# TiVo S2 DT - I don't get it....



## cknight725 (Jul 19, 2001)

At one time I was immersed in TiVo 24-7. I worked tech support, I talked to some of you guys (probably) but that was 3 years ago and the S2 was the brand new thing. All in all, a GREAT advance over the S1 (aka abacus).

So now I see that TiVo has finally released the "TiVo S2 DT", billed as the Dual Tuner Standalone we've all been waiting for. But upon further review, my estimation is simply, yeahhhhh welll not so much. This device basically adds zero hardware capability to the device and only make a simple software modification for users with cable boxes and splitters. I am now sad. I don't get why anyone would upgrade aside from maybe there aren't any of the old S2's in retail?

I used the search feature and really didn't get much that addressed this, but flame me if you will, but keep in mind I'm a faithful TiVo fan, stockholder, and HUGE fan of TiVo. I just see this technology as a really sad waste of resources.

Your Thoughts?


----------



## TiVoPony (May 12, 2002)

cknight725 said:


> This device basically adds zero hardware capability to the device and only make a simple software modification for users with cable boxes and splitters. I am now sad.
> 
> Your Thoughts?


The DT can record two programs at once. That's a rather sizable hardware difference from a single tuner S2.

The DT has built in ethernet. No adapter required for a wired network. That's another hardware difference people typically appreciate.

I am glad to hear that you perceive the dual tuner implementation to be 'simple'. Often things which appear simple to the user are actually quite complex under the hood. If you believe it's simple, then we're doing our job.

If however you were professing that asymetric dual recording is not 'so simple to use' (which in this case, it is) but rather 'so simple it's just a few lines of code'...you'd be completely and utterly wrong. 

It's actually quite a challenge compared to balanced tuners. But the DT handles it in stride.

Sorry, there's not much that we appear to agree on!

The DT is a very nice box.

Pony


----------



## TydalForce (Feb 9, 2006)

There can be a such thing as "evolutionary" rather than "revolutionary. 

People were asking for DT. This is it. Its also got the built in Ethernet. Spiffy features, good to have, but not going to create a mad circus outside Circuit City with people killing each other to get one. 

But the Series 3 is a bit off, and for many users will be overkill. The DT fills a nice void - a little nicer than a ST Series 2 with some often-requested features, but not as expensive or as feature-heavy as the Series 3 will be.

If you're looking for "wow", wait just a little longer for the S3 ;-) In the meantime, either the DT is for you or it isn't. Just another model in the lineup...


----------



## tazzftw (Mar 26, 2005)

Hello? You blind? It's right f'n there. Record two shows at once instead of one. Very important.


----------



## Olde Fortran (Apr 22, 2006)

cknight725 said:


> Your Thoughts?


Your title is correct. You don't get it.


----------



## anuyag (Apr 18, 2006)

OK, I am one of those guys that is absolutely in love with TiVo and went ahead and bought DT without thinking too much merely on the premise that it is a TiVo and will record two shows at the same time so great.

I've had the thing sitting in my room in its original packing for over a week now and I don't know what to do with it. I was disappointed by the fact that all they did was add splitter support which was available in some sense (though not discounting the software advancement) anyway. 

I don't understand why adding ethernet port is such a big deal. Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway. I need to use wireless and the USB adapter worked just fine and was about $20. I searched a bit on Best Buy on the way home and there is no ehternet wireless adapter that is as simple and small or single-function as the USB adapter. So now I have to probably buy some big ugly $60 device for this.

Also, I have just one TV and all I wan to do is upgrade. No easy way to move all my recorded shows or season passes to the new TiVo.

I recently switched to iMac and realized little or no TiVo support. I know there is a hacked way to get shows on my computer but I don't quite have the appetite for that. 

I want to give it to a cousin but I know that means no discount. Not a big deal but something to think about. I now need to call TiVo and work out how to separate these accounts.

All in all, I am disappointed -- more in myself -- for ordering this without proper research. Should've waited for S3.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

anuyag said:


> I was disappointed by the fact that all they did was add splitter support which was available in some sense (though not discounting the software advancement) anyway.


What were you expecting? And how was the dual tuner support "available in some sense" on the standard Series 2?



> I don't understand why adding ethernet port is such a big deal. Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway. I need to use wireless and the USB adapter worked just fine and was about $20. I searched a bit on Best Buy on the way home and there is no ehternet wireless adapter that is as simple and small or single-function as the USB adapter. So now I have to probably buy some big ugly $60 device for this.


What? If you had a wireless adapter for your old Tivo, move it or get another, if you can't use the built in port. The Tivo wireless G adapter (<$50) is your best bet and will get you near wired performance.



> No easy way to move all my recorded shows or season passes to the new TiVo.


OK, I'll give you this one. Some have used Tivo online to schedule their programs on the new box. Not as easy as a migration, but better than typing everything in.
Perhaps we'll see a "My GuruGuide" option in the near term so SPs can be migrated/shared.



> All in all, I am disappointed -- more in myself -- for ordering this without proper research. Should've waited for S3.


Ah ... perhaps the real problem ...


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

cknight725 said:


> Your Thoughts?


This is a logical refresh of the Series 2 platform.

It's unfortunate that dual tuners took so long to arrive, but that and a built-in Ethernet port have to be the top two requested hardware features.

The Series 3 will take care of most of the rest later this year.

I don't see how any Tivo supporter/fan can see the Series 2 DT as a "bad thing" or a disappointment.

The ideal replacement for the Series 2 would be a box that had the features of a Series 3, at the cost of an existing Series 2. Since it'll be a few years before that's possible, Tivo gave us the Series 2 DT, which address the needs of vast majority of its potential subs for a number of years.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

TiVoPony said:


> The DT can record two programs at once. That's a rather sizable hardware difference from a single tuner S2.
> 
> The DT has built in ethernet. No adapter required for a wired network. That's another hardware difference people typically appreciate.
> 
> ...


I definitely see your point about the difference between the DT and previous ST Series 2.  But considering that the D* units have been doing dual tuners for years now it seems that this box is a bit late. Weren't all the dual tuner issues worked out on that box?


----------



## dmdeane (Apr 17, 2000)

anuyag said:


> I don't understand why adding ethernet port is such a big deal. Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway.


Ughhh. That's precisely your problem: you have no freakin' idea what you are talking about.

"Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway"? WTF, are you kidding me?  Anyone who has broadband can and probably does have/need a router. You buy a router, you buy some Cat5 cables, you plug them into the router and plug the other ends of the cables to your computers and TiVos. Done.

It's so simple even a trained monkey (without the training, gorramit) could do it. There's *tens of millions* of people who have figured this "complex" problem out and have their own home LANs set up. It's not rocket science.

We've been screaming at TiVo for six or seven years now to add an Ethernet port; they finally did it. If the original Series 2 design had included an Ethernet port, it would have saved a lot of people a lot of grief, and would have generated more sales (from people who got a ReplayTV instead precisely because it had Ethernet), because there's millions of people out there now with broadband, home Ethernet LANs, *and no landline telephone* connections at all.

The clunky phone dialup TiVo set up calls were a *major* impediment to many potential TiVo sales. The driver problems with WiFi/USB dongles were another huge hassle that an Ethernet port could have avoided. Ethernet is an industry standard that has been around for decades, has no hidden support costs or downside at all, and is in use in practically every PC out there today, in business and consumer use. Ethernet is HUGE.

TiVo is just simply rectifying a mistake with the original Series 2 design. Better late than never.


----------



## JOstroski (May 9, 2006)

The DT is an awesome addition to the lineup and I purchased it *without hesitation*.

Let me tell you why (And this shows that everyone has different needs and not everyone is a techno-phile that wants all features under the sun):

I came from directv. I had the dual tuner set up after having a series 1 for some time. I loved it. I could switch between tuners and record two shows at once. Needless to say, the wife loved it too.

To the reader who said the DT's have been around forever and that this one is late: I read the Directv one can do it cause of the signals, no analog recording and thus not increased hardware requirements.

Ok, now I move. I cannot install a dish in my new residence. I go and buy two Tivos so that I can switch 'tuners' and record two shows at once. I then also got two cable boxes. Needless to say it is kinda messy and not very elegant when I layed it out on paper.

I now see that the DT is available. I hop on it. Get it in 4 days, install it easy as cake especially with the wired ethernet. (Sorry, I had nothing but trouble using wireless even with the approved wireless USB device).

I can hop between tuners and watch shows at the same time flipping between them. Do not need two tivos for dual recording. And, let's be honest, transferring shows between tivos is not the fastest thing in the world. And the switching and dealing with two sources are built in to the unit for easy of use. Only one remote.

Bottom line.... I was really disappointed to lose the use of my Directv unit because of these features and they stepped up to the plate and gave me a solution I could use for my new situation. TOP NOTCH!

Some people here think that anyone who gets a tivo is a person that is savvy, technically oriented, and hacks, whacks, and tweeks. I do not believe this to be true. People who actually take the time to post here regularly are those types. Those who are not, ask a question, get an answer, and then are off doing other things while the Tivo does it's job in background.

This unit rocks in my opinion and has kept me as a Tivo user, and a satisfied one at that.

As for the network. I get my network (Internet) through cable, so my internet cable is right where my TV is. My router goes there and I hook right in. I would guess this is actually a quite common installation. I do have wireless as well but it was so much easier using the wired.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

JOstroski said:


> The DT is an awesome addition to the lineup and I purchased it *without hesitation*.
> 
> Let me tell you why (And this shows that everyone has different needs and not everyone is a techno-phile that wants all features under the sun):
> 
> ...


Eww, gross.  But seriously, good post! Very true, excepting the aforementioned aspersion .


----------



## Olde Fortran (Apr 22, 2006)

JOstroski said:


> To the reader who said the DT's have been around forever and that this one is late: I read the Directv one can do it cause of the signals, no analog recording and thus not increased hardware requirements.


Cable DVRs have been doing it forever too - on both analog and digital signals - late is a fair complaint.



JOstroski said:


> Ok, now I move. I cannot install a dish in my new residence. I go and buy two Tivos so that I can switch 'tuners' and record two shows at once. *I then also got two cable boxes.* Needless to say it is kinda messy and not very elegant when I layed it out on paper.
> 
> I now see that the DT is available. I hop on it.


If a DT works for you, then you didn't need two cable boxes before. At least one cable feed could have gone straight into a TiVo, just like it does now.


----------



## Lukej (Apr 28, 2006)

I asked my cable company in their tech support forum if they offer cablecard or will offer it anytime soon, and the answer was "No, ------- does not currently offer CableCard compatibility. As CableCard is still a young technology, it may well be a few more years before ---------will support it. However, as always, as demand rises for a technology, we will certainly look into providing it for our customers."
So at that point, and considering I am not moving anytime soon, the series 3 will be of no use to me. I just switched to my DT tuner today, added all the season passes and wish lists, and did not get a single conflict. That is more than simple. It should have happened sooner, but it's certainly no small affair IMO.


----------



## Olde Fortran (Apr 22, 2006)

dmdeane said:


> Ughhh. That's precisely your problem: you have no freakin' idea what you are talking about.


You do, of course, realize that he explained why in the very next sentence after your quote ended. But then, that would have defused your rant wouldn't it? You would have had to settle for something like "My wired LAN extends to the location of my TiVo so it's useful to me."


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

Sirshagg said:


> I definitely see your point about the difference between the DT and previous ST Series 2. But considering that the D* units have been doing dual tuners for years now it seems that this box is a bit late. Weren't all the dual tuner issues worked out on that box?


The difference is that with DirecTiVos (and other dual-tuner PVRs like the Motorola boxes Comcast uses) is that the previous dual-tuner implementations had two tuners with _exactly_ the same channel lineup. The new DT has two tuners with two _different_ lineups -- one lineup from the cable box, the other from one or the other internal analog tuner. There may or may not be overlap between those tuners, and in some lineups the overlap may have different channel numbering.

This makes scheduling quite a bit more complicated. No, it's not the only possible implementation (you could build a box that supported two external cable boxes, but there are issues there, too: controlling both external tuners, forcing the user to actually _have_ two external tuners to preserve symmetry, and so on.) But all these issues weren't worked out for the DirecTiVos.

I myself won't be buying a dual tuner; I've got multiple SD units already, and I'm waiting for the Series 3 for myself. But if I were to recommend a unit to family & friends right now, it'd be the DT unit.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

Lukej said:


> I asked my cable company in their tech support forum if they offer cablecard or will offer it anytime soon, and the answer was "No, ------- does not currently offer CableCard compatibility. As CableCard is still a young technology, it may well be a few more years before ---------will support it. However, as always, as demand rises for a technology, we will certainly look into providing it for our customers."
> So at that point, and considering I am not moving anytime soon, the series 3 will be of no use to me. I just switched to my DT tuner today, added all the season passes and wish lists, and did not get a single conflict. That is more than simple. It should have happened sooner, but it's certainly no small affair IMO.


Why are you masking the name of your cable company?

I thought that it was law that the cable companies have to supply a Cable Card upon request (for a fee). Anyone know for sure?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Lukej said:


> I asked my cable company in their tech support forum if they offer cablecard or will offer it anytime soon, and the answer was "No, ------- does not currently offer CableCard compatibility. As CableCard is still a young technology, it may well be a few more years before ---------will support it. However, as always, as demand rises for a technology, we will certainly look into providing it for our customers."
> So at that point, and considering I am not moving anytime soon, the series 3 will be of no use to me. I just switched to my DT tuner today, added all the season passes and wish lists, and did not get a single conflict. That is more than simple. It should have happened sooner, but it's certainly no small affair IMO.


Sounds like someone from your cable company should have a discussion with the FCC.

Unless the cable company is very small, if you ask for a cable card, they MUST provide you one at nominal cost.

Call the main number and get someone who knows what they are talking about.


----------



## Lukej (Apr 28, 2006)

jfh3 said:


> Sounds like someone from your cable company should have a discussion with the FCC.
> 
> Unless the cable company is very small, if you ask for a cable card, they MUST provide you one at nominal cost.
> 
> Call the main number and get someone who knows what they are talking about.


It is in a town of 16,000, so that could be it (Citynet, in south GA). The answer is posted on the tech forum by Citynet's
" General Manager / Director
CityNET / MIS" so he would be the person to ask, which I did. I am guessing their small size must be their loophole?


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Olde Fortran said:


> You do, of course, realize that he explained why in the very next sentence after your quote ended.


Of course, then he went on to show that he actually DOESN'T get it because he seems to think he can't use his USB WiFi adapter on the S2 and he has to get a bridge for the Ethernet port, which is completely wrong.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

anuyag said:


> I was disappointed by the fact that all they did was add splitter support which was available in some sense (though not discounting the software advancement) anyway.


Actually it wasn't available in any sense. They did not just add 'splitter support', where did you get that? They added an internal splitter, yes, but they also added an entire second analog tuner and MPEG encoder to allow the unit to record two channels. That's new hardware. And the software updates to handle asymmetrical tuners is big.



> I don't understand why adding ethernet port is such a big deal. Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway.


And you get your data where? I have wired Ethernet. Many people I know have wired Ethernet. People have been asking TiVo to add an Ethernet port since the Series1, let alone the Series2. Adding Ethernet to the S1 is one of the most popular hacks, probably second after bigger drives.



> I need to use wireless and the USB adapter worked just fine and was about $20. I searched a bit on Best Buy on the way home and there is no ehternet wireless adapter that is as simple and small or single-function as the USB adapter. So now I have to probably buy some big ugly $60 device for this.


So what's wrong with using your USB adapter on the S2DT? You realize it still has two USB ports, right? And it still supports WiFi adapters, just like the standard S2. If you don't want to use the Ethernet port - don't.



> Also, I have just one TV and all I wan to do is upgrade. No easy way to move all my recorded shows or season passes to the new TiVo.


Recorded shows? Put them both on the network and MRV the shows over to the new unit. Simple and easy.

Season Passes - yeah, that's been a missing feature. You have to manually re-create them on the new unit. It would be nice if TiVo had a way to transfer settings to a new box.



> I recently switched to iMac and realized little or no TiVo support.


The one thing you're missing right now is TiVoToGo. Everything else, including publishing video *to* a TiVo, is on the Mac. A new Mac desktop with TTG is supposed to be out mid-year.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Lukej said:


> It is in a town of 16,000, so that could be it (Citynet, in south GA). The answer is posted on the tech forum by Citynet's
> " General Manager / Director
> CityNET / MIS" so he would be the person to ask, which I did. I am guessing their small size must be their loophole?


Why don't you call him and ask why they are exempt from the FCC requirement to provide cable cards? (as of June 2004, I think)

I'm pretty sure there is a size/number of customers exemption, but I couldn't find the text.


----------



## cknight725 (Jul 19, 2001)

Indeed I was not aware that the DT added an internal ethernet connection - that is an upgrade worth mentioning.

I'd be interested to hear from anyone using both tuners with Satellite (I'd assume 2 sat boxes controlled with IR/serial) how well it is working?

I recall the splitter setups quite well (coax using TV tuner for 1-99, sat/cable box to TiVo for all channels) and to my eyes this upgrade seems just a more refined version of that. This is why I feel justified in saying that the upgrade is somewhat lacking. 

I will say that when i saw "Series 2 Dual Tuner" I expected to see 2 Coax -ins, and 2 sets of RCA/SVid -ins. It is very accurate to me that one of the replies thus far has deemed this a "refresh" or an evolutoin rather than a revolution. I would agree with refresh, but evolution it is not. It is a good stop-gap to be sure, but it not elegant enough of a package to be called an evolution by any means. I further realize it does not come with an evolutionary price tag either, so I'll grant the cost is justified.

I guess I'd agree with the folks that are saying that this is overdue. I mean, I've been "away from the scene" for at least 3 years now and still no standalone DT model that really satisfies the consumer. It is sad to see that TiVo has allowed Echostar and Cable in particular to eat into its market share by making available dual tuner models for well over 18months now. Its still difficult to get people to convert from their archaic interface on the Echostar and Cable DVR's for that wonderful interface of TiVo but with such limitations on what the Dual Tuner can record easily. 

I will say the Series3 is absolutely a major evolution and exactly what I've come to expect from TiVo. Thanks to zonereyrie for his extensive report. I'm very glad to see that it supports CableCard 2.0, and that TiVo has finally done a lot of thinking ahead with the SATA port (but ATA133 internally?! C'mon!)for storage upgrades! Hopefully its not too late to steal some market back from the cable companies!


----------



## Troy J B (Sep 27, 2003)

cknight725 said:


> Thanks to zonereyrie for his extensive report. I'm very glad to see that it supports CableCard 2.0


zonereyrie ???? megazone ? The report's I have read indicate the Series 3 has 2 CableCard 1.0 slots, at least one of which can handle the CableCard 1.0 MultiStream card. 
That is a far cry from the CableCard 2.0 standard. Can you please provide a link to the article saying the Series3 will have CableCard 2.0 support ?

Troy


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

cknight725 said:


> I'd be interested to hear from anyone using both tuners with Satellite (I'd assume 2 sat boxes controlled with IR/serial) how well it is working?


These units are asymmetrical. Which means they have two internal tuners but can only control one external box. So for people with digital cable they would split the cable as it comes out of the wall and plug one end into the TiVo and the other into the cable box. They would then connect the cable box to the TiVo via RCA cables along with serial/ir for control. With this setup the user could record two analog channels, or one analog and one digital, at the same time but they can not record two digital channels at the same time. This is the only way TiVo could get around the IR conflict problem that would have arouse if they allowed the unit to control two external boxes.

Dan


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

Troy J B said:


> zonereyrie ???? megazone ? The report's I have read indicate the Series 3 has 2 CableCard 1.0 slots, at least one of which can handle the CableCard 1.0 MultiStream card.


Yes, 'zonereyrie' is my fallback handle when megazone is taken - as it was on LJ where I posted my CES reports. I'm 'zonereyrie' on LJ, AIM, Yahoo, and a few other places. (Zoner being my nickname and Eyrie Productions a writing group I co-founded.)

My original report said CableCard 2.0 as, at the time, there was confusion between 1.0 with Multistream and 2.0, which will include multistream. The Series3 will support CableCard 2.0 - but only because 2.0 is backwards compatible and will work as 1.0 in such devices. So when I asked if it would support 2.0 the answer was yes - but it was just mis-communication. I meant supporting bidirectional, etc - and I'm sure it was answered as 'Yes, the card's will work in this box'.


----------



## JOstroski (May 9, 2006)

Olde Fortran said:


> Cable DVRs have been doing it forever too - on both analog and digital signals - late is a fair complaint.
> 
> If a DT works for you, then you didn't need two cable boxes before. At least one cable feed could have gone straight into a TiVo, just like it does now.


But I am sure you are aware how substandard cable DVRs are. Terrible interfaces, slow, and just not intuitive. At least the offerings in my area: Adelphia, Time Warner.

The two cable box set up was a concession but quite worth it and I do not miss the other cable decoder for the convenience of the dual tuner and switching with just 1 button press.


----------



## megazone (Mar 3, 2002)

cknight725 said:


> I'd be interested to hear from anyone using both tuners with Satellite (I'd assume 2 sat boxes controlled with IR/serial) how well it is working?


You can't use both tuners with satellite. One tuner is analog cable only. The other tuner can do analog cable, or use an external cable box or satellite receiver. The S2DT is really aimed at cable users - it is very good for analog cable and even digital cable, which is usually still mostly analog. For satellite it really only makes sense for those who have cable and satellite - some people use cheap basic cable for their locals, for example.



> I recall the splitter setups quite well (coax using TV tuner for 1-99, sat/cable box to TiVo for all channels) and to my eyes this upgrade seems just a more refined version of that. This is why I feel justified in saying that the upgrade is somewhat lacking.


I think that's grossly over simplified. This is more that just sticking a splitter in the box. There is a second tuner and MPEG encoder, and quite a bit of software changes to handle asymmetric tuners.

So you used to be able to record anything and watch analog on the TV tuner with a splitter.

Now you can record anything on one tuner, record analog cable on the other tuner, and watch a third show on the TV tuner with a splitter.



> I will say that when i saw "Series 2 Dual Tuner" I expected to see 2 Coax -ins, and 2 sets of RCA/SVid -ins.


No need for two coax inputs, you just split the signal internally. Two A/V inputs would need two external tuners - cable boxes, or satellite receivers. And then you'd need to control both - two serial controls or IR blasters. And with IR blasters then you'd pretty much always need to build IR forts to avoid the risk of crosstalk between the systems - emitters for #1 reaching box #2 or vice-versa. The asymmetric setup avoids that, and stills adds quite a lot to the product.

There is a large analog cable market. And still millions of users who can't even get digital cable, and won't have the option soon. For those users a standalone DVR like TiVo is their best, and only, DVR option. Dual-tuners gives them functionality no other DVR offers them - they can't use today's cable DVRs.

There are millions more who could get digital cable, but don't want or need it. And the S2DT is the best DVR for them as well.

Even those with digital cable, in most cases 2-99 are still analog. For myself well over 90%, probably over 95%, of what I record is on analog channels. I have digital cable and I still use analog on my main TiVo - my secondary box records the few shows from digital and I MRV them. Analog is more reliable. If I weren't waiting for the S3 to go HD, I'd get an S2DT.



> It is very accurate to me that one of the replies thus far has deemed this a "refresh" or an evolutoin rather than a revolution. I would agree with refresh, but evolution it is not.


It is the very definition of evolution! The 540 'nightlight' was a refresh - new look, respun board, no feature changes. The S2DT is *absolutely* an evolution - new hardware, second tuner, built-in Ethernet, new software features (to handle dual-tuners). That is exactly what the CE industry calls a product evolution. I don't see how you could not consider it a product evolution. What about it is not elegant? It's a S2 unit that has a second tuner and networking. It just works. I don't know what you expect, but it seems unrealistic if this isn't an evolution to you.



> I mean, I've been "away from the scene" for at least 3 years now and still no standalone DT model that really satisfies the consumer.


The S2DT is the first standalone dual-tuner DVR on the market. Before this the only dual-tuner DVRs were integrated systems - satellite or cable.



> I will say the Series3 is absolutely a major evolution and exactly what I've come to expect from TiVo.


And the Series3 is massive overkill for huge sections of the market. The vast majority of users are still SD, not HD, and won't be HD for a long time yet even with robust HD sales. That's a HUGE installed SD base. They don't need OTA NTSC & ATSC, drive expansion, etc. And certainly won't be looking to pay for a premium product like the S3 for a while. There have been a lot of people here, and in other communities, saying that the S2DT is just what they want and the S3 is simply too much.



> Thanks to zonereyrie for his extensive report. I'm very glad to see that it supports CableCard 2.0, and that TiVo has finally done a lot of thinking ahead with the SATA port (but ATA133 internally?! C'mon!)for storage upgrades!


You're welcome. But some of the things from my first report have since been clarified - the unit will NOT support CableCARD 2.0, at least not in how I expect you mean that. The cards will work in the S3, but only because they are supposed to be backwards compatible. The S2 is a CableCard 1.0 Host Device, with support for Multistream. So you can use two CC1.0 cards, or one CC1.0 with Multistream card, or one CC2.0 card (if it is ever finalized) - but it will operate like a CC1.0 Multistream card. The S3 is not an OCAP device, and it doesn't support bidirectional communication. At this point there are no CC2.0 devices - the specs aren't even close to being finalized.

And all we know is that the internal drive is IDE/PATA - don't know it is ATA133 even - but so what? PATA drives are still cheaper than SATA drives and will be for a while. Cost is key, even on a premium product. Even ATA100 is more than enough, ATA66 probably is for that matter, for the kind of use in a S3. There is no technical reason NOT to use PATA drives internally. They're not meant to be user servicable, and they keep the product costs down. SATA drives are snazzy, but a waste in that kind of application. eSATA makes sense for the external drive because it is a better drive connection than USB or FireWire and there is no 'ePATA'.


----------



## anuyag (Apr 18, 2006)

dmdeane said:


> Ughhh. That's precisely your problem: you have no freakin' idea what you are talking about.
> 
> "Very few people will actually be able to wire the thing to a router anyway"? WTF, are you kidding me?  Anyone who has broadband can and probably does have/need a router. You buy a router, you buy some Cat5 cables, you plug them into the router and plug the other ends of the cables to your computers and TiVos. Done.
> 
> It's so simple even a trained monkey (without the training, gorramit) could do it. There's *tens of millions* of people who have figured this "complex" problem out and have their own home LANs set up. It's not rocket science.


You are getting excited for no reason. I do have some idea of what I am talking about. I have been using a wireless connection to my home network from as early as when it was introduced. What I meant was that very few people will actually have a "physical" wire going into their TiVo because of placement issues. I know it is easy. That's not the point at all. I mean I could do the same thing (and I have been doing it successfully for months) with the USB adapter. What does ethernet port buy me? I guess it helps people who did not have a "wireless" network setup at home but that, according to your note, isn't rocket science.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

anuyag said:


> You are getting excited for no reason. I do have some idea of what I am talking about. I have been using a wireless connection to my home network from as early as when it was introduced. What I meant was that very few people will actually have a "physical" wire going into their TiVo because of placement issues. I know it is easy. That's not the point at all. I mean I could do the same thing (and I have been doing it successfully for months) with the USB adapter. What does ethernet port buy me? I guess it helps people who did not have a "wireless" network setup at home but that, according to your note, isn't rocket science.


Ever heard of a bridge?

They're not expensive and will connect an ethernet port to a wireless network with little or no effort. This is why hotels offer them for connecting to their wireless service.

If you have a USB adapter, can't you just continue to use that for your network connection like before?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

megazone said:


> (Removed contents of post #28 for space)


 :up: :up: :up:

Great post ... should be required reading!


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Sirshagg said:


> I definitely see your point about the difference between the DT and previous ST Series 2. But considering that the D* units have been doing dual tuners for years now it seems that this box is a bit late. Weren't all the dual tuner issues worked out on that box?


Software wise, mostly. Hardware wise, no, as dual analog encoder chips weren't available then, plus the new DT design also gave them the opportunity to use the (then) new Broadcom processor/decoder, which amongst other things, adds Ethernet..


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

cknight725 said:


> I recall the splitter setups quite well (coax using TV tuner for 1-99, sat/cable box to TiVo for all channels) and to my eyes this upgrade seems just a more refined version of that.


STs never allowed the use of their analog tuner plus a cable box, only analog tuner plus satellite box, and at that only one could be encoded at a time. The DT allows use of the secondary analog tuner with a cable box or satellite box on the primary encoder, both at the same time.



> I will say that when i saw "Series 2 Dual Tuner" I expected to see 2 Coax -ins, and 2 sets of RCA/SVid -ins.


You cannot blame TiVo for your expectations being too high.
Perhaps you should lower them next time.


----------



## Olde Fortran (Apr 22, 2006)

JOstroski said:


> But I am sure you are aware how substandard cable DVRs are. Terrible interfaces, slow, and just not intuitive. At least the offerings in my area: Adelphia, Time Warner.


There's lots of variety both in the boxes and in people's perceptions of how good they are. But the fact remains that dual tuner DVRs have been around for years and that's really the only distinction that most new buyers perceive - record one show at once or record two shows at once.

It's great to have the TiVo frosting on top of dual tuners, but they should have had it years ago to counter the cable DVRs that have been sucking up new customers.


----------



## Olde Fortran (Apr 22, 2006)

megazone said:


> Of course, then he went on to show that he actually DOESN'T get it because he seems to think he can't use his USB WiFi adapter on the S2 and he has to get a bridge for the Ethernet port, which is completely wrong.


He said "I don't understand why adding ethernet port is such a big deal" since he would probably hook up like the old one anyway. Not needing the new port doesn't mean not "getting it". It's clear from the help forum that many don't "get" LANs, WiFi, or A/V hookups. But as long as they can cobble something together, that's enough for TiVo.


----------



## Adam1115 (Dec 15, 2003)

jfh3 said:


> Sounds like someone from your cable company should have a discussion with the FCC.
> 
> Unless the cable company is very small, if you ask for a cable card, they MUST provide you one at nominal cost.
> 
> Call the main number and get someone who knows what they are talking about.


Mine won't, and I talked to the manager. He told me I'd have to pay for all of the equipment they would need and the cablecard and then they'd do it.

Of course, who cares, they have no plans to provide HD for several years.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

As jfh3 said some "very small" cable companies have gotten a pass on the CableCARD mandate. However the vast majority of the cable companies out there are required by law to offer CableCARD support.

Dan


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> The difference is that with DirecTiVos (and other dual-tuner PVRs like the Motorola boxes Comcast uses) is that the previous dual-tuner implementations had two tuners with _exactly_ the same channel lineup. The new DT has two tuners with two _different_ lineups -- one lineup from the cable box, the other from one or the other internal analog tuner. There may or may not be overlap between those tuners, and in some lineups the overlap may have different channel numbering.


Fair enough, but even this was handled when the HR10-250 was released.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

Sirshagg said:


> Fair enough, but even this was handled when the HR10-250 was released.


I don't believe that's the case... The HR10 has two sets of tuners (a SAT/ATSC "pair" for lack of a better word), so they have symmetric channel lineups. There's nothing in the UI to have two different lineups, nor are there inputs to facilitate actually hooking up two different sources.

When the HR10 was first announced, it was a single-tuner (tuner pair of SAT/ATSC) unit that would record only one show at a time. I believe that D* had them add in the 2nd satellite tuner, so they wouldn't have a customer satisfaction issue when users upgraded from the dual-sat-tuner SD models. And, I believe, because this would have created an asymmetric tuner arrangement that the software wasn't able to deal with, TiVo probably requested the addition of the 2nd ATSC tuner, to get back to a symmetric arrangement...

Jeff


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Sirshagg said:


> Fair enough, but even this was handled when the HR10-250 was released.


Yep, and so they had a lot of paid for code from the HR10-250 to use. But still it had to be tested and had the added testing of the IR blaster/serial for channel changing an external box vs using the internal access card to get an unencrypted digital bytestream. So only one tuner on the DT was recording upper channels vs either tuner in the HR10-250

having to work an analog signal in some form has always been an extra hassle for series 2 TiVo DVRs. There really was no reason to go revolutionary on the DT unit and cost should be a factor as it is the extended basic cable crowd (about 40% of cable users) that is the target market for the DT. Just needed an evolutionary push to make it as desireable as a Cable Company DVR given that the user is NOT trying to record HD

The sereis 3 is the revolutionary product and will sell at a premium at first as revolutionary products usually do.


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

Sirshagg said:


> Fair enough, but even this was handled when the HR10-250 was released.


No, it wasn't.

The HR10-250 still has symmetric tuners, with the same lineup available to them -- it's just that each tuner can tune both DirecTV and ATSC. In other words, the HR10-250 allows each tuner to have the same two lineups, while the standalone DT has two different lineups, one of which is available to both tuners, and the other available only to one tuner at a time.

You have to hook up both satellite inputs for dual tuner to work, too:



Hughes HR10-250 Manual page 40 said:


> Your HD DVR will work if you connect only one cable to the Satellite In 1 jack, but it will not have dual tuner functionality.


The "asymmetric" case that might have been allowable here (one tuner with ATSC only, one with DirecTV/ATSC) is disallowed by the "must connect both satellite inputs" rule (not that anyone ever connects these things in single-tuner mode anyway.)


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> No, it wasn't.
> 
> The HR10-250 still has symmetric tuners, with the same lineup available to them -- it's just that each tuner can tune both DirecTV and ATSC. In other words, the HR10-250 allows each tuner to have the same two lineups, while the standalone DT has two different lineups, one of which is available to both tuners, and the other available only to one tuner at a time.
> 
> You have to hook up both satellite inputs for dual tuner to work, too:


I thought the HR10-250 has four tuners 2 for Direct and 2 for OTA. In any case the lineups for Direct and OTA are definitely different, and for that matter they don't even have to be the same market. wouldn't this essentially be the same thing as the DT?


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

Sirshagg said:


> I thought the HR10-250 has four tuners 2 for Direct and 2 for OTA. In any case the lineups for Direct and OTA are definitely different, and for that matter they don't even have to be the same market. wouldn't this essentially be the same thing as the DT?


each of the two "recording device" have a direct tuner and an OTA tuner on them.
if you set up to record an OTA show either of the two can record it. if you setup to record DirectTV either of the two can record it.

not so with the DT. either of the two can record analog, only one can record digitial. thus they are asymmetric


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

Sirshagg said:


> I thought the HR10-250 has four tuners 2 for Direct and 2 for OTA. In any case the lineups for Direct and OTA are definitely different, and for that matter they don't even have to be the same market. wouldn't this essentially be the same thing as the DT?


Yes it has 4 physical tuners. But that isn't the way the TiVo treats them. It acts (to the user, and for scheduling purposes) like it has two tuners that can record from any channel (OTA or SAT).

So the scheduling engine doesn't have to think, "are both these programs on channels I can record simultaneously?". because the HR10-250 can record two shows from any source simultaneous.

I think this is a way to think about the terminology:
asymmetric line-ups: The (virtual) tuners of the TiVo have access to different channel sets, which can cause issues because not all channels may be available to all tuners.
symmetric line-ups: The (virtual) tuners of the TiVo have access to the same channel sets from the same sources. 
mixed source line-ups: The lineup includes channels from more than one source, analog cable + sat, OTA + sat, digital cable + analog cable, etc.
(virtual) tuners: The set of actual physical tuners that the TiVo logically groups together to present to the user.

*Que long set of examples of how this terminology applied to existing and future TiVos: (Feel free to skip)*
Even the old S1 standalone TiVos had to deal with some mixed source lineups, because they supported cable (no box) + sat. But because they only had one tuner they didn't have to deal with asymmetric lineups.

The (non HR10-250) DTiVos had symmetric lines-up from a single source. All they could record was non-HD DirecTV channels. Both physical tuners could tune the same set of DirecTV channels, and the (virtual) tuners were a 1 to 1 match with the physical tuners.

The HR10-250 DTiVo has mixed source but symmetric line-ups, and its two (vvirtual tuners were formed by an OTA ATSC tuner + sat tuner pair. Either of the (virtual) tuners you could see in the user interface was capable of being tuned to any OTA ATSC or Satellite station.

The S2 DT supports mixed source asymmetric line-ups. Its internal tuner can access analog cable, while the A/V inputs can use a cable / sat box to access digital channels. This means that while it can record two shows from analog cable simsimultaneouslyt can't record two shows from digital cable (or from satellite) simsimultaneously
The S3 (as far as we know) supports mixed source symmetric line-ups, and its two(vvirtual tuners will be formed by an OTA ATSC + OTA NTSC + analog Cable Ready + digital Cable Ready tuner group. Either of the two (vvirtual tuners you will be able to see in the user interface will be capable of being tuned to any of the four signal sources.

So to date the S2 DT is unique in the ability of its scheduler to deal with asymmetric line-ups.


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

Sirshagg said:


> I thought the HR10-250 has four tuners 2 for Direct and 2 for OTA. In any case the lineups for Direct and OTA are definitely different, and for that matter they don't even have to be the same market. wouldn't this essentially be the same thing as the DT?


Although it's described sometimes as having "four tuners", what it really has is 2 tuners* that can handle either OTA or DirecTV. They share a common lineup that is the union of the OTA and DirecTV lineup. Still symmetric.

* at least, this is how the software treats them. I have no idea if the physical paths are present in the hardware to actually use them as 4 simultaneous tuners or not, or if the drive could keep up even if they were, but since we're talking about the software, this is certainly what the software does.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

Jonathan_S said:


> Yes it has 4 physical tuners. But that isn't the way the TiVo treats them. It acts (to the user, and for scheduling purposes) like it has two tuners that can record from any channel (OTA or SAT).
> 
> So the scheduling engine doesn't have to think, "are both these programs on channels I can record simultaneously?". because the HR10-250 can record two shows from any source simultaneous.
> 
> ...


WOW. I had to read that a few times, but it finally made sense. Thank you for that excellent explanation.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

classicsat said:


> STs never allowed the use of their analog tuner plus a cable box...


You are correct from a "real world user" point of view.

However, the underlying software supports this ability, as can be seen in the hack described at http://archive.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?threadid=99172&perpage=20&pagenumber=1

(Note I have never done this hack myself, though have kept a bookmark to it in the completely unlikely case I'm *forced* to permanently have a cable box sometime in the future. On my current 3 month digital cable promo, I actually haven't bothered switching either of my Tivos to use the box.)


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> Why don't you call him and ask why they are exempt from the FCC requirement to provide cable cards? (as of June 2004, I think)
> 
> I'm pretty sure there is a size/number of customers exemption, but I couldn't find the text.


This link has about everything you'd ever want to know about the FCC mandate.

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/2/198756.html

Looks like even the smaller companies are running out of time. I didn't read through it all, but I'd send a note to the FCC at the address provided and see what they say.


----------



## Lukej (Apr 28, 2006)

jfh3 said:


> This link has about everything you'd ever want to know about the FCC mandate.
> 
> http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/2/198756.html
> 
> Looks like even the smaller companies are running out of time. I didn't read through it all, but I'd send a note to the FCC at the address provided and see what they say.


Thanks! I'll go ahead and do that. At least that way I'll know for sure whether my company is exempt.


----------



## Jason Hoover (Jun 21, 2004)

Purchasing two new DT's was a no brainer for me.

My previous setup:

Basic cable

TiVo #1 - Lifetime
TiVo #2 - $6.95/month
TiVo #3 - $6.95/month
TiVo #4 - $6.95/month
TiVo #5 - $6.95/month

For a total monthly cost of $27.80 (plus tax).

I really wanted another TiVo so I could record another channel. I only record 6 channels, ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, WB, and UPN. I wanted another TiVo so I could dedicate one TiVo to each channel and NEVER have a conflict.

Along comes the DT.

New Setup:

Basic Cable

TiVo #1 - LT (single tuner)
TiVo #2 - $6.95/month (single tuner)
TiVo #3 - $6.95/month (dual tuner)
TiVo #4 - $6.95/month (dual tuner)

For a total monthly cost of $20.85 (plus tax). Now I have 6 tuners, thus eliminating all conflicts and I am saving $6.95 a month.

Now I go and sell 3 of my old TiVo's and apply the cost to the purchase of new DT's and I have now upgraded for free plus saving $6.95/month.

Thank you TiVo for the DT!!!


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Dennis Wilkinson said:


> Although it's described sometimes as having "four tuners", what it really has is 2 tuners* that can handle either OTA or DirecTV. They share a common lineup that is the union of the OTA and DirecTV lineup. Still symmetric.
> 
> * at least, this is how the software treats them. I have no idea if the physical paths are present in the hardware to actually use them as 4 simultaneous tuners or not, or if the drive could keep up even if they were, but since we're talking about the software, this is certainly what the software does.


There are four real tuner blocks, two ATSC, two satellite. They probably lead to one medaiswitch, that can only process two streams at once.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

classicsat said:


> There are four real tuner blocks, two ATSC, two satellite. They probably lead to one medaiswitch, that can only process two streams at once.


I wouldn't call it a "satellite" tuner. It could be slightly misleading. It's really just a "tuner" that can take an analog source from another box. It could be a satellite receiver or it could be a cable box.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

jsmeeker said:


> I wouldn't call it a "satellite" tuner. It could be slightly misleading. It's really just a "tuner" that can take an analog source from another box. It could be a satellite receiver or it could be a cable box.


I think that post was still talking about the HR10-250, in which case "satellite" tuner is exactly right.


----------



## headroll (Jan 20, 2003)

Jason Hoover said:


> Purchasing two new DT's was a no brainer for me.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> ...


I dont think the S2 ST TiVos will have much of a resale value ..
but you monthly cost logic will overtime offshift the purchase cost.

edit: maybe if you sell the lifetime S1?

-Roll


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Jonathan_S said:


> The S3 (as far as we know) supports mixed source symmetric line-ups, and its two(vvirtual tuners will be formed by an OTA ATSC + OTA NTSC + analog Cable Ready + digital Cable Ready tuner group. Either of the two (vvirtual tuners you will be able to see in the user interface will be capable of being tuned to any of the four signal sources.
> 
> So to date the S2 DT is unique in the ability of its scheduler to deal with asymmetric line-ups.


Don't think your assumption on the Series 3 is correct - it will have to be asymmetric, like the DT, because of single stream CableCard support. The available lineups will only be symmetric if there are no cable cards or two cable cards (or one m-stream card) - if there is only one card in use, the lineups will be asymmetric, right?


----------



## TivoZorro (Jul 16, 2000)

A Wednesday evening with my new S2 DT. I watched Amazing Race, Alias, Lost and 24. Before the DT I would have Tivoed either Amazing Race or Alias. One of them would have to go on a VCR tape. It would have been the Amazing Race because I also watch Criminal Minds and CSI NY. But now I have Criminal Minds and CSI NY and Lost and Invasion all on my DT. No more waiting and dealing with tapes.


----------



## Jonathan_S (Oct 23, 2001)

jfh3 said:


> Don't think your assumption on the Series 3 is correct - it will have to be asymmetric, like the DT, because of single stream CableCard support. The available lineups will only be symmetric if there are no cable cards or two cable cards (or one m-stream card) - if there is only one card in use, the lineups will be asymmetric, right?


Hmm, Possibly. Good point.

Or they might follow the path of the HR10-250 and in you only have one cable card only enable one tuner. 
(HR10-250's hardware could support 2x ATSC + 1x satellite, but the software doesn't support that configuration, to have 2 ATSC tuners enabled you must have 2 satellite tuners enabled)

I don't recall seeing anything that stated for sure how the S3 would handle single cable card.


----------



## anuyag (Apr 18, 2006)

Guindalf said:


> If you have a USB adapter, can't you just continue to use that for your network connection like before?


Oh, yes I can continue to as before. But that's just my point -- I get nothing new out of it and I cannot imagine too many people using wired ethernet over wireless.


----------



## Troy J B (Sep 27, 2003)

Jonathan_S said:


> Hmm, Possibly. Good point.
> 
> Or they might follow the path of the HR10-250 and in you only have one cable card only enable one tuner.
> (HR10-250's hardware could support 2x ATSC + 1x satellite, but the software doesn't support that configuration, to have 2 ATSC tuners enabled you must have 2 satellite tuners enabled)
> ...


True we do not know for sure, but now that they have asymmetrical tuner support for the DT, why wouldn't they continue that to the S3 ? Not that is matters to me, I plan on getting 2 CableCard's (hoping for a single multi-stream CableCard).

Troy


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

tazzftw said:


> Hello? You blind? It's right f'n there. Record two shows at once instead of one. Very important.


Yes, but two single tuner Series 2's do exactly the same thing and with Lifetime Service there's no monthly rental fee whatsoever. Check *eBay's* Current Listings for "Series 2 TiVo Lifetime".

Wait for TiVo's Series 3 if you want a significant improvement on Series 2.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

TiVo Troll said:


> Yes, but two single tuner Series 2's do exactly the same thing and with Lifetime Service there's no monthly rental fee whatsoever. Check *eBay's* Current Listings for "Series 2 TiVo Lifetime".
> 
> Wait for TiVo's Series 3 if you want a significant improvement on Series 2.


It may offer the same features for you, but not if you have a family like I do. No way would I try to teach them how to use 2 TiVos. It took forever for them to figure out how to switch the A/V to watch TV when the TiVo was recording.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

Jonathan_S said:


> Hmm, Possibly. Good point.
> 
> Or they might follow the path of the HR10-250 and in you only have one cable card only enable one tuner.
> (HR10-250's hardware could support 2x ATSC + 1x satellite, but the software doesn't support that configuration, to have 2 ATSC tuners enabled you must have 2 satellite tuners enabled)
> ...


I will be really p*ssed if they only enable one tuner if one s-stream cable card is in use, because that's exactly what I want to do (if I can't get an m-stream card), since I don't want to pay Comcast for two cablecards.


----------



## DCIFRTHS (Jan 6, 2000)

jfh3 said:


> I will be really p*ssed if they only enable one tuner if one s-stream cable card is in use, because that's exactly what I want to do (if I can't get an m-stream card), since I don't want to pay Comcast for two cablecards.


What source would you use for the second tuner?


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

DCIFRTHS said:


> What source would you use for the second tuner?


All the digital channels in the clear - which for me is quite a few.


----------



## terryfoster (Jul 21, 2003)

Not to mention analog channels.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

jfh3 said:


> All the digital channels in the clear - which for me is quite a few.


Good question on that then. Can the digital tuner pick digital byte streams straight off the coax cable. Since they are not encrypted there is not need for the cable card to decrypt.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

I realize that for many, the S2 DT may not be a big deal in terms of feature/functionality, etc.

However, for me it's the first standalone Tivo worth considering. Not for myself anymore -- I ultimately tied myself to DirecTV to get dual tuner Tivos. But I've recommended this unit to my mom. Why?

She currently has analog cable
She hates using the VCR
She has no interest in the cableco's DVR because it means upgrading to digital cable
A DVR with a single tuner is of little value to her
Enter the S2 DT. The whole concept of season passes and wishlists has her enthralled, and the fact that she can record two shows at once (or watch live TV while something is recording) was a huge selling point with her. And in her case, the S3 would be of no additional value.

So bravo to Tivo. There's definitely a market for this box.

--chris


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

rainwater said:


> It may offer the same features for you, but not if you have a family like I do. No way would I try to teach them how to use 2 TiVos. It took forever for them to figure out how to switch the A/V to watch TV when the TiVo was recording.


Can't argue with that. Convenience is the "sizzle" that sells TiVo in the first place! But the new DT Ser. 2 is better described as a modification of the Ser. 2 TiVo, not a technical breakthrough.

Isn't the Ser. 2 "dual tuner" designation actually a misnomer? The dual Ser. 2 TiVo actually only has a second a/d converter which gives it the ability to record from the same two inputs (RF and line input) that all TiVo's have always had? Its single cable tuner is even more limited than the regular Ser. 2 tuner which also receives OTA UHF.

When cable goes all digital (as Comcast is planning to do in a few months) the "dual tuner" Ser. 2 TiVo's will become single sourced once again. TiVo's hi-def Ser. 3 future means getting TiVo's software into digital cable boxes which are much more similiar to satellite hi-def DVR boxes than to current Ser. 2 TiVo's.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

TiVo Troll said:


> ... Its single cable tuner is even more limited than the regular Ser. 2 tuner which also receives OTA UHF...


It has two internal tuners for analog over coax, and two video to mpeg encoders.

Scenerio A:
One coax in->Split Internally->Encoder 1 and Encoder 2.
Net result: Two practical tuners at any given time.

Scenerio B:
One coax in->Encoder 1 and/or Encoder 2
One Composite in->Encoder 1 or Encoder 2
Net result: Two practical tuners at any given time.

Scenerio C:
No analog source available.
One Composite in (from Digital Cable Box or Sat STB)->Either encoder, but not both at once(where would the other signal come from?)
Net result: Single usable tuner.

So only in all 100% digital households (either due to cableco dropping analog feeds completely or sat use with no option for analog cable), will the DT be an impractical solution.


----------



## Dennis Wilkinson (Sep 24, 2001)

TiVo Troll said:


> Isn't the Ser. 2 "dual tuner" designation actually a misnomer? The dual Ser. 2 TiVo actually only has a second a/d converter which gives it the ability to record from the same two inputs (RF and line input) that all TiVo's have always had? Its single cable tuner is even more limited than the regular Ser. 2 tuner which also receives OTA UHF.


Nope. There are 2 internal analog cable tuners, plus A-D and MPEG encoders for both. An external box is not required to record 2 shows at once.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

gonzotek said:


> Scenerio B:
> One coax in->Encoder 1 and/or Encoder 2
> One Composite in->Encoder 1 or Encoder 2
> Net result: Two practical tuners at any given time.


I don't think so. One encoder is fixed to one analog tuner , the other encoder works with the secod tuner or the A/V input.

If you choose satellite, you might be able to use the second encoder for satellite or the second cable tuner.


----------



## TiVo Troll (Mar 23, 2006)

So there ARE two analog cable (only) tuners. Good. But isn't cable the only practical source for a DT Ser. 2 box?

An antenna lead for VHF only (chs. 2-12) would probably work but wouldn't be particularly useful.

TiVo's DT Ser. 2 provides TiVo service for cable viewers but with many limitations compared with the dual tuner hi-def cable DVR's currently available for cable subs. who already have digital cable service. Getting a cable company DT hi-def box for $10. monthly with no contract or maintenance obligations along with using a single tuner Series 2 TiVo for analog cable, OTA, or even satellite sourced recordings might be a better choice for many digital cable subscribers.

I already have Comcast's DT hi-def box based on *MS TV's Foundation Edition*. It will be interesting to see how Comcast's TiVo box compares when it becomes available.

Ser. 3 is the future of TiVo and digital TV, cable and otherwise. TiVo's DT Ser. 2 is OK for now, but its dual input capability days are already counting down.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

classicsat said:


> I don't think so. One encoder is fixed to one analog tuner , the other encoder works with the secod tuner or the A/V input.
> 
> If you choose satellite, you might be able to use the second encoder for satellite or the second cable tuner.


I don't think you have it right.

Under this scenerio:
One coax in->Encoder 1 and/or Encoder 2
One Composite in->Encoder 1 or Encoder 2
Net result: Two practical tuners at any given time.

The coax is an analog cable line, the composite could be a sat stb or a cable stb. The coax in would be split to two tuners and available to both encoders. The Composite in (regardless if sat or cable) will be directed straight to either unused encoder. Neither encoder is 'fixed'. The mediaswitch just directs a raw video/audio stream, coming from any tuned input (two internal, one ex) to an available encoder. If Encoder A is occupied or scheduled to be occupied soon it will use Encoder B, and vice versa. If both are occupied, you have a three way conflict and obviously something won't be recorded. Only if you wanted to schedule two digital channels at once (two channels requiring STBs) under this setup would you'd be out of luck because the TiVo will only control one external device at a time, and therefore only has a single source route into the system.


----------



## gonzotek (Sep 24, 2004)

TiVo Troll said:


> So there ARE two analog cable (only) tuners. Good. But isn't cable the only practical source for a DT Ser. 2 box?


Yes, and that is how it's being marketed...principally to analog cable subscribers and cable subscribers who have mixed analog/digital service available to them. It is also useful for those few who have a sat STB and basic analog cable, since the cable can go in via coax and be split internally for dual recording capability of cable, with single recording capability of Sat. It wouldn't be my first choice in that situation, but some people might see some value in that scenerio.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

ZeoTiVo said:


> Good question on that then. Can the digital tuner pick digital byte streams straight off the coax cable. Since they are not encrypted there is not need for the cable card to decrypt.


If you are asking, can this be done? If so, the answer is yes - I do it today on a Sony DHG-250. I just update the TVGOS guide with the digital equivilent of an analog channel.

If you're asking if the S3 will do it, I hope so, but the problem will be getting the proper guide info, since most cable companies don't publish the digital frequency info. I found mine by trial and error.

That's why I hope the S3 will allow some sort of user-controlled channel mapping, so if it has the analog portion of my cable lineup, I can edit specific channels to use the digital frequency instead.


----------



## ozlow (Dec 8, 2004)

TiVoPony said:


> The DT can record two programs at once. That's a rather sizable hardware difference from a single tuner S2.
> 
> The DT has built in ethernet. No adapter required for a wired network. That's another hardware difference people typically appreciate.
> 
> ...


The DT doesn't do anything for me. My current series 2 unit died over night. So I called Tivo. Talked to two different agents. They both told me that the DT unit could record two shows at once off my dish. WELL, I went to Frys and they told me it could too. THEY ARE ALL WRONG! They sould know the products. I'm very, very, very mad.

I went from loving TIVO to hating TIVO in a day.


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

ozlow said:


> The DT doesn't do anything for me. My current series 2 unit died over night. So I called Tivo. Talked to two different agents. They both told me that the DT unit could record two shows at once off my dish. WELL, I went to Frys and they told me it could too. THEY ARE ALL WRONG! They sould know the products. I'm very, very, very mad.
> 
> I went from loving TIVO to hating TIVO in a day.


And when you went to Fry's, you didn't have time to read the box?  Or go to Tivo.com?

Yes, a Tivo rep should know their products. But never rely on a retail sales rep for accurate product information.

You obviously knew about this forum - could've asked here. Or read the few dozen threads on the DT.

I have no sympathy for people that can't do basic research and want to blame others when they screw up.


----------



## Sirshagg (Dec 27, 2001)

jfh3 said:


> I have no sympathy for people that can't do basic research and want to blame others when they screw up.


Come on now!

I definitely agree that one should generally not trust whatever garbage spews out of the mouths of the sales drones at the big box stores, but certainly the folks at TiVo should have accurate info.

This is WAY to harsh to state that people should do all kinds of reaseach before they buy a product otherwise they deserve what they get. People should be able to trust the company who makes the product to give them good info.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Agreed -- it's one thing to listen to the dweebs in the big box stores; I wouldn't trust many of them to operate a carny ride. But if he called Tivo and Tivo gave him that answer, then it's hard to accuse him of not doing his research.

--chris


----------



## jfh3 (Apr 15, 2004)

If it isn't written down, I don't trust it. 

I'm sure the Tivo CSRs have been trained on the DT - it's more likely that the OP misunderstood the response rather than was told the wrong thing. Maybe one rep got it wrong (not good), but two? I'm not buying it. 

I'd also have more sympathy for the guy if he ordered it online and didn't have the opportunity to read the box. 

If I buy something that costs more than a few dollars, I'm going to read the packaging to make sure it's what I want. 

Besides, I'm always a bit suspicious when a new poster starts with a "troll like" post.


----------

