follow that up with the next-gen HR20 for the dbstalk folks.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

MikeR said:


> The HR21 would be the HD version of the H15. No ATSC/Network/E-sata/etc etc.


It'll have a network connection, I can promise you that.


----------



## MikeR (Oct 6, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> It'll have a network connection, I can promise you that.


Probably so! Keep the revenue stream flowing with VOD $


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

kturcotte said:


> We've had 2 tuners for at least 6 years now. I see NO reason why more can't be added.


You obviously haven't contemplated cabling all of those tuners.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Racer88 said:


> A new DVR without OTA tuners is just plain dumb.


That's exactly what TiVo has done with their Series 2 receivers. In a last ditch effort to avoid putting in a digital tuner, they simply declared them incapable of being used with OTA. I suspect that at some point, this may backfire on them.


----------



## convem24 (Mar 11, 2007)

MikeR said:


> Probably so! Keep the revenue stream flowing with VOD $


I don't know if the HR21 with have the ethernet connection. It would be nice but I would believe to help reduce cost to eliminate the E-sata connection. This would confuse some customers if the HR20 is more advanced than the HR21. I know a couple of friends who want a D* HD-DVR for less than 300 which is reasonable. We will see what happens. All I know is that I need the E-sata connector, my R15 is already at 90% filled!!!! I want full seasons of 24, all 3 CSIs, NCIS, Lost, House, Etc, etc. Rant 445.:hurah:


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

convem24 said:


> I don't know if the HR21 with have the ethernet connection.


Like MikeR said, the Ethernet connection is directly linked to VOD, which is a revenue source. All future DVRs will have an Ethernet connection.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

harsh said:


> You obviously haven't contemplated cabling all of those tuners.


You only need one cable with an SWM.


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

DIRECTV was showing off a HR20P at the 2006 CES, it was not present at the 2007 CES but some of the reps at the booth said it was still in the works. 

It would defiantly be interesting to get on the beta for the H21 and HR21.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Personally I'd simplify it even more. Just make the H21 a HR20 without the hard drive. Want to upgrade to DVR? Great, go get yourself a esata drive or have a tech come out and plug in an internal drive modual and your good to go. One stone, two birds.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

convem24 said:


> Earl I heard from a little bird at D* that the H21 will be available this fall. I am wondering the wisdom of this only because if the H20 is interactive capable sooner than later what advances would D* make. I have heard however the HR21 will be a basic HD-DVR (not E-sata, no D* on demand). I have nothing to confirm this but it would not suprise me unless they make the HR21 a more advanced box and decrease the lease cost on the HR20. Again this is all speculation but the next few months will be exciting in my opinion.


It would not be "shocking" to find that the H21 would be out this fall... 
Why? H20 is fairly old now, and the 2 years since it release, there has been a lot of progress in chipsets, design, ect...

And given that the major push for MPEG-4 is going to be occuring... and with NFL and the new nationals this fall.... production of the MPEG-4 compatible receivers is going to increase....

As for the HR21... well I do know (now): HR20P <> HR21... they are two different products.

I would be shocked if the HR21 is stripped down that much.
eSATA is really nothing more then just a 2nd SATA bus in the system, and nearly ever SATA chipset out there has support for two buses, so the financial savings there is probably in the sub $5 a box range.... and such a feature is crucial to allow people to increase their storage size, without opening the unit.

Same goes for the network port. Those are part of the main boards now, and don't add much cost to the units (don't have an estimate, but can't be all that high, since almost ever new consumer electronic device now is comming with some sort of network connection).

On-Demand is a MAJOR MAJOR project/product for DirecTV in the future... I wouldn't be surprised if all the next generation of DirecTV receivers, don't have some sort of network/broadband connectivity to tap into the product.

Simply by "time" factors, the costs of the HR20 is going to reduce.
300gb drives are already cheaper then they were... quanitity of scale on the main boards, and the chips being used are going to drive the cost down.

Mulitple manufactures (two now, with the solid rumors of a third comming on board).

So while the "purchase" price of an HR2* unit may remain high (simple to discourage it), the actuall cost, and the cost to "lease" (I really hate that term for it) it.... will probably drop.

IMHO: The three major costs in the MPEG-4 installations and upgrades:
a) The Dish
b) The Installation
c) The overhead of managing the schedules, backlog, and customer demand of the those installs/upgrades


----------



## Racer88 (Sep 13, 2006)

The dish??? LOL That would be the single least expensive piece of the entire system.

They retail for a 100 bucks anywhere you look, (or less if you look hard enough, I got mine shipping and all for 60 bucks) so that would mean about 25 bucks AT THE VERY MOST to produce one.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Racer88 said:


> The dish??? LOL That would be the single least expensive piece of the entire system.
> 
> They retail for a 100 bucks anywhere you look, (or less if you look hard enough, I got mine shipping and all for 60 bucks) so that would mean about 25 bucks AT THE VERY MOST to produce one.


But the installation of that dish... the time involved, the extra parts, ect...
"Re-Aims" also

And it is a piece, that really isn't going to change in cost... and is just as critical as having an MPEG-4 receiver.

It's not like you can just throw an MPEG-4 receiver, on a 3LNB and have it work.


----------



## Draconis (Mar 16, 2007)

I was doing a web search and found something interesting on the Pace Electronics homepage pertaining to the H21.

http://www.pacemso.com/tech_services/Default.asp

The actual article has been removed / is not longer available but I was able to get the article from Google's cache. Here is the article.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Ratara said:


> I was doing a web search and found something interesting on Pace Electronics homepage pertaining to the H21.


That document seems to imply that the H20 will never work with the SWM.


----------



## Steve Robertson (Jun 7, 2005)

Wow that is very interesting thanks for the info


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Jeremy W said:


> That document seems to imply that the H20 will never work with the SWM.


The H20 is planned to work with SWM, eventually.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> That document seems to imply that the H20 will never work with the SWM.


I think it meant that it will not work with MFH2, which is a fiber distribution system for green properties, what ever that means. Do not think it has anything to do with the current SWM.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> I think it meant that it will not work with MFH2, which is a fiber distribution system for green properties, what ever that means. Do not think it has anything to do with the current SWM.


MFH2 uses the SWM, it says so right in the document.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> MFH2 uses the SWM, it says so right in the document.


True but with just with the SWM the H20 will be able to be used when the software is updated. It is when the SWM is used with the MFH2, it will not work. The H20 will work with the MFH1 system, as per the document. So if you live where you get your input through a MFH2 system, your H20 will not work. Otherwise you will be fine. To say that the H20 will never be SWM capable is IMHO not true.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> It is when the SWM is used with the MFH2, it will not work.


Right, but I just don't see why that is the case. The way I read it, MFH2 seems to be more of a "behind the scenes" system that doesn't really interact with the receivers the way SWM does. Kind of like how any receiver can be hooked up directly to the dish, or to a multiswitch.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Actually from what I understand about MFH2...

It is an SWM module on major steroids... and the ability to handle virutal "hundreds" of SWM channels, when setup properly.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Actually from what I understand about MFH2...
> 
> It is an SWM module on major steroids... and the ability to handle virutal "hundreds" of SWM channels, when setup properly.


Ah, I see. Sounds like a very nice system.


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> Right, but I just don't see why that is the case. The way I read it, MFH2 seems to be more of a "behind the scenes" system that doesn't really interact with the receivers the way SWM does. Kind of like how any receiver can be hooked up directly to the dish, or to a multiswitch.


That is getting into stuff that is miles over my head. :lol:


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

Hmm well for a H/HR21 model would it be possible for there to b e a scaler chip in it to do HDMI upconversion the same way a upconvert DVD player or HD DVD/Blu-ray player would. That wold be a great feature if you ask me. At least the SD channels would not look too bad while we wait for more HD simulcasts.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

drx792 said:


> Hmm well for a H/HR21 model would it be possible for there to b e a scaler chip in it to do HDMI upconversion the same way a upconvert DVD player or HD DVD/Blu-ray player would.


The receivers already have scalers in them. That's how they're able to output SD channels at 720p and 1080i. And it's not just limited to HDMI, the scaling works on component too.


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> The receivers already have scalers in them. That's how they're able to output SD channels at 720p and 1080i. And it's not just limited to HDMI, the scaling works on component too.


Really? The upconverted pic looks nothing like the difference between DVD and upconverted DVD. IO assumed the recievers just scalled the SD to the resolution that was set, not do the FULL upconversion stuff like DVD players. But I may not fully understand this the whole way through.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

drx792 said:


> Really? The upconverted pic looks nothing like the difference between DVD and upconverted DVD. IO assumed the recievers just scalled the SD to the resolution that was set, not do the FULL upconversion stuff like DVD players. But I may not fully understand this the whole way through.


The DVD has much more "data" than a SD program.
Or "more to work with" from the start.


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

Ohh well yeah that actually does make sense. 4.7-9 gigs on a DVD is a lot more than a D* stream. 

i shoulda thought of that. :lol:


----------



## bonscott87 (Jan 21, 2003)

Plus DVDs are 480p. DVDs are WAAAAYYYY better then any SD out there. But yea, it's basically garbage in/garbage out.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

SD channels on DirecTV are 480x480 interlaced, compressed to hell and back. Nothing you do can make them look as good as a DVD.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> SD channels on DirecTV are 480x480 interlaced, compressed to hell and back. Nothing you do can make them look as good as a DVD.


480 x 480* is* the compression [from the 640 x 480].


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

Jeremy W said:


> SD channels on DirecTV are 480x480 interlaced, compressed to hell and back. Nothing you do can make them look as good as a DVD.


Ohh yeah i remember hearing about the fact that D* cuts the vertical lines. Will this be changed once all the HD is on 99 and 103??

Or hopefully withing the next few years or so we will had MPEG4 SD too.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> 480 x 480* is* the compression [from the 640 x 480].


I'm talking about MPEG2 bitrate reduction. Reducing the resolution is not generally referred to as compression.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Jeremy W said:


> I'm talking about MPEG2 bitrate reduction. Reducing the resolution is not generally referred to as compression.


While bit starving may be another part of it, they compress the image and then scale it back for "HD lite" so isn't this the "how" of the bit reduction? They claim 720p isn't starved nor is it "compressed". Just thinking out loud.


----------



## Jeremy W (Jun 19, 2006)

veryoldschool said:


> While bit starving may be another part of it, they compress the image and then scale it back for "HD lite" so isn't this the "how" of the bit reduction? They claim 720p isn't starved nor is it "compressed". Just thinking out loud.


If they actually broadcast the 1280x1080i content at a decent bitrate, it would look pretty good. We have a problem because they not only chop the resolution, but they set the bitrate too low. 720p channels don't have their resolution chopped, but the bitrate is still set too low.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Now, I can definitively say... the H21 is a "lot closer" to retail.. 

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=92223


----------



## MikeR (Oct 6, 2006)

C'mon those that are beta testing software on the H21-200 or HR21-700, give us the scoop! :lol:

Edit: Nice timing Earl!


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

...consider it laid.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=92223


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

HR21 scoop?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

jdspencer said:


> HR21 scoop?


No scoop to be given.


----------



## Thaedron (Jun 29, 2007)

Earl Bonovich said:


> No scoop to be given.


...this month, what about next month?


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

Don't forget that up converting is not the same as up scaling.Your box just converts. The two top of the line Onkyo AV receivers will be available soon and they include up scaling from all inputs. When people get their hands on them then we will know what is possible with the 480i channels. If it works for them then maybe they could be included in a set top box. There are up stand alone scalers on the market for about $2000. I wouldn't pay that much.


----------



## ShadowFree (Feb 10, 2007)

The future of television has arrived. DIRECTV brings you our new HD DVR , soon with the capacity to offer 150 HD channels*, that's three times more than cable.** Images are sharper. Sound is crisper. And now, they can be recorded. Get the best sports, movies, family and special events, all in stunning HD.

This quote from new news section under HD.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

ShadowFree said:


> The future of television has arrived. DIRECTV brings you our new HD DVR , soon with the capacity to offer 150 HD channels*, that's three times more than cable.** Images are sharper. Sound is crisper. And now, they can be recorded. Get the best sports, movies, family and special events, all in stunning HD.
> 
> This quote from new news section under HD.


And.......

Even though it is a year old, it is still their "new" HD-DVR


----------



## drx792 (Feb 28, 2007)

ShadowFree said:


> The future of television has arrived. DIRECTV brings you our new HD DVR , soon with the capacity to offer 150 HD channels*, that's three times more than cable.** Images are sharper. Sound is crisper. And now, they can be recorded. Get the best sports, movies, family and special events, all in stunning HD.
> 
> This quote from new news section under HD.


they still consider the HR20 new for some reason.

but I'm wondering, if theres an H21 now, how soon will the HR21come. Will the HR21 be a step up or down form the HR20? And why would they want a HR21 after all this work on the HR20 us CEers ? OH and will this faster guide and centering be available through a firmware update for the HR20?

I guess we just have to wait and see.

On a side note though, how were people picked for the H21 testing?? If i knew i would have loved to be part of it.


----------



## kevinturcotte (Dec 19, 2006)

If they're going to release a NEW HD DVR, I would imagine there must be SOMETHING desirable about it. More memory (RAM), larger hard drive, something like that. Though cheaper costs seem to be the main feature.
And the HR20 kinda is the "new" HD DVR. Look at how the receiver was when it was FIRST released. It's a COMPLETELY different receiver today, from my understanding (Only been using it since January, I think).


----------



## PoitNarf (Aug 19, 2006)

kturcotte said:


> And the HR20 kinda is the "new" HD DVR. Look at how the receiver was when it was FIRST released. It's a COMPLETELY different receiver today, from my understanding (Only been using it since January, I think).


Very much so. As someone who got the HR20 as soon as it was available, it most certainly feels like an entirely different box now than it did in September. It's a good thing


----------



## bwaldron (Oct 24, 2005)

PoitNarf said:


> Very much so. As someone who got the HR20 as soon as it was available, it most certainly feels like an entirely different box now than it did in September. It's a good thing


Yes, indeed.


----------



## litzdog911 (Jun 23, 2004)

PoitNarf said:


> Very much so. As someone who got the HR20 as soon as it was available, it most certainly feels like an entirely different box now than it did in September. It's a good thing


Agreed! Much, much better now than last September!


----------

