# Is TiVo Really This Stupid???



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

Good Evening All...

I used Replay TV quite happily for about 5 years before purchasing my first TiVo. I only made the jump because Replay TV appears to have no interest in HDTV. I purchased the HDTV DirecTV unit about 6 months ago. After 6 months, I am still astonished at how slow these guides are. For those of us who don't want every single show automatically recorded, it takes an hour to set up a days worth of recordings. Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous? This seems beyond absurd to me. Why is it that ReplayTV units aren't afflicted with this problem?? How is it that no software download has been made available to correct this problem that they must get thousands of complaints about??? Do they simply not care?? I just can't imagine an issue of this magnitude being completely ignored on such a widely used platform. I must say that although I am elated to be able to record in HDTV, the user interface on the TiVo in quite amateur when compared to ReplayTV. I've tried really hard to love TiVo since I adopted it six months ago, but, I have NEVER in my life been more annoyed by a problem with any electronic device I've ever purchased. Does anyone know if there ever might be a fix for this?? Finally, does anyone know if DirecTV's new PVR has overcome this insane issue??? Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.

John from Boston


----------



## darthrsg (Jul 25, 2005)

they say to put the tivo on 2 SD channels before setting up recordings.


----------



## aztivo (Feb 23, 2005)

this is not TIVO it is D*


----------



## miss_my_utv (Sep 29, 2005)

Are you complaining about the "guide", or the slow response to setting a recording?

No doubt, the speed to set a recording is very annoying. As is the default guide (grid guide?). But the alternate guide (list of channels on the left side, several hours of shows on a highlighted channel to the right side) is just fine speed-wise to me.

I'm sure someone else can fill you in on the real names for the guides, and how to change them (if you don't know), since I can't remember them...


----------



## sageone (Feb 24, 2005)

I would agree with my fellow Bostonian...to a certain extent. The guide with the current shows on the left and the line-up of future shows on the right is great. However, what I am dissapointed in is the speed of Tivo's navigation. It does hang sometimes. The HME navigation is even slower. I also galleon to use music playlists. That's even slower. Tivo is a great product but I have said this many a times that I think they rushed the idea to market and not the actual product. What I mean by that is Tivo could be a helluva a lot better just in it's basic sense. Now, adding access to the web or web services, movie tickets, weather, photos, games, etc., etc. I would expect that stuff to be a tough to deal with at first then improve as time goes by.

The best thing I like about Tivo is the fact that I can transfer mpegs from my PC to my tivo, i.e. downloaded movies (no need to burn to svcd or dvd since I can pump them right through tivo).

Anyways...sorry for the rant. To answer your question, there is no solution to your problem. Every upgrade to the Tivo OS always seems to bring another bag of problems.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Don't blame TIVO. TIVO needs permission from DirecTV to issue any updates to the DirecTIVO boxes. Blame DirecTV for any problems with the Hughes HR10-250. Still, despite it's problems the HR10-250 is a better receiver now than anything else DirecTV will ever potentially come up with. That's my opinion.


----------



## NoCleverUsername (Jan 29, 2005)

I find it's generally more efficient to schedule recordings via other means than through the on-screen guide. This is true of any TiVo, not just the DirecTV w/ TiVo units.

Search by title, by time, channel, wishlists, etc.

But I have no personal experience with HD TiVos, so I don't know if they are the same or worse.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

BillyT2002 said:


> Still, despite it's problems the HR10-250 is a better receiver now than anything else DirecTV will ever potentially come up with. That's my opinion.


I'm sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative, but this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read!

How do you KNOW that D* are not going to come up with a better receiver? I agree that it's unlikely, given their track record and the basis they are building on, but I find it very "the world is flat" to say what you said.

My sister in England has the Sky+ NDS receiver and I used it on my visit there three years ago. I thought it was cr*p. I've read the reviews and bug complaints about the R15 on this forum and also over on dbstalk. I'm not impressed so far. However, I won't make any statements like "D* will never get it right" or "TiVo can't be improved upon by non-TiVo software!"

TiVo (and D*) have introduced many software version upgrades that have both added and removed functionality. When I read the forum, I see there are a lot of improvements that could be made - whether they will or not is beside the point.

What I don't see is anything telling me that D* are going to stop upgrading and improving their product. One day, who knows, maybe the the D* offering _will _equal or overtake the TiVo powered unit. Until I see solid evidence to the contrary, I will keep an open mind.

Oh, and for the record, I love my TiVo powered receivers (HD & SD) and do not intend to change them unless I have to. I'd love to get my hands on a HD NDS DVR and play with that, but as previously stated, I won't be dismissing it for at least two to three years or after solid testing and evaluating.


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

sageone said:


> Now, adding access to the web or web services, movie tickets, weather, photos, games, etc., etc. I would expect that stuff to be a tough to deal with at first then improve as time goes by.


I would suggest TiVo first figure how to make a basic PVR function before adding more functionality! Hell, the PC I owned back in the late 80's was fast enough than this thing. Now, to the others who blame D* for this problem and not TiVo...perhaps that's the case. As I stated, this is my very first experience with TiVo. If the non-D* and non HD units are faster, I guess it is a D* problem. I thought I had read elsewhere that this slowless was a problem that afflicted all TiVo boxes. In any event, I don't dislike the TiVo. I think Replay TV has a slightly better interface (i.e. you can look up movies based on a 5 star system, which is a neat feature). I just cannot believe how slow this thing is. I will make an effort to change the guide. I have attempted locating shows (as suggested here) through the "Find Program to Record" option, and I don't find it any faster. I'm just amazed that there are times I can schedule a recording, walk out of my media room, come back 6 minutes later, and that foolish "Please Wait" is still on the screen. On Replay TV, you could schedule a week's worth of recordings in 10 minutes...that's how fast the menus were. I guess I just don't understand how one company can figure this out and a much larger company (whether it's TiVo or D*) just doesn't seem to get a basic concept. Does anyone know if this issue has been resolved with D* new HD PVR? As always, any and all feedback is most appreciated.

John from Boston


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Guindalf said:


> I'm sorry, I don't mean to be argumentative, but this is the most ridiculous statement I have ever read!
> 
> ...


You clearly missed the fact that I was stating my opinion. I even stated as such in my post, but most people clearly don't read an entire post before they respond. 

Yes, it is my opinion that DirecTV (nor will DISH Network) ever really get it right in the DVR software development department. This is because they are not a software house (their business is not in developing good software. This is also not to say that all software focused companies develop good software because most do not.)

They are a video distribution company which is what they do best. Therefore it is my opinion that they will never really spend the money to bring in the talent necessary to write good software to run any of their in-house built receivers. TIVO on the other hand is a software and hardware company and that is why a lot of people love the TIVO experience.

A lot of people also loved the Ultimate TV experience precisely because the software was written by Microsoft which is another company that although it has it's naysayers, can sometimes write really good software too.

Until DirecTV brings in a talented software development staff (which will cost them a lot of money), which practices agile and test-driven (both unit and acceptance testing) development principles, they will never get the software right in their in-house DVR.

That is my opinion and I'm sticking to it.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

BillyT2002 said:


> Don't blame TIVO. TIVO needs permission from DirecTV to issue any updates to the DirecTIVO boxes.


Sorry, but I'm not buying that statement. I've owed a Tivo pratically since the day they came out and in the past 6 years, the software has not evolved anywhere near where it should have given that time span. When the HD TiVo came out a year ago, it already 'should' have had all of the bugs worked out. Instead it retained most of the slowness, etc. that was there since day one.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

BillyT2002 said:


> ...it is my opinion that DirecTV (nor will DISH Network) ever really get it right in the DVR software development department. This is because they are not a software house (their business is not in developing good software. This is also not to say that all software focused companies develop good software because most do not.)
> 
> They are a video distribution company which is what they do best. Therefore it is my opinion that they will never really spend the money to bring in the talent necessary to write good software to run any of their in-house built receivers. TIVO on the other hand is a software and hardware company and that is why a lot of people love the TIVO experience...


That may only be an opinion, but it is widely held by many of us. And it is supported by the sorry track record of every other PVR maker in the world, which pales in comparison to Tivo. If history is any indicator, there is little reason for optimism regarding the NDS PVR, and your reasoning as to why is probably right on target, in MY opinion.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

BillyT2002 said:


> That is my opinion and I'm sticking to it.


Actually, I DID get that - If you look at the quote I pulled, I purposely left that part in there.

I agree with most of your response and, although you may be right, it is not what you said in your original post. You stated that the HR10-250 is a better receiver than anything D* will potentially come up with, and, even as an opinion, that is blinkered thinking to say the least.
I know it's unlikely, but it is possible that some whizz of a programmer arrives at NDS straight from school and produces THE product that blows TiVo, Replay TV and everything else away! I'm not disagreeing with your thinking. I'm merely stating that to close your mind to the possibility that something could come along that's better is ludicrous.

Personally, I like my D* TiVo and I'm in no rush to change. However, I will not join in and say that the R15 "could not possibly be as good" as my TiVo. Even if it's sadly lacking today, an upgrade *may* be around the corner that changes all that.

Now that's MY opinion.  

Merry Christmas.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Sometimes I say what is ludicrous precise because my mind travels at ludicrous speed. 

If I were to open my mind and actually believe in some remote possibility that NDS could get some whizz bang programmer right out of college who will singlehandedly turn the software around and make it the gee whiz best thing since sliced bread, I'd have to be far less cynical than I am now.  I'd probably also really believe in the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus too. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pessimist by any means, but at 42 I'm more cynical than ever and if anything I'm the drowning optimist.

I still doubt that the R15 is ever going to have software that I will find acceptable in it. 

I'm not too sure I believe in whiz bang programmers coming right out of college anymore, either. Most of the kids I see coming out of computer science departments in colleges these days have no clue what a pointer really is or how to allocate or deallocate memory or even why they would want to.

The problem with whiz bang programmers out of college, even if they are really whiz bang is that they have no experience developing applications for users. They have no skill set to define what the average user really wants. They are great at following a specification to the letter provided to them by some suit which defines for them what the user wants. However 9 times out of 10 the suit has no clue what the customers want either. (This is not to say that the customers really know what they want in every case either. In a lot of cases they do not. However, to write good software you have to consider their input at least. You have to get a user story from them; even if you have to help them define it somewhat. Then once you think you've nailed down what it is they want, you have to get them to buy into it to so that you can properly set their expectations. Good software is developed in phases starting with getting input from the user.)

It's a classic case of the inmates running the asylum.


----------



## Morris Herman (Feb 25, 2003)

I have posted many posts on this subject and even after all of these years, we have nothing in the way of speed improvement. The Guide speed can, as many have stated, be made tolerable by switching to the two sided view (current on left, future on highlighted channel on the right). 

However, the simple fact of recording a current program or scheduling a recording from the Guide, takes a lot of time. 

When you know that a current computer works on machine instructions at gigahertz speeds (1 billion per second), how many instructions does it execute in 6 minutes? That is 1 billion X 60 X 6 = 360 billion instructions. There may be some hard disk delays involved but those should be minimal since all we are doing is generating a request to perform the recording in a database. 

The Tivo computer is slower than current computers, so let's take a 50% cut for that to 180 billion instructions in 6 minutes. The code is written in a high level language (Unix) so let's take a 1000 to one reduction (extremely high reduction) in instructions and we have 180 million instructions. 

I started in Software Engineering back in the late 60's and I have to scratch my head to come up with a reasonable scenario for why it would take that many instructions to add a new entry to a database. I am making an assumption that gigabytes of data are not moved at the time of the programming request. A sophisticated hard disk data management system should obviate moving the data but rather pointers to the data should be modified.


----------



## jbradway (Sep 30, 2001)

Mark Lopez said:


> Sorry, but I'm not buying that statement. I've owed a Tivo pratically since the day they came out and in the past 6 years, the software has not evolved anywhere near where it should have given that time span. When the HD TiVo came out a year ago, it already 'should' have had all of the bugs worked out. Instead it retained most of the slowness, etc. that was there since day one.


Actually his statement is pretty accurate. There are software updates that would improve the HR10-250, but Directv has elected to not distribute them. Tivo has zero control over the distribution of updates. D* probably feels it is in there best interests not to distribute updates for a box that is slated for replacement.


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

It seems to me, IMHO, that the TiVo-based products offer excellent features and functions and ease of use, but fall seriously short in the system performance area; in other words, good stuff but too slow.

OTOH, the competing products offer far better performance but fall short in the features, functions and ease of use area; in other words, faster but not-as-good stuff.

The complex logic used to search for and proactively manage potential recording conflicts and storage space conflicts adds to the painfully slow TiVo performance. Much of this logic is applied when a user is scheduling recordings, so those transactions are slower than others on the TiVo unit.

Another factor is the unending need to contain and reduce the costs of manufacturing the TiVo units to keep them reasonably priced as perceived by a prospective buyer. So another performance-affecting trade off here is the lack of using latest and greatest (and fastest) subcomponents because of their higher cost.

So, we are faced with the unfortunate situation of balancing functionality, ease of use, performance and cost of ownership (first cost and monthly fees).

For me, I am not willing to give up functionality (for me), nor ease of use (for my wife), so I choose to sacrifice in the other areas. Of course, what works for me does not work for everyone else.

I am quite satisfied with my SD and HD DirecTV with TiVo receivers. Based on what I read here and elsewhere about other PVR products, I see little hope of any other DVR/PVR provider "catching up" with the TiVo quality and reliability of always, always recording what I have asked for. 

I am, however, very curious about a rumored announcement from Apple Computer regarding PVR/DVR capabilities integrated with the Mac platform. Apple is another company that "gets it" when it comes to ease of use and well-thought-out features and functionality.

These are my personal opinions. Use them or ignore them as you see fit.


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

Budget_HT said:


> TiVo-based products offer excellent features and functions and ease of use, but ... too slow ... painfully slow ... when a user is scheduling recordings


It's always been puzzling to me that with all the knowledgable Tivo users on this forum & the others for all this time, we don't have a clear understanding why a few people are getting such slow performance.

I'm sure these people are not lying or sabotaging their machines through ineptitude; it is clearly a real problem. But with the dozens of DTivos and SA Tivos I've owned over the years the closest I've seen to what these people describe was setting up & sorting season passes on DTivos running 4.x. That could be just awful. And on my wife's 500GB, when she fills it to the brim and refuses to erase anything until it absolutely refuses to record anything new, it slows to a crawl. On those occsasions when a member of my local community complains about it, by the time I look at it, it's always fine. "You should have seen it last night!" I think it's an airborne, short-live virus that disappears in daylight.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

There is a pretty easy workaround to the speed problem on the HR10-250 HD DirecTIVO unit. You should clear your thumb ratings. This will speed things up. Personally I don't use the thumb ratings at all and clear them every month or so. I also turned off the option that enables TIVO to automatically record programming for me based upon what it thinks I might like to watch. My HR10-250 runs really fast and I have almost 50 season passes set up.


----------



## merlin803 (Dec 11, 2005)

BillyT2002 said:


> There is a pretty easy workaround to the speed problem on the HR10-250 HD DirecTIVO unit. You should clear your thumb ratings. This will speed things up. Personally I don't use the thumb ratings at all and clear them every month or so. I also turned off the option that enables TIVO to automatically record programming for me based upon what it thinks I might like to watch. My HR10-250 runs really fast and I have almost 50 season passes set up.


Dumb question, but how do you clear them?


----------



## miss_my_utv (Sep 29, 2005)

merlin803 said:


> Dumb question, but how do you clear them?


It's under the "Restart or Reset System" menu option.

Since one of the first things I did when setting up the HDTivo is turn off suggestions, and I never do the "thumbs thing" (unless inadvertently hitting a key) I have never bothered doing this. But I gave it a shot. It warns you it will take several hours, so I did it overnight (didn't time it).

If it improved anything, it sure didn't make scheduling a recording anywhere near an acceptable speed. The thing "went away and thought" for 20-30 secs when, as a test, I added a football game (HD) to be recorded.

As I stated previously, once I switched to the alternate guide, setting a recording is about the only speed-related complaint I have with the HDTivo. The "pretty easy workaround" offered didn't fix that.

I've only got a few (~10) season passes and suggestions are turned off, so there shouldn't be that many potential conflicts to examine!

BTW, I've used one other HDTivo (which likely had more SPs) - same comments (response is fine, except setting a recording takes what seems like forever).


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Redux said:


> It's always been puzzling to me that with all the knowledgable Tivo users on this forum & the others for all this time, we don't have a clear understanding why a few people are getting such slow performance...


I could take an educated guess. I think that while the original programmers that created the Tivo OS were exceptionally clever in the areas of ergonomics and stability, comparitively, to pretty much every other programming unit that squirted out a marketable PVR interface, they were not equally as clever in the area of coding efficiency. But for a 14-hour Tivo that could only support a handful of SPs and WLs, practically speaking, that really didn't matter. It only became an issue when multiple high-capacity HDDs burgeoned onto the scene.

Not only that, but a good, stable, user-friendly interface takes a lot more coding than an inferior, unstable, and user-hostile one. There are a lot more wheels turning inside a Tivo than inside a DISH 522, and the differences will manifest themselves either by unpredictable and erratic behavior (from bad coding) or slow, dependable behavior (from good, yet inneficient coding).

And honestly, the slow performance only becomes exponentially slower as more SPs and WLs and thumbs ratings are in play, which explains why some users don't see the problem, and also explains why the same Tivo after a "clear and delete" gets comparitively zippy.

Ironically, the later PVR interfaces that appeared didn't have that legacy hand-cuffing of being slow and inefficient, because coding practices change to reflect the options available at the time. But that didn't help them to be as stable or user-friendly as Tivo, which still rules that roost. The speed of 6.2 proves that it is the software, not the hardware, that contains the speed bumps that irk us.



> ...on my wife's 500GB, when she fills it to the brim and refuses to erase anything until it absolutely refuses to record anything new, it slows to a crawl...


We don't even need to speculate on that one. There are plenty of tangible reasons why this kind of slow down occurs.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

jbradway said:


> Actually his statement is pretty accurate. There are software updates that would improve the HR10-250, but Directv has elected to not distribute them. Tivo has zero control over the distribution of updates. D* probably feels it is in there best interests not to distribute updates for a box that is slated for replacement.


My point was that the speed improvements should have been made years ago and *before* the HD Tivo was released. Thus there would not even be an issue of DirecTV 'holding back' a fix. The fix should have already been there had Tivo been actually putting some effort into improving the software over the years (more than the relatively minor 'enhancements').


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

Mark Lopez said:


> My point was that the speed improvements should have been made years ago and *before* the HD Tivo was released. Thus there would not even be an issue of DirecTV 'holding back' a fix. The fix should have already been there had Tivo been actually putting some effort into improving the software over the years (more than the relatively minor 'enhancements').


I agree 100%. It is completely inexcusable for any company to release a product like this where a large percentage of its users are complaining about the snail like pace. Also, I seem to read a great deal about how great the TiVo user interface is and that this contributes to the slowness...HUH??? Am I missing something here?? Replay TV's interface is every bit as user friendly as TiVo's and is not afflicted with this embarrassingly slow speed! The only thing TiVo seems to have that Replay TV doesn't have is the dopey thumbs up and thumbs down button that many of us don't even use. I say, wake up TiVo, and fix this problem that people have been complaining about for quite some time.

I've read the suggestions that turning your thumbs up or down off and changing the guide helps to speed the TiVo up. While I certainly appreciate the suggestion, it doesn't change the fact that a consumer should not have to "trick" their TiVo into functioning at a normal speed. As I've said before, I've been using Replay TV for over 5 years (three different units, due to being an upgrade junkie), and not a single one of them had an issue anything close to this!

John from Boston


----------



## jbradway (Sep 30, 2001)

Hey this Replay deal sounds like a fine unit. Can you provide me with a link to their HD DVR product?


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

jbradway said:


> Hey this Replay deal sounds like a fine unit. Can you provide me with a link to their HD DVR product?


I believe you can find them on the web at www.replaytv.com

John from Boston


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

Enigma869 said:


> I believe you can find them on the web at www.replaytv.com
> 
> John from Boston


Interestingly, you can _*find *_them here buy you can't _*buy *_them!


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

Guindalf said:


> Interestingly, you can _*find *_them here buy you can't _*buy *_them!


That is rather interesting. Well, I would imagine someone could contact Replay TV to ascertain who their retailers are. I purchased mine from Tweeter.

John from Boston


----------



## jbradway (Sep 30, 2001)

Enigma869 said:


> I believe you can find them on the web at www.replaytv.com
> 
> John from Boston


I didn't see any units that were high definition capable on that link. Perhaps I missed it? We are discussing Tivo's failure as a HD DVR here aren't we? I would expect the comparable units being discussed to be at least capable of recording HD content otherwise it's apples and oranges.


----------



## jhimmel (Dec 27, 2002)

You are right.
I could not find any mention of HDTV there either.
Not even in the running as an HR10-250 competitor if it can't do HD. Why even bring it up?


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

jbradway said:


> I didn't see any units that were high definition capable on that link. Perhaps I missed it? We are discussing Tivo's failure as a HD DVR here aren't we? I would expect the comparable units being discussed to be at least capable of recording HD content otherwise it's apples and oranges.


First off, I think I've made my feelings abundantly clear here! I purchased the TiVo for one reason and one reason, only...HDTV! I am fully cognizant of the fact that Replay TV doesn't offer an HD capable DVR (my apologies for missing your sarcasm in your original post).

Having said that, I didn't really post here to hear from TiVo apologists! There is simply ZERO excuse that recordings take as long as they do to setup, PERIOD! I've been at the audio/video game for a long time and am constantly amazed at how sensitive people get over some dopey machine they decided to purchase. For some people, it seems if they spend their hard earned money purchasing a product with flaws, they're too proud to admit the VERY obvious flaws. Like you, I also spent my hard-earned money on an HD TiVo, and that's what entitles me to my opinion. Whether you spent your money or not, junk is junk!

The lack of HD capability notwithstanding, it is absurd that a company like TiVo doesn't have the ability to produce a PVR that can at least match a basic DVR's performance (I have also read that non HD TiVo units have some speed issues). This thing should at least be faster than a computer I owned 20 years ago. Again, I stand by my opinion. TiVo should be completely embarrassed that they brought a product like this to market. I'm just glad I didn't spend the $1,000 they were selling for when they first came out. This isn't about "bashing" TiVo. It's about holding a company accountable for the products they produce. I certainly hope if they continue to build HD DVR's, that they can figure out how to build one that functions more effectively!

John from Boston


----------



## jbradway (Sep 30, 2001)

Well if I deserve the "apologist' label, you more than deserve the "basher" label.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Enigma869 said:


> ...I didn't really post here to hear from TiVo apologists! There is simply ZERO excuse that recordings take as long as they do to setup, PERIOD! I've been at the audio/video game for a long time and am constantly amazed at how sensitive people get over some dopey machine they decided to purchase. For some people, it seems if they spend their hard earned money purchasing a product with flaws, they're too proud to admit the VERY obvious flaws. Like you, I also spent my hard-earned money on an HD TiVo, and that's what entitles me to my opinion. Whether you spent your money or not, junk is junk!
> 
> The lack of HD capability notwithstanding, it is absurd that a company like TiVo doesn't have the ability to produce a PVR that can at least match a basic DVR's performance (I have also read that non HD TiVo units have some speed issues). This thing should at least be faster than a computer I owned 20 years ago. Again, I stand by my opinion. TiVo should be completely embarrassed that they brought a product like this to market. I'm just glad I didn't spend the $1,000 they were selling for when they first came out. This isn't about "bashing" TiVo. It's about holding a company accountable for the products they produce. I certainly hope if they continue to build HD DVR's, that they can figure out how to build one that functions more effectively!
> 
> John from Boston


I don't think even you are as naive to think that a thread doesn't wander into areas not originally intended by the OP. Internet forums are a conversation. If the topic wanders, so be it. That's life.

Your post here states that it is not a bash, but if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck... Bottom line, this one sure smells like a bash. But that's OK. You're entitled. Just don't try to pee on our leg and tell us it's only raining.

At the end of the day, there are certain cut-and-dried otions out there, and no one is holding a gun to anyone's head about what PVR they should buy or fall in love with. People tend to try to justify their personal choices to others, and we all have to take that with a grain of salt. But it you would care to take the time, you can find good info even in a thread that wanders OT a bit. Being brief and using short paragraphs is probably the best way to get clear answers and keep folks on topic if you are after a specific answer, but even then the conversation may naturally wander.

John, it appears that you are clearly unhappy with the options available from Tivo. No worries. But your original question, "is Tivo really this stupid?", while probably a very innocent question, indicates that you also have questions about whether that opinion is even valid, and also could be taken by some as inflammatory. From your point of view, the answer is "Yes, Tivo is really this stupid", so now you have your answer. You can also completely ignore the fact that most of us are completely convinced that Tivo is far and away the best option out there. There's room for all opinions. No one has done anything wrong, here. It might be time to stop venting and and just get on with it.


----------



## jbradway (Sep 30, 2001)

I'm certainly not a Tivo apologist. I see some of the same issues with my own box. However, I dn't see a point in hammering Tivo overr the hr10-250. It's a dead end product for Tivo and Directv. It's already been decided that D* is going on without Tivo. Hopefully the new box is an improvement over the HR10-250. If it isn't then I'll move on to whatever I find that is better at being an HD DVR. I don't think anyone right now is offerring the perfect HD DVR, they all have some issues.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Minor sidebar:

Some of us are using "apologist" like it's inherently a negative thing, like some people consider "liberal" inherently negative. Some branded as apologists are really more evangelists. They simply want to open people's minds to the positive possibilities. Most of them will also acknowledge the limitations.

That only becomes bad or hypocritical when folks who are bent on opening our minds to certain possibilities also are at the same time themselves closed off to alternate possibilities. They end up shooting themselves in the foot by spoiling their own credibility. Then, no one knows what to believe, and we've all just wasted our time.

Complete honesty is the key, and false pride is the enemy. (stepping down now from soapbox...returning you to the thread)


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

If I say that on both of my HR-250's, one which has a ton of SD in now playing and a ton of season passes, that I don't see ANY of the slowness that people are talking about, does that make me an apologist?

Clearly this problem doesn't happen for everybody as has been stated in this thread.

Why it happens for some people, and not others I have no idea.

But my 250 is far faster in remaking menus, deletions and setting up new shows to record than any of my other tivos have been.

-smak-


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

smak said:


> ...I don't see ANY of the slowness that people are talking about...
> 
> Clearly this problem doesn't happen for everybody as has been stated in this thread.
> 
> Why it happens for some people, and not others I have no idea....


I have an idea. As you add more SPs and WLs and thumbs ratings, sorting the DB for recording conflicts takes exponentially more time. Every "slow" Tivo can be made faster by a clear and delete, or even made just as fast by manually removing all SPs, LWs, and thumbs. If you have a lot of those (or are just impatient), to you, Tivo is slow. To everyone else, it isn't.

And as far as capturing live recordings, it appears to wait for a (sometimes long)time and then finally says "I'm recording now", when in reality it will usually capture any part of the program before you even press the button, as long as you have been on that channel (if you just tuned over it will only record from there, and if the beginning of the program is 45-55 minutes earlier and you have been on that channel, you might miss a minute or two). It doesn't display the record light until it's darn good and ready, but it is already recording well before that (since that is what it does 24/7). So does it matter really, how long it takes to indicate that it is recording if it still gets the whole program anyway? Not really.

I'll opt for features and dependability over speed and instability every time. My old 721 was the fastest zippiest PVR interface ever. But I never knew when I turned it on if it really had recorded what I told it to, or whether 70 hours of previously-recorded content would still be there. With Tivo, I might have to wait a little longer, but there is no suspense...it always gets the recordings, and they always stay there until I'm done with them.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Enigma869 said:


> it is absurd that a company like TiVo doesn't have the ability to produce a PVR that can at least match a basic DVR's performance (I have also read that non HD TiVo units have some speed issues).


It's not only absurd, it's not true. Don't believe everything you read. I have five standard definition Tivos and they are quite zippy.


> This thing should at least be faster than a computer I owned 20 years ago.


This statement is meaningless. The computer you owned 20 years ago couldn't do what your Tivo does. And for what it's worth, take your computer from 20 years ago and put Windows on it and tell me how fast it is.


> Again, I stand by my opinion. TiVo should be completely embarrassed that they brought a product like this to market. I'm just glad I didn't spend the $1,000 they were selling for when they first came out. This isn't about "bashing" TiVo. It's about holding a company accountable for the products they produce. I certainly hope if they continue to build HD DVR's, that they can figure out how to build one that functions more effectively!


Tivo didn't build it. Tivo doesn't build boxes. Hughes built it, DirecTV sold it. Tivo supplied the software. Tivo made updates to its software _years_ ago to improve the speed of its boxes. DirecTV only released an update to fix the SD boxes a while ago, and is the only outfit that can fix the problem with the HD ones.

I can understand your frustration, but direct (ahem) it at the proper organization.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> I'll opt for features and dependability over speed and instability every time. My old 721 was the fastest zippiest PVR interface ever. But I never knew when I turned it on if it really had recorded what I told it to, or whether 70 hours of previously-recorded content would still be there. With Tivo, I might have to wait a little longer, but there is no suspense...it always gets the recordings, and they always stay there until I'm done with them.


I couldn't agree more.

As someone whom I respect a great deal once said, "All DVR software is half-a**ed. Tivo's is just less half-a**ed than most."


----------



## wje (Jan 8, 2005)

cheer said:


> Tivo didn't build it. Tivo doesn't build boxes. Hughes built it, DirecTV sold it. Tivo supplied the software. Tivo made updates to its software _years_ ago to improve the speed of its boxes. DirecTV only released an update to fix the SD boxes a while ago, and is the only outfit that can fix the problem with the HD ones.
> 
> I can understand your frustration, but direct (ahem) it at the proper organization.


Finally! Yes, people, it's not Tivo's fault. While Tivo is certainly stupid, the stupidity lies in the business area. Lay the blame squarely where it belongs.

As for speed, I find the HR10 to be _painfully_ slow for some operations. I never had problems with my older SD units. (at least, not after Tivo updated the early software)

The two primary problems seem to be that the CPU is seriously undersized for the workload, and the software we've been graced with is many, many, moons out of date. Neither of these is Tivo's fault.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Mark Lopez said:


> Sorry, but I'm not buying that statement. I've owed a Tivo pratically since the day they came out and in the past 6 years, the software has not evolved anywhere near where it should have given that time span. When the HD TiVo came out a year ago, it already 'should' have had all of the bugs worked out. Instead it retained most of the slowness, etc. that was there since day one.


Given your statement, you are incorrect:

#1) You've owned DirecTivo, not Tivo, since the say they came out. Tivo was out long before DirecTivo.

#2) Tivo has made a significant number of software improvements (up to v7.2). Of those, only a small subset have been made available to DirecTivo (v6.1/2), thanks to DirecTV preventing Tivo from releasing the features.

#3) Further, Tivo has updated the HD Tivo (v6.2x/6.x), but DirecTV won't allow it to be released, so we're stuck with a very old version (v3.1.5f).

This is entirely an issue with DirecTV, and has nothing to do with Tivo. Tivo has done everything they can to update the software, fix bugs, make it faster, all while continuing to innovate with TV over IP, web services like weather and news, etc.

Tivo rocks.

DirecTV (and, frankly, most cable/satellite operators) sucks.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

cheer said:


> Tivo didn't build it. Tivo doesn't build boxes.


Grrr.... I really hate when peaple use the 'Tivo doesn't build boxes' excuse. When a Ford car engine seizes, you blame Ford, not some company in China that actually built the engine.



cheer said:


> Tivo made updates to its software _years_ ago to improve the speed of its boxes.


Ummm... We are talking about the HD Tivo. If Tivo fixed the speed problem 'years ago', there would not be a problem, now would there?  But instead of making it right (for the HD unit) to begin with they just used the same old slow SD code with some kludges to make it work with HD.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Mark Lopez said:


> Grrr.... I really hate when peaple use the 'Tivo doesn't build boxes' excuse. When a Ford car engine seizes, you blame Ford, not some company in China that actually built the engine.
> 
> Ummm... We are talking about the HD Tivo. If Tivo fixed the speed problem 'years ago', there would not be a problem, now would there?  But instead of making it right (for the HD unit) to begin with they just used the same old slow SD code with some kludges to make it work with HD.


You really don't get it. Yes, 6.2 has been available for about a year, and was testing with DirecTV for months. And no one said the HD speed issue was fixed years ago, just that Tivo has been around a lot longer than the DirecTivo, and that Tivo continues to make software improvements that DirecTV won't release.

DirecTV specs the boxes, Tivo just writes the software for them. DirecTV chose to use a weak processor for the HD Tivo (likely to cut costs), and it was a mistake - by DirecTV. DirecTV is also choosing not to release significant software speed enhancements long ago completed by Tivo - again DirecTV's fault.

DirecTV is entirely at fault here. Tivo continues to write great software. DirecTV continues to put customers second, in the hopes that their own non-Tivo DVR's will look better. Unfortunately (except apparently for you) that plan won't work.


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> I don't think even you are as naive to think that a thread doesn't wander into areas not originally intended by the OP. Internet forums are a conversation. If the topic wanders, so be it. That's life.
> 
> Your post here states that it is not a bash, but if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck... Bottom line, this one sure smells like a bash. But that's OK. You're entitled. Just don't try to pee on our leg and tell us it's only raining.
> 
> ...


First and foremost, you can save your Judge Judy book title quotes for someone else...I don't find her title quite as cute as you might! Now, onto business...If my comment came across as a bash, so be it! The machine is an embarassment to technology, period! Now, in terms of whose fault it is, I'm not sure it really matters. While I understand those who blame DirecTV, this product ultimately has TiVo's name on it! I happen to own a mortgage company, and banks screw deals up all the time...I can't then turn around and tell a client "Hey, it's not my fault...it's the bank's fault". Ultimately, I'm the guy on the hook, as the CEO of the company. If I had banks continuously making me look bad, I certainly wouldn't have a business relationship with them.

In terms of me being "clearly unhappy" with the "options" offered by TiVo, that really isn't a true statement. From what I can tell, a lot of people who post here haven't used many other systems. The only thing I have said is that the user interface on Replay TV is every bit as good as TiVo and that there are no technical issues with the three Replay TV units I have owned. I don't really have any issue with TiVo's user interface in terms of it being user friendly. The only issue I have has been clearly stated. I understand that TiVo has the only commercially available HD DVR. I guess I'm just one of these people who thinks when a company sells a product for $1,000, it shouldn't have such a ridiculous issue. It would seem to me that whether or not TiVo builds boxes, they would at least test a product with their name on it to ensure it works as it is supposed to! If they took the time to test this product, I am convinced that a 5 year old would have realized that this was a serious issue that should be remedied before it being released for purchase.

John from Boston


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

The main labels on the front of both of my my HR10-250's say "DirecTV HD DVR." There is also a small TiVo logo, as well as a Dolby Digital 5.1 logo. These are valued features included with the DirecTV unit.

The user manual is titled, "DirecTV HD DVR User's Guide." The only mention of TiVo that I could find is a statement on page viii that says,


> As you use your DirecTV HD DVR, you'll see the TiVo logo in places like the Now Playing List and TiVo Suggestions. Your new HD DVR incorporates the latest high-definition DVR (Digital Video Recorder) technology from TiVo. This means you have access to exclusive TiVo features such as WishList{TM} searches, Season Pass{TM} recordings, Thumbs Up{TM} and Thumbs Down{TM}, TiVo Suggestions and TiVolution{TM} Magazine, all in one seamlessly integrated product that will change the way you watch television.


The service I subscribe to is called, "DirecTV DVR Service with TiVo." If I did not have a prepaid lifetime service subscription, I would be paying a monthly DVR service fee to DirecTV.

The warranty and all customer support is provided by DirecTV.

Clearly the product is a DirecTV product. They happen to license and incorporate software from TiVo, albeit an outdated version (DirecTV's choice), even though a more current version has been completed and was being tested.

So, say your PC was made and sold by HP, but includes an Intel processor ("Intel Inside" logo) and Microsoft XP Pro operating system, Microsoft Office and other application software, and so on. Is your PC a Microsoft product? Or an Intel product? Or an HP product incorporating features and components from other suppliers?

Even the newer, unreleased version of the TiVo software for the DirecTV HD DVR is not a speed demon. But based on my personal experience with the software upgrades to my series 2 DirecTV SD DVR, the performance of its user interface has clearly improved. If only DirecTV would release the comparable upgrade for their HD DVR, we would all be a bit happier.

There is no question in my mind that this is a DirecTV product with some DirecTV quality and performance issues that are clearly outside of the control and influence of TiVo. But even with those issues, the TiVo functionality incorporated in this DirecTV HD DVR is still the best available IMHO.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

AbMagFab said:


> You really don't get it.


No, you don't get it. Tivo has had years to fix the speed issue. It should have been fixed in the HD Tivo *BEFORE* it was released.



AbMagFab said:


> DirecTV is entirely at fault here.


And the Tivo 'army' marches on....



AbMagFab said:


> Tivo continues to write great software.


...and on.


----------



## phxbruzer (Mar 8, 2002)

Budget_HT said:


> The main labels on the front of both of my my HR10-250's say "DirecTV HD DVR." There is also a small TiVo logo, as well as a Dolby Digital 5.1 logo. These are valued features included with the DirecTV unit.
> 
> The user manual is titled, "DirecTV HD DVR User's Guide." The only mention of TiVo that I could find is a statement on page viii that says,
> 
> ...


Amen brother.... :up:

The HD DirecTiVo is first and foremost a DirecTV product.



> Originally Posted by *Mark Lopez*
> Grrr.... I really hate when peaple use the 'Tivo doesn't build boxes' excuse. When a Ford car engine seizes, you blame Ford, not some company in China that actually built the engine.


That is correct (except you have it reversed), you have a DirecTV box (Ford Car) with TiVo software (Chinese Engine).



> Originally Posted by *Enigma869*
> I happen to own a mortgage company, and banks screw deals up all the time...I can't then turn around and tell a client "Hey, it's not my fault...it's the bank's fault". Ultimately, I'm the guy on the hook, as the CEO of the company. If I had banks continuously making me look bad, I certainly wouldn't have a business relationship with them.


This is another good example but you still are making the error of who's making the decisions here. In your example the issue would be stated like this: 
The banks you deal with (TiVo) have loans available for 5%, but you as CEO (DirecTV) have decided that your clients want the 6% loans, because you're the only Mortgage company in the area (HD DVR). Your clients complain (us) about this, but if they want to buy a house (use an HD DVR) in this area they have to use you (DirecTV).

I think this would be a little more apparent to those of you that just aren't getting it, if you would look at a stand alone TiVo. I'm not talking about a SD DirecTV TiVo, I'm talking about a stand alone TiVo that has no tuner built in. It's only issue is the IR Blasters but any product with IR Blasters have issues with them, it's a problem with the technology. The stand alone TiVoes have so many features that we don't even get a taste of in the DirecTV world.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

phxbruzer said:


> That is correct (except you have it reversed), you have a DirecTV box (Ford Car) with TiVo software (Chinese Engine).


Ok, perhaps a better analogy would be the PC example given above. You buy a Dell (just an example) with Windows pre-installed. The box is made and sold by Dell. But when Windows crashes because it has bugs and flaws, who do you blame? Dell? I think not. Everyone would be blaming MS saying that it's their software that is crap. But yet here everyone wants to blame everyone *except* the ones who wrote the software. Now let's go a step farther and say Dell sold those new PCs (today) with outdated Windows 95 because MS said it was 'good enough' for the user.

My point has been it doesn't matter if DirecTV won't send out an update. The speed issue has been a problem since day one. And after 6 years, it should not exist. The SD update proves that the software can work better. But those improvements should have been made years ago and before the HD unit even hit the shelves. The only one to blame for that is Tivo.

Perhaps if they had not wasted that $50M on those stupid ads that no one 'got' a few years back, they would have been able to hire a couple of good software developers.


----------



## BobbyK (Apr 12, 2003)

This is just my opinion but I have been a TiVo user for years I have several including the HD unit. I guess one can argue that the software should have been further along before putting it out...but that would have meant living w/o HD TiVo for even a longer period of time. I do not find the slowness issue to be that aggravating and I'm grateful to have it... the quality is great and I find the unit works well with the exception of some units having bad HDMI ports... at least that was my experience. If I have any frustration it's that D* won't allow the HMO features or software updates.... They are waiting for their HD unit to hit and will offer to trade my unit for an mpeg4 unit. However, with all the complaints the DVR unit D* just released I will likely pass and go with the new HD unit coming from TiVo for cable. Goodbye NFL.....


----------



## stephenC (Apr 15, 2004)

You have to give Mark Lopez some credit for his description "Just click ignore". But, it's difficult to read his posts. I understand that this is DirecTV's fault and not TiVo. I've read the many posts of forum members trying to explain this to Mark. But, in the end I just keep shaking my head when I read Mark's rebuttals. Does anyone live near Hondo that can take an afternoon and sit down with a cup of coffee and really explain the situation to Mark. Of course, I could just click to ignore.


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

stephenC said:


> You have to give Mark Lopez some credit for his description "Just click ignore". But, it's difficult to read his posts. I understand that this is DirecTV's fault and not TiVo. I've read the many posts of forum members trying to explain this to Mark. But, in the end I just keep shaking my head when I read Mark's rebuttals. Does anyone live near Hondo that can take an afternoon and sit down with a cup of coffee and really explain the situation to Mark. Of course, I could just click to ignore.


And see that 'join date' over there too? As already mentioned, I have had Tivos since they first came out (every model) and I believe I am faily qulified to comment on the progress (or lack of) of the software over the years.

But go ahead and shake your head and continue to think that Tivo can do no wrong and this is only DirecTVs fault. You are exactly the type of person that companies who balk at improving their products love.

Yep, got to love that Tivo army


----------



## phxbruzer (Mar 8, 2002)

Mark Lopez said:


> Ok, perhaps a better analogy would be the PC example given above. You buy a Dell (just an example) with Windows pre-installed. The box is made and sold by Dell. But when Windows crashes because it has bugs and flaws, who do you blame? Dell? I think not. Everyone would be blaming MS saying that it's their software that is crap. But yet here everyone wants to blame everyone except the ones who wrote the software. Now let's go a step farther and say Dell sold those new PCs (today) with outdated Windows 95 because MS said it was 'good enough' for the user.


And still you're not understanding the situation. I'll use your Dell/Windows analogy. You buy a Dell with Windows on it. Windows it buggy, MS creates the fix for it, but you can only get your fixes from Dell, you can't get them from MS. Dell decides they don't want to give you the fixes. Who's fault is it?

You see TiVo has the updated software all ready to distribute, DirecTV doesn't want to/won't distribute it. It's available but not to you directly. You have to get it from DirecTV.



Mark Lopez said:


> My point has been it doesn't matter if DirecTV won't send out an update. The speed issue has been a problem since day one. And after 6 years, it should not exist. The SD update proves that the software can work better. But those improvements should have been made years ago and before the HD unit even hit the shelves. The only one to blame for that is Tivo.


But it _does_ matter. When did the SD update come out that fixed it's speed issue, before or after the HD version came out??? I'll help you out, AFTER. TiVo has fixed the problem, as the SD update proves. The fix is available. Where can you get the fix from? Is there a TiVo update site? No? Well then I guess DirecTV is the only place you can get it from. That's all we're saying. TiVo's not perfect. I don't know one piece of software that's ever been created that was perfect from day one. Your expectations are way off if that's what you think.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Mark Lopez said:


> Grrr.... I really hate when peaple use the 'Tivo doesn't build boxes' excuse. When a Ford car engine seizes, you blame Ford, not some company in China that actually built the engine.


A very bad analogy. If Tivo sold the box under the Tivo name and claimed it a wholly Tivo product but subbed out the manufacturing to someone else, that would be one thing. But that's not what happened. Hughes built the box, and DirecTV sold it with Tivo software.

If your new Compaq PC dies, do you blame Compaq or Microsoft?


> Ummm... We are talking about the HD Tivo. If Tivo fixed the speed problem 'years ago', there would not be a problem, now would there?  But instead of making it right (for the HD unit) to begin with they just used the same old slow SD code with some kludges to make it work with HD.


You missed my point. My point was that Tivo has release software to speed up the DVRs, but DirecTV has chosen not to implement it.


----------



## cheer (Nov 13, 2005)

Mark Lopez said:


> My point has been it doesn't matter if DirecTV won't send out an update. The speed issue has been a problem since day one. And after 6 years, it should not exist.


Here you contradict yourself. If, as you say, after six years it shouldn't exist, and a fix DOES exist but DirecTV won't implement, why are you so unbelievably reluctant to blame DirecTV? I don't get it.


> The SD update proves that the software can work better. But those improvements should have been made years ago and before the HD unit even hit the shelves. The only one to blame for that is Tivo.


I suppose you can make this argument, although one could make an argument that had DirecTV used a beefier processor none of this would matter. But at the time of release, 3.1x is all ANY of the DirecTivos used. Blame Tivo for that if you want, but what do you want Tivo to do? Or do you just want to yell and scream that it wasn't perfect on day one?


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

cheer said:


> Tivo has release software to speed up the DVRs, but DirecTV has chosen not to implement it.


Sure, and knowledgable DTV users are fixing the crippled DTV boxes with newer software. So why can't Tivo release software directly to _all_ customers, along with the means of installing the new software? If they are contractually prohibited by DTV from doing so, they should break the law and do it anyway.

Just trying to get into the spirit of this nonsense.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Enigma869 said:


> First and foremost, you can save your Judge Judy book title quotes for someone else...


First and foremost, John, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. I know who JJ is, but I've been careful to never listen to a word she has ever spoken, so if she and I both quoted the same thing, that is purely an embarrased coincidence.

I really only tend to dispense lectures when it appears that someone really needs them badly, so draw your own conclusions who I had been saving that one for.

Attitude turns out to be important on the internet. That is apparent by the meaningless dick-waving contest this thread has devolved into, the blame for which can be squarely placed on one person's shoulders, my friend. Ask a silly question, get a silly answer.

I'm out. And Johnny Damon will be kicking your team's ass regularly this year  .


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

TyroneShoes said:


> First and foremost, John, I don't have a clue what you're talking about. I know who JJ is, but I've been careful to never listen to a word she has ever spoken, so if she and I both quoted the same thing, that is purely an embarrased coincidence.
> 
> I really only tend to dispense lectures when it appears that someone really needs them badly, so draw your own conclusions who I had been saving that one for.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry you feel one has a poor attitude just because they don't agree with their point of view. Passing the buck to DirecTV is fine if that's what you want to do. Ultimately, I really don't care whose fault it is! I think both companies have complete dopes running them. TiVo made a business relationship to do business with DirecTV. That decision alone makes them partially culpable! I'm no computer expert, but if what all you TiVo "experts" claim to be true about a fix being available, there should be zero reason why the new firmware/patch or whatever it is can't be accessed through the internet and downloaded to the machine.

On a lighter note, I could care less about Johnny Damon leaving. My 10 year old niece has a stronger throwing arm! Only Steinbrenner would be stupid enough to give a 33 year old guy who can't throw and who can't run any longer a 4 year, 52 million dollar deal! George can keep spending all his money, signing has beens, but it doesn't change the fact that it hasn't won him a thing in the past 5 years. Pitching wins, and the Yankees don't have enough of it! See you in October!

John from Boston

p.s. Now it's become very clear why you and I don't get along...I've always despised anything or anyone from NY!


----------



## Mark Lopez (Jan 1, 2000)

cheer said:


> Here you contradict yourself. If, as you say, after six years it shouldn't exist, and a fix DOES exist but DirecTV won't implement, why are you so unbelievably reluctant to blame DirecTV? I don't get it.


I never said that DirecTV didn't play a part in this problem. My point (that many seem to want to dismiss), is that after 5 years of development (before the HD unit), the speed issue (that the SD update shows can be somewhat fixed in software) should have already been out. Why did it take them 5 years to suddenly figure out how to speed it up? Sure we can blame DirecTV for not releasing it now, but why wasn't it already there to begin with, given all of the elapsed time?



cheer said:


> But at the time of release, 3.1x is all ANY of the DirecTivos used. Blame Tivo for that if you want, but what do you want Tivo to do? Or do you just want to yell and scream that it wasn't perfect on day one?


And your comment proves my point. 3.1x after 5 years? I believe 2.x was already out after about a year or so. Not very much progress in the next 4 years, eh?

I'm not saying it it needs to be perfect on day one. But on day 1825 (before HD unit) it better be pretty close.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

Updates, especially performance related updates can take a lot of time due to the need to:

a). Find and fix the source of the problem.
b). Test the fix and results.
c). Deploy to the customer base.

a). Depending on the complexity of the problem this may or may not take some time to do. If the problem is a result of a missing index in the database or what not, the problem can probably be fixed easily using a SQL script. Otherwise, if the problem is in the application, then a new build of the application is needed and the fix may or may not take a while longer. If the software house does not employ Agile software development principles or does not employ writing acceptance tests and unit tests as part of their development process than the bug or problem might be harder to track down in the software. Acceptance tests are made to test the application using the user-interface of the application whenever possible. Unit tests are made to test the internal objects and methods created for the application directly. In general, every method and object in an application should have a unit test written for it (ideally before the object and method itself are created). Every dialog or screen in the application should also likewise have an acceptance test written to test it.

b). Any fix will need to be deployed to the testing or QA department for internal testing before it is deployed to the customer base. If the company such as TIVO is juggling many software applications or many versions of a software application between various parts of their customer base, then the time to test the fix may also take a while longer. Steps (a) and (b) are also integrated with each other in that additional problems may be found during step (b) which will cause the problem to be resubmitted for further analysis to step (a). If acceptance tests are available, this can really shorten the QA cycle as they can run those acceptance tests in order to retest the problem and not have to retest everything by hand. QA should also be able to use the acceptance tester to create their own acceptance tests to reproduce the steps to show the developer the problem. This is also helpful as the developer needs to be able to reproduce a problem before they can fix a problem.

(c). This step should be the easiest step although it rarely is. Depending on the technology used to deploy the application (Installshield, Wise Installer, parts of the application are downloaded by the application itself, ...), and depending on whether or not the application has ever been deployed before, whether the application uses shared DLLs, etc, can all increase or decrease the complexity of this step. This step also requires a review by QA before anything can be deployed.

Then, once your confident in the deployment mechanism, usually you can burn the CDROM (which also needs to be tested in case you burned to bad media or what not) or make the deployment files available on the web or what not.

In TIVO's case however, for the DirecTIVO, they need to obtain permission from DirecTV before they actually deploy the files. If they can get that permission or not is one thing. However, DirecTV also likes to stagger the files for updates, meaning that not every customer gets the update at the same time. This can also add to the length of time to get the problem fixed.

I believe in the past few years, DirecTV has nixed TIVO's ability to deploy most updates to DirecTIVO receivers. Maybe they allowed the 6.2 update because it was only going to affect the standard-definition TIVO receivers. Also, I believe that the 6.2 update was planned to deploy most likely before Rupert Murdoch had real control of DirecTV and before he really decided that the DirecTV/TIVO relationship was coming to an end.

That's about as simply as I can break it down to you.


----------



## Guindalf (Jun 13, 2001)

Just my 2 cents....

Have any of you considered that there may be financial reasons here? 

I plead ignorance to all of this, so don't flame me if I'm wrong, but is it not possible that TiVo's deal with D* included a certain number of upgrades before additional costs would be incurred? Kinda like buying a navigation system and getting two years of free updates and then having to pay $200 for a new dvd after that expires? Maybe it's a per-user fee for an update making it financially impractical to push out the updates.


----------



## stephenC (Apr 15, 2004)

Maybe TiVo should open source the 6.x code. That way we could just download and hack away. But, then maybe just maybe DirecTV would shut off our units because of code incompatiblity. What do you think?


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

Guindalf said:


> Just my 2 cents....
> 
> Have any of you considered that there may be financial reasons here?
> 
> I plead ignorance to all of this, so don't flame me if I'm wrong, but is it not possible that TiVo's deal with D* included a certain number of upgrades before additional costs would be incurred? Kinda like buying a navigation system and getting two years of free updates and then having to pay $200 for a new dvd after that expires? Maybe it's a per-user fee for an update making it financially impractical to push out the updates.


Close - DirecTV has financial reasons for not letting Tivo look better than it's own DVR. Tivo wants nothing more than to get more Tivo users through DirecTV.

Again, this is a DirecTV issue entirely.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

I agree with the basic premise of this thread: Yes, TiVo really IS this stupid!

In TiVo's defense you must remember they were founded in late '90s during the dot-com boom. There was great pressure to get a product out and to go public. The product was great for a 1.0 effort. The word "revolutionary" doesn't even begin to describe it. Then, because the bubble hadn't burst yet, many of the original people scattered to the four winds. I don't know about programmers but I definitely know that many original hardware people left.

So then new people come in. They don't want to break legacy code that works. Maybe that code is fragile. It was probably written in haste. Also, didn't some development get outsourced to India along the way?

On the other hand, and this is really a crying shame, where is the standalone HD TiVo that accepts one or two cablecards? Even the dumbest CEO on the planet should have been able to get that one out the door years ago! Otherwise, exactly what is he getting paid for?


----------



## bwistein (Jul 7, 2002)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> I agree with the basic premise of this thread: Yes, TiVo really IS this stupid!
> 
> In TiVo's defense you must remember they were founded in late '90s during the dot-com boom. There was great pressure to get a product out and to go public. The product was great for a 1.0 effort. The word "revolutionary" doesn't even begin to describe it. Then, because the bubble hadn't burst yet, many of the original people scattered to the four winds. I don't know about programmers but I definitely know that many original hardware people left.
> 
> ...


I'll agree with much of this post. Though I think sometimes stupidity if confused with an inability to do what a specific customer wants. Tivo has had problems with limited resources for quite some time. There is no doubt that the reason a DirecTV HD unit exists and a standalone does not is that DirecTV was there with a checkbook able to make the DTV unit exist and no such similar deep pocket existed for the standalone.

I think the other point that a lot of people miss, and you've started to hint at, is that TIvo and DirecTV pushed this product out quickly. With DISH and the cable companies offering HD PVRs the need existed for DirecTV to get product out quickly. Perhaps as a result the comparos should be between the cable co. HD DVRs and the DTivo or god forbid the DISH HD-PVR. Clearly the expertise exists to fix all of these problems, but I believe a misconception exists that it was DirecTV's aim to bring out a superior product, they wanted an HD port of the SD product and pronto. That's what they got. Since that release the nature of the business arrangement between DirecTV and Tivo has changed and hence DirecTV is in the unusual (and I as many here believe, unwise) position of selling and supporting a product that they don't want to make look too good as they are about to release what will become a competing product.

I believe the whole equation is not as simple as stupid and smart. I think many hear are plying their own agenda and that's the reality of a message board on the internet. I think several are more interested in name calling than discussion and that's also the nature of the beast.

Good Luck
Ben


----------



## Enigma869 (Jul 6, 2005)

bwistein said:


> I'll agree with much of this post. Though I think sometimes stupidity if confused with an inability to do what a specific customer wants. Tivo has had problems with limited resources for quite some time. There is no doubt that the reason a DirecTV HD unit exists and a standalone does not is that DirecTV was there with a checkbook able to make the DTV unit exist and no such similar deep pocket existed for the standalone.
> 
> I think the other point that a lot of people miss, and you've started to hint at, is that TIvo and DirecTV pushed this product out quickly. With DISH and the cable companies offering HD PVRs the need existed for DirecTV to get product out quickly. Perhaps as a result the comparos should be between the cable co. HD DVRs and the DTivo or god forbid the DISH HD-PVR. Clearly the expertise exists to fix all of these problems, but I believe a misconception exists that it was DirecTV's aim to bring out a superior product, they wanted an HD port of the SD product and pronto. That's what they got. Since that release the nature of the business arrangement between DirecTV and Tivo has changed and hence DirecTV is in the unusual (and I as many here believe, unwise) position of selling and supporting a product that they don't want to make look too good as they are about to release what will become a competing product.
> 
> ...


Well said, Ben. In all honestly, I sort of knew I was asking for trouble by daring to hint TiVo was less than intelligent in my original thread. I've been visiting message boards on the net for years and am most cognizant that most on a website devoted to any one product are all drinking the same Kool-Aid and wouldn't dare to recognize any mistake a given manufacturer makes, regardless of how glaring the mistake is. In any event, I really don't have a beef with TiVo, and I absolutely agree 100% that the TiVo product is revolutionary. I don't think that's an overstatement. It's changed the way we all watch tv, and for that I'm thankful. Having said that, it doesn't change my opinion that both TiVo and DirecTV dropped the ball on this HDTiVo. Anyone who believes otherwise just doesn't get it. While I understand those who want to point the finger at DirecTV and state there is no longer a relationship between the two companies, they fail to mention that this problem has been around since the HD TiVo was introduced and that the two companies still had a working relationship for most of it's run. Let's hope for everyone's sake that the next HD anything that is released doesn't have this VERY annoying problem.

John from Boston


----------



## Valor55 (Feb 8, 2002)

Enigma869 said:


> Good Evening All...
> 
> I used Replay TV quite happily for about 5 years before purchasing my first TiVo. I only made the jump because Replay TV appears to have no interest in HDTV. I purchased the HDTV DirecTV unit about 6 months ago. After 6 months, I am still astonished at how slow these guides are. For those of us who don't want every single show automatically recorded, it takes an hour to set up a days worth of recordings. Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous? This seems beyond absurd to me. Why is it that ReplayTV units aren't afflicted with this problem?? How is it that no software download has been made available to correct this problem that they must get thousands of complaints about??? Do they simply not care?? I just can't imagine an issue of this magnitude being completely ignored on such a widely used platform. I must say that although I am elated to be able to record in HDTV, the user interface on the TiVo in quite amateur when compared to ReplayTV. I've tried really hard to love TiVo since I adopted it six months ago, but, I have NEVER in my life been more annoyed by a problem with any electronic device I've ever purchased. Does anyone know if there ever might be a fix for this?? Finally, does anyone know if DirecTV's new PVR has overcome this insane issue??? Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.
> 
> John from Boston


I've always understood this to be a problem with the memory --not enough of it. I don't know if there is a way to upgrade the memory or not. It would be nice to drop in a few DRAM chips and speed things up...


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

I few points you guys haven't mentioned yet...

The biggest problem the HD DVR has is disk bandwidth when recording HD channels. The slow response tends to become almost tolerable if both tuners are set on SD channels before making changes. This problem would likely not be solved by a faster CPU or more memory. Because this was a minor annoyance on the SD Tivos it could have been later in the development process before someone noticed this problem on the HD units.

Software updates of any kind will cause a jump in customer support calls. It's easier for Tivo to handle the call volume increase on its SA units than for DirecTV to handle the increase because of the size of their respective DVR customer bases. DirecTV released the 6.2 update for the SD units not that long ago. Now they undoubtedly have a call volume increase with the new NDS unit release. You don't roll out a new software increase for one unit and release a new unit at the same time. Customer support would be swamped.

Other than adding folders and speeding up database access the 6.2 release is not that exciting. It certainly didn't make me jump up and scream for joy. So I can understand DirecTV's reluctance to move it to the top of their to-do list. Especially when they are trying to finish the new mpeg 4 HD dvr at the same time.

While I loved the ability to record HD so much that I bought a second HR250 back when they were $1000 a pop, it ain't perfect. And what's not perfect is the software. Just because Tivo makes better DVR software than anyone else today, doesn't make the Tivo software great or flawless.


----------



## kbohip (Dec 30, 2003)

Redux said:


> It's always been puzzling to me that with all the knowledgable Tivo users on this forum & the others for all this time, we don't have a clear understanding why a few people are getting such slow performance.
> 
> I'm sure these people are not lying or sabotaging their machines through ineptitude; it is clearly a real problem. But with the dozens of DTivos and SA Tivos I've owned over the years the closest I've seen to what these people describe was setting up & sorting season passes on DTivos running 4.x. That could be just awful. And on my wife's 500GB, when she fills it to the brim and refuses to erase anything until it absolutely refuses to record anything new, it slows to a crawl. On those occsasions when a member of my local community complains about it, by the time I look at it, it's always fine. "You should have seen it last night!" I think it's an airborne, short-live virus that disappears in daylight.


You've obviously never used the HD-Tivo then. They are pathetically slow, and not too reliable either as my first one died in only 3 months. This isn't just mine but many others on other forums. My R10 on the other hand is fairly fast most of the time. I have no complaints with it at all really.

Still, I'll take a dog slow Tivo anyday over a fast, unreliable DVR from either Dish or Directv. In the end if the DVR doesn't do what it's supposed to do, such as actually record your SP's, it's useless. I've been down that road before with Dish and their craptacular 522 DVR, and now it looks as if Directv's following suit with their R15. I really hope they get the bugs out of them.


----------



## kbohip (Dec 30, 2003)

TyroneShoes said:


> I'll opt for features and dependability over speed and instability every time. My old 721 was the fastest zippiest PVR interface ever. But I never knew when I turned it on if it really had recorded what I told it to, or whether 70 hours of previously-recorded content would still be there. With Tivo, I might have to wait a little longer, but there is no suspense...it always gets the recordings, and they always stay there until I'm done with them.


Lol, the funny thing is almost all of the Dish users happily state that the 722 was Dish's most reliable DVR ever! I'm with you though, even though my HD-Tivo is very slow, I still love it as it's never missed a recording or crashed and lost all of my recordings. The exception being when the hard drive on my first one died.


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

HiDefGator said:


> I few points you guys haven't mentioned yet...
> 
> The biggest problem the HD DVR has is disk bandwidth when recording HD channels. The slow response tends to become almost tolerable if both tuners are set on SD channels before making changes. This problem would likely not be solved by a faster CPU or more memory. Because this was a minor annoyance on the SD Tivos it could have been later in the development process before someone noticed this problem on the HD units.
> 
> ...


Wrong again. The constraint is the processor, not the disk. It doesn't even come close to taxing the disk bandwidth, even with 3 HD shows simultaneously.

It's the processor, which was DirecTV's decision when spec'ing the box.


----------



## hiker (Nov 29, 2001)

AbMagFab said:


> Wrong again. The constraint is the processor, not the disk. It doesn't even come close to taxing the disk bandwidth, even with 3 HD shows simultaneously.
> 
> It's the processor, which was DirecTV's decision when spec'ing the box.


Then why does changing both tuners to SD channels speed things up? Maybe there's more than one constraint?


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

hiker said:


> Then why does changing both tuners to SD channels speed things up? Maybe there's more than one constraint?


Because of the processor.

There are at least 4x as many pixels in a DirecTV HD picture as there is in a DirecTV SD picture (I'm doing math in my head, so forgive me if I'm off a little). It takes a lot more processor power to deal with an HD picture than it does an SD picture, whether your displaying on your screen or not. Yes, the box records the feed from the satellite to the HD, but it's also doing some processing of the signal as it passes through. Bigger signal = more processor time.


----------



## bdlucas (Feb 15, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> The constraint is the processor, not the disk.


Do you know this or are you supposing it? If it's supposition, keep in mind that the disk is handling two streams which it must give real-time priority (else your show doesn't get recorded), and using whatever capacity is left for reading and writing an on-disk (or so I've read) database. That's potentially a lot of seeking, so raw disk bandwidth isn't the sole determinant of performance.



AbMagFab said:


> There are at least 4x as many pixels in a DirecTV HD picture as there is in a DirecTV SD picture (I'm doing math in my head, so forgive me if I'm off a little). It takes a lot more processor power to deal with an HD picture than it does an SD picture, whether your displaying on your screen or not.


This would be true only if the processor were doing any per-pixel processing. How do you know that this is the case? It seems highly doubtful to me that the pixel data stream goes through the processor.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

AbMagFab said:


> Wrong again. The constraint is the processor, not the disk. It doesn't even come close to taxing the disk bandwidth, even with 3 HD shows simultaneously.
> 
> It's the processor, which was DirecTV's decision when spec'ing the box.


I disagree that the problem is limited CPU bandwidth. But even if you are right about the processor being the limiting factor it is unlikely DirecTV spec'd the processor without discussing with Tivo how much processor they needed. The scenario you are suggesting is unlikely to be true. Do you really think DirecTV designed the box and the cpu and then told Tivo here's what you have to work with, do the best you can because we are going to sell them for $1000 a pop.

The software and hardware design had to both happen at the same time. When Tivo agreed to write the software for the box and put their logo on the box they knew how fast the cpu was going to be.

If the cpu was the problem then using a cache card on a series 2 unit should make no difference but it makes a huge difference. Even with the cache card the cpu is still doing the same work load writing streams to disk.

Ditto for the 6.2 release which fixes the problem by using a better software design. With 6.2 the cpu would still be processing all those same pixels.

Is it really that hard for you to admit that the Tivo software was not the most optimal design before 6.2?


----------



## tgibbs (Sep 22, 2002)

I have a standalone SD TiVo, and setting up recordings is much faster than on my HD TiVo. I don't buy the processor power argument--the HDTiVo isn't doing much signal processing, just streaming shows to disk. Disk bandwidth makes more sense as a limiting factor, especially if people are seeing improvements when the HDTiVo is recording SD (I haven't tried this). What this means, basically, is that the HDTiVo is unable to manage its database in RAM, so database activities are competing with storing of data for access to the HD. One of the things that people most appreciate about TiVos is their reliability, but this means that saving video to disk must have absolute priority over all other activities. 

Of course, the TiVo must be able to manage its database from disk to avoid running up against a hard limit on the amount of stuff it can schedule, but ideally there should be enough RAM so that only people with enormous Season Pass databases fell into this category. This may well have been a cost-saving issue. Unfortunately, if this analysis is correct, it is a hardware problem rather than a software problem, and is unlikely to be corrected. DirecTV is moving away from TiVo, so they'd rather switch customers to a new, homegrown system than upgrade the ones already in place.

One change that perhaps could be made in software would be to allow people to watch existing recordings or live TV while the database is being updated. The fact that it takes a long time is less of a problem than the fact that you can't even watch TV while it is happening. But I'm not holding my breath. When it comes to software upgrades, DirecTV TiVos are falling further and further behind TiVo TiVos.

Frankly, it's irritating, but not a big deal for me. These days I make scheduling changes only occasionally, so its no big deal to pick up a book while the HDTiVo is updating its database.


----------



## Morris Herman (Feb 25, 2003)

AbMagFab said:


> Because of the processor.
> 
> There are at least 4x as many pixels in a DirecTV HD picture as there is in a DirecTV SD picture (I'm doing math in my head, so forgive me if I'm off a little). It takes a lot more processor power to deal with an HD picture than it does an SD picture, whether your displaying on your screen or not. Yes, the box records the feed from the satellite to the HD, but it's also doing some processing of the signal as it passes through. Bigger signal = more processor time.


If the Tivo hardware design includes the processor handling the video and audio data, then Tivo is REALLY THAT STUPID!!!.

In a good design, the video and audio data would be handled by one or possibly two specialized chips (i.e. gate arrays) that simply take the decoded data and store it on the hard disk with the processor only handling storage area location information and status information from those chips that indicates success or failure of the processes.

At the same time, another chip would be handling the playback of the data from the hard disk to the TV inputs.

In a good design, the processor would be the "cop on the beat" starting and stopping recording or playback processes, monitoring their status as well as responding to user commands. In addition, the Season Pass and To-Do-List deconfliction process would happen in the background while the user is returned to whatever he was doing before, without waiting 6 minutes for the current commanded process to complete.

P.S. If Tivo only generated the software for a given hardware design into which they had no input, then the blame lies with the hardware designers that "crippled" the machine.


----------



## bigrig (Jul 1, 2004)

If you are so inclined, I would recommend hacking your Tivo and putting TivoWebPlus on it. Using the web interface it doesn't make you wait XX minutes to add a recording. And I can access my Tivo from over the internet! :up:

http://www.mastersav.com/tivo_zipper.html
or 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hdtivo/

Matt



Enigma869 said:


> Good Evening All...
> 
> I used Replay TV quite happily for about 5 years before purchasing my first TiVo. I only made the jump because Replay TV appears to have no interest in HDTV. I purchased the HDTV DirecTV unit about 6 months ago. After 6 months, I am still astonished at how slow these guides are. For those of us who don't want every single show automatically recorded, it takes an hour to set up a days worth of recordings. Am I the only one who finds this ridiculous? This seems beyond absurd to me. Why is it that ReplayTV units aren't afflicted with this problem?? How is it that no software download has been made available to correct this problem that they must get thousands of complaints about??? Do they simply not care?? I just can't imagine an issue of this magnitude being completely ignored on such a widely used platform. I must say that although I am elated to be able to record in HDTV, the user interface on the TiVo in quite amateur when compared to ReplayTV. I've tried really hard to love TiVo since I adopted it six months ago, but, I have NEVER in my life been more annoyed by a problem with any electronic device I've ever purchased. Does anyone know if there ever might be a fix for this?? Finally, does anyone know if DirecTV's new PVR has overcome this insane issue??? Any and all feedback is greatly appreciated.
> 
> John from Boston


----------



## AbMagFab (Feb 5, 2001)

tgibbs said:


> I don't buy the processor power argument--the HDTiVo isn't doing much signal processing, just streaming shows to disk.


You can say you don't buy it, but disk bandwidth is hardly a limiting factor. A full HD broadcast is 19.2mb/sec, or about 2.5mB/sec. For 2 shows recording at the same time, that's only 5mB/sec, far below what hard disks channels are capable of, even a single IDE channel.

So whatever you want to "buy", the fact is it's the processor, not that hard drive, that is the limiting factor in these boxes.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

AbMagFab said:


> So whatever you want to "buy", the fact is it's the processor, not that hard drive, that is the limiting factor in these boxes.


I don't have any inside information, but I'd wager 10:1 odds that it's neither the processor nor the hard drive. Rather, it's the incompetence of the TiVo programmers who wrote that abominably slow code. If any of them have a degree in Computer Science, I think the granting institution should lose its accreditation. Is Devry University accredited?


----------

