# Phasing out dial-up modem service



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

As a heads-up, we are getting ready to start phasing out support for dial-up modem access to the TiVo service. This will affect Series 2 and Series 3 devices that are not connected to broadband, as well as a small number of Series 4 users that are using the TiVo USB phone-line connector.

We are making this decision primarily because the cost of dial-up access has risen dramatically (3x price increase) and our usage has fallen to the point where the minimum costs and overhead are no longer sustainable.

We are not discontinuing support for these S2/S3/S4 devices. However, customers who want to continue to access the TiVo service will need to take steps in order to connect to the service via broadband. We will be sending different options to our customers based on the type of box they are using. We will also be making a number of special offers to customers who would like to upgrade to a newer TiVo box or who need help connecting their existing boxes via broadband.

The first phase of this project will start shortly, with TiVo disabling access to our Toll-Free access number. Local access numbers will continue to work for the next 3-4 months as we work through the details of the full phase-out, although this usage could incur long distance phone charges. I would suggest that you look into potential phone charges before choosing a local dial-up number.

For Series 2 customers who would like help in finding a compatible USB network adapter, I would recommend that you start here: https://support.tivo.com/articles/FAQ/TiVo-Compatible-Network-Adapters-FAQ

Customers with Series 3 or Series 4 devices that have built-in Ethernet, there are a ton of cost-effective network bridges available via Amazon, Best Buy, etc. that will likely perform much better than a USB adapter.


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

Heh. I remember back, the Series 1 only option was phone line (well, there were hacks, but still) and the room I had the TiVo in did not have an outlet. 100 foot phone cord FTW!


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Tested with TiVo (in no price/performance order):
EX7000
DAP-1650
WUMC710
RE6500
TEW-800MB
TiVo Wireless N (AN0100)

No matter the choice, a good router is really important.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

stile99 said:


> Heh. I remember back, the Series 1 only option was phone line (well, there were hacks, but still) and the room I had the TiVo in did not have an outlet. 100 foot phone cord FTW!


They use to supply a 50' cord with the TiVo since most people didn't have a phone jack behind their TV. They also sold those wireless modem jack things on their site that used the power lines to transmit the phone signal. (My wife still uses one of those for a little caller ID box she has in her office)


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> They use to supply a 50' cord with the TiVo since most people didn't have a phone jack behind their TV. *They also sold those wireless modem jack things on their site that used the power lines to transmit the phone signal. *(My wife still uses one of those for a little caller ID box she has in her office)


Heh--I still have that set up for and connected to my Toshiba Series 2 TiVo box, although the box has used a TiVo Wireless G adapter for many years (the phone system is a nice back-up--although I may have used it as such only 1x).


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

JoeKustra said:


> Tested with TiVo (in no price/performance order):
> EX7000
> DAP-1650
> WUMC710
> ...


ANY wireless bridge or extender that the tivo will connect to via ethernet will work


----------



## LI-SVT (Sep 28, 2006)

How will this effect Directv TiVo users? Those boxes are all Series 2 and use the dialup to autherize DVR service and software uodates.


----------



## ke3ju (Jan 5, 2004)

LI-SVT said:


> How will this effect Directv TiVo users? Those boxes are all Series 2 and use the dialup to autherize DVR service and software uodates.


My Series 2 DirecTiVo was never hooked to a phone line and worked fine.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Once the S2 DTiVo has authorized service, the phone line isn't needed, but if you ever need reauthorization you may be in trouble. Guide data comes over the satellite, and the probability of there ever being a software update for those boxes is effectively zero. The "current" THR22 doesn't need a phone line at all.


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

DTV boxes and TiVo boxes going through guided setup should not be affected. I believe there is also a "back door" code for using broadband adapters on DTV boxes if needed.


----------



## chiguy50 (Nov 9, 2009)

TiVo_Ted said:


> As a heads-up, we are getting ready to start phasing out support for dial-up modem access to the TiVo service. This will affect Series 2 and Series 3 devices that are not connected to broadband, as well as a small number of Series 4 users that are using the TiVo USB phone-line connector.
> 
> We are making this decision primarily because the cost of dial-up access has risen dramatically (3x price increase) and our usage has fallen to the point where the minimum costs and overhead are no longer sustainable.


It is very gratifying to see this type of proactive communication, not to mention the customer-friendly policies to provide accommodation for the users affected by the forthcoming discontinuation of service.

Kudos are due!


----------



## LI-SVT (Sep 28, 2006)

TiVo_Ted said:


> DTV boxes and TiVo boxes going through guided setup should not be affected. I believe there is also a "back door" code for using broadband adapters on DTV boxes if needed.


Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We are not discontinuing support for these S2/S3/S4 devices. However, customers who want to continue to access the TiVo service will need to take steps in order to connect to the service via broadband. We will be sending different options to our customers based on the type of box they are using. We will also be making a number of special offers to customers who would like to upgrade to a newer TiVo box or who need help connecting their existing boxes via broadband.


Thanks for the heads up. I am not affected. I used a competing DVR in two OTA applications where no ISP was available. These DVRs get their guide data via PSIP and do not need to authenticate. Too bad TiVo could not offer similar customers a Lifetime option with a PSIP EPG and no authentication required.


----------



## samccfl99 (Sep 7, 2013)

I think I have an external 56K modem in a box somewhere, along with a DSL modem...

Anyone remember the 3-Way days when the download was 512K thru the cable and upload was thru the modem??? The beginning of high speed. Mid to late 90's I think, with Adelphia (eaten by Comcast)...


----------



## dmurphy (Jan 17, 2002)

samccfl99 said:


> Anyone remember the 3-Way days ....... Mid to late 90's I think


Ahh, my college years. Only that one time though.


----------



## tim_m (Mar 8, 2017)

No affect to me either. Have not been on dial-up since before the turn of the century.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We are making this decision primarily because the cost of dial-up access has risen dramatically (3x price increase) and our usage has fallen to the point where the minimum costs and overhead are no longer sustainable.


Has it just lost scale of economy or something? That's so bizarre, I would think it would be nearly free these days considering how cheap telephony in general is. There are still some modem services hanging around out there for alarm systems and faxes and stuff, but otherwise it's pretty dead. I guess the other news is that someone is still using a modem, even though they haven't been needed on S2 boxes since at least 2004(???).



LI-SVT said:


> How will this effect Directv TiVo users? Those boxes are all Series 2 and use the dialup to autherize DVR service and software uodates.


I think the bigger issue is that MPEG-2 SD service on DirecTV is going away next year. It's going to be a big year for phase-outs with DirecTV MPEG-2 and Verizon CDMA both dying by the end of 2019.


----------



## ajwees41 (May 7, 2006)

Bigg said:


> Has it just lost scale of economy or something? That's so bizarre, I would think it would be nearly free these days considering how cheap telephony in general is. There are still some modem services hanging around out there for alarm systems and faxes and stuff, but otherwise it's pretty dead. I guess the other news is that someone is still using a modem, even though they haven't been needed on S2 boxes since at least 2004(???).
> 
> /QUOTE]
> 
> think the bigger picture is most cheaper phone service is voip based not sure how dial up would handle that.


----------



## caughey (May 26, 2007)

I assumed this had quietly gone away already.

Does TiVo still do the Teleworld infomercials in the middle of the night?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

caughey said:


> I assumed this had quietly gone away already.
> Does TiVo still do the Teleworld infomercials in the middle of the night?


Probably not. The gold star ads and other ads can appear at any time. There's a new one in the Discovery Bar right now. It seems they have a new marketing person who is trying harder.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

Hopefully he won't try too hard. I'm enjoying the colorful TiVo logo so have checked into the Gold star ads.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

caughey said:


> Does TiVo still do the Teleworld infomercials in the middle of the night?


I'm guessing anything they want to push out can go out over IP, as anyone who is still using a dial-up modem for anything is not a customer you want to market to anyway.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

Bigg said:


> I'm guessing anything they want to push out can go out over IP, as anyone who is still using a dial-up modem for anything is not a customer you want to market to anyway.


 I'm surprised they don't leave just one long-distance number and make the call in frequency every other day on those boxes until blank date. Agree, those customers wouldn't buy a new box anyway. The beat goes on...


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

Bigg said:


> anyone who is still using a dial-up modem for anything is not a customer you want to market to anyway.


Yeah, screw the 22 million in rural America, amirite? Who would want them for a customer?

Dial-Up Internet is a Still Thing in Rural America. Why That's a Problem (For Everyone)


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

I still have POTS. However, I haven't used a dial-up modem in many years. My Discovery channel ads were from my cable feed but that was also a while back.


----------



## cannonz (Oct 23, 2011)

caughey said:


> I assumed this had quietly gone away already.
> 
> Does TiVo still do the Teleworld infomercials in the middle of the night?


 I asked not long ago, haven't seen the recording light on late at night when I did not have anything scheduled. Teleworld


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

stile99 said:


> Yeah, screw the 22 million in rural America, amirite? Who would want them for a customer?
> 
> Dial-Up Internet is a Still Thing in Rural America. Why That's a Problem (For Everyone)


Wow--according to the article, it's roughly 35% of rural Americans. (Thanks for the article--that's pretty shocking.)

Plus, those on limited incomes or who are technically-challenged, who do not have home Internet but still are perfectly capable to have a TiVo box?

I wish there were a way around this/an escape valve, for those people--life does not seem to be treating them equitably.


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

Also, many are foregoing the expense of home internet and just use their smartphones for everything.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

stile99 said:


> Yeah, screw the 22 million in rural America, amirite? Who would want them for a customer?


Dial-up internet is only a thing for people who are stuck on some other planet. Rural internet access is a real problem, as LTE often sucks for home-based internet, is capped, etc, satellite has crappy latency and is throttled, but there is no reason anyone should be using dial-up for literally anything in the year 2018. Anyone who is so stuck in the past that they are using dial-up anything is not a customer that anyone wants, at least not in the technology sphere.



Mikeguy said:


> Plus, those on limited incomes or who are technically-challenged, who do not have home Internet but still are perfectly capable to have a TiVo box?


And what are they recording with it? I suppose some areas could have OTA reception with a large rooftop antenna, but if they had cable, they would have cable internet, so there's that. If they have DirecTV, just get their DVRs.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> *Dial-up internet is only a thing for people who are stuck* on some other planet. Rural internet access is a real problem, as LTE often sucks for home-based internet, is capped, etc, satellite has crappy latency and is throttled, but there is no reason anyone should be using dial-up for literally anything in the year 2018. Anyone who is so stuck in the past that they are using dial-up anything is not a customer that anyone wants, at least not in the technology sphere.


Yep, for people who don't have access or who can't afford it (including seniors on a limited budget), or who don't need/want home Internet. Of course they're still real and valuable customers, including for advertisers.


> And what are they recording with it? *I suppose some areas could have OTA reception* with a large rooftop antenna, but if they had cable, they would have cable internet, so there's that. If they have DirecTV, just get their DVRs.


Absolutely--depending on the area, there can be way active OTA, sufficient for many people and easily accessible through a set-top antenna (no need to go out on the roof). E.g. urban America.


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

To be clear, I fully support TiVo turning off the modem bank. I would assume they have the numbers regarding how many people are using it (and the flip side of the coin, how many aren't). It looks like they are making provision for the very few people who would be affected, and if I recall ICS before my cable modem days, you CAN turn a phone line into a shared local network, so even those few WILL still be able to access the service.

What I condemn is the myopic attitude that people using dialup are dinosaurs and should be actively shunned. Only an idiotic business would subscribe to this philosophy. It is the apex of privilege to assume everyone has affordable access (or even access at all, as already demonstrated) to high speed internet connections, especially considering the fact that when it comes to high speed the US is a backwards, third-world country. Greece has better internet. Yup, the country that redefined bankrupt kicks the US's butt at internet speed and access.

US broadband is scarce, slow and expensive. 'Great!' says the FCC


----------



## samccfl99 (Sep 7, 2013)

Mikeguy said:


> Yep, for people who don't have access or who can't afford it (including seniors on a limited budget), or who don't need/want home Internet. Of course they're still real and valuable customers, including for advertisers.


For people who are on SNAP (food stamps) and some other situations, ATT has the Access Program, which at least can give them 3-10 MB DSL for ten bucks a month. Was news to me that they can go up to 10mb. Used to be 6 if you were close to a central office. My friend's parents won't give up their 50+ year lan line since the one block in Metro Broward County they live on, ATT won't put high-speed Uverse (yuck) in. They only have 3mb down and also have crappy DirectTV because ATT killed Dish off. I tried to get them to go to Comcast, which probably the whole block is on, but Noooo....They are in their 80's...LOL


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

samccfl99 said:


> For people who are on SNAP (food stamps) and some other situations, ATT has the Access Program, which at least can give them 3-10 MB DSL for ten bucks a month. Was news to me that they can go up to 10mb. Used to be 6 if you were close to a central office. My friend's parents won't give up their 50+ year lan line since the one block in Metro Broward County they live on, ATT won't put high-speed Uverse (yuck) in. They only have 3mb down and also have crappy DirectTV because ATT killed Dish off. I tried to get them to go to Comcast, which probably the whole block is on, but Noooo....They are in their 80's...LOL


As with so many things, it is the people who are above poverty (according to the gov't) but below nice sustainability (according to the rest of us) who so often are caught without options.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

If you live in rural areas, you probably don't have cable.
If you don't have cable, you probably don't have a Tivo.

Also, if you are near the poverty line, you probably don't own a Tivo.

You might have an old S3 using OTA and dial up. But I'm guessing that's not a lot of people. And if you dial up, you can always share the PC's Internet connection with the Tivo. 

I guess Tivo could give out credit towards the purchase of the adapter and/or a gift card like they did for S1. But a service transfer to a new DVR would be pointless as it would have the same problem.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> Yep, for people who don't have access or who can't afford it (including seniors on a limited budget), or who don't need/want home Internet. Of course they're still real and valuable customers, including for advertisers.


Someone who is so cheap or so poor that they can't/won't pay for basic utilities is not a customer that most advertisers are going to want.



stile99 said:


> What I condemn is the myopic attitude that people using dialup are dinosaurs and should be actively shunned. Only an idiotic business would subscribe to this philosophy. It is the apex of privilege to assume everyone has affordable access (or even access at all, as already demonstrated) to high speed internet connections, especially considering the fact that when it comes to high speed the US is a backwards, third-world country. Greece has better internet. Yup, the country that redefined bankrupt kicks the US's butt at internet speed and access.


I don't think TiVo is subscribing to any particular philosophy, they are simply looking at the books, and they are making less money off of monthly subscribers with dial-up than it's costing them to run the dial-up service. That's math.

However, that doesn't change the fact that these people are dinosaurs. Even my 85 year old grandmother gave up dial-up at her summer place several years ago. AT&T failed to put in a VRAD for their road, and Charter refuses to build the remaining ~8kft of plant required to service their neighborhood, so they don't have broadband access, but she gets her AT&T LTE hotspot every summer, goes to the store, they activate it for her, and she's online with her iPad. Even on a busy Saturday afternoon when everyone is in town Instagramming stuff on their iPhones or whatever they're doing, it's still at least a few mbps, far better than dial-up.

Yes, our internet availability is a real problem. Price gouging is also a problem, due to lack of competition. However, rural areas should expect to pay $75-$100/mo for broadband, as they are rural, and it costs more to maintain. Urban and suburban areas, however, shouldn't be having to pay that much, and the fact that broadband is $60-$75/mo in most areas is simply due to a lack of competition and/or regulation.



samccfl99 said:


> They only have 3mb down and also have crappy DirectTV because ATT killed Dish off. I tried to get them to go to Comcast, which probably the whole block is on, but Noooo....They are in their 80's...LOL


You have no clue what you're talking about. For one, AT&T didn't do anything to DISH, they bought DirecTV. Secondly, Comcast is a trash service with trash video quality, and DirecTV is the most advanced pay TV provider in the US. They are expensive, they lock you into contracts, but the fact of the matter is the actual service is literally the exact opposite of "crappy", they have significantly more HD than Comcast, far better picture quality, higher reliability, a more scalable multi-room DVR, and offer live 4k channels. The ultimate combination would be DirecTV with Comcast internet, but they'd lose the bundling, so it would be expensive. For people with basic internet needs, 3mbps DSL is probably serviceable, even though software updates would be painful with that.



BobCamp1 said:


> If you live in rural areas, you probably don't have cable.
> If you don't have cable, you probably don't have a Tivo.
> 
> Also, if you are near the poverty line, you probably don't own a Tivo.
> ...


Yup. That pretty much sums it up.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Someone who is so cheap or so poor that they can't/won't pay for basic utilities is not a customer that most advertisers are going to want.


McDonald's, Starbucks, Target, Burger King, and Pizza Hut don't want people with limited income or who are careful with their funds for customers? Some of these places seem to offer senior discounts of one type or another, seeming to want to get them in the door . . . .


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

BobCamp1 said:


> If you don't have cable, you probably don't have a Tivo.


Swing and a HUGE miss.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

BobCamp1 said:


> If you live in rural areas, you probably don't have cable.
> If you don't have cable, you probably don't have a Tivo.
> 
> Also, if you are near the poverty line, you probably don't own a Tivo.
> ...


My first TiVo box, a Toshiba Series 2 TiVo box with built-in DVD player/recorder, cost me around $100 after rebate, and had a free, included TiVo Basic perpetual subscription. Way affordable (esp. where I didn't have a DVD player at the time, and so the TiVo box was doing double duty).


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

If you can get cell phone service and have a smartphone you could turn on the hotspot and download guide data for a Tivo. 3G will work too.


----------



## JACKASTOR (May 26, 2011)

shwru980r said:


> If you can get cell phone service and have a smartphone you could turn on the hotspot and download guide data for a Tivo. 3G will work too.


I wonder what the download amount would be, it might bE cost prohibitive for some due to the other stuff in the background being downloaded with the guide information. Anyone have an idea how much data is actually pushed when TiVo "calls" home?


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

stile99 said:


> BobCamp1 said:
> 
> 
> > If you don't have cable, you probably don't have a Tivo.
> ...


So you're saying that the majority of people w/o cable do have a Tivo?


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Mikeguy said:


> My first TiVo box, a Toshiba Series 2 TiVo box with built-in DVD player/recorder, cost me around $100 after rebate, and had a free, included TiVo Basic perpetual subscription. Way affordable (esp. where I didn't have a DVD player at the time, and so the TiVo box was doing double duty).


So how well does that Series 2 box record OTA in 2018?

Also, the Premieres lost dial-up service two years ago and nobody seemed to care. Since the newer DVRs don't have it, that literally only leaves S3 OTA rural owners who are screwed.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Bigg said:


> However, that doesn't change the fact that these people are dinosaurs. Even my 85 year old grandmother gave up dial-up at her summer place several years ago.


They're not dinosaurs. There's just no broadband access available where they live, including 3G and 4G coverage.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

scandia101 said:


> So you're saying that the majority of people w/o cable do have a Tivo?


Why do you go to both extremes? First you say that non-cable users don't have TiVo then you come back by putting words in the poster's mouth that he said the 'majority' of non-cable users do have TiVo.

Have you ever considered the middle ground where 'more than zero but less than majority' do?

There are quite a few OTA TiVos sold and users that participate here.


----------



## timr_42 (Oct 14, 2001)

BobCamp1 said:


> So how well does that Series 2 box record OTA in 2018?


Still have two lifetimes S2 OTA and they work just fine thanks.
Also have a Roamio and a Bolt, all OTA. Cut cable 3 years ago and don't see myself ever going back.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

BobCamp1 said:


> So how well does that Series 2 box record OTA in 2018?


Still working great, 11+ years later! 


> Also, the Premieres lost dial-up service two years ago and nobody seemed to care. Since the newer DVRs don't have it, that literally only leaves S3 OTA rural owners who are screwed.


? No, it also affects all Series 2 box owners who use the dial-up connection service, as well as any other non-rural users who use dial-up.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

BobCamp1 said:


> They're not dinosaurs. There's just no broadband access available where they live, including 3G and 4G coverage.


Everywhere in the CONUS and PR has broadband:

HughesNet Gen 5 Coverage Areas



timr_42 said:


> Still have two lifetimes S2 OTA and they work just fine thanks.
> Also have a Roamio and a Bolt, all OTA. Cut cable 3 years ago and don't see myself ever going back.


There's plenty of OTA users, but virtually all of them have broadband. I use a Roamio OTA, my internet could max out the 100mbps NIC on 3 Roamios at the same time.



Mikeguy said:


> No, it also affects all Series 2 box owners who use the dial-up connection service, as well as any other non-rural users who use dial-up.


Series 2 works just fine on Ethernet or WiFi. My former S2 never used phone line on a regular basis, I think we had to plug it in for the initial setup with a 50' phone cord, but there was no phone where the TiVo was anyway.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Mikeguy said:


> Still working great, 11+ years later!
> 
> ? No, it also affects all Series 2 box owners who use the dial-up connection service, as well as any other non-rural users who use dial-up.


OK, so there are a few people who are still using a 9-year-old digital tuning adapter with their even-older-S2s to receive OTA signals who also must use dial-up Internet access (those S2s must be single tuner but not the last variant of the single tuner). And of course original S3 owners who are also receiving OTA. I think Tivo should reimburse all 100 of those people with a $25 gift card.

Otherwise, everybody else has an inexpensive workaround. https://support.tivo.com/articles/FAQ/TiVo-Compatible-Network-Adapters-FAQ

Actually, those people in the first paragraph also have the same inexpensive workaround. They may also have to buy a $15 Ethernet switch, buy two $5 cables, and turn on ICS in Windows. Oh, the horror.

It's not like the S1s which were bricked by Tivo. There are solutions to this dial up problem.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Everywhere in the CONUS and PR has broadband:
> 
> HughesNet Gen 5 Coverage Areas


Are you personally willing to pay $50/month plus $350 of installation costs for each affected user's broadband service? If not, that's not a real suggestion. Most sane people (i.e. everybody else) would just throw out the $30 Tivo and sign up for DSS and use their DVR. Or use ICS for (almost) free.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

... And for 10 GB of data. Love when people (usually people living in urban areas) believe they understand rural options and suggest ridiculous options like 4G or satellite as a broadband option. "Here's your broadband option -- which will be useful for about 2 days of the month"


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

BobCamp1 said:


> Are you personally willing to pay $50/month plus $350 of installation costs for each affected user's broadband service? If not, that's not a real suggestion. Most sane people (i.e. everybody else) would just throw out the $30 Tivo and sign up for DSS and use their DVR. Or use ICS for (almost) free.


If someone is so backwards/off the grid that they don't have any internet access but somehow have OTA, then TiVo certainly doesn't need to worry about them. For people living in this century, everywhere in the CONUS can get broadband. Not good broadband, but broadband nonetheless, and it is certainly more than adequate for downloading guide data for an OTA TiVo that only get a few channels anyway.

These people aren't sane if they don't have broadband. If they were just too lazy to get a network adapter for the thing, those are pretty cheaply available. That's going to be 99% of the people affected.



eherberg said:


> ... And for 10 GB of data. Love when people (usually people living in urban areas) believe they understand rural options and suggest ridiculous options like 4G or satellite as a broadband option. "Here's your broadband option -- which will be useful for about 2 days of the month"


HughestNet isn't a great option, but it is an option. If I lived rural, I would have jumped on AT&T Unlimited Hotspot wagon when it was available as that was a great deal. Even now, using an Unlimited iPad SIM in a mobile hotspot or a Mobley is a halfway decent option. And the current hotspot plans of 100GB for $100 are certainly not your hyperbolic "10GB". Not great, but halfway workable. If you have no LTE coverage, then you're stuck on satellite. It's still good enough for TiVo guide updates in the few places in the US that have OTA reception and no LTE coverage or wired broadband of any type. We're talking about an edge case of an edge case here.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> There's plenty of OTA users, but virtually all of them have broadband.





BobCamp1 said:


> OK, so there are a few people who are still using a 9-year-old digital tuning adapter with their even-older-S2s to receive OTA signals who also must use dial-up Internet access (those S2s must be single tuner but not the last variant of the single tuner). And of course original S3 owners who are also receiving OTA. I think Tivo should reimburse all 100 of those people with a $25 gift card.
> 
> Otherwise, everybody else has an inexpensive workaround.
> https://support.tivo.com/articles/FAQ/TiVo-Compatible-Network-Adapters-FAQ
> ...


It would be interesting to see the numbers: how many people indeed who use the dial-in.

Also, it's not simply the necessity of getting the physical connection equipment--for some, it's now buying Internet service. Again, for some, not an insignificant expense (e.g. especially when there also are drug prescriptions to pay for, not covered by Medicare), and something not in the cards originally when buying a TiVo box with dial-in capability and not otherwise desired.


Bigg said:


> *If someone is so backwards*/off the grid that they don't have any internet access but somehow have OTA, then TiVo certainly doesn't need to worry about them. For people living in this century, everywhere in the CONUS can get broadband. Not good broadband, but broadband nonetheless, and it is certainly more than adequate for downloading guide data for an OTA TiVo that only get a few channels anyway.
> 
> *These people aren't sane *if they don't have broadband. *If they were just too lazy *to get a network adapter for the thing, those are pretty cheaply available. That's going to be 99% of the people affected.


Wow. Not necessarily a matter of being backwards, insane, or lazy--possibly being a senior, including living on Social Security, being financially-challenged, being technologically-challenged, and/or just not otherwise needing home Internet.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

JACKASTOR said:


> I wonder what the download amount would be, it might bE cost prohibitive for some due to the other stuff in the background being downloaded with the guide information. Anyone have an idea how much data is actually pushed when TiVo "calls" home?


It's not cost prohibitive. If you can get coverage from Freedompop on Sprint, you can just use their free 500MB Sprint plan and pay for the cost of the hotspot device. If you can get coverage from Freedompop on ATT you can just use their free 250MB plan and pay for a sim to use in an old smartphone setup as a hotspot. My series 2's quit working on sprint after several years because sprint blocked a port, so I use ATT for Series 2's and Sprint for Series 3 and 4.

A Tivo HD and a Premiere used about 275 MB of data for the last month.
Two Series 2's used about 100 MB of data for the last month.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> Also, it's not simply the necessity of getting the physical connection equipment--for some, it's now buying Internet service. Again, for some, not an insignificant expense (e.g. especially when there also are drug prescriptions to pay for, not covered by Medicare), and something not in the cards originally when buying a TiVo box with dial-in capability and not otherwise desired.


They're so poor... but they're paying for a landline? Technology has to move on, and it can't cater to every possible edge case of an edge case forever. People will cry and whine and groan and moan when any technology is shut down, but technology has to move forward. Over a year ago, AT&T killed their GSM network. Verizon is killing CDMA on December 31, 2019, DirecTV will kill MPEG-2 SD sometime in 2019, I'm sure many other technologies will be shuttered. It's time for people to move on.



> Wow. Not necessarily a matter of being backwards, insane, or lazy--possibly being a senior, including living on Social Security, being financially-challenged, being technologically-challenged, and/or just not otherwise needing home Internet.


If they're doing everything on/from their phone, then they can use MHS. If they don't have cellular data, then clearly they need internet anyway, so whatever internet they have will work fine with the TiVo. There are no excuses anymore. LTE covers basically everywhere, and the small fraction of places it doesn't, well HughesNet or Excede is part of the price of living in the middle of nowhere and having a lot of land and not having to deal with neighbors. People make choices about where to live, and they have trade-offs.



shwru980r said:


> A Tivo HD and a Premiere used about 275 MB of data for the last month.
> Two Series 2's used about 100 MB of data for the last month.


Wow, that's very data efficient. That won't hurt a data plan much at all, since they pretty much all come with 10-15GB of MHS now anyway, or the shared data plans that start at a few GB.

What do you use for your normal day to day internet?


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

scandia101 said:


> So you're saying that the majority of people w/o cable do have a Tivo?


Even bigger miss!


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Everywhere in the CONUS and PR has broadband


*snort*


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> They're so poor... but they're paying for a landline?


Some people see having some form of communication as a necessity. For example, to be able to call an ambulance when you're 85 years old and have fallen and have lacerated your scalp and are bleeding.


> Technology has to move on, and it can't cater to every possible edge case of an edge case forever. People will cry and whine and groan and moan when any technology is shut down, but technology has to move forward. Over a year ago, AT&T killed their GSM network. Verizon is killing CDMA on December 31, 2019, DirecTV will kill MPEG-2 SD sometime in 2019, I'm sure many other technologies will be shuttered. It's time for people to move on.
> 
> If they're doing everything on/from their phone, then they can use MHS. If they don't have cellular data, then clearly they need internet anyway, so whatever internet they have will work fine with the TiVo. There are no excuses anymore. LTE covers basically everywhere, and the small fraction of places it doesn't, well HughesNet or Excede is part of the price of living in the middle of nowhere and having a lot of land and not having to deal with neighbors. People make choices about where to live, and they have trade-offs.


Yes, you're right, technology moves on and should--and that can cause issues, at times. But you keep on minimalizing into near-existence the challenges mentioned above--both financial and technological. Having seen them personally, it doesn't seem to me that they are "every possible edge case of an edge case," nor people who simply "cry and whine and groan and moan." Nor are we necessarily talking about people "living in the middle of nowhere."


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

How much is HughesNet? At what point does a monthly charge for a DVR price it out of the market? That is the case here. TiVo is walking away from another group of customers.



Bigg said:


> Everywhere in the CONUS and PR has broadband:
> 
> HughesNet Gen 5 Coverage Areas
> 
> ...


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

My parents are a great example of people who relied on dial-up. Note that I consider broadband to be defined as not just speed -- but data allowances as well. If somebody in a rural area can't reasonably have access to the same cord-cutting options as those in urban areas -- then they ain't got broadband. 12 Mbps speed - but only given out so that you can check your email faster and not watch even a single Netflix program a night longer than a week -- that's not an option. In fact - they don't even use the dial-up anymore. They just go without internet because no option that exists is a good one.

For me - I live in a very remote area and paid the thousands to have wired access run out. Even then, I pay $100 a month for 30 Mbps. I had no choice if I wanted internet as I routinely use around 300 GB a month with heavy video usage. The perception that somebody without internet is backwards and poor is inaccurate. Not everybody could incur the costs I had to in order to get internet - but not having a few spare thousands on hand doesn't make you poverty-level.

Rural areas are no stranger to this. The same arguments have been used time and again throughout the years. "You don't need electricity because it costs too much to provide", etc. My parents still haul water in a large tank on the back of a truck because no rural water lines exist. These arguments are usually made by companies that show profits in the billions but are somehow so cash-strapped when handing out limited data, you would think they are barely scraping by. Rural areas have typically only gotten access to urban options only with government intervention and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

Urban people really don't have any idea of the challenges faced in rural areas (and are ill-equipped to comment on them). They also don't have a good idea of the fortitude of those living there. I doubt most of them could make it if they had to live using the skill set required. It perhaps explains a lot of ideology difference between rural and urban. With so many things for existence provided by the work of others instead of your own work - it causes all of this extra time in populated areas to think about increasingly silly things to be outraged over. 

Back to the subject at hand -- I would agree with the assumption that most people in rural areas without broadband don't have a TiVo. Hell -- most people in urban areas don't have one. 

If I was in a rural area and still recording television post-digital shift - I would have long ago moved to a cheap m-star based box for $40 that let me use my old TV while recording to hard drive/flash drive. In fact - that's what my sister who lives near my parents does -- only after I bought her the box. Prior to that - she had the analog converter box running into her ... wait for it ... VCR. My parents just don't record at all. The M-star box is a better option for no internet and old (but still very usable) equipment. Another difference, I suppose, between urban and rural. Just because for-profit businesses tell you that you need the next 4K or 8K or 1.21 gigawatts do-dad ... doesn't mean you really do. Hell, most people in rural areas would happily have taken an analog option for OTA TV to avoid problems with the digital cliff. An analog, snowy - but completely watchable picture would still be a better option than no picture as was introduced with the digital cliff. If (and that's a *big* if) ATSC 3.0 actually takes off - it's one of the things that could actually benefit rural users. A graceful drop-off in resolution given areas further out a still viewable picture as opposed to the complete drop-off that occurs now. But I'm skeptical of it's success because of the below.

As for the assertion that advertisers or companies care at all about the millions in rural-land?

Nope -- not one bit. They absolutely don't give one rat's-turd about those people. Although I don't agree with the reasoning -- I understand the reasoning. They are viewed as unlikely to change and not a good possibility of return on investment. It's the same reason advertisers don't give a shat about what I watch on TV -- I'm over 50 now and not a desired demographic.

And it's not just advertisers or companies -- the same holds true for OTA users as well. You urban OTA users are lumped right in with those filthy rural users as far as an advertising-based model is concerned. Advertisers don't deem OTA users as desirable. Hell -- even local TV stations don't really give 2 shakes about the OTA viewers. In my market there are only 2 of the 4 major network affiliates that even cover their entire market OTA. For 2 of them, it is just accepted that for those people outside of the urban area, they will have to use a pay-provider to access the station. While working on a PSIP problem with a local station in my area in regards to a home-brew DVR solution I was experimenting with and an issue with the STT table in the PSIP - I got chummy with the station engineer. I learned what I always suspected from the engineer. Station owners and managers would happily shut down OTA if it were not for needing it to keep valuable spectrum. Rightly or (as I view) wrongly - they are viewed as non-desirable from an advertising perspective. I suspect if mobile companies were to go to local stations and offer them both cash for their spectrum ... *and* the option to broadcast their signals for them for free over their wireless network ... stations would fall all over themselves to sell. It's a scenario that I read about not too long ago about tech predictions for the next 25 years that suggested something similar in one of the predictions being the death of OTA television. Younger people are expecting it to be stream-able like everything else. OTA usage only has trackable numbers in age groups that will be soon nursing-home bound in 25 - 35 years. If mobile companies offered up a box that connected to the wireless network to stream locals for free - it would sail through government approval, no problem. Stations wouldn't have the thousands per month expense of broadcasting with what they see as little return on that investment (plus cover more area than they do now). The only problem is with the wireless coverage itself as it applies to rural areas.

Urban people won't know this -- but you know those big coverage areas shown on your cell phone provider map? (Since, you know, I read above that LTE options are "everywhere".) It's mostly lies .... big fat lies. In my area, for example, there is zero Sprint coverage. Nada, Zilch. AT&T and T-Mobile? Coverage map has us in LTE glory. The reality is that the coverage exists only when you're outside. Take one foot inside of your house? No coverage. The snark about landline usage earlier is again not knowing the realities of rural mobile coverage. In fact, with AT&T it matters where I stand in my yard. Stand on the south side of my property outside? Coverage. Barely -- but coverage. Stand on the north side? Nada. A far cry from what somebody would expect looking at all of that colored area on the coverage map. Verizon is the only company that actually put a tower up here -- and as a result is the only viable option for anybody with a cell phone up here. If you have a cell phone (and want to use it inside the small-town grocery store to check if you need eggs) - then you need a Verizon phone up here. When I drive 18 miles to the west for church on Sunday morning - I know the exact spot where I lose even that coverage inside my car (despite what the LTE coverage map tells me).

Until the perception from urban areas regarding the value of rural areas to equal access is altered, it ain't just how one accesses data on your TiVo that will be affected.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

eherberg said:


> My parents are a great example of people who relied on dial-up. Note that I consider broadband to be defined as not just speed -- but data allowances as well. If somebody in a rural area can't reasonably have access to the same cord-cutting options as those in urban areas -- then they ain't got broadband. 12 Mbps speed - but only given out so that you can check your email faster and not watch even a single Netflix program a night longer than a week -- that's not an option. In fact - they don't even use the dial-up anymore. They just go without internet because no option that exists is a good one.
> 
> For me - I live in a very remote area and paid the thousands to have wired access run out. Even then, I pay $100 a month for 30 Mbps. I had no choice if I wanted internet as I routinely use around 300 GB a month with heavy video usage. The perception that somebody without internet is backwards and poor is inaccurate. Not everybody could incur the costs I had to in order to get internet - but not having a few spare thousands on hand doesn't make you poverty-level.
> 
> ...


Well said!


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

eherberg said:


> My parents are a great example of people who relied on dial-up... yadda yadda yadda


I think this may be the best rant I've ever seen on TCF. Bravo.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

Mikeguy said:


> It would be interesting to see the numbers: how many people indeed who use the dial-in.
> 
> Also, it's not simply the necessity of getting the physical connection equipment--for some, it's now buying Internet service. Again, for some, not an insignificant expense (e.g. especially when there also are drug prescriptions to pay for, not covered by Medicare), and something not in the cards originally when buying a TiVo box with dial-in capability and not otherwise desired.
> 
> Wow. Not necessarily a matter of being backwards, insane, or lazy--possibly being a senior, including living on Social Security, being financially-challenged, being technologically-challenged, and/or just not otherwise needing home Internet.


My 98 year-old grandfather lives in a city. He uses AOL dial up and OTA. His landline is $20 per month and his AOL subscription another $20 per month. We can't find a cheaper plan than that, unless Bigg wants to man up and pay for his broadband service. Considering my grandfather served in WWII in the Air Force just outside of London, I don't think he is lazy or backwards. He's just on limited income and just wants to check his e-mail and Facebook accounts.

However, he doesn't have a DVR or VCR because he just doesn't watch that much TV. So he's not affected.

My point is I suspect not that many people with just dial up access own a Tivo, and that there are workarounds for almost everybody who has a Tivo. I suspect many can just grab a USB adapter, but a few people will have more complex solutions like this: How to Network Two Computers Using Dial Up Internet Connection.

Subscribing to broadband just for the Tivo wouldn't be cost effective.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

ah30k said:


> Why do you go to both extremes? First you say that non-cable users don't have TiVo


I never said any such thing. BobCamp1 said it and he said probably don't have tivo. And I agree with his statement.



> then you come back by putting words in the poster's mouth that he said the 'majority' of non-cable users do have TiVo.


He said that BobCamp1 was wrong. In terms of probability there are really only two choices, probably do or probably don't because the probability of an even 50:50 split is very unlikely.



> Have you ever considered the middle ground where 'more than zero but less than majority' do?


 Yes, I have considered that and these are the people who probably don't. I'm not saying they don't just that the odds are not in favor of them having tivo. 


> There are quite a few OTA TiVos sold and users that participate here.


That is a correct statement, but that statement is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

You clearly don't understand probabilities because you clearly don't get that probably do and probably don't are different than do and don't.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

stile99 said:


> Even bigger miss!


Tell us why BobCamp1's statement that 'people who don't have cable probably don't have tivo' is a swing and a huge miss.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

scandia101 said:


> You clearly don't understand probabilities because you clearly don't get that probably do and probably don't are different than do and don't.


You're correct. Following the literal meaning or 'probably' (>50%), then not any population you can meaningfully define probably has a TiVo. While this must be correct in your literal sense it really adds no value whatsoever to this conversation or forum. No population set probably has a TiVo.


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

ah30k said:


> You're correct. Following the literal meaning or 'probably' (>50%), then not any population you can meaningfully define probably has a TiVo. While this must be correct in your literal sense it really adds no value whatsoever to this conversation or forum. No population set probably has a TiVo.


"TiVo owners" probably have a TiVo. "TCF members" probably have a TiVo. Actually, even that last group may be questionable, since it is possible that over half of the 261,395 members have moved on and no longer have a TiVo.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

stile99 said:


> *snort*


Well, it covers the entire CONUS. It's not the greatest internet, but if you can't get LTE, it is a passable option.



Mikeguy said:


> Some people see having some form of communication as a necessity. For example, to be able to call an ambulance when you're 85 years old and have fallen and have lacerated your scalp and are bleeding.


If there's no cell service, sure, but again, we're talking an edge case of an edge case.



> Having seen them personally, it doesn't seem to me that they are "every possible edge case of an edge case," nor people who simply "cry and whine and groan and moan." Nor are we necessarily talking about people "living in the middle of nowhere."


These are absolutely edge of edge cases. Over 90% of the US population has access to cable broadband, over 75% already has access to gigabit. Of the remaining 10%, some have fiber, VDSL, DSL, of the remaining people, most have access to LTE, and the few remaining beyond that are stuck with 25mbps and 600ms+ pings on satellite, at least until MEO or LEO becomes practical, or the political situation that is holding up universal wireline broadband gets resolved. The tech is there for low-latency satellite, it's just not scaled down to residential yet. RCI ships have low-latency, high-bandwidth MEO satellites that allow for Facetime, Skype, etc. They throttle to 5mbps symmetrical per device, but still, the tech is moving forward, and will probably solve the problem before politicians do in terms of funding and/or regulating universal gigabit fiber for all who have POTS and electricity.



wizwor said:


> How much is HughesNet? At what point does a monthly charge for a DVR price it out of the market? That is the case here. TiVo is walking away from another group of customers.


It doesn't really matter, because people need internet anyway, so whatever they have will work for TiVo's relatively small data downloads, be it LTE, HughesNet, or a regular wireline connection.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

eherberg said:


> My parents are a great example of people who relied on dial-up. Note that I consider broadband to be defined as not just speed -- but data allowances as well.


You have a good point about broadband policy in general, but the reality is, due to bad telecom policy for decades, a small subset of people just can't get that type of service. Anyone who is in range of an AT&T tower and doesn't have better options should have jumped on the hotspot UDP while it was good, as people are sucking hundreds of GB off of that, and AT&T doesn't seem to care. Even now, you can get the Mobley and iPad UDPs, and you can stream from an iPad with an HDMI adapter. Not the best solution, I'll give you that, but better than nothing.



> In fact - they don't even use the dial-up anymore. They just go without internet because no option that exists is a good one.


Why on earth would anyone not have internet? HughesNet Gen 5 is CONUS even if they have no LTE. Very, very few people have no LTE available, even if they have to boost it with a Wilson Electronics (WeBoost) 4G-X booster. Having very limited service, like Verizon 15GB hotspot limit, is better than nothing. The new Verizon UDPs allow up to 20GB/mo of hotspot, and 75GB on-phone before depri if they have no AT&T LTE available. If they lucky enough to have T-Mobile, their One Plus International has Unlimited MHS off of the phone. Again, not ideal, but a lot better than nothing.



> For me - I live in a very remote area and paid the thousands to have wired access run out. Even then, I pay $100 a month for 30 Mbps.


Who's your ISP?



> Rural areas are no stranger to this. The same arguments have been used time and again throughout the years. "You don't need electricity because it costs too much to provide", etc. My parents still haul water in a large tank on the back of a truck because no rural water lines exist.


Wait...WHAT? They haul water in on a truck? We have wells and septics, but a truck?!? We have no water, sewer, or gas, but we have gigabit internet available... as long as you're willing to fork over the dough to Comcast. I agree about broadband availability, at this point, it's far more important than electricity. Now you can make your own electricity with battery solar systems, but you can't make your own internet. I think everywhere that has POTS and electric should have gigabit internet. However, that doesn't change the fact that there are some less than ideal options for internet that are certainly NOT dial-up or having 10GB of data a month.



> Hell, most people in rural areas would happily have taken an analog option for OTA TV to avoid problems with the digital cliff. An analog, snowy - but completely watchable picture would still be a better option than no picture as was introduced with the digital cliff.


Analog had to go, but 8VSB was a lousy way to do OTA. It's actually worse in many urban areas because of strong multi-path. There are better standards that other countries use for digital OTA.



> And it's not just advertisers or companies -- the same holds true for OTA users as well. You urban OTA users are lumped right in with those filthy rural users as far as an advertising-based model is concerned. Advertisers don't deem OTA users as desirable. Hell -- even local TV stations don't really give 2 shakes about the OTA viewers.


OTA viewers generally aren't a great audience to advertise to. That being said, I think the main problem is that the networks have increased the costs so much to the affiliates to get the content that the affiliates have to pass that cost on to the cable companies and ultimately consumers through re-transmission fees. While the networks are raking in billions and billions in profits, they are forcing the affiliates to focus on retrans fees, since they will never bring in enough in advertising to any audience to cover the exorbitant costs the networks charge for their content.



> Urban people won't know this -- but you know those big coverage areas shown on your cell phone provider map? (Since, you know, I read above that LTE options are "everywhere".) It's mostly lies .... big fat lies.


They are and aren't. They're usually pretty good. I was in upstate NY in a very rural area a couple weeks ago, and the AT&T maps were dead on accurate. I've also driven down the west coast of Michigan, and the AT&T maps are pretty heavily crayoned in there.



> The reality is that the coverage exists only when you're outside. Take one foot inside of your house? No coverage. The snark about landline usage earlier is again not knowing the realities of rural mobile coverage.


You've got cable, so you can use Wi-Fi calling, but in situations like that where LTE is the internet access, you can use an external antenna or booster to get a good LTE signal several miles outside of where a phone will pick up any signal at all.



BobCamp1 said:


> My 98 year-old grandfather lives in a city. He uses AOL dial up and OTA. His landline is $20 per month and his AOL subscription another $20 per month. We can't find a cheaper plan than that, unless Bigg wants to man up and pay for his broadband service. Considering my grandfather served in WWII in the Air Force just outside of London, I don't think he is lazy or backwards. He's just on limited income and just wants to check his e-mail and Facebook accounts.


Dial-up is effectively worthless. The last time I've actually used it was probably the summer of 2008 at my grandmother's cottage, and by that point, almost nothing would load over that low of a bandwidth connection. The next summer, I had a my E71 with JoikuSpot and I could tether off of EDGE, which would pull a slow but usable 180kbps. If he can't get DSL, there are plenty of options for various LTE providers, and some cable companies have value tiers that are 10 or 15 or 20mbps at much lower prices than broadband. Once you've got a good connection, you can do VOIP, so no need for the landline.



> Subscribing to broadband just for the Tivo wouldn't be cost effective.


Of course not. But internet is necessary for lots of other things, so that shouldn't be an issue. If somebody is one of the last few people who have never used the internet and haven't died off yet, but somehow use a TiVo, that's an edge case of an edge case, and not something TiVo needs to be concerned with. Heck, in most cases, with someone like that, a neighbor would probably just put it on their Wi-Fi network to get it's whole 50MB of updates a month.


----------



## m.s (Mar 8, 2007)

scandia101 said:


> Tell us why BobCamp1's statement that 'people who don't have cable probably don't have tivo' is a swing and a huge miss.


Not because of the truth of the matter (it's also true that people who *do *have cable probably don't have a tivo), but that he's simply presenting a red herring.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> These are absolutely edge of edge cases. Over 90% of the US population has access to cable broadband, over 75% already has access to gigabit. Of the remaining 10%, some have fiber, VDSL, DSL, of the remaining people, most have access to LTE, and the few remaining beyond that are stuck with 25mbps and 600ms+ pings on satellite, at least until MEO or LEO becomes practical, or the political situation that is holding up universal wireline broadband gets resolved.


Oh, I agree, service physically mostly is available (and, coincidentally, I just saw a Hughes Internet commercial last nite, during primetime). But the question for more than "edge" people is, at what $ cost, as pointed out above. Again, e.g., if you're living on social security and have to be concerned about the dollar cost of your prescriptions (not covered by Medicare), a $50/month Internet charge is a very real expense. Especially when compared to being able to simply have your Series 2 TiVo box dial in to the TiVo mothership to get Guide data, for free.


Bigg said:


> OTA viewers generally aren't a great audience to advertise to.


Is there an advertising study that backs that up? My assumption going in is that McDonalds, Domino's Pizza, Starbucks, and Target like the OTA crowd just fine. Including the under-30 group, with disposable income and is used to doing so, that has disassociated itself from cable. 


> If somebody is one of the last few people who have never used the internet and haven't died off yet, but somehow use a TiVo, that's an edge case of an edge case, and not something TiVo needs to be concerned with.


User numbers-wise, agreed that the numbers here are lesser--presumably, that's part of the reason why TiVo is doing what it is doing, and likewise did what it did earlier in EOL'ing the Series 1 box. Having said that, issues are raised, as they were then.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Bigg said:


> It doesn't really matter, because people need internet anyway, so whatever they have will work for TiVo's relatively small data downloads, be it LTE, HughesNet, or a regular wireline connection.


People don't need internet or television. Or TiVo. I'm not arguing that TiVo should retain dial up support. I'm simply saying that in cases where internet is not in place, requiring such a service makes TiVo much more expensive than alternatives and, at some price, too expensive.


----------



## cwerdna (Feb 22, 2001)

Bigg said:


> HughestNet isn't a great option, but it is an option. If I lived rural, I would have jumped on AT&T Unlimited Hotspot wagon when it was available as that was a great deal.
> ...
> If you have no LTE coverage, then you're stuck on satellite.


A few years ago (probably <2 years ago), at work, we had a team event where we went to Pismo Beach, CA and stayed in a house (sort of an Airbnb) that a co-worker arranged.

The house was really in the boonies sorta near Pismo Beach (I can get the town name, if needed). None of our cell phones worked. I personally had cell phones on AT&T and Vrizon on me and they didn't work. I think I had a T-Mobile phone w/me, as well. If I did, it didn't work either. I'd have to check w/my co-workers to see if they had T-Mobile or Sprint and if their phones worked.

AT&T hotspot would obviously not work.

The house had a landline and slower than molasses HughesNet.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> Again, e.g., if you're living on social security and have to be concerned about the dollar cost of your prescriptions (not covered by Medicare), a $50/month Internet charge is a very real expense. Especially when compared to being able to simply have your Series 2 TiVo box dial in to the TiVo mothership to get Guide data, for free.


$50-$75/mo is the normal cost for internet, even in places with gigabit-capable HFC systems. Here, Comcast's basic non-broadband plan is $50/mo, broadband is $75/mo. Of course you don't need broadband for basic internet usage.



> Is there an advertising study that backs that up? My assumption going in is that McDonalds, Domino's Pizza, Starbucks, and Target like the OTA crowd just fine. Including the under-30 group, with disposable income and is used to doing so, that has disassociated itself from cable.


No, but it's sort of self-evident. I'm sure there are some brands that find success with OTA, but in general, pay tv and highly targeted (podcasts, magazines, etc) audiences are a LOT more valuable.



> User numbers-wise, agreed that the numbers here are lesser--presumably, that's part of the reason why TiVo is doing what it is doing, and likewise did what it did earlier in EOL'ing the Series 1 box. Having said that, issues are raised, as they were then.


There's always somebody who will come out of the woodwork with an edge case of an edge case, but technology needs to move on. I used to be against technology transitions, but in most cases, the technology got better, cheaper, and faster as a result. TiVo is 14+ years past dial-up modems, so it's time to finally let them go.



wizwor said:


> People don't need internet or television. Or TiVo. I'm not arguing that TiVo should retain dial up support. I'm simply saying that in cases where internet is not in place, requiring such a service makes TiVo much more expensive than alternatives and, at some price, too expensive.


Well, people don't NEED electricity or running water either if you take that hard-line type of approach. TiVo also requires electricity. It's not really any different than requiring internet access in this day and age.



> The house was really in the boonies sorta near Pismo Beach (I can get the town name, if needed). None of our cell phones worked. I personally had cell phones on AT&T and Vrizon on me and they didn't work. I think I had a T-Mobile phone w/me, as well. If I did, it didn't work either. I'd have to check w/my co-workers to see if they had T-Mobile or Sprint and if their phones worked.
> 
> AT&T hotspot would obviously not work.


Maybe, maybe not. Unfortunately, with a rental, if the owners have crappy service, you're stuck with crappy service. However, that whole area has AT&T LTE coverage, so it's likely that you could pull in a signal with a 4G-X booster, which boosts 50dB. It's quite likely that in-car Wi-Fi would work as well, as they use AT&T LTE, but have significantly stronger antennas than a handheld cell phone.



> The house had a landline and slower than molasses HughesNet.


That was in the pre-Gen5 world. Gen5 is actually halfway decent. I wouldn't move anywhere without wireline broadband, but for people who don't have access to wireline broadband, and can't pull in LTE with a booster, Gen5 is a pretty good option.[/QUOTE]


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

m.s said:


> Not because of the truth of the matter (it's also true that people who *do *have cable probably don't have a tivo), but that he's simply presenting a red herring.


I see what happened. In a thread/conversation exclusively about S2s, S3s, and dial-up access, some "cord cutting" Bolt/Roamio/Premiere owners took my comment out of context and got offended. Relax, I wasn't talking about you. I couldn't have been, as you all have broadband/DSL Internet access.

Something Rovi could do before the end is update the S2 and S3 software to allow ANY number to be used for dial-up. Then users can sign up for NetZero which allows 10 free hours per month of dial-up access. Then users could enter NetZero's access number into their Tivo. Or they can use their existing non-AOL dial-up service provider.

Or, one can use serial PPP to connect the Tivo to an older PC with a modem, then enable ICS on that PC.

Or, one can buy the USB-to-Ethernet adapter for the Tivo, connect the Tivo to a PC with a modem via Ethernet, then enable ICS on that PC.

Or, one can buy a Channel Master DVR+ which does not need an Internet connection. That sucks, because Rovi took something that was working for you and ruined it, and now you have to spend a lot of money to get back to where you were. As a former S1 owner, I can certainly empathize with you.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

ah30k said:


> You're correct. Following the literal meaning or 'probably' (>50%), then not any population you can meaningfully define probably has a TiVo. While this must be correct in your literal sense it really adds no value whatsoever to this conversation or forum. No population set probably has a TiVo.


I didn't bring it up and I'm not the one who told somebody else "Swing and a huge miss" when they were actually correct. My last post was only in response to a false accusation. 
And regarding your response here, it really adds no value whatsoever to this conversation or forum.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

BobCamp1 said:


> Something Rovi could do before the end is update the S2 and S3 software to allow ANY number to be used for dial-up. Then users can sign up for NetZero which allows 10 free hours per month of dial-up access. Then users could enter NetZero's access number into their Tivo. Or they can use their existing non-AOL dial-up service provider.


This is a great idea!


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> $50-$75/mo is the normal cost for internet, even in places with gigabit-capable HFC systems. Here, Comcast's basic non-broadband plan is $50/mo, broadband is $75/mo. Of course you don't need broadband for basic internet usage.


Yep, that's what I said. The monthly price of some prescriptions for some seniors.


> No, but it's sort of self-evident. I'm sure there are some brands that find success with OTA, but in general, pay tv and highly targeted (podcasts, magazines, etc) audiences are a LOT more valuable.


But I guess not terribly self-evident to all those advertisers on OTA, who are spending billions of dollars on it, which continues to rise. 


> There's always somebody who will come out of the woodwork with an edge case of an edge case, but technology needs to move on. I used to be against technology transitions, but in most cases, the technology got better, cheaper, and faster as a result. TiVo is 14+ years past dial-up modems, so it's time to finally let them go.


Yep, technology does go on, and thankfully so, as I said. But far from agreeing that we're only talking about "an edge case of an edge case," as you keep on saying without support in the numbers. When the U.S. moved to digital OTA signals, that was great. And the government mandated an accommodation for those with analog televisions, to ease matters.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> But I guess not terribly self-evident to all those advertisers on OTA, who are spending billions of dollars on it, which continues to rise.


For certain live events, yes, because there is just less eyeball time for ads now that a lot of people spend a lot of their TV-watching time streaming.



> Yep, technology does go on, and thankfully so, as I said. But far from agreeing that we're only talking about "an edge case of an edge case," as you keep on saying without support in the numbers. When the U.S. moved to digital OTA signals, that was great. And the government mandated an accommodation for those with analog televisions, to ease matters.


Series 2 DVRs are an edge case to begin with. So are Series 3's to a large extent. The number of people who have those boxes AND use dial-up are an edge case. The number of people who have those boxes AND use dial-up AND don't have a home network with internet to connect to (not necessary broadband, 1mbps DSL would be fine for the purpose of this discussion) are an edge case of an edge case of an edge case. If the tech had to accommodate every edge-edge-edge case, we'd still have analog TV, analog cell phones, everything would have composite video outputs, and so forth and so on.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Series 2 DVRs are an edge case to begin with. So are Series 3's to a large extent. The number of people who have those boxes AND use dial-up are an edge case. The number of people who have those boxes AND use dial-up AND don't have a home network with internet to connect to (not necessary broadband, 1mbps DSL would be fine for the purpose of this discussion) are an edge case of an edge case of an edge case. If the tech had to accommodate every edge-edge-edge case, we'd still have analog TV, analog cell phones, everything would have composite video outputs, and so forth and so on.


Yep, those are your self-imposed characterizations, edge-wise. I'd prefer to see actual numbers. And there is a way to accommodate (but I would not feel comfortable with such a discussion here, in TiVo_Ted's thread).


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

ah30k said:


> @TiVo_Ted , have the dial-in numbers been deactivated yet? I have two older TiVos that are now getting "service not answering" (or similar) error messages. I am going back and forth with the useless TiVo web support who is having me check the phone jack connections and do reboots and try changing the dial settings, etc.


What phone number are you using? As Ted posted June 13th, "_*The first phase of this project will start shortly, with TiVo disabling access to our Toll-Free access number.* Local access numbers will continue to work for the next 3-4 months as we work through the details of the full phase-out"_

Ask TiVO phone support for local dial-up access numbers for your location.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

CloudAtlas said:


> What phone number are you using?


I tried another number that seemed to work.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> Yep, those are your self-imposed characterizations, edge-wise. I'd prefer to see actual numbers. And there is a way to accommodate (but I would not feel comfortable with such a discussion here, in TiVo_Ted's thread).


A tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction turns into almost nothing. That's just how math works. Most of the few people who are affected by this in the first place will get a Wi-Fi adapter and go on the merry way, continuing to get guide data downloads over the internet.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> *A tiny fraction of a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction turns into almost nothing. *That's just how math works. Most of the few people who are affected by this in the first place will get a Wi-Fi adapter and go on the merry way, continuing to get guide data downloads over the internet.


I guess you must have hard data the rest of us do not have, to continually be making this same refrain.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

It's just trolling. I checked out once I realized it's just stating outlandish things to elicit a response. Stating that internet is more valuable than electricity - but offering up solutions where the broadband provided can't actually be used like broadband. Claiming coverage is "everywhere" without once having spent time in those places. Anybody who has seen a map presented by a wireless carrier when seeking tower approval knows it is a *very* different map than the one presented on their consumer-facing page.

For the part of the conversation that relates to TiVo - I agree that dial-up isn't probably necessary. People living in remote areas haven't had TiVo be a viable option since the Premiere anyway. 

It was the following generalizations that frost me. People living in urban areas (and often on the coasts) who somehow feel qualified to talk about remote rural areas because they've driven an hour out of the city one weekend. There are very good reasons why a big chunk (millions) of remote America still relies on landline phones and either don't have internet (or use dialup). Oh sure -- they miss out on reading posts from people whose lives are so easy that they have the time to get themselves worked up over whether a program guide is horizontally or vertically based, fercrissakes.

But they have more pressing matters to deal with in day-to-day living.

But we're used to people who don't know what they are talking about somehow feeling qualified to talk about policy or solutions outside of their own expertise.


----------



## m.s (Mar 8, 2007)

eherberg said:


> But we're used to people who don't know what they are talking about somehow feeling qualified to talk about policy or solutions outside of their own expertise.


It's called the Dunning-Kruger effect.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> I guess you must have hard data the rest of us do not have, to continually be making this same refrain.


It's not hard to figure out. It doesn't really matter the actual percentages whether it's 2% of 0.5% of any of the edge cases, when you multiple 3 edge cases together, you end up with a teeny, tiny, itty bitty number. It's math.



eherberg said:


> It's just trolling. I checked out once I realized it's just stating outlandish things to elicit a response. Stating that internet is more valuable than electricity - but offering up solutions where the broadband provided can't actually be used like broadband. Claiming coverage is "everywhere" without once having spent time in those places. Anybody who has seen a map presented by a wireless carrier when seeking tower approval knows it is a *very* different map than the one presented on their consumer-facing page.


No, it's not trolling. Yes, internet access is more valuable than electricity. You can't just make your own internet access in the middle of nowhere like you can with electricity. We absolutely need universal GOOD broadband access in this country, not crappy satellite. I'm not arguing against good broadband for all, and I think the government has failed in doing this. They should have either regulated AT&T and Verizon and forced them to do it, or found a way to send it out to bid like NY State did. It's simply a FACT that HughesNet covers the entire CONUS, so I don't know what your problem is there. Of course there are a few people here and there with no LTE coverage. This is no secret to anyone. Of course wireless provider maps are crayoned in to varying degrees. This is also no secret to anyone.



> It was the following generalizations that frost me. People living in urban areas (and often on the coasts) who somehow feel qualified to talk about remote rural areas because they've driven an hour out of the city one weekend. There are very good reasons why a big chunk (millions) of remote America still relies on landline phones and either don't have internet (or use dialup). Oh sure -- they miss out on reading posts from people whose lives are so easy that they have the time to get themselves worked up over whether a program guide is horizontally or vertically based, fercrissakes.


I absolutely support universal broadband access with good, low-latency wireline broadband. However, it is idiotic to pretend that anyone who somehow still uses dial-up in 2018 is doing do because they don't have broadband available. That's utter nonsense. I'd rather use non-broadband DSL if it were 6-24mbps than broadband via satellite, but no one in their right mind would choose dial-up over satellite. That's just nuts. There is no legitimate reason to use dial-up internet in the year 2018. None. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. There are definitely reasons to have a copper landline, although so few people are choosing that option that the copper landline network is going to disappear eventually, like it or not.

I think the government needs to step in and whether through regulation or incentive programs, get broadband internet access to 100% of users who have ever had wired electricity and POTS. If you're so far off the grid that you don't have electric and POTS, then you're on your own. That's what satellite really should be for.

And if we're pushing for that, let's set the bar a tad bit higher and say gigabit for all. Over 75% of US households currently have gigabit available, over 90% will via HFC once Charter gets their buttocks in gear and does the D3.1 upgrades, any fiber can be upgraded to gigabit, so that would only require replacement of a small number of VDSL lines that are between 0.3kft and 3-4kft or so that can currently provide 25/3 broadband but not gigabit.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> It's not hard to figure out. It doesn't really matter the actual percentages whether it's 2% of 0.5% of any of the edge cases, when you multiple 3 edge cases together, you end up with a teeny, tiny, itty bitty number. It's math.


LOL, sorry--I prefer real numbers to supposition magnified and using unsubstantiated buzzwords such as "edge case." 

Having said that, yes, I would guess that the majority of Series 2 box owners are not on dial-up. But when I think of it, that purely is a guess. If I were to state something more definitive, I'd want to see real numbers from the source, TiVo.


> There is no legitimate reason to use dial-up internet in the year 2018. None. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada.


You meant to add: for you. For others: 1. cost; 2. lack of need, apart from a few areas.

Having said that, personally, I want broadband, but 1. can afford it, and make efforts to (including by going DSL); and 2. have a need (professionally) and a desire (personally).


----------



## brucedelta (Oct 2, 2001)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We are not discontinuing support for these S2/S3/S4 devices. However, customers who want to continue to access the TiVo service will need to take steps in order to connect to the service via broadband. We will be sending different options to our customers based on the type of box they are using. We will also be making a number of special offers to customers who would like to upgrade to a newer TiVo box or who need help connecting their existing boxes via broadband.


I have an S3 lifetime that I still use and received this offer. I am not sure why they may think I use dial-up since as far as I know there is no phone line connected and the Netflix app works fine. In any case, I am thinking of taking advantage of the trade up since I have seen signs of hard drive problems on the box in addition to the whining from an old HD.

The upgrade offer is only for the 1/2 & 1 TB models. I am surprised I can not get the 3TB unit. The credit is only $50 so what is the logic of not letting me spend more for 3TB.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

brucedelta said:


> I have an S3 lifetime that I still use and received this offer. I am not sure why they may think I use dial-up since as far as I know there is no phone line connected and the Netflix app works fine. In any case, I am thinking of taking advantage of the trade up since I have seen signs of hard drive problems on the box in addition to the whining from an old HD.
> 
> The upgrade offer is only for the 1/2 & 1 TB models. I am surprised I can not get the 3TB unit. The credit is only $50 so what is the logic of not letting me spend more for 3TB.


What is the offer? A $50 credit on a new 500GB or 1TB Bolt box purchased from TiVo, nothing as to a Lifetime service transfer?


----------



## brucedelta (Oct 2, 2001)

Mikeguy said:


> What is the offer? A $50 credit on a new 500GB or 1TB Bolt box purchased from TiVo, nothing as to a Lifetime service transfer?


$50 off a 1TB (nothing for 500G) and I think $6.95 mo for service. I intend to upgrade but would like to just get the 3TB unit. I am surprised they will not let me spend the extra $.

I logged into my Tivo online account today after support fixed my lockout issue and I see my first payment to Tivo for service is Jan 2000. I did a one-time lifetime service xfer to DirectTV years ago and spent about 7 years with them. When I moved into my current residence in 2010 I bought S2 units with lifetime and when they failed I got these S3 units as a replacement in 2014 & 15 paying about $149. After over 18 years using the Tivo menu I do not think we can easily change.

I point out the above to highlight my mixed emotions on their offer as it is not great. On the other hand, they really have not gotten a lot of revenue from us but I doubt there are many loyal customers who have been with them for 18+ years.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> LOL, sorry--I prefer real numbers to supposition magnified and using unsubstantiated buzzwords such as "edge case."


TiVo has the hard numbers, we don't. But does it matter if it's 1.5% or 0.5%? And edge case is still an edge case.



> You meant to add: for you. For others: 1. cost; 2. lack of need, apart from a few areas.


There is no legitimate reason for anyone to be using dial-up in the year 2018. None. It doesn't even work for most things anymore.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> TiVo has the hard numbers, we don't. But does it matter if it's 1.5% or 0.5%? And edge case is still an edge case.


Sorry, but: your continual reference to this as an "edge case," without support, doesn't make it as such.


> There is no legitimate reason for anyone to be using dial-up in the year 2018.


Lol, of course there is, as mentioned above. Just not for you (or for me).


----------



## pfiagra (Oct 13, 2014)

2018 Broadband Deployment Report


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

For both the AARP crowd and the Millennials, an AT&T account with DirecTV and unlimited data renders traditional high speed internet redundant. If DirecTV Now gets better or AT&T allows AirPlay of DirecTV, all the rest will shrivel up and die -- too much work and too much money. Not sure where TiVo sees itself in five years, but I cannot imagine that I will be part of it.

Doing away with dialup is not important. Seems like the impact will be minimal. I suspect the decision is more about the inadequacy of dialup to support modern updates and collection activities than the cost of the infrastructure. In that sense, Bigg, you are correct that high speed internet is as important as electricity _to TiVo_.

What comes next is more important. Either TiVo needs to figure out how to get revenue out of LifeTime subscribers or cut the cost of serving them. The revenue opportunities would be from sale of customer data, sales of advertising, and/or moving LifeTime customers to some kind of subscription. I can't think of many ways to cut costs beyond trimming back on labor intense services like commercial skipping, customer support, and guide quality. Seems they are already on top of all of these.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

brucedelta said:


> I logged into my Tivo online account today after support fixed my lockout issue and I see my first payment to Tivo for service is Jan 2000. I did a one-time lifetime service xfer to DirectTV years ago and spent about 7 years with them. When I moved into my current residence in 2010 I bought S2 units with lifetime and when they failed I got these S3 units as a replacement in 2014 & 15 paying about $149. After over 18 years using the Tivo menu I do not think we can easily change.


If you get a new TiVo, you may find that you want to downgrade to the gen3 HD UI which is very similar to the S3 UI (the new ones will come with/upgrade to the new Hydra UI).

Scott


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> Lol, of course there is, as mentioned above. Just not for you (or for me).


No, there is not any legitimate reason to use dial-up in the year 2018.



wizwor said:


> For both the AARP crowd and the Millennials, an AT&T account with DirecTV and unlimited data renders traditional high speed internet redundant.


LTE is not a replacement for wireline internet, unless you're looking at the very fringes of a CO or RDSLAM and no cable is available.



> In that sense, Bigg, you are correct that high speed internet is as important as electricity _to TiVo_.


I am saying that broadband access is more important than the electricity grid for people. I'd much rather have a nice fiber line and no electricity than electricity service and no broadband. I can put solar panels and batteries with inverters together and make electricity, I cannot make my own internet.

EDIT: Combine posts


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> No, there is not any legitimate reason to use dial-up in the year 2018.


Lol, OK. Then you must be right.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

wizwor said:


> For both the AARP crowd and the Millennials, an AT&T account with DirecTV and unlimited data renders traditional high speed internet redundant.


Not a chance. As someone who has "traditional high speed internet" at one location, and LTE (both ATT & Verizon) at another, they are apples and pigs. Latency alone will kill you on the wireless. If I have some heavy-Internet things to do, I try to wait until I'm at the wired location, so as to save my head from banging against the wall. And I actually have a strong wireless signal; I can see the Verizon tower from my backyard.

Maybe when true 5G arrives, we can reopen this discussion.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

astrohip said:


> Not a chance. As someone who has "traditional high speed internet" at one location, and LTE (both ATT & Verizon) at another, they are apples and pigs. Latency alone will kill you on the wireless. If I have some heavy-Internet things to do, I try to wait until I'm at the wired location, so as to save my head from banging against the wall. And I actually have a strong wireless signal; I can see the Verizon tower from my backyard.
> 
> Maybe when true 5G arrives, we can reopen this discussion.


How old are you?


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

wizwor said:


> How old are you?


I fall into one of your demos. Why does it matter though?


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

astrohip said:


> I fall into one of your demos. Why does it matter though?


You sound like someone who uses the internet for important things. My kids (who are millennials) do everything with their phones. My peers (the AARP crowd) use iPads for everything.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

astrohip said:


> I fall into one of your demos. Why does it matter though?


He wants to know if he can expect you to survive that long!

Edit: He replied while I was composing, but I think my answer is better!


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

wizwor said:


> You sound like someone who uses the internet for important things. My kids (who are millennials) do everything with their phones. My peers (the AARP crowd) use iPads for everything.


While my son who is a Millennial as well does do quite a bit with his phone, he couldn't live without fast Internet (he had issues with our slow Comcast upload speeds so is happier at school where he can get FIOS).

My wife and I have our AARP cards but definitely do not use iPads for everything. 

Scott


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

I'm in my 60s, retired, and while I have a tablet, only use it on rare occasion. My laptop is my go-to Internet device.

I would be reluctant to say I use the I-net for "important things". I just surf...

But I am an impatient son of a biscuit. Slow speeds are frustrating. Wired beats wireless, well, all the time. Sadly, I spend half my time in the deep country, where a Verizon cell tower is my only connection to civilization. Oh, and DirecTV.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

TiVo_Ted said:


> As a heads-up, we are getting ready to start phasing out support for dial-up modem access to the TiVo service. This will affect Series 2 and Series 3 devices that are not connected to broadband, as well as a small number of Series 4 users that are using the TiVo USB phone-line connector.
> 
> We are making this decision primarily because the cost of dial-up access has risen dramatically (3x price increase) and our usage has fallen to the point where the minimum costs and overhead are no longer sustainable.
> 
> ...


I have a Series 2, and without any warning, none of the dial in numbers work anymore. I was not provided with any options in advance; TiVo didn't contact me via mail or email. This is infuriating.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

chiguy50 said:


> It is very gratifying to see this type of proactive communication, not to mention the customer-friendly policies to provide accommodation for the users affected by the forthcoming discontinuation of service.
> 
> Kudos are due!


I just had to reply to this comment because the exact opposite is true regarding my experience with this issue. TiVo didn't communicate to me at all that the dial in numbers were being phased out. I found out when my TiVo suddenly couldn't get program guide information any longer. I tried 15 different numbers, multiple times each, and none of them worked. I spent over an hour on the phone with TiVo and they couldn't even tell me if any numbers in my area are still active or not; I was advised to just keep trying different numbers. There was no proactive communication, and nothing about this has been customer-friendly. My "lifetime" service was just discontinued, out of the blue.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

TiVo is suggesting that I upgrade to a Bolt Vox from my Series 2; can anyone answer these questions, please?:

- We currently have Comcast and a cable box, so we have On Demand, which we do use. With a cable card and Bolt Vox, can you use On Demand somehow?

- Our only internet access is through our cell phones; we use them as hot spots when we need to use our laptop. Can I use my phone hotspot to get program info for the Bolt Vox? If so, does it use a lot of data? We have limited monthly data.

- Are we better off just going with a DVR from Comcast?

Thank you for your help.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

TRLK said:


> - Our only internet access is through our cell phones; we use them as hot spots when we need to use our laptop. Can I use my phone hotspot to get program info for the Bolt Vox? If so, does it use a lot of data? We have limited monthly data.


 I've used my S2 via hot spot without any issues. You just need to get a wireless G adapter, preferably a TiVo one.

TiVo Wireless 802.11g USB Adapter (Factory Refurbished) - TiVo Part - WeaKnees - the DVR Superstore

If you let it connect once a week you'll be fine.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

TRLK said:


> TiVo is suggesting that I upgrade to a Bolt Vox from my Series 2; can anyone answer these questions, please?:
> 
> - We currently have Comcast and a cable box, so we have On Demand, which we do use. With a cable card and Bolt Vox, can you use On Demand somehow?
> 
> ...


A Bolt (and Roamio, for that matter) box, unlike a Series 2 box, really wants an ongoing Internet connection to the mother ship. Some of its/their ongoing features require it.


----------



## Phil T (Oct 29, 2003)

TRLK said:


> TiVo is suggesting that I upgrade to a Bolt Vox from my Series 2; can anyone answer these questions, please?:
> 
> - We currently have Comcast and a cable box, so we have On Demand, which we do use. With a cable card and Bolt Vox, can you use On Demand somehow?
> 
> ...


A Bolt Vox and cable card will do on demand but it is through an app and not as seamless as through a Comcast box. The Bolt does need a internet connection.

I would think since you already have Comcast they would have a bundle price that would be almost the same or cheaper then cable only.

The X1 Comcast box is ok but I like the Tivo Bolt Vox and Hydra better.

Going through a hotspot may work but would be a pia to have to connect it all the time.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

rdrrepair said:


> I've used my S2 via hot spot without any issues. You just need to get a wireless G adapter, preferably a TiVo one.
> 
> TiVo Wireless 802.11g USB Adapter (Factory Refurbished) - TiVo Part - WeaKnees - the DVR Superstore
> 
> If you let it connect once a week you'll be fine.


Good to know, thanks! It looks like the G adapter is for a USB connection, but I think ours is ethernet, so I'd need an N adapter, then?


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Mikeguy said:


> A Bolt (and Roamio, for that matter) box, unlike a Series 2 box, really wants an ongoing Internet connection to the mother ship. Some of its/their ongoing features require it.


Ok, good info, thanks for your reply!


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Phil T said:


> A Bolt Vox and cable card will do on demand but it is through an app and not as seamless as through a Comcast box. The Bolt does need a internet connection.
> 
> I would think since you already have Comcast they would have a bundle price that would be almost the same or cheaper then cable only.
> 
> ...


Ok, thanks for your help, Phil, I appreciate it!


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

TRLK said:


> Good to know, thanks! It looks like the G adapter is for a USB connection, but I think ours is ethernet, so I'd need an N adapter, then?


Those adapters would require an internet connection in the home which you don't have, correct?


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Ok, so if I go the adapter route, I need to figure out which adapter I need (G or N); I have both USB and ethernet on the back of my TiVo, does that mean that I can use either adapter?

It looks like this:


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

ah30k said:


> Those adapters would require an internet connection in the home which you don't have, correct?


We use our phones as hotspots and tether for internet access.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

TRLK said:


> We use our phones as hotspots and tether for internet access.


So you plan to tether for your daily service connection?


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

ah30k said:


> So you plan to tether for your daily service connection?


Yes; we won't need to do it daily, though. For the house we've lived in for the last 9 years, we didn't have a phone jack near our Tivo, so about every 12 days I hook up a long phone cord and call in to get program guide info.


----------



## wml1950 (Dec 25, 2006)

You can use a g adapter for sure. I use more than one g adapters as three separate series two still in use. I have not tried an "n" adapter. The g adapter is placed in the usb slot of the series 2. You then set the tivo to use a wireless network. Then select your network, enter the network's password, and then use the wifi network to download the guide information. I still use a series two as well as the newer bolt. The series two is very stable but its biggest problem is that it does not record in high definition. News show and mainly dialog shows do not really need high definition. You also do not need a cable card with the series 2. You may need a cable box with the cable company with analog jacks to allow the series 2 to record. You may be lucky and your cable company may still allow the direct connection of the coax cable into the back of the series 2. You may be able to record network shows over the air with an antenna and a analog to digital box converter.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

wml1950 said:


> You can use a g adapter for sure. I use more than one g adapters as three separate series two still in use. I have not tried an "n" adapter. The g adapter is placed in the usb slot of the series 2. You then set the tivo to use a wireless network. Then select your network, enter the network's password, and then use the wifi network to download the guide information. I still use a series two as well as the newer bolt. The series two is very stable but its biggest problem is that it does not record in high definition. News show and mainly dialog shows do not really need high definition. You also do not need a cable card with the series 2. You may need a cable box with the cable company with analog jacks to allow the series 2 to record. You may be lucky and your cable company may still allow the direct connection of the coax cable into the back of the series 2. You may be able to record network shows over the air with an antenna and a analog to digital box converter.


Ok, great, thank you!


----------



## wml1950 (Dec 25, 2006)

TRLK,

Your earlier posts says that you have a Comcast box already. You can continue to use it for on demand. Obtain your guide information from the g adapter ( or maybe the N adapter). You will not have to do anything with the cable company's box--no disconnecting or reconnecting. You could update to Vox and use a cable card. You would still need to use the cable company's cable box in another input jack of the television for on demand. As you currently have a lifetime series two and seem satisfied with it, just buy and connect the g (or possibly n adapter). Weakknees or ebay will have a g adapter. Maybe one is even on amazon. Sometimes a "g" adapter is on Craigslist for $15. Good luck.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

TRLK said:


> Ok, great, thank you!


No offense, but the slower "g" adapter is much easier to configure, doesn't need power or a PC to setup.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

TRLK said:


> I just had to reply to this comment because the exact opposite is true regarding my experience with this issue. TiVo didn't communicate to me at all that the dial in numbers were being phased out. I found out when my TiVo suddenly couldn't get program guide information any longer. I tried 15 different numbers, multiple times each, and none of them worked. I spent over an hour on the phone with TiVo and they couldn't even tell me if any numbers in my area are still active or not; I was advised to just keep trying different numbers. There was no proactive communication, and nothing about this has been customer-friendly. My "lifetime" service was just discontinued, out of the blue.


Have you verified the e-mail address on your TiVo account at www.tivo.com (and checked your junk mail settings)?

Scott


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

Use the wireless G adapter in the usb port that I linked for you with your phone. Force a connection whenever needed and your phone set up for hot spot. The newer units require a constant internet connection.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

wml1950 said:


> TRLK,
> 
> Your earlier posts says that you have a Comcast box already. You can continue to use it for on demand. Obtain your guide information from the g adapter ( or maybe the N adapter). You will not have to do anything with the cable company's box--no disconnecting or reconnecting. You could update to Vox and use a cable card. You would still need to use the cable company's cable box in another input jack of the television for on demand. As you currently have a lifetime series two and seem satisfied with it, just buy and connect the g (or possibly n adapter). Weakknees or ebay will have a g adapter. Maybe one is even on amazon. Sometimes a "g" adapter is on Craigslist for $15. Good luck.


Ok, thanks for your help!


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

JoeKustra said:


> No offense, but the slower "g" adapter is much easier to configure, doesn't need power or a PC to setup.


Gotcha. Thanks!


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

HerronScott said:


> Have you verified the e-mail address on your TiVo account at www.tivo.com (and checked your junk mail settings)?
> 
> Scott


Yes, I get emails from TiVo all the time, including one just a couple weeks ago. I just logged into my TiVo account and everything is correct with my account.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

rdrrepair said:


> Use the wireless G adapter in the usb port that I linked for you with your phone. Force a connection whenever needed and your phone set up for hot spot. The newer units require a constant internet connection.


Ok, thanks, that's what I'm planning to do.


----------



## pfiagra (Oct 13, 2014)

JoeKustra said:


> No offense, but the slower "g" adapter is much easier to configure, doesn't need power or a PC to setup.


100% true. For simplicity, I would also recommend using the 'g', especially if the use is only for guide data.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

pfiagra said:


> 100% true. For simplicity, I would also recommend using the 'g', especially if the use is only for guide data.


Yes, it's just for guide data. Thanks!


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

The TiVo G adapter is the equivalent of plug-'n-play--have had one set up for many years and have never had an issue with it or even notice it, it's like a knick-knack on the shelf at this point.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

TRLK said:


> We use our phones as hotspots and tether for internet access.


That makes no sense. Just use your own Wi-Fi network, since you mentioned you have Comcast.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Bigg said:


> That makes no sense. Just use your own Wi-Fi network, since you mentioned you have Comcast.


Sounds like you're missing something here.

We don't have internet access through Comcast, just cable. The only way we have internet access is through our phones.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

TRLK said:


> Sounds like you're missing something here.


 Delve back through this thread. Apparently you're an edge of an edge of an edge. Welcome aboard. Where do you reside?


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

rdrrepair said:


> Delve back through this thread. Apparently you're an edge of an edge of an edge. Welcome aboard. Where do you reside?


Ha, I guess it works for us to be on the edge of an edge of an edge!

We've had a TiVo since I bought one in 2002 after graduating from college. We're in downstate Illinois. I've always wanted a landline for safety reasons, and then after an EF4 tornado hit a few years ago and our landline was the only way to communicate, it solidified my decision. So it worked for us to keep the same TiVo (if it ain't broke, don't fix it) and use our landline to get our program guide info.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

If you ever upgrade the newest TiVo you'll be able to use is a Series 4 Premiere. Just set the menu to the SD screen and allow your TiVo to connect like you'll be doing shortly.

You'll enjoy the benefits of a HD TiVo with the current interface menu you're using now. Anything newer than that model will require you to connected to the internet full time.

Good luck, I've got a vacation house full of S2's in Calabash, NC but they're on internet via Wi-Fi. If I'm down there in the "off season" I connect like how I described earlier. No issues doing it that way. That TiVo wireless G has a processor built in and it's pretty much flawless and bullet proof.
_
Edit: one more thing. Consider doing this to the bottom of your wireless G. The rubber becomes tacky and eventually will stick to whatever you placed it on. Do not place it on your cable company cable box, I had skipping on a couple of channels._


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

rdrrepair said:


> If you ever upgrade the newest TiVo you'll be able to use is a Series 4 Premiere. Just set the menu to the SD screen and allow your TiVo to connect like you'll be doing shortly.
> 
> You'll enjoy the benefits of a HD TiVo with the current interface menu you're using now. Anything newer than that model will require you to connected to the internet full time.
> 
> ...


That's good to know about the Series 4 Premiere, thanks! The only things we don't like about our Series 2 is not being able to record more than 1 thing at a time and the lack of HD.

Also, good to know about the adapter becoming tacky! We have lots of those furniture pads on hand. Thanks for your help!

ETA: Can you use a cable box with the Series 4 Premiere? We have an newer TiVo sitting in our basement (can't remember which model), but it requires a cable card, so we haven't used it. We like having On Demand with our Series 2.


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

TRLK said:


> ...Can you use a cable box with the Series 4 Premiere? We have an newer TiVo sitting in our basement (can't remember which model), but it requires a cable card, so we haven't used it. We like having On Demand with our Series 2.


 Sorry. The series you have uses a cable box. Anything newer than that requires a cable card and you'll lose your "On Demand".


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

rdrrepair said:


> Sorry. The series you have uses a cable box. Anything newer than that requires a cable card and you'll lose your "On Demand".


Thanks. That's a bummer :/


----------



## Hank (May 31, 2000)

TRLK said:


> Thanks. That's a bummer :/


I don't know if this is feasible for you, but why not use both the cable box (for on-demand) and the newer Tivo with a cable card, and just switch TV inputs between them?

The only additional cost would be the Comcast cablecard.. Here, Cablevision only charges $5/month per cablecard. Is your S2 on a lifetime subscription? What about the newer Tivo you're not using? If both are on monthly subscriptions, you wouldn't have to pay any more since you'd be retiring the S2, otherwise, you would have to subscribe the new box somehow. (although if you have a S3 or HDTivo, I don't think Tivo is enabling new subs on those boxes unless they are lifetime).

This would get you HD programming and multiple tuners, but still keep on-demand when you need it.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

rdrrepair said:


> Sorry. The series you have uses a cable box. Anything newer than that requires a cable card and you'll lose your "On Demand".


Not true with Comcast (at least for most of us excluding the conversation where users moved to fiber to the home may be losing access to it). If you have a Premiere or newer with a CableCard, you should be able to get XOD on your TiVo (I browsed the free Cinemax last night).

Scott


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

TRLK said:


> ETA: Can you use a cable box with the Series 4 Premiere? We have an newer TiVo sitting in our basement (can't remember which model), but it requires a cable card, so we haven't used it. We like having On Demand with our Series 2.


Can you pull it out and find out which model you have (post the number here if you can't tell)? Why aren't you using it since it would record HD for you and is there a reason to not get Comcast Internet even the cheapest package since you could use it beyond just the TiVo's for Internet access?

Scott


----------



## rdrrepair (Nov 24, 2006)

HerronScott said:


> Not true with Comcast (at least for most of us excluding the conversation where users moved to fiber to the home may be losing access to it). If you have a Premiere or newer with a CableCard, you should be able to get XOD on your TiVo (I browsed the free Cinemax last night).
> 
> Scott


 In this case they're not connected to the internet full time and would not be able to use the HD screen of a newer TiVo.

In this configuration the best, I believe, they can do is a Premiere with the SD menu.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Hank said:


> I don't know if this is feasible for you, but why not use both the cable box (for on-demand) and the newer Tivo with a cable card, and just switch TV inputs between them?
> 
> The only additional cost would be the Comcast cablecard.. Here, Cablevision only charges $5/month per cablecard. Is your S2 on a lifetime subscription? What about the newer Tivo you're not using? If both are on monthly subscriptions, you wouldn't have to pay any more since you'd be retiring the S2, otherwise, you would have to subscribe the new box somehow. (although if you have a S3 or HDTivo, I don't think Tivo is enabling new subs on those boxes unless they are lifetime).
> 
> This would get you HD programming and multiple tuners, but still keep on-demand when you need it.


Our Series 2 and the newer box we're not using both have lifetime subscriptions.

The last time I talked to Comcast about getting a cable card, the price was way too much to have both a cable box and a cable card. And I'd rather not pay Comcast anymore than we already do.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

HerronScott said:


> Can you pull it out and find out which model you have (post the number here if you can't tell)? Why aren't you using it since it would record HD for you and is there a reason to not get Comcast Internet even the cheapest package since you could use it beyond just the TiVo's for Internet access?
> 
> Scott


I'll have to find it and I can tell you which model it is.

We just don't need Comcast internet; we have enough data with our phones that we're able to do everything we need online via tethering without Comcast.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

TRLK said:


> Sounds like you're missing something here.
> 
> We don't have internet access through Comcast, just cable. The only way we have internet access is through our phones.


Then get internet through Comcast. Living on x number of GB of LTE and overpaying for your cell phone service to get those GB is idiotic when you have Comcast internet available. LTE is a method of last resort for internet, it is NOT a replacement for cable, fiber, VDSL, or a decent DSL loop if available.


----------



## WVZR1 (Jul 31, 2008)

TRLK said:


> I'll have to find it and I can tell you which model it is.
> 
> We just don't need Comcast internet; we have enough data with our phones that we're able to do everything we need online via tethering without Comcast.


Very dependent maybe on the area that you're in but if you had Xfinity/Comcast Internet you could use Xfinity Mobile and likely save money!! I don't use a cell phone for conversation but talk & text are free. I spend most of my time in areas where Xfinity 'WiFi' or 'WIFi' of some sort is available so everything I do is done using WiFi. My Xfinity Mobile bill is less than $5 per month (5 months running) because I use NO DATA. You could have up to 5 phones. I can't rid myself completely from Comcast because I need their voice plan so I can TEXT from a PC and I wouldn't/couldn't get by without their Internet.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Bigg said:


> Then get internet through Comcast. Living on x number of GB of LTE and overpaying for your cell phone service to get those GB is idiotic when you have Comcast internet available. LTE is a method of last resort for internet, it is NOT a replacement for cable, fiber, VDSL, or a decent DSL loop if available.


It's not idiotic in our case. It is a considerable savings to not have Comcast internet. We've been doing this for a few years now and it works for us, and saves us money.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

WVZR1 said:


> Very dependent maybe on the area that you're in but if you had Xfinity/Comcast Internet you could use Xfinity Mobile and likely save money!! I don't use a cell phone for conversation but talk & text are free. I spend most of my time in areas where Xfinity 'WiFi' or 'WIFi' of some sort is available so everything I do is done using WiFi. My Xfinity Mobile bill is less than $5 per month (5 months running) because I use NO DATA. You could have up to 5 phones. I can't rid myself completely from Comcast because I need their voice plan so I can TEXT from a PC and I wouldn't/couldn't get by without their Internet.


I don't know if that's an option in our area, but given our multitude of negative experiences with Comcast, we'd never willingly choose to do *more *business with them. Regardless, we regularly travel somewhere where AT&T is the only option, so for that reason alone, our mobile plan needs to be AT&T.


----------



## Phil T (Oct 29, 2003)

FYI, I switched from AT&T wireless to the T-mobile 55+ plan last September. I have unlimited everything for 2 IPhones @$55.00 a month including taxes. Coverage in my area (metro Denver) is the same or better. Also dropped DirecTV for Comcast and Tivo. Getting TV and internet for less then I was paying for DirecTV only. 

Your feelings towards Comcast mirror my feelings towards AT&T. Comcast customer service has been much better. It also could be because I am within walking distance of a Comcast service center and have never had a problem dealing with them. AT&T/DirecTV has been a nightmare for me since the merger.


----------



## TRLK (Jul 7, 2018)

Phil T said:


> FYI, I switched from AT&T wireless to the T-mobile 55+ plan last September. I have unlimited everything for 2 IPhones @$55.00 a month including taxes. Coverage in my area (metro Denver) is the same or better. Also dropped DirecTV for Comcast and Tivo. Getting TV and internet for less then I was paying for DirecTV only.
> 
> Your feelings towards Comcast mirror my feelings towards AT&T. Comcast customer service has been much better. It also could be because I am within walking distance of a Comcast service center and have never had a problem dealing with them. AT&T/DirecTV has been a nightmare for me since the merger.


We had a bad experience with T-Mobile several years back when they were our carrier; all of a sudden, we no longer had service at our house. I called and they said that they had re-positioned the tower, and that they'd put work order in to fix it. Weeks went by, and I kept calling back (landline for the win!), and they kept not fixing it. Every time I'd call, they'd assure me that it would be fixed, and it never was. After several weeks, we switched to AT&T.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

TRLK said:


> I'll have to find it and I can tell you which model it is.
> 
> We just don't need Comcast internet; we have enough data with our phones that we're able to do everything we need online via tethering without Comcast.


Understood, but in that case you shouldn't look at a newer TiVo with CableCard then. XOD will require Internet service as the Xfinity XOD app on the TiVo communicates with Comcast via Internet and then tunes to the correct XOD channel to receive the show you select. Also as rdrrepair indicates, a lot of the functionality of the newer TiVo's depends on a fulltime Internet connection.

It's obviously a personal choice there, but for me not being able to record HD would be one of the bigger drivers to move to a newer TiVo. We upgraded from 2 S1's to 2 S3's in 2007 due to the lifetime transfer offer even though we didn't have an HD TV until 2010. 



TRLK said:


> The last time I talked to Comcast about getting a cable card, the price was way too much to have both a cable box and a cable card. And I'd rather not pay Comcast anymore than we already do.


If you had fulltime Internet with your TiVo/CableCard as your primary device (retiring the S2's), you would turn your Comcast cablebox back in and there wouldn't be any additional charge for the TiVo/CableCard ADO (Additional Digital Outlet). In fact you would get a $2.50 credit for using your own equipment in that case (which is how we are configured with 1 Roamio and 1 TiVo Mini upstairs in my son's game room).

Scott


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

TRLK said:


> It's not idiotic in our case. It is a considerable savings to not have Comcast internet. We've been doing this for a few years now and it works for us, and saves us money.


Not having home internet when it is available is idiotic. I've used AT&T as home internet for up to a week at a time when staying somewhere not served by any wireline broadband services, and it's possible to eke by, but that's all you're doing, eking by.

If you don't need much speed, get the $50 25/2 package from Comcast and switch to a smaller cell phone plan, then you won't have to be constantly watching GB and using MHS, which is great for travel, but a giant kludge for home use.



TRLK said:


> I don't know if that's an option in our area, but given our multitude of negative experiences with Comcast, we'd never willingly choose to do *more *business with them. Regardless, we regularly travel somewhere where AT&T is the only option, so for that reason alone, our mobile plan needs to be AT&T.


Whereabouts? TX? WV? Then why do you have Comcast TV? Do you have broadband options through anyone else where you could get a streaming TV service?



Phil T said:


> FYI, I switched from AT&T wireless to the T-mobile 55+ plan last September. I have unlimited everything for 2 IPhones @$55.00 a month including taxes. Coverage in my area (metro Denver) is the same or better. Also dropped DirecTV for Comcast and Tivo. Getting TV and internet for less then I was paying for DirecTV only.


The problem is, T-Mobile has a lot less coverage nationwide, and a lot of their rural coverage is crap. You get what you pay for.



HerronScott said:


> If you had fulltime Internet with your TiVo/CableCard as your primary device (retiring the S2's), you would turn your Comcast cablebox back in and there wouldn't be any additional charge for the TiVo/CableCard ADO (Additional Digital Outlet). In fact you would get a $2.50 credit for using your own equipment in that case (which is how we are configured with 1 Roamio and 1 TiVo Mini upstairs in my son's game room).


That's a good point. The cost would go down at least $7.50/mo, more if there are multiple boxes involved, plus downgrading the AT&T plan to a lower tier.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> The problem is, T-Mobile has a lot less coverage nationwide, and a lot of their rural coverage is crap. You get what you pay for.


It's not 2011 anymore. I get better nationwide reception on T-Mobile than my brother-in-law on his Verizon, and not to mention that T-Mo's data is faster. I've got 7 lines, all unlimited, and pay $127.50 + tax. My bro-in-law pays more than that for only 2 lines on Verizon.

I agree.... you DO get what you pay for... just sometimes you get MORE by paying LESS.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> It's not 2011 anymore. I get better nationwide reception on T-Mobile than my brother-in-law on his Verizon, and not to mention that T-Mo's data is faster. I've got 7 lines, all unlimited, and pay $127.50 + tax. My bro-in-law pays more than that for only 2 lines on Verizon.


T-Mobile has added a lot of coverage, but they have a LONG way to go before they are competitive with the big two. No, they don't have more coverage than Verizon, they have significantly less. The data speeds are very close between Verizon and T-Mobile nationwide, some tests show Verizon ahead, some show T-Mobile ahead, but it depends heavily on the market. I would argue that AT&T is more consistent due to spectrum depth, as Verizon is either crazy fast on small cells, or slow on macros.



> I agree.... you DO get what you pay for... just sometimes you get MORE by paying LESS.


Not the case with T-Mobile.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> T-Mobile has added a lot of coverage, but they have a LONG way to go before they are competitive with the big two.


Laughable. It really isn't a competition when T-Mobile provides better coverage for less money.



Bigg said:


> No, they don't have more coverage than Verizon, they have significantly less.


Again, a common misconception for someone that hasn't been paying attention since 2011.



Bigg said:


> The data speeds are very close between Verizon and T-Mobile nationwide, some tests show Verizon ahead, some show T-Mobile ahead, but it depends heavily on the market.


T-Mobile's ahead at last check right now. Maybe Verizon will try and catch up?



Bigg said:


> Not the case with T-Mobile.


Nothing wrong with staying with Verizon, paying more, and getting less, if you're into wasting money. You should be used to the saying, "You DON'T get what you pay for when Verizon is concerned."


----------



## Hcour (Dec 24, 2007)

I'm confused. I just got a msg on my Tivo about this discontinuation of "dial-up" service for my Tivo (series 3). I haven't had dial-up in about 12 yrs. I have a Spectrum modem/router. It is connected via ethernet to my Tivo. Are talking about using wireless instead of ethernet?


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Hcour said:


> I'm confused. I just got a msg on my Tivo about this discontinuation of "dial-up" service for my Tivo (series 3). I haven't had dial-up in about 12 yrs. I have a Spectrum modem/router. It is connected via ethernet to my Tivo. Are talking about using wireless instead of ethernet?


Probably just covering their bases and sending that out to all dial-up capable TiVo's. No need to worry about it if you aren't using dial-up with your S3.

Scott


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

mahermusic said:


> Laughable. It really isn't a competition when T-Mobile provides better coverage for less money.


I get that in your area, you've got adequate T-Mobile coverage. But extending that assumption to other areas to justify the T-Mobile bromance doesn't work. All you can say for sure is in the area you are, it seems to be OK.

I can tell you that in my area, T-Mobile isn't in option. Everybody in my rural area has Verizon, or they don't have a cell at all. Sprint is completely non-existent. T-Mobile and AT&T claim coverage -- but people in rural areas know that consumer-facing coverage maps and actual coverage maps they present when they want tower permission are 2 different things. With a T-Mobile phone, I can get coverage if I stand in certain areas of my yard (same with AT&T). They seem to have put towers in with less density than when Verizon covered our area years ago. So they can claim wide coverage on a map -- but in reality (in our area), that coverage is only realized if you decide to sell your house and live outside in a tent instead.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

eherberg said:


> I get that in your area, you've got adequate T-Mobile coverage. All you can say for sure is in the area you are, it seems to be OK.


And it's good that Verizon seems to be working for you in the area you live in. But hearing Verizon fanboys state that T-Mobile "has a LONG way to go to be competitive" is just silly talk from 2011. I've had T-Mo since 2000... and on the Eastern Seaboard to California, have never NOT had service. Texas, Wyoming, Florida, North Dakota... some quite rural places where my brother-in-law (a Verizon user) didn't have service, and I did.

He's also paying twice as much for his two lines than I am for my seven. That's just silly. And don't get me started on the Verizon congestion.... sometimes we both have coverage, but he just can't use his. I'm also on Unlimited... he's sharing GBs of data...

There's a LOT of Verizon users that have never even tried T-Mo, that spout worse fake news than our president... It's just silly...and, yes, laughable!

So, if Verizon is working for you where you're at... that's great! I just hope you're not paying too much. I can surely say that T-Mobile is working for me nationwide. Seven lines, all unlimited w/HD streaming and 14 GB per line of high-speed tethering + a free Napster unRadio account per line for $127.50 + tax. Good stuff.


----------



## samsauce29 (Nov 30, 2007)

eherberg said:


> I get that in your area, you've got adequate T-Mobile coverage. But extending that assumption to other areas to justify the T-Mobile bromance doesn't work. All you can say for sure is in the area you are, it seems to be OK.
> 
> I can tell you that in my area, T-Mobile isn't in option. Everybody in my rural area has Verizon, or they don't have a cell at all. Sprint is completely non-existent. T-Mobile and AT&T claim coverage -- but people in rural areas know that consumer-facing coverage maps and actual coverage maps they present when they want tower permission are 2 different things. With a T-Mobile phone, I can get coverage if I stand in certain areas of my yard (same with AT&T). They seem to have put towers in with less density than when Verizon covered our area years ago. So they can claim wide coverage on a map -- but in reality (in our area), that coverage is only realized if you decide to sell your house and live outside in a tent instead.


Love this assessment. Had heard all of these good things about T-Mobile here and elsewhere, so checked out the 55+ plan for my parents who live in rural NW PA. Coverage map at the macro level was a nice dark purple... then I zoomed in and the map got a lot lighter. "Fair coverage" meaning some coverage in homes and ok coverage outdoors. i was like "thanks but no thanks".


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

samsauce29 said:


> Love this assessment. Had heard all of these good things about T-Mobile here and elsewhere, so checked out the 55+ plan for my parents who live in rural NW PA. Coverage map at the macro level was a nice dark purple... then I zoomed in and the map got a lot lighter. "Fair coverage" meaning some coverage in homes and ok coverage outdoors. i was like "thanks but no thanks".


Can't tell you just how many times we hear this.... people seeing what's on a map, but not actually trying it, and they go on paying more and more $$$. John and Neville have really changed this company.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

I thought TiVo fanboys were drunk on the sauce .... Clearly it seems an occasional T-Mobile tweet from John can line 'em up for Kool-Aid around the block.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

samsauce29 said:


> Love this assessment. Had heard all of these good things about T-Mobile here and elsewhere, so checked out the 55+ plan for my parents who live in rural NW PA. Coverage map at the macro level was a nice dark purple... then I zoomed in and the map got a lot lighter. "Fair coverage" meaning some coverage in homes and ok coverage outdoors. i was like "thanks but no thanks".


I will give T-Mobile props for at least having a better representation of coverage on zoom-in mode than others. Both Verizon and AT&T show the same 4G coverage no matter what -- when the reality is always a little different. T-Mobile is the only provider that gives that zoomed-in assessment.

In my case - their 'outdoor' coverage assessment is a bit of a stretch. Sure there's outdoor coverage ... depending on where I stand in my yard.

I suspect those who travel in what they think are 'rural areas' probably aren't straying too far from the major roads. In my area (the only one I feel qualified to assess), the simple company decision to do coverage using the least resources possible (a John decision, I'm sure) gives a nice map of continuous coverage with the reality being one where nobody who lives where I do could seriously consider it an option.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

I've had the big three off and on for years here in WI, traveling to AZ and AR on vacations, and all were good. I switch around for price changes but for me they all seem the same.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> Laughable. It really isn't a competition when T-Mobile provides better coverage for less money.


T-Mobile does not provide better coverage nationwide.



> Again, a common misconception for someone that hasn't been paying attention since 2011.


I actually pay a lot of attention to this stuff, and even with a B71 capable phone, they still have significantly less coverage than AT&T or Verizon.



> T-Mobile's ahead at last check right now. Maybe Verizon will try and catch up?


Verizon certainly could build out more coverage, but they are still quite a ways ahead of T-Mobile coverage wise.



> Nothing wrong with staying with Verizon, paying more, and getting less, if you're into wasting money. You should be used to the saying, "You DON'T get what you pay for when Verizon is concerned."


I personally have AT&T, but factually speaking, Verizon has more coverage, so you pay more, you get more coverage. That's how it works.



eherberg said:


> I get that in your area, you've got adequate T-Mobile coverage. But extending that assumption to other areas to justify the T-Mobile bromance doesn't work. All you can say for sure is in the area you are, it seems to be OK.


Yeah. I just don't understand the extreme fanboyism that T-Mobile fanboys and trolls exhibit on the internet. The attitudes of the various carrier fanboys is about as follows:

Verizon: "Verizon's network is the best, but they're overpriced and kind of a bad company"
AT&T: "AT&T's network is really good, I love my bundle/plan/whatever, but they're the evil Death Star"
Sprint: "Sprint's network sucks, but I have Sprint because [either hyper local coverage or some old plan that's really cheap]"
T-Mobile: "ALL HAIL JOHN LEGERE! John Legere is God! All worship John Legere! T-Mobile is better than every other carrier in the world because they are T-Mobile! Thou shalt not say anything bad about T-Mobile! All bow down to the god of gods John Legere!"

The T-Mobile fanboys and trolls are the only ones out there who will continuously spout nonsense and outright lie to support T-Mobile. They change their positions when confronted with facts, or just outright deny them. It's the weirdest phenomenon I've seen in a long time discussing technology on the internet.



> I can tell you that in my area, T-Mobile isn't in option. Everybody in my rural area has Verizon, or they don't have a cell at all. Sprint is completely non-existent. T-Mobile and AT&T claim coverage -- but people in rural areas know that consumer-facing coverage maps and actual coverage maps they present when they want tower permission are 2 different things. With a T-Mobile phone, I can get coverage if I stand in certain areas of my yard (same with AT&T). They seem to have put towers in with less density than when Verizon covered our area years ago. So they can claim wide coverage on a map -- but in reality (in our area), that coverage is only realized if you decide to sell your house and live outside in a tent instead.


Yeah, it depends a lot on the area. Historically, Verizon had the lowest tower density, but it depends on what company bought what other company, and how their towers were spaced, who the ILEC was, etc. T-Mobile is a viable option for a lot of people, but they just don't have the raw land mass coverage that AT&T and Verizon do. It's highly regional too, there are areas where the same can be said for AT&T and nothing else works. Verizon still has the best network on average nationwide, but the gap between them and AT&T has gotten much smaller, and the gap between AT&T and T-Mobile, while still big, has gotten quite a bit smaller.

Also, all of the carriers crayon in the map. T-Mobile is taking that to new extremes right now, but it used to be a big Verizon trick, then AT&T started to push it even further, now Verizon's maps are more honest than AT&T or T-Mobile's. They all do their maps a bit differently so they are hard to compare side by side.



mahermusic said:


> And it's good that Verizon seems to be working for you in the area you live in. But hearing Verizon fanboys state that T-Mobile "has a LONG way to go to be competitive" is just silly talk from 2011. I've had T-Mo since 2000... and on the Eastern Seaboard to California, have never NOT had service. Texas, Wyoming, Florida, North Dakota... some quite rural places where my brother-in-law (a Verizon user) didn't have service, and I did.


OMG, you seem to have no awareness of the irony. The T-Mobile fanboys are by far the worst of them all. It's not even a contest. The Verizon fanboys are barely fanboys anymore, they spend more time complaining about Verizon's prices than being fanboys about the network.

If you've always had service on any carrier, then you haven't traveled much, but that's especially true on T-Mobile. You haven't really traveled until you're somewhere with no cell service on any carrier.



> He's also paying twice as much for his two lines than I am for my seven. That's just silly. And don't get me started on the Verizon congestion.... sometimes we both have coverage, but he just can't use his. I'm also on Unlimited... he's sharing GBs of data...


Verizon has both a band parking problem, as well as a bad spectrum position. They really need to work on the macro side of thing, since they've been doing all small cells the past few years, so Verizon people seem to either get 150mbps+ on small cells, or <5mbps if that on congested urban/surburban macros. T-Mobile has a highly densified macro network, and AT&T has spectrum coming out of their ears now so that a mid-density macro network can handle most areas with no issues. AT&T isn't winning any speed competitions, but their network rarely slows down below 5mbps, and usually just plods along at 10-20mbps, but their speeds will be going up as they rebuild towers covering 95% POPS over the next 3 years with B14/29/30/66 in addition to whatever core bands (B2/4/5/12) are already running.



> There's a LOT of Verizon users that have never even tried T-Mo, that spout worse fake news than our president... It's just silly...and, yes, laughable!


Verizon's network is still overall better than T-Mobile's. There is also a brand effect that makes people think that Verizon is just the best, when it's about equal to AT&T, and T-Mobile, while just not as good, is probably good enough for a lot of people.

I think there is also an effect of the NYC market, which is a heavily Verizon market. Comedians still make jokes about AT&T and not having service, which was the result of AT&T's exclusivity on the iPhone, high iPhone penetration in NYC, a hostile RF environment due to it being an old city, and a bad spectrum position in NYC making their network there crap for years. No one pays attention to San Antonio, Houston, or Dallas, which are all AT&T-dominant markets, but in their combined size are a significant proportion of the POPs size of the Acela corridor.

I think Verizon would have fared better than AT&T with the iPhone, since they have a better spectrum position in NYC, and they were running CDMA and EVDO at the time, which separate voice and data, but I think it still would have caused their network to melt down, at least on the EVDO side, although it wouldn't have resulted in the dropped calls and almost totally useless network that AT&T's HSPA+ did.

Luckily, AT&T has turned things around in NYC, and while their network is not at the level Verizon's is at there, it's actually usable, and highly reliable, if a bit slow at times. Further rollout of B14 and B66 with new phones coming online that can use those bands should help things out a lot more.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

eherberg said:


> I thought TiVo fanboys were drunk on the sauce .... Clearly it seems an occasional T-Mobile tweet from John can line 'em up for Kool-Aid around the block.


Yeah, the T-Mobile fanboys are unlike any other breed of them.



eherberg said:


> I suspect those who travel in what they think are 'rural areas' probably aren't straying too far from the major roads. In my area (the only one I feel qualified to assess), the simple company decision to do coverage using the least resources possible (a John decision, I'm sure) gives a nice map of continuous coverage with the reality being one where nobody who lives where I do could seriously consider it an option.


I purposefully try to take back roads when reasonably possible, as the most interesting places in the US are back roads. That's a problem with a lot of T-Mobile's rural coverage. They slapped up a single 5x5 of B12 in a lot of areas, and stretched it so thin that it isn't really continuous coverage. Now, their maps for B71 are totally ridiculous, they have it stretched MUCH farther than AT&T's roaming coverage from a single tower, even though the actual difference between 600mhz and 700/850mhz is minimal.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> T-Mobile does not provide better coverage nationwide.


Oh yes they do.



Bigg said:


> I actually pay a lot of attention to this stuff, and even with a B71 capable phone, they still have significantly less coverage than AT&T or Verizon.


Then you really don't pay attention to "this stuff"



Bigg said:


> Verizon certainly could build out more coverage, but they are still quite a ways ahead of T-Mobile coverage wise.


Not even close.... they'd BETTER build out their coverage. They're now playing catch-up.



Bigg said:


> I personally have AT&T,


This explains a lot.



Bigg said:


> Yeah. I just don't understand the extreme fanboyism that T-Mobile fanboys and trolls exhibit on the internet. The attitudes of the various carrier fanboys is about as follows:


You don't have to tell anyone you don't understand things. I think it's pretty self-evident.



Bigg said:


> Verizon: "Verizon's network is the best, but they're overpriced and kind of a bad company"


Now, don't be so hard on Verizon. No one is saying they're the best. Not when other networks have the same or better coverage, and charge less...



Bigg said:


> The T-Mobile fanboys and trolls are the only ones out there who will continuously spout nonsense and outright lie to support T-Mobile. They change their positions when confronted with facts, or just outright deny them. It's the weirdest phenomenon I've seen in a long time discussing technology on the internet.


Yes, let's talk about lies... the reason we need to counter "fake news" is because Verizon, the others... and people like YOU are constantly spouting off falsehoods.

Here's the latest "salvo" from Verizon, itself, lying about T-Mobile's supposed "fees that they're hiding.... how sad.:

__
https://www.reddit.com/r/path%3D%252Fr%252Ftmobile%252Fcomments%252F8yco55%252F

Do you know what's even worse? When a Verizon fanboy is spouting off outright lies..... and DOESN'T EVEN HAVE VERIZON. Sad x2.


----------



## astrohip (Jan 7, 2003)

eherberg said:


> I can tell you that in my area, T-Mobile isn't in option. Everybody in my rural area has Verizon, or they don't have a cell at all.


True here also. My wife is bugging me to add Netflix (we have no landline Internet), and I looked into T-Mobile just to get the unlimited data for streaming. I was willing to pay for a new account to do that.

But their map shows us as "fair coverage". That ain't gonna cut it.



mahermusic said:


> Can't tell you just how many times we hear this.... people seeing what's on a map, but not actually trying it


Then fix the effing maps! No way I'm going to "try it" and find out it sucks, just like they said it would.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

To be fair -- I actually wish T-Mobile did have decent coverage where I live. If that was the case - I would go back in a heartbeat just for the ease of phone use during travels across the border to Canada and back (as opposed to the idiotic 24-hour 'TravelPass' from Verizon). It's just that where I live, T-mobile (or any GSM carrier) isn't an option. One feels compelled to point **** like this out when reading some glowing proclamation of T-Mobile's now-fantastic nationwide coverage ... extrapolated from home-use in that area plus a few car trips.

But enough hanging out on the T-Mobile forum ... I'm heading back to the TiVo forum.

Oh wait ... 

Edit: TCF has a 'swear' filter? Neat -- I guess I never really noticed it. Guess it's the first time I used a naughty word in a post.


----------



## oscarfish (Mar 2, 2009)

Hcour said:


> I'm confused. I just got a msg on my Tivo about this discontinuation of "dial-up" service for my Tivo (series 3). I haven't had dial-up in about 12 yrs. I have a Spectrum modem/router. It is connected via ethernet to my Tivo. Are talking about using wireless instead of ethernet?


I have two Series 2s that both received this message. I don't remember how long its been since either of them connected via dial-up, maybe 10 years. I didn't think that message was worded very well. I'm so glad @TiVo_Ted announced what was happening because if I didn't already know, I'd be in a mild/medium state of panic (yes, I panic easily).


----------



## CAG45 (Mar 15, 2009)

Like Hcour above, I received the same message on my Series3 - but I never received any email (like the message said I would).

Just to confirm - this is only cancelling connecting via a phone call, correct?
If my Tivo3 is connected via USB adapter -> wireless router -> cable modem, this won't impact me?

thanks


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

CAG45 said:


> Like Hcour above, I received the same message on my Series3 - but I never received any email (like the message said I would).
> 
> Just to confirm - this is only cancelling connecting via a phone call, correct?
> If my Tivo3 is connected via USB adapter -> wireless router -> cable modem, this won't impact me?
> ...


Correct--it's cool beans for you.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

eherberg said:


> I will give T-Mobile props for at least having a better representation of coverage on zoom-in mode than others. Both Verizon and AT&T show the same 4G coverage no matter what -- when the reality is always a little different. T-Mobile is the only provider that gives that zoomed-in assessment.
> 
> In my case - their 'outdoor' coverage assessment is a bit of a stretch. Sure there's outdoor coverage ... depending on where I stand in my yard.
> 
> I suspect those who travel in what they think are 'rural areas' probably aren't straying too far from the major roads. In my area (the only one I feel qualified to assess), the simple company decision to do coverage using the least resources possible (a John decision, I'm sure) gives a nice map of continuous coverage with the reality being one where nobody who lives where I do could seriously consider it an option.


My experience is the same here comparing AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon where we live and travel. We ca n easily compare AT&T and T-Mobile coverage as 3 of us have AT&T but my son's girlfriend has T-Mobile and in our area she frequently has no to poor coverage while we're fine with AT&T. And I don't recall us ever being in an area travelling where she had coverage and we didn't. In Virginia though, Verizon does have the best coverage in the rural areas although AT&T had improved over the past 5 years. We stick with AT&T though as my work supplies my phone and we get a corporate discount for my wife and son's phone as part of our company arrangement with AT&T (family).

Scott


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

> Do you know what's even worse? When a Verizon fanboy is spouting off outright lies..... and DOESN'T EVEN HAVE VERIZON. Sad x2.


I'm not a Verizon fanboy. But facts are facts. Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile. That's just physical objective reality. Now, whether AT&T or Verizon has more land area 4G coverage (assuming you allow Faux G to be counted), that's a really interesting discussion, as no one is really sure which one actually has more, and you can slice it and dice it different ways, like do you count LTEiRA partners or not? Are you looking at CONUS, or do you give AT&T PR too?



mahermusic said:


> Oh yes they do.


You're just literally, physically WRONG. Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile. AT&T has more coverage than T-Mobile. Who has the most coverage? Either AT&T or Verizon, but no one is really sure. It depends on the region of course.



> Then you really don't pay attention to "this stuff"


Yeah, actually I do, very closely.



> You don't have to tell anyone you don't understand things. I think it's pretty self-evident.


I understand the cell phone networks. What I don't understand is the extreme fanboyism of T-Mobile trolls like you. The worshipping of John Legere is beyond bizarre.



> Yes, let's talk about lies... the reason we need to counter "fake news" is because Verizon, the others... and people like YOU are constantly spouting off falsehoods.
> 
> Here's the latest "salvo" from Verizon, itself, lying about T-Mobile's supposed "fees that they're hiding.... how sad.:


Some things in there are misleading or irrelevant, others are pretty interesting... like T-Mobile's network being 68% the size of Verizon's. That's probably pre B71 rollout. Maybe T-Mobile is up to 70% or 72% of the size of Verizon's network by now.


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

You can go and look at several non-biased sites to see that Verizon's coverage is #1, AT&T is #2, and T-Mobile is a close third. I'm of course excluding the 600 MHz band that T-Mobile uses, since hardly any phones can use that today. T-Mobile ties with Verizon in speed, though. 

But it is possible that in any given area, T-Mobile ties Verizon in coverage. Or that tethering is a better option than their cable company's Internet service. Or that dial-up is the best option for low Internet usage.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

BobCamp1 said:


> You can go and look at several non-biased sites to see that Verizon's coverage is #1, AT&T is #2, and T-Mobile is a close third. I'm of course excluding the 600 MHz band that T-Mobile uses, since hardly any phones can use that today. T-Mobile ties with Verizon in speed, though.


Even with 600mhz, T-Mobile doesn't have the raw coverage that Verizon does. A lot of their rural coverage is paper-thin too, since they've been building out a map graphic, not a network.



> But it is possible that in any given area, T-Mobile ties Verizon in coverage.


True. There are local strongholds for all the carriers, even a few for Sprint. T-Mobile has a highly densified network throughout Florida and California, Florida being a traditionally strong T-Mobile market.



> Or that tethering is a better option than their cable company's Internet service. Or that dial-up is the best option for low Internet usage.


No. No way, no how.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

astrohip said:


> True here also. My wife is bugging me to add Netflix (we have no landline Internet), and I looked into T-Mobile just to get the unlimited data for streaming. I was willing to pay for a new account to do that.
> 
> But their map shows us as "fair coverage". That ain't gonna cut it.
> 
> Then fix the effing maps! No way I'm going to "try it" and find out it sucks, just like they said it would.


That's what I'm saying. You're going by a map that shows there's coverage where you need it. It doesn't show a "dead zone".... it shows coverage. Go to the "effing" store and get a sim to try it out for 21 days!!! It shows the same thing where I live, too... and coverage is excellent here. Hey, it's YOUR nickel... (although I suspect you're currently paying MUCH more than that...)


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> I'm not a Verizon fanboy.


Oh, come now.... We all believe you....



Bigg said:


> You're just literally, physically WRONG. Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile.


Not even close.... especially when the Verizon "coverage" is so slow, it's unusable...



Bigg said:


> Yeah, actually I do, very closely.


Time to get better glasses, then.



Bigg said:


> I understand the cell phone networks. What I don't understand is the extreme fanboyism of T-Mobile trolls like you. The worshipping of John Legere is beyond bizarre.


You mean Neville Ray, not John Legere.... Neville is the one that put T-Mobile on top.... not John. Please try and get SOMETHING in your thread correct, ok?

And I just don't understand your Verizon Fanboy-ism, spewing forth on the pre-2011 nonsense. It's got to be embarrassing to you, to continue forth with the trolling for a cell phone company... that you don't actually HAVE as a provider. I've only HEARD about Verizon Worshipping... until now.



Bigg said:


> Some things in there are misleading or irrelevant, others are pretty interesting...


Well, that's the FIRST thing you've said that actually, kind of, sorta makes any sense. It's a good look for you...


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> Oh, come now.... We all believe you....


The fact of the matter is that I'm not a fanboy for any carrier. I like AT&T, and I generally defend AT&T a bit, but I will trash them equally as much. I think Verizon is overrated, but I still recognize that they have the biggest and the best network in the US.



> Not even close.... especially when the Verizon "coverage" is so slow, it's unusable...


That's not the argument. The argument was about T-Mobile's coverage versus Verizon's coverage. Of course you know that you're wrong about T-Mobile's coverage, because Verizon just has more coverage, that's just a physical, objective reality, so now you're trying to change the subject. I'm not going to let you. Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile.



> Time to get better glasses, then.


I pay close attention to this stuff, and I know what I'm talking about. You can't get around the objective reality that Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile.



> You mean Neville Ray, not John Legere.... Neville is the one that put T-Mobile on top.... not John. Please try and get SOMETHING in your thread correct, ok?


John Legere is the CEO and public face of T-Mobile. Neville Ray is the CTO. It all goes back to John Legere. T-Mobile has been fairly successful, but what are they top in? Maybe data speeds depending on what you read, some have Verizon winning. If you accounted for zeros where T-Mobile has no coverage, their average would be much lower than Verizon or even AT&T. They certainly are not top in coverage, they are #3 there, as they are #3 in terms of the number of customers. Of course if you really slice and dice, you could eventually find *something *they are top in, like number of net postpaid adds or something, which is interesting, if a bit more esoteric.



> And I just don't understand your Verizon Fanboy-ism, spewing forth on the pre-2011 nonsense. It's got to be embarrassing to you, to continue forth with the trolling for a cell phone company... that you don't actually HAVE as a provider. I've only HEARD about Verizon Worshipping... until now.


You can't understand my Verizon fanboyism because it doesn't exist. ROFL, you're the one trolling here, I'm just stating objective reality.

The reality on forums is that T-Mobile trolls and fanboys like you are 100x worse than Verizon, AT&T and Sprint fanboys combined. T-Mobile trolls are the only ones who continually deny objective reality and are on some sort of holy crusade for their carrier. There barely even are Verizon and AT&T fanboys anymore. The closest you can get are people who like one or the other, and defend them, but aren't really fanboys.


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

The easiest way to identify a company cult-member: When they use the word 'we' when talking about a company they are not employed by. I checked out after realizing I was reading the postings of a die-hard cultist.

FYI: That strategy works pretty well identifying the TiVo cultists too ...


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> The fact of the matter is that I'm not a fanboy for any carrier.


You say this, but you're creaming for Verizon in about every post... so...



Bigg said:


> That's not the argument. The argument was about T-Mobile's coverage versus Verizon's coverage. Of course you know that you're wrong about T-Mobile's coverage, because Verizon just has more coverage, that's just a physical, objective reality, so now you're trying to change the subject. I'm not going to let you. Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile.


And once again, I'll state that this is nothing to do with 2011. T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. Period. You need to know that you're wrong. If not... sad.



Bigg said:


> I pay close attention to this stuff, and I know what I'm talking about. You can't get around the objective reality that Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile.


You really, really have no idea whatsoever on what you're talking about. T-Mobile had more coverage than Verizon, and even has FASTER data. When will you enter reality? I mean, really. You're only embarrassing yourself. (Again and again...)



Bigg said:


> John Legere is the CEO and public face of T-Mobile. Neville Ray is the CTO.


See... even if you're not telling the truth among carriers... I'm happy you're at least learning SOMETHING around here.



Bigg said:


> You can't understand my Verizon fanboyism.


You got that right.... and you don't even HAVE Verizon... which makes absolutely no sense to me...

As a Verizon troll, you really need a lesson in reality, and I'm going to make sure you receive it. T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon... T-Mobile's data is FASTER than Verizon, and T-Mobile is less expensive than Verizon.

Listen, Verizon Fanboy... you just keep spouting forth on your "fake news" about Verizon, just like the advertisement I uploaded a few posts above, and I'll keep coming here to correct you. This is how it will work.

You're welcome.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> You say this, but you're creaming for Verizon in about every post... so...


I'm not advocating for Verizon, I'm simply stating the factual differences between T-Mobile and Verizon, as well as Verizon and other carriers. If I were to recommend a service, it would be AT&T, but I'm not a fanboy for them. I will absolutely trash them when and where they deserve it.



> And once again, I'll state that this is nothing to do with 2011. T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. Period. You need to know that you're wrong. If not... sad.
> 
> You really, really have no idea whatsoever on what you're talking about. T-Mobile had more coverage than Verizon, and even has FASTER data. When will you enter reality? I mean, really. You're only embarrassing yourself. (Again and again...)


I really can't tell whether you are delusional, or just trolling here. It seems more like trolling, but you seem so convinced of the bull**** you are spewing out even that it's patently ridiculous that it might just be delusion.



> See... even if you're not telling the truth among carriers... I'm happy you're at least learning SOMETHING around here.


I didn't learn anything because I already knew that.



> You got that right.... and you don't even HAVE Verizon... which makes absolutely no sense to me...
> 
> As a Verizon troll, you really need a lesson in reality, and I'm going to make sure you receive it. T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon... T-Mobile's data is FASTER than Verizon, and T-Mobile is less expensive than Verizon.
> 
> ...


Nice selective quoting. The rest of the sentence read "because it doesn't exist". Because I'm not a Verizon fanboy.

T-Mobile is less expensive than Verizon because they have a smaller network with less coverage that's less reliable. It's good enough for some people, but you have to be delusional to think that it's anywhere close to equivalent.

You can't correct me because you're either lying or delusional. Everyone knows that Verizon has the largest LTE network in the US.

As to who has the largest 4G network, that's a good question. AT&T might, Verizon might. T-Mobile definitely doesn't.[/quote]


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I just got a Pre TiVo Central Message on my TiVo HD telling me that I still have "one or more TiVo devices connecting to the TiVo Service via dialup." I haven't had a device on dialup for many, many years (at least a decade or more). Even my S1 had a TiVoNet card installed to get data via the network, and it and the S2 hit the scrap heap a couple years ago.

It's possible someone rescued either or both of them off the recycle pile, which would be fine, but I doubt it. I think it was just a badly targeted PTCM that went out to far more people than it should have.


----------



## pfiagra (Oct 13, 2014)

LoadStar said:


> I just got a Pre TiVo Central Message on my TiVo HD telling me that I still have "one or more TiVo devices connecting to the TiVo Service via dialup." I haven't had a device on dialup for many, many years (at least a decade or more). Even my S1 had a TiVoNet card installed to get data via the network, and it and the S2 hit the scrap heap a couple years ago.
> 
> It's possible someone rescued either or both of them off the recycle pile, which would be fine, but I doubt it. I think it was just a badly targeted PTCM that went out to far more people than it should have.


Yippee, an on-topic post!


----------



## KDeFlane (Jan 29, 2014)

LoadStar said:


> I just got a Pre TiVo Central Message on my TiVo HD telling me that I still have "one or more TiVo devices connecting to the TiVo Service via dialup."


I also got this message on my box, the only TiVo unit I've ever owned, my Premiere 4 which has never had dialup ever. My housemate says to ignore the message. It wouldn't be such a bad thing for them to make a global announcement, but when that message says their records indicate a falsehood it bothers me.


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

KDeFlane said:


> I also got this message on my box, the only TiVo unit I've ever owned, my Premiere 4 which has never had dialup ever. My housemate says to ignore the message. It wouldn't be such a bad thing for them to make a global announcement, but when that message says their records indicate a falsehood it bothers me.


We thought we limited the message to customers who had a S2/S3/S4 box on their account which had connected to the TiVo service via dialup in the past 90 days. Is it possible you sold/gave away an older box which is still on your account?


----------



## bluecruiser (Oct 31, 2009)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We thought we limited the message to customers who had a S2/S3/S4 box on their account which had connected to the TiVo service via dialup in the past 90 days. Is it possible you sold/gave away an older box which is still on your account?


I received the same message, and called TiVo that day and asked them to check my account, which has just 2 boxes on it. TiVo confirmed that my current active TiVo Premiere box has not connected via dialup in the past 90 days, nor has my previous box, a Series 2 that has been inactive since I got the new box in 2011. So the message was sent out to a broader customer base than you expected.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

I find it completely unacceptable that we are being sent warnings about a problem that may not affect us, wasting our time and valuable internet resources. We must immediately bring a class action suit to end this abhorrent behavior! Meet me at the town square and I'll hand out torches and pitchforks!!!


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We thought we limited the message to customers who had a S2/S3/S4 box on their account which had connected to the TiVo service via dialup in the past 90 days. Is it possible you sold/gave away an older box which is still on your account?


Hey Ted,

Just to let you know that we got the message on both of our old S3 OLED TiVo's which have always been networked (and the prior 2 S1's have long been retired to basement museum around 2007). Kind of sounds like it might have gone to all? Not a big deal but probably would have been better in that case to have it just say that dial-up service is going away if you are still using it.

Scott


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Dial-up, dial-in? Where's the dial?  In the soap isle?


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> I'm not advocating for Verizon, I'm simply stating the factual differences between T-Mobile and Verizon, as well as Verizon and other carriers. If I were to recommend a service, it would be AT&T, but I'm not a fanboy for them. I will absolutely trash them when and where they deserve it.


Lying about the differences between T-Mobile and Verizon, then stating them as "factual differences" is the same thing, at least the way you're going on about it. You are definitely a Verizon fanboy, the way you continue to troll for them.



Bigg said:


> I really can't tell whether you are delusional, or just trolling here. It seems more like trolling, but you seem so convinced of the ******** you are spewing out even that it's patently ridiculous that it might just be delusion.


If you took a time machine back to 2011, I would attempt to understand the level of inaccuracy you're spewing forth... as it might have made sense.... but you've been SO brainwashed by all the Verizon commercials and ads (like the one I posted in the earlier post with all the inaccuracies, that's it truly, truly makes me feel sad for you. Most people with a bit of common sense wouldn't fall for rubbish such as what Verizon is stating.

P.T. Barnum said it best: "There's a sucker born every minute."



Bigg said:


> I didn't learn anything.


Yes... we fully see that. Glad you do as well.



Bigg said:


> Because I'm not a Verizon fanboy.


Not only are you a Verizon fanboy, you've got a sense of humor to match.... Nice!



Bigg said:


> T-Mobile is less expensive than Verizon because they have a smaller network with less coverage that's less reliable.


I read Verizon's ad that I posted earlier as well. It says a lot of lies about T-Mobile. I'm just sad they've hooked you and are reeling you in...



Bigg said:


> You can't correct me because you're either lying or delusional.


Already did correct you, as T-Mobile has a better network than Verizon... and faster... and less expensive. It's easy to correct someone when they're wrong.



Bigg said:


> As to who has the largest 4G network, that's a good question.


Please don't be scared and try to change the subject. I'm not letting you out of this one that easily.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

JoeKustra said:


> Dial-up, dial-in? Where's the dial?  In the soap isle?


*aisle


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

Okay, I hear you guys. It sounds like our data pull identified too many accounts here. I apologize for that, and will follow-up with the team to see what criteria might have cast the net too wide here.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

TiVo_Ted said:


> Okay, I hear you guys. It sounds like our data pull identified too many accounts here. I apologize for that, and will follow-up with the team to see what criteria might have cast the net too wide here.


I guess a way to think of it is, better too wide a net than too narrow. 

And, perhaps wording for the future: "If you use your [product] for [X capability], please note that . . . ."


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> Lying about the differences between T-Mobile and Verizon, then stating them as "factual differences" is the same thing, at least the way you're going on about it. You are definitely a Verizon fanboy, the way you continue to troll for them.


Well, the actual, physical reality is that Verizon has more LTE coverage than any other carrier. Period. T-Mobile comes nowhere close. I am not a Verizon fanboy. If I were to be a fanboy of anything, it would be AT&T, but I perfer not to get into fanboyism. I do, however, acknowledge objective reality. The earth spins around the sun, the earth is round, Verizon has the biggest LTE network in the US. Stuff like that.



> If you took a time machine back to 2011, I would attempt to understand the level of inaccuracy you're spewing forth... as it might have made sense.... but you've been SO brainwashed by all the Verizon commercials and ads (like the one I posted in the earlier post with all the inaccuracies, that's it truly, truly makes me feel sad for you. Most people with a bit of common sense wouldn't fall for rubbish such as what Verizon is stating.


Except for the inescapable physical reality that Verizon's LTE network is bigger than anyone else's. I suspect AT&T actually has the most coverage, but that's up for debate. If you go by 4G only, it's either AT&T, Verizon as a close second, T-Mobile as a distant third, or Verizon, AT&T as a close second, and T-Mobile as a distant third.



> Not only are you a Verizon fanboy, you've got a sense of humor to match.... Nice!


Still not a Verizon fanboy.



> I read Verizon's ad that I posted earlier as well. It says a lot of lies about T-Mobile. I'm just sad they've hooked you and are reeling you in...


Everything they say about T-Mobile is true. Less coverage, gimmicky promos. You ultimately have to decide is less coverage is worth the lower price.



> Already did correct you, as T-Mobile has a better network than Verizon... and faster... and less expensive. It's easy to correct someone when they're wrong.


You can't just "correct" someone by telling them that the earth is flat. Or the sun rotates around the earth. Or T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. None of those things are true.



> Please don't be scared and try to change the subject. I'm not letting you out of this one that easily.


Let me get out of what? The objective reality remains that Verizon and AT&T have larger 4G networks than T-Mobile. It's also possible that T-Mobile has caught up to AT&T's LTE network, but AT&T still has a lot of Faux G coverage, so they have FAR more coverage overall. And Verizon blow them both out of the water on pure LTE.


----------



## Clem (Jul 18, 2018)

HerronScott said:


> Probably just covering their bases and sending that out to all dial-up capable TiVo's. No need to worry about it if you aren't using dial-up with your S3.
> 
> Scott


I have OTA and internet with Cox. I connect using my adapter. I am happy to read this because I also received a message that according to their records I have one or more devices connecting to Tivo service via dialup. I have never used dial up. So that message scared me. I have a lifetime S3.


----------



## Ang80 (Jul 18, 2018)

I agree on the wide net it sounds like. I have never used dial up. My premier (I don’t remember which series) is connected into my broadband through Ethernet. I also have lifetime service and have now spent nearly 2 hours off and on (around calls at work) trying to find more info as the message scared me as well. It sounds as though from the info listed here like I am fine, correct? Thanks!!


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Ang80 said:


> I agree on the wide net it sounds like. I have never used dial up. My premier (I don't remember which series) is connected into my broadband through Ethernet. I also have lifetime service and have now spent nearly 2 hours off and on (around calls at work) trying to find more info as the message scared me as well. It sounds as though from the info listed here like I am fine, correct? Thanks!!


Yes, you are fine--this only affects dial-in (telephone dial-up) connections.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> Well, the actual, physical reality is that Verizon has more LTE coverage than any other carrier.


You know you're continuing to spew forth lies, right? T-Mobile has more LTE coverage than Verizon... Period.



Bigg said:


> Except for the inescapable physical reality that Verizon's LTE network is bigger than anyone else's.


More tiring Verizon fanboy-ism displayed here.... just like the ad I posted earlier. Verizon claims it, you re-post it. Please don't be Verizon's sheep.



Bigg said:


> Still not a Verizon fanboy.


Verizon fanboy... Verizon troll. You choose. Both the same.



Bigg said:


> Everything they say about T-Mobile is true.


Glad you agree T-Mobile's network is better than Verizon. Thank Neville for that.



Bigg said:


> You can't just "correct" someone by telling them that the earth is flat. Or the sun rotates around the earth. Or T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. None of those things are true.


Um... you're making less sense than usual... which is a lot. You believe the Earth is flat? the sun rotates around the Earth? I don't understand what you're saying, but you probably hear that from many, correct? Only the fact that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon is true. (Hey, at least you got one out of three right... it's a change of pace from the lies we've come accustomed to you spreading.)



Bigg said:


> Let me get out of what?


The fact that you refuse to believe reality, and you're in your own distorted realm of lies....

Remember, just because Verizon tells you something, doesn't mean it's true. You need to comprehend the FACTS, and the fact is T-Mobile has the better, faster network, and has more coverage than Verizon.

Oh, and once again, you're welcome. I know life can be hard.


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

Ang80 said:


> I agree on the wide net it sounds like. I have never used dial up. My premier (I don't remember which series) is connected into my broadband through Ethernet. I also have lifetime service and have now spent nearly 2 hours off and on (around calls at work) trying to find more info as the message scared me as well. It sounds as though from the info listed here like I am fine, correct? Thanks!!


Sorry!


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mahermusic said:


> You know you're continuing to spew forth lies, right? T-Mobile has more LTE coverage than Verizon... Period.


So we've established that you're just here to troll at this point.



> More tiring Verizon fanboy-ism displayed here.... just like the ad I posted earlier. Verizon claims it, you re-post it. Please don't be Verizon's sheep.


LOL. I don't even like Verizon that much.



> Verizon fanboy... Verizon troll. You choose. Both the same.


Actually neither.



> Glad you agree T-Mobile's network is better than Verizon. Thank Neville for that.


You should try actually reading my posts. Of course you don't want to since you're just trolling.



> Um... you're making less sense than usual... which is a lot. You believe the Earth is flat? the sun rotates around the Earth? I don't understand what you're saying, but you probably hear that from many, correct? Only the fact that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon is true. (Hey, at least you got one out of three right... it's a change of pace from the lies we've come accustomed to you spreading.)


Well, it's not hard to believe the earth is flat if you believe that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. Stupid people believe lots of ridiculous things.



> The fact that you refuse to believe reality, and you're in your own distorted realm of lies....
> 
> Remember, just because Verizon tells you something, doesn't mean it's true. You need to comprehend the FACTS, and the fact is T-Mobile has the better, faster network, and has more coverage than Verizon.
> 
> Oh, and once again, you're welcome. I know life can be hard.


Dude, your trolling is just lame at this point. You just keep lying over and over and over, even though everyone else knows that what you're saying is patently ridiculous.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

AAARRGGGHHHH !!! ENOUGH WITH THE VERIZON/T-MOBILE

Please!!! No one else gives a F^&^#$


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> So we've established that you're just here to troll at this point.


If "trolling" truth to the Verizon fanboys is what you're talking about.... then guilty as charged.



Bigg said:


> LOL. I don't even like Verizon that much.


OMFG.... you're trolling like Verizon fanboy #1..... it's sad to read how much they've brainwashed you.



Bigg said:


> Actually neither.


You keep telling yourself that.



Bigg said:


> You should try actually reading my posts. Of course you don't want to since you're just trolling.


I need to put boots on to get through the pigpen of your Verizon trolling. Lies, lies & MORE lies! Stop believing everything Verizon is telling you...



Bigg said:


> Well, it's not hard to believe the earth is flat...


That sounds like a personal issue that you need to work out with yourself. I deal with facts, and the fact is T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. (Another fact is that not everything that Verizon mails you is factual... especially when they're losing thousands of members to T-Mobile each quarter.)



Bigg said:


> Dude, your trolling is just lame at this point.


[/QUOTE]

I don't mind putting Verizon fanboy trolls in their place when they start to lie. T-Mobile is the better network, and I have no issues putting you in your place to... educate you.

Oh, and once again, you're welcome.


----------



## ah30k (Jan 9, 2006)

Well, I guess the only way to move on is to block the offenders.


----------



## tapokata (Apr 26, 2017)

TiVo_Ted said:


> Okay, I hear you guys. It sounds like our data pull identified too many accounts here. I apologize for that, and will follow-up with the team to see what criteria might have cast the net too wide here.


Thanks Ted! I got the same message on a still-active HD unit. If I recall correctly, I've never connected a TiVO box of any type via dial-up, as there's no phone jack anywhere near the TiVo/TV location. I would remember running a 50' cord across the floor, as the wife would have wrapped it around my neck.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

ah30k said:


> AAARRGGGHHHH !!! ENOUGH WITH THE VERIZON/T-MOBILE


Then step up and actually deal with the troll instead of complaining about it.



mahermusic said:


> If "trolling" truth to the Verizon fanboys is what you're talking about.... then guilty as charged.


Posting ridiculous lies like claiming that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon is trolling. I can't tell how much of this is just pure trolling and how much of it is actually being delusional about basic, easy to obtain facts.



> OMFG.... you're trolling like Verizon fanboy #1..... it's sad to read how much they've brainwashed you.


You should try actually reading my posts. I'm not a huge fan of Verizon. If I had to pick a carrier to be a fanboy for, it would definitely be AT&T.



> You keep telling yourself that.


It's just the reality.



> I need to put boots on to get through the pigpen of your Verizon trolling. Lies, lies & MORE lies! Stop believing everything Verizon is telling you...


Well, you could go by the map on T-Mobile's website that shows how much larger Verizon's LTE network is than T-Mobile's, even with T-Mobile's extra creative crayoning and dishonest representation of AT&T's network that doesn't show Faux G, yet shows T-Mobile's tissue paper thin 5x5 B12-only LTE that has less capacity than AT&T's Faux G network.



> That sounds like a personal issue that you need to work out with yourself. I deal with facts, and the fact is T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon. (Another fact is that not everything that Verizon mails you is factual... especially when they're losing thousands of members to T-Mobile each quarter.)


You clearly have some issues because you're either so delusional/stupid that you somehow believe T-Mobile has more LTE coverage than Verizon, which is just an insane concept, or you are just trolling over and over even though no one finds it funny anymore.

In fact, you're so delusional that you've made up things that no one even claimed in the first place. T-Mobile claims that they will have equally as much LTE coverage as Verizon *by the end of 2019*. We'll see.



> I don't mind putting Verizon fanboy trolls in their place when they start to lie. T-Mobile is the better network, and I have no issues putting you in your place to... educate you.
> 
> Oh, and once again, you're welcome.


"Better" could mean anything. But Verizon's network is still quite a bit bigger than T-Mobile's in terms of land area coverage. That's just an objective fact which is even acknowledged by T-Mobile itself.


----------



## mahermusic (Mar 12, 2003)

Bigg said:


> Then step up and actually deal with the troll instead of complaining about it.


So easy to do.... and I've been doing it like a BOSS.



Bigg said:


> Posting ridiculous lies like claiming that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon is trolling.


Except when the trolling Verizon fanboy wannabe (emphasis on the "wannabe") continues to spread ridiculous lies regarding Verizon. The fact that you think Verizon has more coverage than T-Mobile, when just the opposite is true, makes me think you might have neurological issues... I'm actually serious about this.



Bigg said:


> You should try actually reading my posts.


Don't feel bad, I stopped reading your posts after you started regurgitating lies about Verizon having more coverage than T-Mobile. When I deal with people with psychological issues such as yourself, it's pretty easy to put them in their place, especially when their version of reality borders on the absurd.



Bigg said:


> It's just the reality.


...that T-Mobile has more coverage than Verizon... Yes, we all get that.



Bigg said:


> Well, you could go by the map on T-Mobile's website that shows how much larger Verizon's LTE network is than T-Mobile's.


...and the turnaround starts here, folks. Welcome back to reality.



Bigg said:


> You clearly have some issues because you're either so delusional/stupid that you somehow believe T-Mobile has more LTE coverage than Verizon, which is just an insane concept, or you are just trolling over and over even though no one finds it funny anymore.


I have no qualms dealing with idiots that continue to spread lies and believe they're right, when they are not. You're just a notch on a totem pole to me... and a small one at that...



Bigg said:


> In fact, you're so delusional that you've made up things that no one even claimed in the first place.


Again, please stay on topic and stop running away from reality. Put your big boy pants on or leave the sandbox. For the second time, I'm not going to allow you to change topics to create MORE confusion in your delusional, delirious world.



Bigg said:


> "Better" could mean anything.


Such as "T-Mobile's network is BETTER than Verizon's network."

Got it.


----------



## Mike Lang (Nov 17, 1999)

No more of this petty bickering or you're out.


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

I got the message and it scared me too. It was so emphatic about me using dialup that I worried about hackers or scammers using my account or something.

P.S. How do I block mahermusic and Bigg?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Lurker1 said:


> P.S. How do I block mahermusic and Bigg?


Click on name, then ignore. Note that when they are quoted or the thread has new posts by them, you will still know.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

Even better, both parties take it elsewhere instead of trashing a thread that has nothing to do with Verizon or LTE coverage. Maybe there should be a Private Bickering forum that we can all ignore.

This thread is SUPPOSED to be about TiVo phasing out dial-up service, and as unlikely as it sounds to most of us there are still people out there who probably need help converting their S2 or S3 boxes.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

ggieseke said:


> Even better, both parties take it elsewhere instead of trashing a thread that has nothing to do with Verizon or LTE coverage. Maybe there should be a Private Bickering forum that we can all ignore.


That's a great idea! Maybe the Hydra Haters can gather there too.

But not TiVo's support. They deserve the bashing.


----------



## ggieseke (May 30, 2008)

JoeKustra said:


> But not TiVo's support. They deserve the bashing.


I'm one of the original "gold-star" members on the official TiVo suppport forum, and I couldn't agree more. I gave up on it about a year ago when it turned into the the official TiVo spam forum. If they're not going to monitor it they should shut it down and just link to TCF.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We thought we limited the message to customers who had a S2/S3/S4 box on their account which had connected to the TiVo service via dialup in the past 90 days. Is it possible you sold/gave away an older box which is still on your account?


I also got that message. i never used dialup with my TivoHD. I used dialup, briefly, with a DTivo unit, at least 10 years ago.

I don't know if it's related but my MAK number is temporarily unavailable on my TivoHD. I'm trying the usual steps before contacting support.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

Bigg said:


> There's an official TiVo support forum? I've been posting here for years, and I never knew such a thing existed.


Where have you been?? 

I believe there used to be a sticky post here about it and of course it's listed on Tivo.com under Support (Support & User Forums).

Scott


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Bigg said:


> There's an official TiVo support forum? I've been posting here for years, and I never knew such a thing existed.


TiVo - Customer Help Forums

Tivo Customer Support Community


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

TiVo_Ted said:


> We thought we limited the message to customers who had a S2/S3/S4 box on their account which had connected to the TiVo service via dialup in the past 90 days. Is it possible you sold/gave away an older box which is still on your account?


I got the message and havent ever had a Tivo on dialup. Havent ever had a Tivo when I had a landline (havent had a landline since 2004)


----------



## Al H (Aug 11, 2017)

TiVo_Ted said:


> As a heads-up, we are getting ready to start phasing out support for dial-up modem access to the TiVo service. This will affect Series 2 and Series 3 devices that are not connected to broadband, as well as a small number of Series 4 users that are using the TiVo USB phone-line connector.
> 
> We are making this decision primarily because the cost of dial-up access has risen dramatically (3x price increase) and our usage has fallen to the point where the minimum costs and overhead are no longer sustainable.
> 
> ...


Anybody know if my Moca connection will still work? I've been using since 2010. They don't mention this as a replacement, just ethernet and wireless. Makes me nervous as my Premier 4 has lifetime and don't want to lose a good thing.


----------



## samsauce29 (Nov 30, 2007)

Al H said:


> Anybody know if my Moca connection will still work? I've been using since 2010. They don't mention this as a replacement, just ethernet and wireless. Makes me nervous as my Premier 4 has lifetime and don't want to lose a good thing.


This change should NOT affect a MoCA connection.


----------



## ajwees41 (May 7, 2006)

Al H said:


> Anybody know if my Moca connection will still work? I've been using since 2010. They don't mention this as a replacement, just ethernet and wireless. Makes me nervous as my Premier 4 has lifetime and don't want to lose a good thing.


Does the 4 tuner even have a phone jack? This only concerns TiVo's using phone lines to connect not wireless, Ethernet, or Mocs they should all work like the have in the past.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Got a warning from TiVo about dialup going away and all the offers to upgrade/replace affected devices. Owning five Roamio/OTAs and a pair of Minis, I was curious why they thought I would be affected so I emailed TiVo Support.

_"We apologize for any inconvenience that this has brought you. Since your device is not connected via phone line, you do not have to worry about it. The email will reach all customers with Series1-Series4 devices and those are only for who are using dial-up connection. You may disregard the email.."_​Did this warning go out to everyone? Seems like TiVo should know who is authenticating via dialup -- never mind who has a device that could authenticate over dialup.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

wizwor said:


> Did this warning go out to everyone? Seems like TiVo should know who is authenticating via dialup -- never mind who has a device that could authenticate over dialup.


Unless everyone leaves a post we'll never know. I received one. Email is cheap. If they used USPS they would be more careful.

I wonder if there are users who don't use the internet except for their TiVo will start calling when the service stops.


----------



## kpeters59 (Jun 19, 2007)

Did you _ever_ have a dial-up device on your account?

One of my clients called me last week to ask about it, too.

She only has a Bolt and Mini's, currently, but has had TiVo's since Series 1. The older TiVo's are not listed on her account, though.

-KP


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Never had a dial-up device. I do have two used Premiere units. Perhaps the previous owners used dial-up.

BTW, on my Premiere, there is no RJ-11 or other phone line connection. How does it work?


----------



## schatham (Mar 17, 2007)

I would guess they sent it to everyone, myself included. I have a series 1 and 2, but neither are active. Notice though they will still charge you!
"Following September 30, 2018, your current subscription plan will remain active even if you are not using the TiVo Service."

"TiVo will be discontinuing our dial-up service on September 30, 2018. According to our records you may still have one or more TiVo devices connecting to the TiVo Service via dial-up. Your TiVo box will still be able to receive program guide data from the TiVo service via dial-up modem until September 30, 2018. Following September 30, 2018, your current subscription plan will remain active even if you are not using the TiVo Service. If you would like to continue using the TiVo Service, we have outlined several options for you below."


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

kpeters59 said:


> Did you _ever_ have a dial-up device on your account?
> 
> One of my clients called me last week to ask about it, too.
> 
> ...


I never did. I have never owned a TiVo that could use dialup. I would have guessed they would have created the list by running a query against the database of registered devices. While it is easier to blast the entire mailing list, I would suspect some panicked calls were made to support and support isn't free.


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

wizwor said:


> I would suspect some panicked calls were made to support and support isn't free.


I just got this message on my Series 3. A casual non-technical customer may not even understand what "dial-up service" is or whether she uses it. "If you would like to continue using the TiVo Service, we have outlined several options for you below." I can certainly see this message generating panicked calls to support.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Lurker1 said:


> I just got this message on my Series 3. A casual non-technical customer may not even understand what "dial-up service" is or whether she uses it. "If you would like to continue using the TiVo Service, we have outlined several options for you below." I can certainly see this message generating panicked calls to support.


Most asked question: what's a dial? [soap] [sun]


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

JoeKustra said:


> BTW, on my Premiere, there is no RJ-11 or other phone line connection. How does it work?


Dongle
New Genuine TiVo DVR Phone Line Networking Adapter AP0100 | eBay


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

Well, I am one of the unfortunate few for whom the end of dail-up hits really hard. While I do not live in a remote place I happen to reside in a hilly area of east tennessee near knoxville where the cost of installing cable is thought to be too costly to do. The power lines do not follow the roads but were run from hill top to hill top across what were then pasture fields (1940s), but are now wooded. The cable company wants $10,000 to bury cable along the roads or so I was told. So I have OTA local TV and direct tv (for which I am paying $100 a month with no HD, DVR, or internet), and I cannot find a way to use tivo without dial up. I do have 3G version cellular service, but tivo says that will not work. Losing the tivo service is to us a great loss as we use it all the time to record shows that we want to watch but conflict with another programs we want to watch at the same time. I would say it accounts for 50% of our TV viewing. I am considering keeping the tivo service just to use as a dvr if I could still record on it. I have a series 2 tivo box.


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

As long as your phone can be used as a hotspot it will work regardless if its 3G or not. When I lived in northern Minnesota I would use my cell phone as a hot spot for the Tivo and with spotty 4G at the time it would still connect to 3G. Or you can get a separate Hotspot for internet

I see you mention a Series 2 box. You'll need a wireless adapter to attach to the Series 2. Wireless N adapter or Wireless G adapter will work. I know Tivo has them but they can be had on Ebay


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

unclehonkey said:


> As long as your phone can be used as a hotspot it will work regardless if its 3G or not. When I lived in northern Minnesota I would use my cell phone as a hot spot for the Tivo and with spotty 4G at the time it would still connect to 3G. Or you can get a separate Hotspot for internet
> 
> I see you mention a Series 2 box. You'll need a wireless adapter to attach to the Series 2. Wireless N adapter or Wireless G adapter will work. I know Tivo has them but they can be had on Ebay


Maybe so, but not according to tivo support. I dont have a a smart phone, but I do have an iPad that works as a hot spot; But when I asked Tivo tech support if that would work they said no it would not. I think they want a wifi source that is there when "THEY" decide to connect, not when I decide to. Besides this they said 3G is too slow. So at least according to Tivo I have no way to use thier service anymore. They said I would not even be able to use the recording function, even if I kept my subscription, once the Dial up was cut off. They said I could still watch tv through the tivo, and what ever was previously recorded. But I had read you could watch OTA tv and pause and rewind on old Tivos. I do not have, and cannot get, any wired in internet service. At one time I did have dial-up internet with AT&T but I am too far from the substation for it too be any good.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Nailhammer said:


> Maybe so, but not according to tivo support.


You will lead a happier and healthier life if you avoid TiVo support. Just do what works. Use your hot spot. You can connect on a weekly basis and the TiVo will be happy. Just make the internet connection, then force a service connection. I do that on a Premiere every Saturday. Otherwise the Premiere is powered off. A wireless G is easier to configure, but not as fast. In your case, go with the G.


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

Nailhammer said:


> Maybe so, but not according to tivo support. I dont have a a smart phone, but I do have an iPad that works as a hot spot; But when I asked Tivo tech support if that would work they said no it would not. I think they want a wifi source that is there when "THEY" decide to connect, not when I decide to. Besides this they said 3G is too slow. So at least according to Tivo I have no way to use thier service anymore. They said I would not even be able to use the recording function, even if I kept my subscription, once the Dial up was cut off. They said I could still watch tv through the tivo, and what ever was previously recorded. But I had read you could watch OTA tv and pause and rewind on old Tivos. I do not have, and cannot get, any wired in internet service. At one time I did have dial-up internet with AT&T but I am too far from the substation for it too be any good.


They're wrong. I know it works because I *DID* it for about a year. I had a AT&T hotspot (and used my Verizon phone as a hotspot when I ran out of internet on the hotspot) because where I lived (the lake house) the only other option is satellite internet. Cable is a pipe dream (20 miles from town) and Centurylink wont even do DSL here due to the length away from the Telco DSLAM. Anywho I would let it do the update about every 3rd or 4th day and when it was done I would turn off the hot spot (I used the hotspot with my computer too). On Tivo it still showed the hotspot name but said no connection. If it tried to connect all it would do is say "failed. No connection".
You can still record just fine
You can still set timers
You can even set up one passes just fine (Roamio is a different story but since you have a Series 2 its irrelevant)
You can do a manual update. If you read the thread here about "daily guide updates" you'll see some of us do multiple "forced updates" daily.

3G is not too slow. It would just take longer for the update.


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

JoeKustra said:


> You will lead a happier and healthier life if you avoid TiVo support. Just do what works. Use your hot spot. You can connect on a weekly basis and the TiVo will be happy. Just make the internet connection, then force a service connection. I do that on a Premiere every Saturday. Otherwise the Premiere is powered off. A wireless G is easier to configure, but not as fast. In your case, go with the G.


What is a wireless G?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

Nailhammer said:


> What is a wireless G?


https://www.amazon.com/TiVo-AG0100-Wireless-Network-Adapter/dp/B000ER5G6C
I have one. It's pretty much plug & play. The VID is 0BDA if you are looking for a replacement.


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

Ebay has them for much cheaper 
tivo wireless g adapter | eBay


----------



## pfiagra (Oct 13, 2014)

I no longer use the G or N, but especially for the series 2, I highly recommend the Wireless G (which are plug and play) over the N (which require some configuration).


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

Nailhammer said:


> What is a wireless G?


That was a dumb question. All I had to do was look back a post or two.


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

pfiagra said:


> I no longer use the G or N, but especially for the series 2, I highly recommend the Wireless G (which are plug and play) over the N (which require some configuration).


As i understand it the Wireless G is connected to the tivo and it looks for a wifi signal, and say it finds the signal from the hotspot on my iPad, what happens then? And lets say it downloads the tv guide info, any idea how much data that connection would usually consume?


----------



## pfiagra (Oct 13, 2014)

Nailhammer said:


> As i understand it the Wireless G is connected to the tivo and it looks for a wifi signal, and say it finds the signal from the hotspot on my iPad, what happens then? And lets say it downloads the tv guide info, any idea how much data that connection would usually consume?


I don't know for certain, but I doubt it's much for a series 2.


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

Nailhammer said:


> As i understand it the Wireless G is connected to the tivo and it looks for a wifi signal, and say it finds the signal from the hotspot on my iPad, what happens then?


You have to set it up which is easy. Go into settings then network and you select what network you use. Put password in and youre set. If you power off the Ipad (or take it too far away from the signal) then the Tivo just wont have a wireless signal. It still will work fine.



> And lets say it downloads the tv guide info, any idea how much data that connection would usually consume?


not much. Under 100mb if I remember someone saying that.
Also you wouldnt have to do this daily.


----------



## Nailhammer (Sep 14, 2018)

unclehonkey said:


> You have to set it up which is easy. Go into settings then network and you select what network you use. Put password in and youre set. If you power off the Ipad (or take it too far away from the signal) then the Tivo just wont have a wireless signal. It still will work fine.
> 
> not much. Under 100mb if I remember someone saying that.
> Also you wouldnt have to do this daily.


I am going to order a wireless G adapter and attempt to do this. I have little to lose and much to gain. My wife uses the tivo more than me and is heartbroken at the thought of losing it. You guys would likely get a laugh to see our tivo nook setup. In a small cozy corner of our living room we have a 19" sony analog tv. On top of the Sony is a set of rabbit ears. The rabbit ears are connected to a converter box which is connected to the Tivo, which is connected back to the Sony tv. In front of the Sony is a very old, but very comfortable chair. The Sony tv happens to have a very goog tuner for OTA signals and a very good picture, and if the content is good you do not miss the size of the picture. Down stairs in the den we have a 50" panasonic tv connected to direct tv, and also connectef to a OTA out door antenna. We get all the local channels from Knoxville and several more from surrounding areas OTA: total of about 25. Frankly 80% of Direct TV is junk, but my wife likes to watch tennis on ESPN. The tivo plays a major role role in our tv viewing.


----------



## Mr Tony (Dec 20, 2012)

Nailhammer said:


> I am going to order a wireless G adapter and attempt to do this. I have little to lose and much to gain.


When you get it setup is a breeze. But if you have difficulties thats where we come into help 

And I know the Wireless G adapter will work with a Series 2 because my stepdad had a Series 2 from years ago that he gave me (no sub on it but I just wanted to see if it would work). Hooked up the G adapter and went into network settings to set up and was connected within 5 minutes to the hotspot.
Looking at this site looks like the Series 2 is the same as my Series 3/Tivo HD. So in the menus its just "Messages & Settings > Settings > Phone & Network > Change network settings". You may want to look at the menus before you get it just to make sure its correct.
(One word of advice...Use a simple password for the hotspot. I didnt and it was a pain using the remote to rock to each letter) 



> My wife uses the tivo more than me and is heartbroken at the thought of losing it. You guys would likely get a laugh to see our tivo nook setup. In a small cozy corner of our living room we have a 19" sony analog tv. On top of the Sony is a set of rabbit ears. The rabbit ears are connected to a converter box which is connected to the Tivo, which is connected back to the Sony tv. In front of the Sony is a very old, but very comfortable chair. The Sony tv happens to have a very goog tuner for OTA signals and a very good picture, and if the content is good you do not miss the size of the picture. Down stairs in the den we have a 50" panasonic tv connected to direct tv, and also connectef to a OTA out door antenna. We get all the local channels from Knoxville and several more from surrounding areas OTA: total of about 25. Frankly 80% of Direct TV is junk, but my wife likes to watch tennis on ESPN. The tivo plays a major role role in our tv viewing.


Hey whatever works!


----------



## humbb (Jan 27, 2014)

I just received this from Amazon. If you have a wired Ethernet cable near the Series 2, it works great. New, inexpensive, plug-and-play and Prime eligible:
Cisco-Linksys USB100TX EtherFast 10/100 USB Network Adapter


----------



## HoTatII (Sep 21, 2016)

Got an email warning me of this over a week ago ....

Never had a TiVo standalone box with dialup access before (Had ReplayTV for that type of unit back during that era).

But as a (very) longtime DIRECTV subscriber since '95. Did have a lot of SD DTIVO DVR combo boxes over the years which used dialup to the TiVo service mainly for firmware updates.

So I assume this is why TiVo sent me this email, as these must still be on their records. Even though I retired the last DTIVO box many many moons ago ... 

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Nailhammer said:


> As i understand it the Wireless G is connected to the tivo and it looks for a wifi signal, and say it finds the signal from the hotspot on my iPad, what happens then? And lets say it downloads the tv guide info, any idea how much data that connection would usually consume?


Less than 100MB per Tivo connecting every day.


----------



## Rkkeller (May 13, 2004)

I got a kick out of seeing this topic: Phasing out dial-up?????? I thought it was phased out over 15 years ago, didn't even know you could still get it.


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

Not exactly something to brag about


----------



## scandia101 (Oct 20, 2007)

scandia101 said:


> Dongle
> New Genuine TiVo DVR Phone Line Networking Adapter AP0100 | eBay


Is there any use for these tivo phone line adapters other than for use with a tivo - which completely ends very very soon?


----------

