# 4-tuner OTA compatible tivo's



## jollygrunt777 (Feb 28, 2012)

Will there be any newer tivo's that are OTA compatible with more tuners than the current Premiere version which has 2? 

Thanks.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

No one knows but my guess is no


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

If you are an OTA user and either need more than 2 tuners or have multiple TVs I would recommend looking at the used original Series 3 models with lifetime service after you get a Premiere as your primary DVR (again I recommend with lifetime). Just for the record I am an OTA only user and use an Original Series 3, a TiVo HD, and a Premiere, (all with lifetime and upgraded hard drives) but really have never needed more than 4 tuners. 

Good Luck,


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

It's sad, but atmuscarella is probably right. Just not enough profit margin or customers to justify the market.

My OTA is now handled by my existing Windows 7 PC, Media Center, and two HD HomeRun network tuners.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The current platform can only support a maximum of 4 tuners, regardless of configuration. So a 4 tuner OTA unit would only be able to record OTA. I doubt there is enough of a market for such a device.

On the plus side now that Premiere units have streaming capabilities, rather then just transfers, having multiple units in different rooms is much more convenient. Although the cost can be a bit prohibitive.

Dan


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> ...
> On the plus side now that Premiere units have streaming capabilities, rather then just transfers, having multiple units in different rooms is much more convenient. ...


When you look at using TiVo DVRs for OTA only versus cable several things change such as: 

There no issues with MRV as there are no copy restriction flags
There is no need to spend money for cable cards as they are not needed for OTA only use. So when you have multiple DVRs or an original Series 3 DVR it doesn't cost you anything extra every month like it does if you are using them for cable. 
The above make it easier to have multiple DVRs and easier to keep older Series 3 units in the mix.

Personally as an OTA only user I would rather have multiple DVRs than a single 4 tuner unit.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

The advantages to streaming apply even if the shows aren't copy protected....

1) All trick play functions work immeditaely. You don't have to wait for it to actually copy the data to the remote DVR

2) When the show is done you get the normal keep/delete prompt and if you select delete it deletes from the remote TiVo. 

3) You can get a Stream and watch your shows on an iPad. (or transfer them for ofline viewing)

Don't get me wrong the S3 is still a good DVR, but for a multi-room setup the Premiere is just a better experience. 

Dan


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> The advantages to streaming apply even if the shows aren't copy protected....
> 
> 1) All trick play functions work immeditaely. You don't have to wait for it to actually copy the data to the remote DVR
> 
> 2) When the show is done you get the normal keep/delete prompt and if you select delete it deletes from the remote TiVo.


Umm, if I start a transfer, I can start watching it *close* to immediately. I would suspect that most people when transferring something, are intending to watch it in its entirety, so as long as the transfer is faster than realtime, I don't think that's much of an issue.

(I admittedly talked about what to me is a very special case of me purposely transferring something AND skimming through it, e.g. old talk shows I had offloaded.. but I think that's a very rare use case.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

mattack said:


> Umm, if I start a transfer, I can start watching it *close* to immediately. I would suspect that most people when transferring something, are intending to watch it in its entirety, so as long as the transfer is faster than realtime, I don't think that's much of an issue.
> 
> (I admittedly talked about what to me is a very special case of me purposely transferring something AND skimming through it, e.g. old talk shows I had offloaded.. but I think that's a very rare use case.)


What about things like sports where there is a bunch of pre-game crap you don't care about? Or when a show starts with 5 minutes of "previously on" and then an immediate commercial break. MRV is not very convenient for those situations. Streaming is just like if you were sitting in front of the TiVo watching it locally. You can skip around as mich as you want immediately.

I had multiple S3 units for years. And in those years I always had them in the same room distributed to the rest of the house using various devices. It was always kind of a PITA, but better then MRV. Now that I have two Premiere units I decided to try the streaming. It worked so well that I moved one of the TiVos into the other room and got rid of the wireless HDMI thing I was using. Streaming is a seamless experience. MRV is a kludge they decided on way back when networks weren't fast enough to support real streaming.

If you like your S3 units that's great. But I think for most people the streaming offered on the Premiere units is what they really want in a multi-room experience.

Dan


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

OTA is what got me started with HTPCs back when I had DirecTV. I had multiple HR10-250 HDTivos, but I didn't want to allocate them to OTA-only use. DirecTV only offered a few of my local channels, and those were only for one local market (I get both Baltimore and Washington stations via antenna).

I tried an OTA tuner with a spare PC I had built and eventually expanded it to six ATSC tuners. At the time I was using BeyondTV with Windows XP. It worked great for recording OTA channels and it integrated nicely into my home theater system with my Tivos. Eventually I switched to FIOS and picked up a couple S3 Tivos for recording FIOS channels. 

The Ceton InfiniTV4 was introduced a couple years later so I decided to switch to Windows 7 and give one a try. It didn't arrive until five months later, but it was well worth the wait. I still used my Tivos as a backup until I was comfortable that WMC would work well enough. It worked out far better than I could have hoped and eventually stopped using the Tivos altogether. I now had a box that could record both digital cable channels and all of my locals. I added Blu-Ray and DVD playback a short while later and now it's a one-stop unit that does all of my home theater chores.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

HTPCs are nice. But they are power hogs, can be a bit loud and are significantly more expensive then a dedicated device like a TiVo.

That being said right before the Elite was announced I was seriously considering switching to an HTPC. At that point TiVo seemed to have stagnated and I was getting very irritated with them. However over the last year they seemed to have kicked it into gear and I'm actually excited by what they have to offer again.

Although the all in one box concept does still appeal to me. If only it weren't so expensive to build one.

Dan


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

My computer uses 85 watts but it hibernates 12 hours a day so it does not use that much power. A computer with intel new i7 22nm ivy brige uses 55 watts. older computer will use a lot more power.



Dan203 said:


> HTPCs are nice. But they are power hogs, can be a bit loud and are significantly more expensive then a dedicated device like a TiVo.
> 
> That being said right before the Elite was announced I was seriously considering switching to an HTPC. At that point TiVo seemed to have stagnated and I was getting very irritated with them. However over the last year they seemed to have kicked it into gear and I'm actually excited by what they have to offer again.
> 
> ...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

A TiVo Premiere XL4 only draws 23 watts max when using all 4 tuners. So even running 24/7 it still uses half as much power as your HTPC which hibernates 1/2 the day.

Dan


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Multiply that figure by the number of Tivos you have to run to have the same number of tuners in my HTPC (currently at 17) and see who's the real power hog. If you're only running one Tivo Elite vs. a HTPC with four tuners then the Tivo is a clear winner when it comes to power consumption. Double or triple the number of tuners in the HTPC and we're talking a whole new ballgame.

HTPCs can be built to be completely passive (i.e., no fans) and dead silent. You can also just go with quieter fans for a minimal cost. My Tivos have always been noisier than my HTPCs because the drives constantly seek and never rest. I'd never dream of having one in my bedroom because of the noise. At least I can shut off my HTPC when I want or at least put it into sleep mode whereas a Tivo never shuts down without pulling the plug. You can easily make a HTPC as power efficient as a Tivo for that reason alone.

The cost of a HTPC vs. a Tivo has been beaten to death so I won't rehash the subject. Just suffice it to say that HTPCs can be built to meet just about any price point and certainly below what a Tivo with lifetime costs. It all depends on what features you want it to have. With a Tivo, you're limited to what's in the box. With a HTPC you can start small and expand as your budget and imagination allows. It's nice to have options.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

mr.unnatural said:


> Multiply that figure by the number of Tivos you have to run to have the same number of tuners in my HTPC (currently at 17) and see who's the real power hog.


Why do you need 17 tuners? Are you really recording 17 different channels at a time? If so don't you run into I/O issues?

For most people 4 tuners is fine, and with the upcoming Mini you'll be able to watch those 4 tuners in any room in the house. And I can almost guarantee that a TiVo Mini will draw a lot less power then the only available MCE extender. (i.e. XBox 360)

Plus there is something to be said for buying something off the shelf and having it just work. Having to buy all the parts for an HTPC, building it, installing the OS, finding the drivers, etc... is a PITA. Fun for geeks like us sure, but most people wouldn't even know how to do it let alone want to. This is likely why Ceton is releasing a complete MCE DVR. They've already captured the geek crowd and they need a ready to go unit to attempt to break into the main stream.

Dan


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

I have 6 tuners on my computer. 4 cable a 2 ota. i think 17 tuners would wear out a hard drive.



Dan203 said:


> Why do you need 17 tuners? Are you really recording 17 different channels at a time? If so don't you run into I/O issues?
> 
> For most people 4 tuners is fine, and with the upcoming Mini you'll be able to watch those 4 tuners in any room in the house. And I can almost guarantee that a TiVo Mini will draw a lot less power then the only available MCE extender. (i.e. XBox 360)
> 
> ...


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Five of the 17 tuners are networked and shared by other PCs throughout the house. I don't recall ever using more than about 6 or 7 tuners simultaneously in my primary HTPC so 17 tuners is a bit of overkill. The point is that the cost of the additional tuners over and above the basic PC is a drop in the bucket compared to buying extra Tivos for the additional tuners. 

In reality, you'd need a Tivo at each TV in order to share recordings or use a tuner. I can put together a small form factor PC or get an extender at the fraction of the cost of a Tivo to do the same thing and much more.

While the XBox 360 is the only extender currently marketed, the Linksys and HP extenders can be found on ebay for $100 or less. The Ceton Echo is beginning beta testing in a couple of weeks and I'm signed up to get one. I agree the XBox is a power hog, plus it gets too hot and is noisy, which is why I never use mine.

Dan's arguments have been brought up countless times in these forums so I'm not going to keep beating a dead horse. Same goes for the cost of ownership. If you're pinching pennies that tight then you probably shouldn't even be considering a Tivo. HTPCs are aimed at hobbyists and not someone that just wants a plug and play device. They can be frustrating at times if they don't work right, but they're not as bad as when I used to hack my Tivos and ran into problems. 

It all depends on what you want out of your DVR. Tivos are great DVRs and I'd recommend them to anyone in a heartbeat that doesn't have any technical expertise. OTOH, if I know someone has the smarts to work on PCs then I'd definitely steer them towards a HTPC instead.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Well, hang on. The desire for a 4 tuner anything suggests the OP is not wanting to have multiple anythings, so MRV may be a moot point. To put it another way, if the OP intends to have multiple DVRs of whatever type, then 4 tuners in one DVR is not particularly attractive. (Indeed, that is one major reason I have no desire for a 4 tuner DVR.)

Given the lack of anything even remotely interesting on OTA channels (other than PBS), if my TiVos were OTA only I would be hard pressed to keep even one tuner active, let alone four, but if one is going to limit ones' self to OTA, then I think mr.unnatural has a point. OTA programming lends itself marginally, if at all, to most of the more important features of the TiVo (excluding the Premier), and the ATSC tuners are relatively inexpensive. Thus, IMO, for an OTA only machine, an HTPC might be a near optimal solution.

Dan203's objections are well considered, although some steps can be taken to mitigate some of them. Unfortunately, mitigating one will usually accent the others. In particular, making the unit quieter and more energy efficient will almost surely increase its cost. Assembling the unit from used parts will make it less expensive, but may make it louder and more of a power hog, etc.

The best thing about an OTA HTPC, though, is it can easily avoid Microsoft software.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> For most people 4 tuners is fine


For lots of us, 2 tuners per box is fine. I have never had any desire to spend extra money on a 3rd and 4th tuner for any one box.



Dan203 said:


> and with the upcoming Mini you'll be able to watch those 4 tuners in any room in the house. And I can almost guarantee that a TiVo Mini will draw a lot less power then the only available MCE extender. (i.e. XBox 360)


At the moment I have no interest in such a box, but I might in the future. (I guess that is good, because the box won't be available until the future!) If it can stream from a plain vanilla server, which would include an HTPC, of course, I might be interested.



Dan203 said:


> Plus there is something to be said for buying something off the shelf and having it just work.


There is a lot more to be said for buying something off the shelf and modifying it to fit one's needs and desires. The alternative is to accept what some idiot engineer has decided is good for you. (Or worse, what some bean counter has decided they can make profitable.)



Dan203 said:


> Having to buy all the parts for an HTPC, building it, installing the OS, finding the drivers, etc... is a PITA. Fun for geeks like us sure


I disagree, at least for myself. Easy? Sure. Trivial? Probably. Fun? Not really. It's pretty boring, actually. 'Kinda like washing dishes or vacuuming. I would rather be designing something or reading a book, or - goodness me - watching TV.



Dan203 said:


> This is likely why Ceton is releasing a complete MCE DVR. They've already captured the geek crowd


Not me. There are far too many critical features unavailable in that arena, the absence of any one of which makes it unacceptable.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

lrhorer made a good point in that a HTPC for OTA only can be even cheaper than what I was inferring. There are several freeware DVR apps out there that work very well for recording OTA. MythTV has been around for quite a while and has a very active support community. You'll save yourself an additional $100 or so by not having to purchase a Windows 7 license.

From a hardware cost perspective, I just picked up an Asus F1A55-M LX micro ATX motherboard and an AMD Liano A4 3400 CPU from Newegg for $120 with free shipping (this is for a server upgrade). 4GB of DDR3-1333 RAM will probably cost about $20-40. The Corsair CX430 PSU regularly goes on sale for less than $20 after rebate. A 1-1.5TB drive will average about $100. An inexpensive mid-tower case will cost about $30 and you can probably get one with free shipping. Used SiliconDust dual ATSC/QAM tuners are going for about $35 on ebay. If you want Windows 7 Media Center then factor in another $100 for Home Premium, although you can probably get an OEM version of Win 7 on sale for less. Total cost for this WMC PC is approximately $445. A MythTV version is only about $345. If you don't want to build one then dealnews.com has turnkey PC deals daily for even less, sans tuner.


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

my computer uses about 500 watts when playing call of duty mw3 at 1080p 90 fps
It makes my ps3 look obsolete. But its recording 4 shows while playing cod mw3.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

To each their own I guess. But I still think you guys are in the minority. I still think that for most people buying one TiVo with 4 (or 6) tuners and a couple of Minis to use around the house would be a lot cheaper (both upfront and power usage wise) and easier to setup. I know you guys want flexibility, but most people just want something to work. They don't want infinite options to configure everything. They just want simplicity and will (usually) scrafice flexibility to get it. 

Dan


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Tuners in any for or fashion is fine. I don't care if I have to have multiple Tivos to get what I need. However, I would like for TiVo to implement cooperative scheduling and an integrated NPL. Then it would not matter which box records it. I should not have to care which one records it or which one it is that has the recording. It should just work like one virtual TiVo.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> To each their own I guess. But I still think you guys are in the minority. I still think that for most people buying one TiVo with 4 (or 6) tuners and a couple of Minis to use around the house would be a lot cheaper (both upfront and power usage wise) and easier to setup. I know you guys want flexibility, but most people just want something to work. They don't want infinite options to configure everything. They just want simplicity and will (usually) scrafice flexibility to get it.
> 
> Dan


No argument here as that's pretty much what I've been saying all along. Most people want a plug and play box they don't have to mess with. That's what separates the average consumer from the hobbyists. If off-the-shelf items don't give us what we want, we have to find a way to get it. HTPCs just happen to offer the flexibility we're looking for, but they're not for everyone.

All of the arguments about cost and energy consumption are moot when it comes to niche items like HTPCs. I doubt that the owner of a Ferrari is going to worry about the cost of the car or the gas mileage it gets. It's all about the performance. OTOH, the owner of a Honda Civic is probably more conscious about gas mileage, just wants reliable transportation, and isn't as concerned about performance (unless the owner happens to be a teenager).

A lot of HTPC owners will trick out their HTPCs with high end hardware and create media center PCs that are also superb gaming machines. These can get to be extremely expensive and are even more of a niche product for hardcore gamers. Most HTPC enthusiasts build their first one out of curiosity and then escalate it to a higher purpose once the bug bites them. Some people try it and never quite take to it. It's all a matter of personal preference. The thing is, until you try it you really don't know what you're missing.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

magnus said:


> Tuners in any for or fashion is fine. I don't care if I have to have multiple Tivos to get what I need. However, I would like for TiVo to implement cooperative scheduling and an integrated NPL. Then it would not matter which box records it. I should not have to care which one records it or which one it is that has the recording. It should just work like one virtual TiVo.


That's what a 4 tuner box is good for. Everything is scheduled and recorded by a single box, so you don't have to worry about which TiVo records what or manually manage conflicts.

Plus you only have to buy one box and one subscription so it's a lot cheaper to get up and running.

Dan


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> That's what a 4 tuner box is good for. Everything is scheduled and recorded by a single box, so you don't have to worry about which TiVo records what or manually manage conflicts.
> 
> Plus you only have to buy one box and one subscription so it's a lot cheaper to get up and running.
> 
> Dan


Tell that to those that have already purchased more than one box. I don't why know every one seems to think that the 4 tuner box should be the answer to what TiVo really needs to do with cooperative scheduling and an integrated NPL. A 4 tuner TiVo really does not solve this.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I don't think it's the "answer", but I think it's the plan. I've been asking TiVo for cooperative scheduling for nearly a decade, back when TiVos only had one tuner and cooperative scheduling would have improved the product immensely, but they never listened. Now that they have boxes that are capable of recording 4 channels at once, and 6 tuner units on the horizon, their motivation for developing cooperative scheduling has diminished even further. Which is why I think it's unlikely to ever happen.

If you're a cable user and currently use both of your TiVos in one room then it's a no brainier to upgrade to an XL4. In addition to having a single To Do and My Shows list, which is awesome, it also only requires one CableCARD, one tuning adapter and one "outlet". Depending on how much your provider charges for those things it could be a large monthly savings. Plus if your two current units have lifetime you can likely sell them and cover most, if not all, of the upgrade cost.

If you need to access them in multiple rooms then I'd hold off until the Mini is released and then judge if it's worth it based on it's cost. (no one knows yet how much those things are going to cost)

Dan


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

looks like macrosoft is removing internet tv from wmc on 9-20 Wont be able to watch podcasts in wmc if this happens.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

I never watched much internet TV so it's no loss to me. I'm sure there are other ways to watch it on a PC without resorting to WMC. Still, I'm sure it's a convenient feature for those that do watch it.

Cooperative scheduling has never been an issue for me either. It's another reason why I opted for an HTPC over multiple Tivo boxes. I used to have to create a schedule grid and assign specific shows to each Tivo so there wouldn't be any conflicts. If something special got aired in addition to my regular shows it was usually a nightmare trying to work around it and still get all of my shows. With multiple cablecard plus ATSC tuners in a single box and a method to share the recordings with any TV I never had any issue with conflicts. It's also why I've got so darn many tuners. At a cost of about $35-50 for each cablecard tuner and about $25-50 for each ATSC/QAM tuner, it's just cheap insurance against any chance of a scheduling conflict. Some people see HTPCs as a headache (i.e., glass half empty syndrome). I see it as a solution that gives me peace of mind.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> That's what a 4 tuner box is good for. Everything is scheduled and recorded by a single box, so you don't have to worry about which TiVo records what or manually manage conflicts.


Having had an Elite for about half a year, I will only use 4 tuner boxes in the future. Even though I had (still have, actually) two 2-tuner S3s, the ease of a single box is great. I love it. I'm considering getting another Elite for my wife, to replace the S3 she uses. Mainly so we can stream. Although the Mini may change my mind.

I'm keeping the S3s running though. In the case of a natural disaster, I want to be able to get OTA. I have an excellent roof-mounted antenna system feeding all my wall/coax outlets, and I need the OTA capability of the S3s.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

mr.unnatural said:


> Cooperative scheduling has never been an issue for me either. It's another reason why I opted for an HTPC over multiple Tivo boxes. I used to have to create a schedule grid and assign specific shows to each Tivo so there wouldn't be any conflicts. If something special got aired in addition to my regular shows it was usually a nightmare trying to work around it and still get all of my shows.


Sounds like cooperative scheduling would have helped a lot in your case. The point of cooperative scheduling is to allow multiple TiVos communicate with one another and allow them to automatically reschedule shows they can't get due to conflict on one of the other TiVos on your network. So basically you'd turn multiple TiVos into a big tuner bank. It would be nice to have, even now, but I just don't think TiVo is heading in that direction.

Dan


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

mr.unnatural said:


> lrhorer made a good point in that a HTPC for OTA only can be even cheaper than what I was inferring.


Implying, not inferring. Infer is to imply as receive is to send. One person makes implications from which another draws inferrences.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> To each their own I guess. But I still think you guys are in the minority.


Surely by "you guys" you don't mean me? I have absolutely no intention of buying an HTPC or of switching to OTA.



Dan203 said:


> I still think that for most people buying one TiVo with 4 (or 6) tuners and a couple of Minis to use around the house would be a lot cheaper (both upfront and power usage wise)


That depends on how one approaches it. I am also not obsessively concerned about cost if a more expensive system better meets my needs. I do want the best value, for the money, of course, and don't care at all to pay for things (like 4 tuners) which do little or nothing for me.



Dan203 said:


> and easier to setup. I know you guys want flexibility,


Yes, but not only that. I want reliability. With your proposed setup, the failure of a $0.10 capacitor can cause the entire setup, costing perhaps well over $1000, to fail completely. 'Same for an HTPC with satellites. I much prefer that when - not if but when - one of the components of the system fail the other components continue to work without interruption.



Dan203 said:


> but most people just want something to work. They don't want infinite options to configure everything. They just want simplicity and will (usually) scrafice flexibility to get it.


Well, there is one born every minute, you know. Certainly many people espouse this utterly foolish notion, but I counter with this:

A system does not work unless it performs the way I want it to in every detail. A system is not "easy" to set up if after doing so it fails to meet my needs, no matter how trivial the setup effort may have been.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

tootal2 said:


> my computer uses about 500 watts when playing call of duty mw3 at 1080p 90 fps
> It makes my ps3 look obsolete. But its recording 4 shows while playing cod mw3.


I find that extremely unlikely. 500 watts is a huge amount of power; enough to cause a 2 cm sphere to reach high enough temperatures to melt lead. A motherboard with CPU may at most draw 180 watts - probably much, much less, and it would require at least 25 hard drives to make up the rest. The servers and arrays in my computer room don't draw that much power, and there are two servers hosting a total of 26 hard drives.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

magnus said:


> Tuners in any for or fashion is fine. I don't care if I have to have multiple Tivos to get what I need. However, I would like for TiVo to implement cooperative scheduling and an integrated NPL. Then it would not matter which box records it. I should not have to care which one records it or which one it is that has the recording. It should just work like one virtual TiVo.


The problem is the MPAA pees in its pants at the thought anyone, anywhere, might have a copy of a movie on hand they have not paid for at least three times.

Cooperative scheduling is only mostly practical if copy protection does not interfere. For me, TiVoWebPlus does a more than adequate job of allowing schedule manipulation on those rare occasions when a pair of tuners cannot be employed to resolve a three-way conflict. With 24 hours in a day and 8 tuners at the ready, it just is not an issue very often.


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

Its not the cpu the uses the power in gaming its the gpu. some gaming computers can have 3 video cards useing 800 watts or more.



lrhorer said:


> I find that extremely unlikely. 500 watts is a huge amount of power; enough to cause a 2 cm sphere to reach high enough temperatures to melt lead. A motherboard with CPU may at most draw 180 watts - probably much, much less, and it would require at least 25 hard drives to make up the rest. The servers and arrays in my computer room don't draw that much power, and there are two servers hosting a total of 26 hard drives.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> I find that extremely unlikely. 500 watts is a huge amount of power; enough to cause a 2 cm sphere to reach high enough temperatures to melt lead. A motherboard with CPU may at most draw 180 watts - probably much, much less, and it would require at least 25 hard drives to make up the rest. The servers and arrays in my computer room don't draw that much power, and there are two servers hosting a total of 26 hard drives.


Nothing unusual about 500 watts with a gaming rig. If you have one of the expensive gaming video cards it will certainly draw alot of power. I used to have a couple of power supplies in two rigs(not for gaming) that would each always draw around 500 watts no matter what the load(it was designed that way). I don't remember the reason for it but it was rated well. But this was a few years ago when I wasn't concerned with my power usage.

My current PC and TiVo Desktop PC each draws around 140 watts with just web browsing and several SSDs. But even that is too much. I used to leave half a dozen PCs/servers running 24/7. But not any more since electricity rates have gone up so much in the last few years in this area.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

lrhorer said:


> The problem is the MPAA pees in its pants at the thought anyone, anywhere, might have a copy of a movie on hand they have not paid for at least three times.
> 
> Cooperative scheduling is only mostly practical if copy protection does not interfere.


With the Premiere's ability to stream even copy protected content it no longer matters which TiVo holds a show. You just select a program on any TiVo on your network and hit play and it will play no matter what copy protection it has. The flag prevents there from being more then one "copy", but it doesn't prevent you from playing that copy back anywhere inside your home.

TiVo might even be able to skirt it even more and allow people to move recordings from one TiVo to another or even a TiVo to PC or iPad. As long as the original copy is destroyed as it's being transferred then you only have one copy and you're still within the rules. Although I don't think they'll ever do this as there are too many variables and too many things that could go wrong that could result in customer dissatisfaction. Plus their encryption on the PC is a joke so cable labs and the MPAA might not take to kindly to that.

Dan


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> With the Premiere's ability to stream even copy protected content it no longer matters which TiVo holds a show.


Yes, it does. First of all, streaming is only available from one Premier to another. Anyone who already owns an S3 must either downgrade to a Premier at significant expense or else streaming is not an option to that unit. Secondly, when the TiVo in question fails, the show is lost, period.



Dan203 said:


> You just select a program on any TiVo on your network and hit play and it will play no matter what copy protection it has.


Incorrect. Any Premier on the network, not any TiVo. Plenty of people still have Series III even Series II or Series I TiVos on their network.



Dan203 said:


> The flag prevents there from being more then one "copy", but it doesn't prevent you from playing that copy back anywhere inside your home.


Oh, yes it does. It can't be played on any of my PCs, or a laptop, or a DVD / BluRay player. As already mentioned, it can't be played back on an S1, S2, or S3 TiVo.

As much as I like the S3 TiVo platform, there is no way I am gong to allow TiVo to lock me into their product, even if the Premier were otherwise acceptable, which it is not.



Dan203 said:


> Plus their encryption on the PC is a joke so cable labs and the MPAA might not take to kindly to that.


The MPAA doesn't take kindly to people owning DVRs, at all, or of allowing MRV. There's nothing they can do about those things at this point, though. The encryption on a TiVo is perfectly strong, and if that encryption were kept on the files when they transferred, it is unlikely it would ever be broken. TiVo evidently isn't taking any chances, though.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Nothing unusual about 500 watts with a gaming rig.


Oh, yes, there is. There is nothing unusual about a 500 Watt or even a 700 watt power supply, but a machine actually pulling that much power continuously is another matter. Gaming machines often hit high peaks, but their continuous dissipation is usually much lower.



aaronwt said:


> If you have one of the expensive gaming video cards it will certainly draw alot of power.


Yes, but even 100 watts is a helluva lot of power for something the size of a video card. Of course, some are double-width, but even then dissipating that much power in a device that size without it glowing cherry red is a challenge. It is also a challenge to deliver more than 8 amps on the 12V traces or more than 20 amps on the 5V traces of a motherboard to be delivered to a plug-in peripheral card. It is not impossible, of course, but it is definitely not trivial. When I was an engineer for a CATV system, I had monumental headaches with CATV amplifiers made by RCA that supposedly were rated for 15A at 50C, but the motherboards regularly burned up carrying anything more than 12A in the Texas heat. I finally quit arguing with the manufacturer and instead went on a campaign to re-design the power realms so that no amplifier carried more than 12 amps.

Note the maximum permissible draw on a standard 5-15R 110VAC receptacle is just a hair over 1500 watts. A small electric space heater might dissipate 500W on its low setting.



aaronwt said:


> I used to have a couple of power supplies in two rigs(not for gaming) that would each always draw around 500 watts no matter what the load(it was designed that way).


I'm skeptical. If so, it was a truly lousy design.



aaronwt said:


> I don't remember the reason for it but it was rated well.


It doesn't matter what it was rated, it was still a foolish design.



aaronwt said:


> My current PC and TiVo Desktop PC each draws around 140 watts with just web browsing and several SSDs.


That is fairly high, especially with SSDs. A TTG and GoBack server needn't draw more than 50 watts, if that. A low speed, low power CPU is all that is required, with no video board and no attached mouse or keyboard. A headless thin client attached hosted by a low power array or a low power NAS will work just fine.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

I've built an HTPC and have Silicon Dust tuners on my network, but I abandoned the idea of replacing my Tivos because I thought the amount of tinkering/maintenance would be too high to use them as anything more than toys. It's cool to have, but it's certainly not mainstream. Heck, most just settle for whatever the generic cable company DVR is.


I have two Elites and two Premieres, so I have more TiVo tuners than I really need, but I would still like to see cooperative scheduling (I live in the Mountain Time Zone, so I have to start every network program two minutes early (or maybe it's just a Denver local issue). That would be the single biggest addition to base function in a long time. As others have said, with MRS and the Stream, it no longer matters where a recording resides, but it can still take a lot of work setting up Season Passes and scheduling to get those recordings in the first place.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Sounds like cooperative scheduling would have helped a lot in your case. The point of cooperative scheduling is to allow multiple TiVos communicate with one another and allow them to automatically reschedule shows they can't get due to conflict on one of the other TiVos on your network. So basically you'd turn multiple TiVos into a big tuner bank. It would be nice to have, even now, but I just don't think TiVo is heading in that direction.
> 
> Dan


Sure, it would have helped. Considering it doesn't yet exist in Tivoland doesn't do me or anyone else much good, hence the desire for a one box solution. WMC with media extenders allows for cooperative scheduling because it's all done via one primary PC. You can schedule shows remotely from any extender networked with the HTPC. In other words, HTPCs with WMC have offered what Tivo owners have been wanting from day one. Chalk that one up in the "pro" column for HTPCs.



lrhorer said:


> Implying, not inferring. Infer is to imply as receive is to send. One person makes implications from which another draws inferrences.


Seriously? You have got way too much time on your hands.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

My current PCs are old. The only things I've built in the last few years have been a couple of unRAID servers. My PCs are over four years old and the CPUs are rated at something like 100 watts with a Core 2 Quad and an old Phenom 4 core processor.

This has been the longest time during the last seventeen years that I have gone without upgrading my PCs. Since I have been on a kick to use less power the last couple of years I guess I should have checked into upgrading my systems. At this point I was planning on waiting for Windows 8 to be released so I can do clean installs. BUt if I could get my power usage for each PC down 40% I would be very pleased.


----------



## turbobozz (Sep 21, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> My current PCs are old. The only things I've built in the last few years have been a couple of unRAID servers. My PCs are over four years old and the CPUs are rated at something like 100 watts with a Core 2 Quad and an old Phenom 4 core processor.
> 
> This has been the longest time during the last seventeen years that I have gone without upgrading my PCs. Since I have been on a kick to use less power the last couple of years I guess I should have checked into upgrading my systems. At this point I was planning on waiting for Windows 8 to be released so I can do clean installs. BUt if I could get my power usage for each PC down 40% I would be very pleased.


I built my current desktop in mid 2010 purposefully to do some gaming and to be a WMC server.
At the time I went with a Lynnfield CPU and an ATI 58xx class GPU because they could both step down in power significantly better than other available options at the time.
I also used massive heatsink for better passive cooling, and the mobo was capable of spinning up fans as needed.
I've never put one of the power meters on it to see how much it pulls doing different things though.... maybe I should do that sometime.
I believe most of the of the more recent CPUs from both Intel and AMD handle power step downs pretty well automatically.
Same for Nvidia and AMD GPUs, I think. (If you intend to do some gaming.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

mr.unnatural said:


> WMC with media extenders allows for cooperative scheduling because it's all done via one primary PC. You can schedule shows remotely from any extender networked with the HTPC. In other words, HTPCs with WMC have offered what Tivo owners have been wanting from day one. Chalk that one up in the "pro" column for HTPCs.


The XL4 in combination with the upcoming TiVo Mini will offer the same ability. You have one central TiVo with 4 tuners and the Mini is an extender that can watch anything on the host TiVo and schedule recordings on it. It'll be very similar to the HTPC/XBox setup except the boxes involved will require a LOT less power to operate and the combination should be a bit cheaper.

Dan


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

lrhorer said:


> Yes, it does. First of all, streaming is only available from one Premier to another. Anyone who already owns an S3 must either downgrade to a Premier at significant expense or else streaming is not an option to that unit.
> 
> ...
> 
> Incorrect. Any Premier on the network, not any TiVo. Plenty of people still have Series III even Series II or Series I TiVos on their network.


Obviously you have some sort of resentment of the Premiere platform and/or the fact that the S3 platform was abandoned. Nothing I can do to help with that other then say... For me the Premiere units work just fine so the added features make them an upgrade not a "downgrade".



lrhorer said:


> Secondly, when the TiVo in question fails, the show is lost, period.


Nothing I record from TV is important enough that I'd be devastated if one of my TiVos failed. It would suck, but I'd live. It's not like we're talking about irreplaceable family photos or financial data.



lrhorer said:


> Oh, yes it does. It can't be played on any of my PCs, or a laptop, or a DVD / BluRay player. As already mentioned, it can't be played back on an S1, S2, or S3 TiVo.


I'm hoping that support for PC streaming will be added to a future release of TiVo Desktop, but I will concede that is a limitation. Although the DVD/BluRay limitation apples to MCE recorded shows as well. Anything that is encrypted is locked into the ecosystem that recorded it. That doesn't only apply to TiVo.



lrhorer said:


> The MPAA doesn't take kindly to people owning DVRs, at all, or of allowing MRV. There's nothing they can do about those things at this point, though. The encryption on a TiVo is perfectly strong, and if that encryption were kept on the files when they transferred, it is unlikely it would ever be broken. TiVo evidently isn't taking any chances, though.


TiVo uses hardware based encryption on the TiVo itself, they can't just pass that along to a PC. They invented the current encryption scheme as a way of converting their hardware based encryption to something transferable to a PC. Their mistake was providing a DirectShow filter that basically strips the encryption but leaves the original stream intact. That allowed hackers to reverse engineer the encryption and ultimately break it. No way to put that cat back into the bag at this point.

Dan


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> The XL4 in combination with the upcoming TiVo Mini will offer the same ability. You have one central TiVo with 4 tuners and the Mini is an extender that can watch anything on the host TiVo and schedule recordings on it. It'll be very similar to the HTPC/XBox setup except the boxes involved will require a LOT less power to operate and the combination should be a bit cheaper.
> 
> Dan


I agree. It will be a boon to Tivo users to be able to share content without having to buy additional Tivos. The only caveat is that you still don't have OTA reception. Still, kudos to Tivo for providing a less expensive alternative to MRV. If the Tivo Mini also offers a UI that permits access and control of the primary Tivo then this would finally provide the cooperative scheduling function for multiple locations. Tivo now needs to come up with an add-on OTA tuner module that connects via USB or the eSATA interface.

OTOH, it's a bit of a catch22 situation. I'm no big fan of extenders simply due to the fact that you're putting all of your eggs in one basket. You're assuming the primary Tivo or HTPC will never go offline, which we all know does happen on occasion. When it does, the household goes into a turmoil until they get their TV back again.


----------



## steve614 (May 1, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Obviously [lrhorer has] some sort of resentment of the Premiere platform...


He only resents that the Premieres aren't hackable like the Series 3 machines.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> I don't think it's the "answer", but I think it's the plan. I've been asking TiVo for cooperative scheduling for nearly a decade, back when TiVos only had one tuner and cooperative scheduling would have improved the product immensely, but they never listened. Now that they have boxes that are capable of recording 4 channels at once, and 6 tuner units on the horizon, their motivation for developing cooperative scheduling has diminished even further. Which is why I think it's unlikely to ever happen.
> 
> Dan


funny thing is that we now have a free space indicator and Hulu plus! That's just awesome.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> With the Premiere's ability to stream even copy protected content it no longer matters which TiVo holds a show. You just select a program on any TiVo on your network and hit play and it will play no matter what copy protection it has. The flag prevents there from being more then one "copy", but it doesn't prevent you from playing that copy back anywhere inside your home.
> 
> TiVo might even be able to skirt it even more and allow people to move recordings from one TiVo to another or even a TiVo to PC or iPad. As long as the original copy is destroyed as it's being transferred then you only have one copy and you're still within the rules. Although I don't think they'll ever do this as there are too many variables and too many things that could go wrong that could result in customer dissatisfaction. Plus their encryption on the PC is a joke so cable labs and the MPAA might not take to kindly to that.
> 
> Dan


You can't stream you Amazon content from one box to the other though. I'm not sure why that is.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> Obviously you have some sort of resentment of the Premiere platform and/or the fact that the S3 platform was abandoned. Nothing I can do to help with that other then say... For me the Premiere units work just fine so the added features make them an upgrade not a "downgrade".


From what I've read in previous threads, the S3 can be modified to disable the copy protection codes so that anything can be copied from the Tivo to a disk array for archiving. Copy protection can't be disabled on the S4.



Dan203 said:


> Nothing I record from TV is important enough that I'd be devastated if one of my TiVos failed. It would suck, but I'd live. It's not like we're talking about irreplaceable family photos or financial data.


I agree, but from what I've read in previous threads, there is some programming that is very rare and may have only been available to record once in the past decade with the copy protection flag set and is not available digitally anywhere else. In this case an S3 that has been modified to disable the copy protection is needed to capture the program and archive it for future viewing.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

lrhorer said:


> Well, hang on. The desire for a 4 tuner anything suggests the OP is not wanting to have multiple anythings, so MRV may be a moot point. To put it another way, if the OP intends to have multiple DVRs of whatever type, then 4 tuners in one DVR is not particularly attractive. (Indeed, that is one major reason I have no desire for a 4 tuner DVR.)
> 
> Given the lack of anything even remotely interesting on OTA channels (other than PBS),


See, that's your opinion, but to the rest of us (and I definitely think it's closer to the average consumer than your viewpoint), the multiple tuners are MORE necessary _because_ of the OTA channels than cable channels. (I am including the cable rebroadcasts of the "broadcast" networks, not just literally OTA with an antenna.)

The cable channels DO typically rerun their shows many times within the week, so multiple tuners are FAR less needed, IMHO. The LACK of reruns _and_ the stupid timeslot overlap business (though that is also necessary on cable -- e.g. MTV programming can slip either direction several minutes, all Discovery, Biography, and E! channel shows need 1 minute end pad), are what make multiple tuners necessary for broadcast networks.

The most popular shows _are_ still on the broadcast networks, even though you apparently don't like them.

Heck, I don't like the lack of OTA tuners in the Premiere 4/XL4, but I'm not currently using them in my Tivo HD, so will grit my teeth and deal with being "tied" to cable, for the additional tuners. (I'm hoping one of those BB 10-12% off coupons I keep hearing about comes out sometime soon, then I'll use my Viggle-earned BB GCs to get a Premiere 4 free, and pay just for lifetime.)


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

steve614 said:


> He only resents that the Premieres aren't hackable like the Series 3 machines.


He's not alone in that assessment.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

lrhorer said:


> Yes, but even 100 watts is a helluva lot of power for something the size of a video card. Of course, some are double-width, but even then dissipating that much power in a device that size without it glowing cherry red is a challenge. It is also a challenge to deliver more than 8 amps on the 12V traces or more than 20 amps on the 5V traces of a motherboard to be delivered to a plug-in peripheral card. It is not impossible, of course, but it is definitely not trivial. When I was an engineer for a CATV system, I had monumental headaches with CATV amplifiers made by RCA that supposedly were rated for 15A at 50C, but the motherboards regularly burned up carrying anything more than 12A in the Texas heat. I finally quit arguing with the manufacturer and instead went on a campaign to re-design the power realms so that no amplifier carried more than 12 amps.


Probably why there are standards for gaming video cards to use 6 pin or 8 pin sockets to plug in additional power connections from the power supply; rather than trying to power themselves exclusively off the motherboard's power traces.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> HTPCs are nice. But they are power hogs, can be a bit loud and are significantly more expensive then a dedicated device like a TiVo.


After all the discussion about HTPCs being power hogs I thought I'd invest in a Kill A Watt meter and see just what this beast was using. So far it appears to average about 85 watts. The CPU is an Intel i5-660 (73W dual core) with an ASRock H55DE3 motherboard and 8GB RAM. I don't put mine to sleep and just let it run 24/7. 85W is slightly less power than a desk lamp with a 100 watt bulb. I'm going to leave the meter connected for a longer period to see how that equates to kilowatt-hours.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

mr.unnatural said:


> After all the discussion about HTPCs being power hogs I thought I'd invest in a Kill A Watt meter and see just what this beast was using. So far it appears to average about 85 watts. The CPU is an Intel i5-660 (73W dual core) with an ASRock H55DE3 motherboard and 8GB RAM. I don't put mine to sleep and just let it run 24/7. 85W is slightly less power than a desk lamp with a 100 watt bulb. I'm going to leave the meter connected for a longer period to see how that equates to kilowatt-hours.


100 watts!!!! Or are you talking about an incandescent bulb? My Floor lamps use 72 watts and put out the equivalent light of a 300 watt incandescent bulb. Aren't they supposed to finally start the phase out of the power hogging incandescent bulbs next month?

Bottom line, even 85 watts adds up over time. My power usage is noticeably lower now with two Elites and one two Tuner Premiere, than when I was using eight, two tuner premieres.

Although the biggest change wwas when I stopped running my servers 24/7. Those draw over 200 watts each since I use so many hard drives and external cases.

But I guess the bottom line is the power usage doesn't really matter as long as the user is comfortable with whatever it is. I know I'm uncomfotabel now with my main PC drawing 140 watts. I really need to purchase a tiny PC that can still use a corei7 but use 40% less power. i don't need to be using these large boxes any more for my main PCs. with the electricty rates around here rising 5% to 10% each year I've been try to use less energy from my devices.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

TiVos use about 22 watts each, so a 4 tuner Premiere uses 1/4 as much power. I know your system is more capable, but that's still a big difference. And the only extender available for an HTPC, the XBox 360, draws about 120 watts when playing a video. Those aren't used as much, so not as big of a deal, but still much higher then a second TiVo. And I'm assuming the Mini will draw even less. 

Dan


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> 100 watts!!!! Or are you talking about an incandescent bulb? My Floor lamps use 72 watts and put out the equivalent light of a 300 watt incandescent bulb. Aren't they supposed to finally start the phase out of the power hogging incandescent bulbs next month?


Geeezzz Dude, don't have a cow for god's sake. I was just using the 100-watt bulb for comparison purposes.

Keep in mind that my current setup is at least a couple years old and the hardware isn't the most energy efficient. Lots of current CPU models use far less energy as do other PC components. After seeing the actual numbers I'll be sure to concentrate on a more efficient configuration next time around. FWIW, the extra cost for electricity is well worth it to me for what my HTPC can do when compared to my old Tivos.

If you want more you'll have to pay a little more. It's not worth bickering over nickels and dimes. Let's face it, both Tivos and HTPCs are luxury items and not necessities. If you're really that concerned about pinching pennies then you probably shouldn't own either one.

What's amazing is that almost everyone has a cell phone of some kind these days, which is a total luxury item unless you use it in your line of work. I don't hear see anyone griping about the cost of cell phones to the point where they want to cut the wireless cord. Aside from a car or mortgage payment and possibly other utility bills, it's probably the biggest monthly bill people pay, but ask them if they'd be willing to part with it and chances are you'll get a "Hell, No!" as a response. It all boils down to what it's worth to you and what you're willing to pay for the convenience.

FYI, I just downloaded the new Ceton Companion app for my Android phone and it's awesome. I haven't had much time to play with it yet but it lets me connect with my HTPC from anywhere. I can check my recording schedule and program guide and set up recordings in real time as well as other things I haven't explored yet. I scheduled my HTPC to record Monday Night Football from the phone and it showed up in the schedule by the time I walked into the next room to check it.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I gripe about the cost of cell phones. I only have an expensive one due to work. Before that, I had a $5/month Virgin Mobile phone&#8230; and would likely try to find the cheapest way to go iPhone if I didn't have a work one anymore. (i.e. I'd do the $30/month ones at MOST, but possibly go back to a crappy phone and get an iPod touch instead.)


----------



## wwsmith (Jun 9, 2008)

Well, I've read through this entire thread and I surprised that nobody has mentioned the usefulness of OTA everytime a cable company has a dispute with one of the local channels. Right now Optimum / Cablevision is having a dispute with WPIX. With a Tivo HD I can simply add back in the OTA channel in the setup screean and not be dependent on the cable company to get my recordings. I would have upgraded to a four tuner box some time ago if OTA was available on those. I suppose I could still do it and move the two tuner box somewhere else, but I'd much rather have a 4 tuner box with OTA, so I am going to stick with the my upgraded HD for now.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I just keep one two, tuner box around so I can use it for OTA if I need to. With streaming I watch content from it on my two Elites. It came in handy when FiOS took all my services down for several days when they botched my internet upgrade to the 150/65 tier. OTA was the only way for me to watch any new content during that time.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

wwsmith said:


> Well, I've read through this entire thread and I surprised that nobody has mentioned the usefulness of OTA everytime a cable company has a dispute with one of the local channels. Right now Optimum / Cablevision is having a dispute with WPIX. With a Tivo HD I can simply add back in the OTA channel in the setup screean and not be dependent on the cable company to get my recordings. I would have upgraded to a four tuner box some time ago if OTA was available on those. I suppose I could still do it and move the two tuner box somewhere else, but I'd much rather have a 4 tuner box with OTA, so I am going to stick with the my upgraded HD for now.


I've had a HTPC dedicated to OTA recording for well over five years. I used to have DirecTV before I switched to FIOS and they didn't offer all of my locals so I decided to tinker with a HTPC and see what it was all about. Using one device for OTA freed up my HDTivos for recording other DirecTV channels so it was a win-win for me.

When I moved to FIOS I kept using the HTPC for OTA and replaced my HDTivos with two series 3 models. I still prefer to use the HTPC for OTA because it's the best picture you can get from any source. OTA network programming is usually broadcast only once per week so scheduling conflicts are a real concern, which is why I have six ATSC tuners. I pad everything I record so multiple tuners are an absolute must. FWIW, I've never had to worry about any disputes between my provider and the local channels simply because I receive them directly.

Tivo should consider coming up with an external ATSC USB tuner module with 2 - 4 tuners. It should be a relatively simple task to enable the USB ports for the tuners and include the necessary drivers. It seems to me that the infrastructure is already in place so it would be mostly a matter of sending out a software update to enable the use of such a device. A Tivo Elite with four digital cable and four ATSC/QAM tuners would indeed be a formidable device. The hardware should be able to handle eight data streams simultaneously, but I'm not 100% sure. Tivo tends to design underpowered DVRs to keep costs down. However, if the USB ports are up to version 2.0 and the SATA bus is compatible with SATA II I see no reason why it couldn't handle the load.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Or an HD-Homerun type device (ATSC in, network out).


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

classicsat said:


> Or an HD-Homerun type device (ATSC in, network out).


I agree with the upcoming mini concept they should remove tuners from everything and just put them on peoples network to be used by what ever (TiVo DVR, computer, mini, stream) that way it would be affordable to have has many tuners as you wanted with just one "DVR".


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

atmuscarella said:


> I agree with the upcoming mini concept they should remove tuners from everything and just put them on peoples network to be used by what ever (TiVo DVR, computer, mini, stream) that way it would be affordable to have has many tuners as you wanted with just one "DVR".


There is a limit to the number of streams a single TiVo can record though. Due to I/O limitations of the hard drive, and bandwidth limitations of the network, you wouldn't really be able to do more then 4-6 tuners anyway. It's easier for TiVo to support if they simply include all the recording hardware in a single box because then they can test it and be sure that it will perform as expected.

Plus I think having network devices with 2-3 tuners each, each requiring a CableCARD and tuning adapater, would be more expensive for the consumer.

Dan


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> There is a limit to the number of streams a single TiVo can record though. Due to I/O limitations of the hard drive, and bandwidth limitations of the network, you wouldn't really be able to do more then 4-6 tuners anyway. It's easier for TiVo to support if they simply include all the recording hardware in a single box because then they can test it and be sure that it will perform as expected.
> 
> Plus I think having network devices with 2-3 tuners each, each requiring a CableCARD and tuning adapater, would be more expensive for the consumer.
> 
> Dan


I pretty much agree that for entry level/cable only solutions DVRs with built in tuners are the logical solution.

However once we start talking about whole home solutions and the possibility that the FCC might someday force the satellite companies to open their networks like the law intended, then you're talking allot of different types of tuners, I count at least 4 (cable, OTA, dish, & direct) plus IP solutions.

Add in high end storage solutions and a system that breaks the DVR control units, tuners, & storage apart looks real interesting. You basically need a mini at each TV while the storage unit(s) and tuners are anyplace on your network.

Yes I know I am dreaming but that is really what people around here are saying they want.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> There is a limit to the number of streams a single TiVo can record though. Due to I/O limitations of the hard drive, and bandwidth limitations of the network, you wouldn't really be able to do more then 4-6 tuners anyway. It's easier for TiVo to support if they simply include all the recording hardware in a single box because then they can test it and be sure that it will perform as expected.
> 
> Plus I think having network devices with 2-3 tuners each, each requiring a CableCARD and tuning adapater, would be more expensive for the consumer.
> 
> Dan


The limitation isn't in the I/O bandwidth of the hard drive but in the design of the Tivo itself. A typical SATA II drive can easily handle well over a dozen data streams simultaneously. The SATA II standard supports up to 300mbps transfer rates. A typical HD program is broadcast at only about 8-9mbps so you do the math. The actual standard for ATSC broadcasts is about 19mbps and digital cable can be as high as 38mbps, although the numbers I mentioned are closer to actual bitrates. The only real bottleneck is with the seek times for the drive since it has to jump all over the platter to access all of these data streams.

I ran a test on my HTPC a while back just for grins and giggles and I was able to record 12 HD programs simultaneously and play back a 13th show that was previously recorded with no glitches whatsoever. This was all from a single 1.5TB SATA II drive.


----------



## ineed2upgrade (Oct 6, 2012)

FYI...

I just completed a Tivo Advisors survey about a potential new device that would work as a replacement to a cable box as well as work with OTA. It would have either 4 or 6 Tuners record more than 300 hours of HD programming and a boat load of features that the current Premiere 4's aren't even equipped with...

The features it listed and one's the survey asked if I would be interested in have convinced me to hold off on upgrading my poor Series 2 to one of the currently available Premiere's.


----------



## tootal2 (Oct 14, 2005)

SATA II is old. everyone uses SATA 6 now.



mr.unnatural said:


> The limitation isn't in the I/O bandwidth of the hard drive but in the design of the Tivo itself. A typical SATA II drive can easily handle well over a dozen data streams simultaneously. The SATA II standard supports up to 300mbps transfer rates. A typical HD program is broadcast at only about 8-9mbps so you do the math. The actual standard for ATSC broadcasts is about 19mbps and digital cable can be as high as 38mbps, although the numbers I mentioned are closer to actual bitrates. The only real bottleneck is with the seek times for the drive since it has to jump all over the platter to access all of these data streams.
> 
> I ran a test on my HTPC a while back just for grins and giggles and I was able to record 12 HD programs simultaneously and play back a 13th show that was previously recorded with no glitches whatsoever. This was all from a single 1.5TB SATA II drive.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

tootal2 said:


> SATA II is old. everyone uses SATA 6 now.


SATA 3 is overkill for most applications. All SATA 3 drives are backwards compatible with older hardware. SATA I drives are perfectly capable for most DVRs. In any case, you've just made my point for me. The transfer rates are even faster than before so the sky's the limit as to how many tuners you can use.


----------



## gfgray (Mar 14, 2004)

Sorry to revive an old thread. But Tivo asked me to take a survey in which they asked some questions about a hypothetical 4-tuner OTA-compatible 300hr DVR. I rated it midrange as to whether I would buy one. But in my comments added that if it was Tivo Mini compatible, it would increase the odds that I would buy. I also let them have it over the performance of their Premiere OTA tuner.


----------



## L David Matheny (Jan 29, 2011)

gfgray said:


> Sorry to revive an old thread. But Tivo asked me to take a survey in which they asked some questions about a hypothetical 4-tuner OTA-compatible 300hr DVR. I rated it midrange as to whether I would buy one. But in my comments added that if it was Tivo Mini compatible, it would increase the odds that I would buy. I also let them have it over the performance of their Premiere OTA tuner.


The 2-tuner Premiere's performance as an OTA receiver is a mixed bag. There is evidence that the demodulators in the 2-tuner Premieres are better than those in the older TiVo HD at handling static multipath (reflections from hills, buildings, etc) but worse at handling dynamic multipath (reflections from moving cars, planes, etc). The actual tuner chips are the same. But be careful what you wish for: It seems to be pretty clear that the tuners (and/or demodulators) in the newer 4-tuner cable-only Premieres are distinctly worse than those in the 2-tuner models. So TiVo engineers need to do their homework before releasing any new models.


----------



## gfgray (Mar 14, 2004)

Good info. Its been a few weeks since I took the survey, but I hope I told them that I was comparing it to the tuners in my 2 TVs and 2 computer tuners which have no problems.

Also, I noticed this thread covers the new Tivo rumors:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=500243


----------



## moyekj (Jan 24, 2006)

L David Matheny said:


> The actual tuner chips are the same. But be careful what you wish for: It seems to be pretty clear that the tuners (and/or demodulators) in the newer 4-tuner cable-only Premieres are distinctly worse than those in the 2-tuner models. So TiVo engineers need to do their homework before releasing any new models.


 I agree. I really hope for the rumored 6-tuner model that they picked someone other than Maxlinear for the tuners which are pretty crappy in the current 4 tuner units. Otherwise if 4 tuners cause all these headaches I can't imagine what 6 tuners will do...
(I now fully expect a barrage of posts saying my 4 tuner unit works great, but for me my 2 tuner Premiere has been very solid but the Elite not so much).


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Generally, the more tuners you have, the better your cable wiring needs to be to support it. I had to add an amp to my parent's wiring to get their 2-tuner Comcast DVR to work on all the HD channels.


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Bigg said:


> Generally, the more tuners you have, the better your cable wiring needs to be to support it. I had to add an amp to my parent's wiring to get their 2-tuner Comcast DVR to work on all the HD channels.


Your cabling probably has the older crimp-type connectors on it with copperclad steel RG6 coax cable. If you're using an amp to boost the signal then the signal coming into your house isn't what it should be. Either that or you're getting too much loss from the cable and connectors. If you use a lot of splitters you might want to consider a distribution amp to compensate for the signal loss from the spitters.

I upgraded the wiring in my house about six years ago in anticipation of switching to the newer DirecTV dish. It's more sensitive to voltage drops with long cable runs and may not switch LNBs or transponders properly using copperclad steel cable. I never made the switch to the new dish as FIOS moved into my neighborhood and I jumped ship to get their internet and TV. I replaced my existing RG6 with solid copper core RG6 and used compression connectors on all coax connections. Even with the input cable split six ways, the signal is almost too strong, but that's typical of FIOS.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mr.unnatural said:


> Your cabling probably has the older crimp-type connectors on it with copperclad steel RG6 coax cable. If you're using an amp to boost the signal then the signal coming into your house isn't what it should be. Either that or you're getting too much loss from the cable and connectors. If you use a lot of splitters you might want to consider a distribution amp to compensate for the signal loss from the spitters.
> 
> I upgraded the wiring in my house about six years ago in anticipation of switching to the newer DirecTV dish. It's more sensitive to voltage drops with long cable runs and may not switch LNBs or transponders properly using copperclad steel cable. I never made the switch to the new dish as FIOS moved into my neighborhood and I jumped ship to get their internet and TV. I replaced my existing RG6 with solid copper core RG6 and used compression connectors on all coax connections. Even with the input cable split six ways, the signal is almost too strong, but that's typical of FIOS.


It's a Comcast issue. They went from I think 0dB to like 3dB coming in the house, which was a big improvement, but still way too low. It's all Belden 1000mhz with compression connectors installed in 2000. There's only one central amp, that replaced the single splitter. It's a 4-way, with a cable modem, two TVs, and a location that used to have a DTA.

FIOS is different, as you're generating the electrical RF signal locally, so every house starts out with the same signal strength. With cable, it can vary widely.


----------

