# Sad Day - Just made the switch



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

I know there are people who say the HR20-700 is fine, and I hope it will be... but I just got off the phone with DTV and they'll be swapping out my dish and HR10-250 tomorrow.

I feel like I just called the vet to arrange to have a beloved pet put to sleep.

Will actually also be swapping out an old SAT T60 for a second HR20-700, but will still have one TiVo unit functioning in the house... so at least I can visit it some times.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

I won't be swapping, but I will get the HR20 when I need to.


----------



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

Well yeah... not swapping, per se. Get to keep/sell the old units. I guess that makes it worse. I have to pack it up and send it off to someone.... like when my parents told me my dog was "going to the farm". That's how I'll rationalize this. I'll be sending my HR10-250 to a farm where it has lots of room to run around!


----------



## snickerrrrs (Mar 31, 2006)

...to put your HR10-250 into? I think that you'll be less than pleased with the Directv dvr software, so make sure you can swap your Directivo back to your main tv. What's it going to cost you to keep the HR10-250 running, 5 bucks? Well worth it.


----------



## Frank_M (Sep 9, 2001)

snickerrrrs said:


> ...to put your HR10-250 into? I think that you'll be less than pleased with the Directv dvr software, so make sure you can swap your Directivo back to your main tv. What's it going to cost you to keep the HR10-250 running, 5 bucks? Well worth it.


I'll give it a week or so, absolutely. But if I'm going to sell it, it makes sense to do it soon than later.

And I think (hope) that my expectations for the HR20-700 are sufficiently low that it will at least be able to meet them.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

In my case, the HR20 will be sitting on top of the HR10 replacing the T60. The T60 will go downstairs to sit on top of the DSR6000. I'll have to reduce the DSR6000 to a single tuner since I still plan to have the HTL-HD receiver active.


----------



## spooniep (Jan 22, 2005)

It's kinda funny/sad that we all have to go through the painful process at DirecTV.... I managed to talk them down from $299 to $99 to $19, all in a matter of 10 minutes and a few hand-offs between CSRs.

Like garlic to a vampire, kryptonite to Superman or the words "Cleaning Woman" to Steve Martin, repeating "Comcast" over and over again to the DirecTV folks seems to do the trick.

Now I get to lay my beloved TiVo to rest in hopes that the trade-offs will be worth it for all the new channels.


----------



## Stanley Rohner (Jan 18, 2004)

Frank_M said:


> I know there are people who say the HR20-700 is fine, and I hope it will be... but I just got off the phone with DTV and they'll be swapping out my dish and HR10-250 tomorrow.
> 
> I feel like I just called the vet to arrange to have a beloved pet put to sleep.
> 
> Will actually also be swapping out an old SAT T60 for a second HR20-700, but will still have one TiVo unit functioning in the house... so at least I can visit it some times.


It's also kinda sad the OP doesn't even have an HR20-700 yet and already decided it's bad.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

i feel guilty having all this clutter and great OTA reception (thus the need for keeping old tuners) while you guys don't have the space....I will not be selling/trading anything when i add hddvr...already have 2 hd tivos stacked....t60 unsubbed on floor with tons to watch....so the wires may be a plenty but I just can't ever seeing give any of these working machines up. Period.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

I think the really sad day will be the day they stop supporting the HR10. I can live with HR10's that can't get M4, even if all SD goes to M4, but I can't live with HR10's that they won't support for OTA. With the new DTV boxes coming out that don't include OTA tuners, it looks like things might be heading that way.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

snickerrrrs said:


> I think that you'll be less than pleased with the Directv dvr software, so make sure you can swap your Directivo back to your main tv.


I love when people make wild assumptions on what others will like or dislike based on thier biases rather than actual facts.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Why not swap out DirecTV!!! or are you handcuffed by the sports packages


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

how much does it add to a cost of a dvr to include OTA? It must be significant for them not to include it in the new machine , right?


----------



## sjberra (May 16, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> I think the really sad day will be the day they stop supporting the HR10. I can live with HR10's that can't get M4, even if all SD goes to M4, but I can't live with HR10's that they won't support for OTA. With the new DTV boxes coming out that don't include OTA tuners, it looks like things might be heading that way.


sad day for you maybe, given all the issues I had with the HR10 - and now that the HR20 has been installed the only thing that comes to mind is Roy Clarks old song - "Thank God and Greyhound it's Gone"


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

sjberra said:


> sad day for you maybe, given all the issues I had with the HR10 - and now that the HR20 has been installed the only thing that comes to mind is Roy Clarks old song - "Thank God and Greyhound it's Gone"


Which brings to mind another popular one..."You Can Put Me In Jail, But My Face Will Still Break Out."


----------



## joed32 (Jul 9, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> I think the really sad day will be the day they stop supporting the HR10. I can live with HR10's that can't get M4, even if all SD goes to M4, but I can't live with HR10's that they won't support for OTA. With the new DTV boxes coming out that don't include OTA tuners, it looks like things might be heading that way.


I think that all of the SD channels going to Mpeg 4 is way out in the future. There really isn't any need for it to happen soon. My HR 10s will be humming along until they die. When I got the HR20s I kept the HR10s active at a cost of $10 a month, 4 extra tuners, 400 hours of SD recording, seems like a bargain to me.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

sjberra said:


> sad day for you maybe...


Well, yes, sj. That's sort of what "I think..." usually implies.


----------



## alwayscool (May 10, 2005)

Why is everyone so hyped about all these D* HD channels? The resolution *ucks and they haven't even rolled out these "new channels". Compare an OTA HD channel to D*'s watered down "HD" and there is no comparison! I'm sticking to my HR10-250's till the day the signal dies. lol


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

alwayscool said:


> Why is everyone so hyped about all these D* HD channels? The resolution *ucks and they haven't even rolled out these "new channels". Compare an OTA HD channel to D*'s watered down "HD" and there is no comparison! I'm sticking to my HR10-250's till the day the signal dies. lol


Because the new channels are being broadcast using a different compression scheme that is much more efficient, and looks a whole lot better than what you will be sticking with on your HR10-250.

And oh, yeah, by the way, there is the ability to receive the local channels in MPEG4 format which saves a very considerable amount of space compared to recording the over-the-air signals (with little or no noticable difference in quality of the recording).

My HR10-250 became my wife/daughter's receiver some time back and I'm plugging along nicely with a receiver that will be getting me a *lot* more HD content very soon. I know I'm waiting impatiently for it to get lit up and will be very happy when it is.


----------



## tucsonbill (Aug 11, 2004)

newsposter said:


> how much does it add to a cost of a dvr to include OTA? It must be significant for them not to include it in the new machine , right?


I don't think that's the issue. It's a matter of wanting you to pay them for your locals vs. getting them for free OTA.


----------



## terpfan1980 (Jan 28, 2002)

newsposter said:


> how much does it add to a cost of a dvr to include OTA? It must be significant for them not to include it in the new machine , right?


If you are referring to the HR20, then you are terribly mis-informed as that system does include OTA and the ability to record same (in addition to having the ability to receive and record local network affiliates in designated markets).

When the HR20 was first released it couldn't receive or record over-the-air programming but that was rectified by a software update a long time ago.

People that know the history of the early TiVo based DirecTV receivers know that those boxes didn't do dual tuner to begin with either, but I don't see many people currently holding that against those boxes. If they did use that outdated information, do you think people would love those boxes as much as they do now?

Personally, having jumped from the Dish player (Dish Network) to the DSR6000 units a long time ago I remember hating the way several things worked on the TiVo based units. The auto-correction ticked me off as I was smart enough to know how to stop the playback where I wanted when I was fast forwarding. The units always had to record even when I was happy to watch shows 'live' and didn't want to waste space on the drives recording shows that I was watching live.

Things change, as someone argued with me in another thread here, progress and all that. The HR20s are different than the HR10s and no they aren't currently perfect, but then neither is the HR10 no matter what some people would have you believe.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

bdowell said:


> If you are referring to the HR20.


21 not 20....i dont know how you can call a machine a new improved model and not include something like that.

and i can't believe that enough of America would go through the hassle of setting up ota that dtv thought it would threaten them enough to not include it.

plus i didnt even think we had an option not to get locals anymore, isn't' it build in all the fees?


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

The HR20 was touted as the 'new and improved' DVR version, yet it doesn't have something as basic as DLB.

And as far as looking back at when the HR10 first came out....history-schmistory. When a 'new' box comes out, you don't compare it to the existing box at the time of its' inception; you compare it to what the existing box is and can do... _now._

A new box should be able to do everything it's predecessor can do ...and _then_ some.

An opinion.


----------



## fasTLane (Nov 25, 2005)

Absolutely!


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

Sir_winealot said:


> The HR20 was touted as the 'new and improved' DVR version, yet it doesn't have something as basic as DLB.
> 
> An opinion
> 
> .


The HR10 is touted as 'the best DVR on the planet' yet it doesn't have something as basic as a free space indicator.

As for DLB, I can't recall once ever using/needing the feature. Of course eveyone has their own list of needs/wants and IMO the HR20 incoroporated the ones most people wanted.

An opinion


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> The HR10 is touted as 'the best DVR on the planet' yet it doesn't have something as basic as a free space indicator.
> 
> As for DLB, I can't recall once ever using/needing the feature. Of course eveyone has their own list of needs/wants and IMO the HR20 incoroporated the ones most people wanted.
> 
> An opinion


Well then, since the HR20 is in fact the 'new and improved' version, it stands to reason that it should _indeed_ have things that are not on the HR10 ...like the 'free space indicator.'

Whether you can't "recall once ever using/needing DLB" is not at all relevant to my point ...which you've aparently missed while trying to make yours.

But that said, the #1 requested feature for the HR20 was for DLB (do a search at DBS) which pretty much blows a hole in your "the HR20 incorporated the ones (features) most people wanted" statement. 

Great try tough.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

Sir_winealot said:


> But that said, the #1 requested feature for the HR20 was for DLB (do a search at DBS) which pretty much blows a hole in your "the HR20 incorporated the ones (features) most people wanted" statement.


Or perhaps that since the unit does everything else that was asked for on the HR10 (but we never got) that's all that is left to ask for. 

And at least DirecTV is listening to the requests, unlike the 7 years it took to get folders on the Tivo (HR10)


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

alwayscool said:


> ........till the day the signal dies. lol


How many people did NOT get this pun......

Bye, bye my TiVo in the sky
Took my DTV to the levy.........


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> Or perhaps that since the unit does everything else that was asked for on the HR10 (but we never got) that's all that is left to ask for.
> 
> And at least DirecTV is listening to the requests, unlike the 7 years it took to get folders on the Tivo (HR10)


Oh really? Well, let's see how long it takes before we get the #1 requested feature of DLB. It's already been over a year. And since it's been around for a while, I'd imagine that D* should have no problem implementing it any day now. 

Ya know, I agree that D* has been listening, and trying to make the HR20 a better unit (I've even grown to like it), but this BS of comparing it to when the HR10 _first came out_ is ridiculous. Any reasonable person doesn't think that way ..."lemming" or otherwise ...it holds absolutely no water.

When you trade in your 2001 Ford for a new 2007, and the '07 has no airbags ...but it has that nifty new GPS, most people wouldn't say "well, the '07 has _most _ of the features that the '01 had plus that nifty new GPS that the '01 never had! And I never once used/needed the airbags....and the '01 took 3 years before the FM radio even worked!"

No, you _expect_ to get everything the '01 had ..._and then some._ IF you're a 'reasonable person.'

But if you want to argue, simply for the sake of arguing (and the dislike of those who happen to like a product that _you _ do not), then you make misdirecting statements that don't have much relevance to that of the original, (and maybe toss out a couple disparaging comments as well).

As always ...an opinion.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

Sir_winealot said:


> Oh really? Well, let's see how long it takes before we get the #1 requested feature of DLB. It's already been over a year. And since it's been around for a while, I'd imagine that D* should have no problem implementing it any day now.


Yeah sort of like the undelete Tivo users have asked for since day one too and folders etc etc. All which were at the top of the requested feature list. And other than *finally* getting folders we 'might' get to see the undelete. Too little - too late IMO.

You just don't get it do you? You want to constantly bash DirecTV for not doing things exactly the way you and some others would like, but yet Tivo who can do no wrong has failed to implement anything useful (and that had been asked for time and time again) for many years (7+ to be exact). <shrug> Tivo lemmings or Tivo zealots, either way the shoe fits.


----------



## GreyGhost00 (Mar 11, 2004)

I too, placed my order today for 2 HR20s to "move" the HR10-250s I have. I felt like I held out to the very last, but for me content trumps everything. The additional channels and programming I'll be getting with the HR20s is worth the extra aggravation of a newer platform. To me the equation is better programming vs. better UI. I'd rather watch more on the HR20 than less on the HR10-250. 

Yes, I'll miss many things from the Tivos, including most of all DLB, but I'm also looking forward to some things with the HR20s. For one, it's an interactive-enabled receiver and thus can take advantage of the interactive channels like GameMix which the HR10-250 can't. In addition, the OTA tuner in the Tivo while solid, handled (or more accurately didn't handle) multipath horribly. Even a marginal improvement there would enable me to get more OTA channels.

I will keep my Tivos active, but unless they can magically be retrofitted to receive MPEG4, I know their days are indeed numbered, and that is the reality.


----------



## Sir_winealot (Nov 18, 2000)

Mark Lopez said:


> Yeah sort of like the undelete Tivo users have asked for since day one too and folders etc etc. All which were at the top of the requested feature list. And other than finally getting folders we 'might' get to see the undelete. Too little - too late IMO.
> 
> You just don't get it do you? You want to constantly bash DirecTV for not doing things exactly the way you and some others would like, but yet Tivo who can do no wrong has failed to implement anything useful (and that had been asked for time and time again) for many years (7+ to be exact). <shrug> Tivo lemmings or Tivo zealots, either way the shoe fits.


Er....um....ok, lol.  Did you wander off somewhere, or is it just a focus problem? 

BOL.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

Mark Lopez said:


> Yeah sort of like the undelete Tivo users have asked for since day one too and folders etc etc. All which were at the top of the requested feature list. And other than *finally* getting folders we 'might' get to see the undelete. Too little - too late IMO.
> 
> You just don't get it do you? You want to constantly bash DirecTV for not doing things exactly the way you and some others would like, but yet Tivo who can do no wrong has failed to implement anything useful (and that had been asked for time and time again) for many years (7+ to be exact). <shrug> Tivo lemmings or Tivo zealots, either way the shoe fits.


Why do you say Tivo has held back the features? When you know that many of the features in the Tivo boxes were not implemented by DirecTV. Why don't you face it, DirecTV does as little as it can to support it's customers? :down:


----------



## shlomo99 (Aug 28, 2007)

After 2 years of working pretty well, my DirecTV remote to the HR10-250 stopped working on the PVR. The remote still works great on the TV itself (changes channels on TV, volume, sound, power) but does NOT work on the PVR itself, forcing me to use the front panel to get access to anything recorded, etc. Thoughts?


----------



## sherlocc (Mar 3, 2004)

Some input from an "old codger". :>) :>)

I was a very early adopter of the HR10 (#111 from Value Electronics April 2004) and the HR20 (Sept 2006). I have both and have no difficulty with either one and don't understand what all the fuss is about.

I just don't understand the emotion of some of these comments I am reading. 

The HR20 with MPEG4 support is the "killer app". This capability trumps all that the HR10 has to offer.

The HR10 without MPEG4 support is an obsolete platform for the future. 

There are times when it is wise to skip a technological generation, but this is not one of them.

Rejecting the HR20 to stay with the lovable HR10 is like:

. rejecting touch tone phones in favor of rotary.
. rejecting CDs in favor of vinyl.
. rejecting Windows/XP in favor of Windows/98.
. rejecting DvDs in favor of VHS.

These are rejections of the future to stay with the past and only serve to "cut off one's nose to spite their face". It is like focusing on the hole rather than the donut.

I just don't understand why some of you "young guys" don't want to get with the future, and want to stay with the past. 

That is what old people too stuck in their habits do. I certainly have many friends who do this across the board. Of course many of them are in their 80s and need to be given a little slack.

Keep the pressure on to fix the annoyances in the HR20, but don't wrap yourselves up in the security blanket represented by the HR10.

MPEG4 is the future, MPEG2 is the past. Nothing else matters when comparing these two boxes.

Signed,

A progressive 70 year old who intends to stay current well into this century of technology revolutions!


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Nothing wrong with going to MPEG4. Its going with a vendor lockin and not having a choice in your platform that is the big issue. We want everybody to have an opportunity to make a set top box and let them compete to make a better platform.

We would still be back on acoustic modems because you couldn't plug your computer directly into the network in the old days. Opening it up and allowing third party vendors advanced us greatly in many areas.


----------



## durl (Dec 1, 2005)

I have both the HR10 and HR20 and they're both fine machines. The HR20 is actually the better machine for our viewing habits. Sure, I miss DLB but the other features of the HR20 go a long way to make up for it's absence.

I dreaded the day when my HR10 died but I've been pleasantly surprised with the HR20.


----------



## Cubfan (Aug 19, 2000)

durl said:


> I dreaded the day when my HR10 died but I've been pleasantly surprised with the HR20.


Be careful there, whippersnapper. Them there's fightin' words 'round these parts.


----------



## Greencat (Jan 21, 2004)

Cubfan said:


> Be careful there, whippersnapper. Them there's fightin' words 'round these parts.


I understand the emotions around this issue. I went to the HR20 because my HR10 was dying. It was limping along and rebooting everyday. I finally had to put her down. I pulled the hard drive, fan and kept the remote. The rest is in the recycle bin in the sky. I could have rebuilt the drive but I thought I had to face the HR20 eventually.

3 weeks after the switch I have to say that I like the HR20. I miss the DLB but there are other features that the HR10 did not have. There is a learning curve but it's not the end of the world.


----------



## sluciani (Apr 21, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> I think the really sad day will be the day they stop supporting the HR10. I can live with HR10's that can't get M4, even if all SD goes to M4, but I can't live with HR10's that they won't support for OTA. With the new DTV boxes coming out that don't include OTA tuners, it looks like things might be heading that way.


My uneducated guess is OTA tuners might become a D* sanctioned (or offered) "outboard" USB option for those that really need or want it. Maybe something like this.

This would allow D* to ship a less expensive box to the majority of users that might not need OTA. Just my .02. /s


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

sluciani said:


> My uneducated guess is OTA tuners might be an "outboard" USB option for those that really need or want it. This would allow D* to ship a less expensive box tot he majority that wouldn't use it. Just my .02. /s


I've not heard that this would be possible, but technology marches on, so I would not be surprised, and this makes your guess a very good one.

I've actually always been surprised that OTA tuners integrated into a DBS receiver or PVR was even something a DBS company would consider, although it does make a certain amount of sense when the DBS company can't bring those channels over the sat, I guess, as an interim plan. But I've always been extremely grateful that they did include them in the HR10, as OTA HD is 95% of what I record. I probably would not have owned one had they not included it.

But now that DBS is capable of bringing OTA HD channels over the sat, possibly the interim period is considered over, and they are actively phasing out that capability in favor of sat delivery. If so, that could disenfranchise viewers from certain OTA options, unless they vow to carry all OTA channels in every market.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

TyroneShoes said:


> I've not heard that this would be possible, but technology marches on, so I would not be surprised, and this makes your guess a very good one.
> 
> I've actually always been surprised that OTA tuners integrated into a DBS receiver or PVR was even something a DBS company would consider, although it does make a certain amount of sense when the DBS company can't bring those channels over the sat, I guess, as an interim plan. But I've always been extremely grateful that they did include them in the HR10, as OTA HD is 95% of what I record. I probably would not have owned one had they not included it.
> 
> But now that DBS is capable of bringing OTA HD channels over the sat, possibly the interim period is considered over, and they are actively phasing out that capability in favor of sat delivery. If so, that could disenfranchise viewers from certain OTA options, unless they vow to carry all OTA channels in every market.


DirecTV is not bringing all local channels in for HD, so you may still need an OTA receiver even if you have the HR20. They generally only bring in the 4 commercial networks in HD, but not the PBS and independent stations. It just shows that there is still a limited amount of bandwidth that is available even with 2 new satellites being used for HD.

It makes me wonder how many satellites it will require in the future for all of this HD stuff. I also wonder why D* & E* couldn't form a 'backhaul wholesale' company to broadcast the signals but then each company service it's own clients. That would certainly give them both a lot more capacity. I'm sure the encryption, etc. would need to be changed so that both companies could handle the signal, but they are both converting to mpeg4 anyway. This would have been an ideal time to do something like this.

It would sort of be like the utility companies feeding power to the grid. I'm paying my local power company for the usage, but they don't have to produce everything on their own.


----------

