# Tivo and DirecTv



## rbaron (Dec 14, 2005)

Is there a dual channel TiVo box that works with DirecTv programing?

If not..... is there one on the way?

Thanks much.......


----------



## CrashHD (Nov 10, 2006)

yes...there has been for many years. They are no longer produced, and only available for standard definition. The high definition model does not get all the HD channels.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

And no... there isn't one on the way


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

CrashHD said:


> yes...there has been for many years. They are no longer produced, and only available for standard definition. The high definition model does not get all the HD channels.


I'm confused by "only available for standard definition" which seems not to be the case if "the high definition model does not get all the HD channels" (which implies it does get some HD channels and must therefore be "available"). If from eBay or other 3rd-party sources qualifies as available, then they most definitely are, unless there is some recent news about DTV not authorizing them; and that would seem to clash with their support agreement that goes until 2010.

As an example, I still have two HR10's that record 95% of the HD I watch, so they are most definitely not just "available for standard definition".


----------



## CrashHD (Nov 10, 2006)

point taken...that was poorly stated. I should have found a better way of saying the SD units get all SD channels, while the HD unit only gets a handful.

The hr10 gets what, about 7 or so HD channels, from the total of about 75 or so available, right? But it gets all the SD channels. Seems to me that unit is a halfway step between SD and HD, being closer to SD.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

HR10 is good if you can find a good deal (pls don't pay a whole lot) if you plan to stay with DirecTV and want to record just HD OTA and SD on it. It only gets 5-7 HD channels on it and those are going away. So don't get an HR10 thinking it's going to get you all the HD out there, it's not. But it's certainly good for OTA and SD if you need a receiver to do that.


----------



## agulfer (Dec 21, 2006)

I spoke with DTV today and they told me that DTV & TIVO are renewing their relationship and according to him there is a new DTV/TIVO HD DVR coming available in "...the summer of 2008". He didn't have the model number or any other specifics.


----------



## llarch (May 7, 2004)

agulfer said:


> I spoke with DTV today and they told me that DTV & TIVO are renewing their relationship and according to him there is a new DTV/TIVO HD DVR coming available in "...the summer of 2008". He didn't have the model number or any other specifics.


Hmm, highly suspect...


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

agulfer said:


> I spoke with DTV today and they told me that DTV & TIVO are renewing their relationship and according to him there is a new DTV/TIVO HD DVR coming available in "...the summer of 2008". He didn't have the model number or any other specifics.


Its pronounced that way and its spelled TWO YEAR CONTRACT LOCK.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

agulfer said:


> I spoke with DTV today and they told me that DTV & TIVO are renewing their relationship and according to him there is a new DTV/TIVO HD DVR coming available in "...the summer of 2008". He didn't have the model number or any other specifics.


Probably what he is referring to is that DirecTV and Tivo renewed their contract a couple years ago that now runs thru 2010. This contract is for Tivo to keep supporting the DirecTivos, do software updates and an agreement to not sue DirecTV.

Sometime this year, probably in the summer (thus the "summer of 2008") there is an expected update on the current DirecTivo's (SD versions at least) that will add a couple new features like online scheduling.

That's all there is to it. There is no new hardware coming. In fact, DirecTV is actually moving toward only having one receiver period for all new subs and that is the HR21 by 2009. Sorry, no Tivo.


----------



## majortom (Apr 17, 2002)

shibby191 said:


> Probably what he is referring to is that DirecTV and Tivo renewed their contract a couple years ago that now runs thru 2010. This contract is for Tivo to keep supporting the DirecTivos, do software updates and an agreement to not sue DirecTV.


Who knows to what, if anything at all, he was referring (possibly saying whatever it took to get you to sign).



> That's all there is to it. There is no new hardware coming. In fact, DirecTV is actually moving toward only having one receiver period for all new subs and that is the HR21 by 2009. Sorry, no Tivo.


I have 3 SD DirecTiVos and 2 HR10-250s at my house in Florida. My Parents have basically the same setup, but I just added a TiVo HD receiver on their RCN cable service. They have to decide if they are willing to completely give up their West Coast feeds (grandfathered) and move to RCN completely. I do not have cable available to me in Florida right now (although I have asked Bright House to see about bringing service to my house).

The new features on the TiVo HD box and the much less compressed HD signals have me drooling.

I cannot understand DirecTv's logic of moving from as system with choice to one without. Even if they want to only support their own DVR, let others build receivers for their service (as they used to do, and as almost all cable companies do now).

I know quite a few people who have dropped DirecTv and switched to cable or FiOS over its decision to push people to their inferior DVR.

/carmi


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

I wish "agulfer" would reply to the responses to his post. Who did he talk to, was an HD-Tivo specifically mentioned?
The fact that this is his first post even though he registered over a year ago is not encouraging; But as a Tivo Lemming it doesn't take much to give me hope.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

majortom said:


> Even if they want to only support their own DVR, let others build receivers for their service (as they used to do, and as almost all cable companies do now).


You do realize that the only reason the cable companies "allow" 3rd party receivers with cable cards such as the Tivo HD is because they are forced to by the government. While I grant you the option is there, I certainly wouldn't put the cable companies on the alter of allowing choice. If *they* had a choice you'd get no choice yourself, you'll take their DVR and you'll like it. 

Now Comcast and Cox are indeed trying something different in allowing Tivo to be loaded on their receivers. We'll see where that goes and if it's a trend in choice or if it fails over the next year or two.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

majortom said:


> ...I cannot understand DirecTv's logic of moving from as system with choice to one without...


I'm not sure why you think there ever was a choice. DTV made a deal with Tivo, and that became the only PVR choice. When that ran its course, they made an internal decision to go in house, and that quickly became the only choice, usurping the previous choice. Nothing's really changed regarding choice or lack thereof.

Steve Jobs proved that choice leads to confusion and unnecessary overhead, and keeps people from even making that choice. Streamlining has many benefits. DTV wants a one-size-fits-all solution, and they always have. They also want their solution to be perceived as the best solution among competitors, and currently, for the majority of folks, they've been very successful in doing that.

The closest thing to a "choice", regarding DTV PVRs is the natural transition period from Tivo to DVR+, where you have an established base of the old choice coexisting with the push to replace it with the new choice, a period which is just about over, BTW. The logistics in making such a sweeping change are rife with possibilities of pissing off paying customers, and the realities of the market place dictate that you can't just ramp up and fill the warehouses while waiting to begin the process. It's a long, multiphased haul, and it takes time. Which reminds me, tick...tick...tick


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

TyroneShoes said:


> I'm not sure why you think there ever was a choice. DTV made a deal with Tivo, and that became the only PVR choice. When that ran its course, they made an internal decision to go in house, and that quickly became the only choice, usurping the previous choice. Nothing's really changed regarding choice or lack thereof.


I think he meant that in a much broader sense. You used to be able to buy DTV equipment, including DVRs, from a variety of CE companies. That was one of the things that initially attracted me to DirecTV even before DVRs were available.

In the case of DVRs, you could once take your pick of either Ultimate TV or TiVo service and in the case of TiVo you could choose from four different CE brands.

Now that DirecTV evidently doesn't feel that they need "choice" to attract new subscribers they've dropped it for the same reason that cable was so reluctant to offer it. They'd rather lock as much of your home entertainment dollar into their services as possible.


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

nrc said:


> I think he meant that in a much broader sense. You used to be able to buy DTV equipment, including DVRs, from a variety of CE companies. That was one of the things that initially attracted me to DirecTV even before DVRs were available.
> 
> In the case of DVRs, you could once take your pick of either Ultimate TV or TiVo service and in the case of TiVo you could choose from four different CE brands.
> 
> Now that DirecTV evidently doesn't feel that they need "choice" to attract new subscribers they've dropped it for the same reason that cable was so reluctant to offer it. They'd rather lock as much of your home entertainment dollar into their services as possible.


But for all the talk that people keep bringing up about choice, there was never any choice on their HD-DVR was there? It was TiVo only? Just now the only choice isnt TiVo only.


----------



## wblynch (Aug 13, 2003)

I would like to add that the DirecTV HD Tivo (HR10-250) delivers a superior SD picture compared to the DirecTV SD Tivos.

The SD models had only a composite or S-video output and the HD Tivo uses a component output. (and perhaps HDMI? --have never looked).

I found that when we switched to the HR10 the SD picture quality was nearly as good as a regular old DVD player.

So... if one were to chose at this point, I would still recommend the HD HR10-250 since it not only accommodates High Definition locals off-the-air, but the SD channels are still pretty good.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Tyrone's post is a good argument for government regulation. Without it customers are not given a choice.


----------



## ebonovic (Jul 24, 2001)

Cudahy said:


> Tyrone's post is a good argument for government regulation. Without it customers are not given a choice.


You have a choice....

-) DishNetwork
-) Cable
-) Fiber
-) OTA Exclusive


----------



## CrashHD (Nov 10, 2006)

forgot one Earl,

-)DirecTV


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

Cudahy said:


> Tyrone's post is a good argument for government regulation. Without it customers are not given a choice.


That's certainly not how I meant it. As Earl points out, there is choice, and no monopoly on what vendors are available.

(And BTW, by the time I got there in 2003 there was no choice but Tivo. Also, I don't consider 4 equipment vendors producing the same PVR choice in any manner of the concept at all.)

On the contrary, I am (mostly) firmly against regulation beyond what we have now, although I think Kevin Martin is a bright, visionary guy, and I hope he can survive in his position under a democratic regime. Maybe if he'd been around in 2001 satellite radio wouldn't be such a total mess.

I would like to see 3rd-party STB/DVR vendors given an equal opportunity with the in-house brands, however, and I welcome the push that direction that the FCC is giving to cable, which is a start in the right direction.


----------



## Cudahy (Mar 21, 2001)

Why should cable companies have to offer choices but not Directv?
I originally got Directv because of Extra Innings and the sports channels. After having a Directv HR21 for 4 months alongside my HDtivo I still much prefer the Tivo. 
The arguments that Directv can't afford to continue to offer a choice makes no sense to me since there are still over 2 million directv customers utilizing a Tivo.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

Cudahy said:


> Why should cable companies have to offer choices but not Directv?


Why can cable companies offer locals from nearby markets and DirecTV/Dish can't?
Why can Comcast withhold Comcast Sports Net Philly from DirecTV/Dish?
Why does MLB have an antitrust exemption?

It's because the rules/laws are made by our congress critters and that's just the way it is.

Cable card rules go back nearly a decade. Back then DirecTV and Dish were just getting going while cable was this huge monopoly. Fiber and telco's didn't exist. The government wanted to not "burden" the sat companies in order to spur their growth and competition.

Now maybe that doesn't apply anymore but it takes a change in the law for things to change. Push your congressmen to make that happen if you want it.


----------



## agulfer (Dec 21, 2006)

Sorry for that late feedback from my original post -- true I only have 1 post, I'm more of a computer forum poster but I do read this forum when I need additional info (ie HR10-250 upgrade offers). I'm gradually moving to the HTPC world. I've had DTV for many years, still have/use my Sony T60....blah blah blah. Anyway....I currently have a HR10-250 and inquired to DTV about upgrade offers to a HD DVR mpeg4. I wasn't please with the free upgrade w/ "ownership" upgrade offer of the HR20/HR21 since he wouldn't transfer my "lifetime tivo(DVR)" sub. I asked for retention and he (I'll hold off on the name so I don't cause him grief) said they would/could also transfer my "lifetime DVR". When I questioned him further about giving up my HD TIVO, since I like TIVO from my HR10-250 and T60....that is when HE offered up the upcoming HD TIVO (mpeg4) and how they were again renewing their relationship with TIVO and were coming out with new hardware. He said the new HD TIVO unit info used to be available to "them" on the site but was removed for reference for unknown reasons to him. I asked him if he new the model number or other specifics but he said he didn't have the model number and he told me to keep watching the DTV site. I'm not sure if he is telling me the truth but I don't know why he wouldn't be since he said the same upgrade offer would apply to the new HD TIVO as with the HR20/21. He said the ownership upgrade offer w/ transfer of the lifetime DVR would also apply for the new HD TIVO. I'm just repeating what he told me. I have no motives....other than IF they are coming out with a new HD TIVO (mpeg4) then I would hold onto my HR10-250 until then (he told me the summer of 2008). I'm beginning to doubt the "DTV retention guy" since no one else on this forum has news of this. I'm going to be calling "him" back in the next few days and will try and get some more info.


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

agulfer said:


> Sorry for that late feedback from my original post -- true I only have 1 post, I'm more of a computer forum poster but I do read this forum when I need additional info (ie HR10-250 upgrade offers). I'm gradually moving to the HTPC world. I've had DTV for many years, still have/use my Sony T60....blah blah blah. Anyway....I currently have a HR10-250 and inquired to DTV about upgrade offers to a HD DVR mpeg4. I wasn't please with the free upgrade w/ "ownership" upgrade offer of the HR20/HR21 since he wouldn't transfer my "lifetime tivo(DVR)" sub. I asked for retention and he (I'll hold off on the name so I don't cause him grief) said they would/could also transfer my "lifetime DVR". When I questioned him further about giving up my HD TIVO, since I like TIVO from my HR10-250 and T60....that is when HE offered up the upcoming HD TIVO (mpeg4) and how they were again renewing their relationship with TIVO and were coming out with new hardware. He said the new HD TIVO unit info used to be available to "them" on the site but was removed for reference for unknown reasons to him. I asked him if he new the model number or other specifics but he said he didn't have the model number and he told me to keep watching the DTV site. I'm not sure if he is telling me the truth but I don't know why he wouldn't be since he said the same upgrade offer would apply to the new HD TIVO as with the HR20/21. He said the ownership upgrade offer w/ transfer of the lifetime DVR would also apply for the new HD TIVO. I'm just repeating what he told me. I have no motives....other than IF they are coming out with a new HD TIVO (mpeg4) then I would hold onto my HR10-250 until then (he told me the summer of 2008). I'm beginning to doubt the "DTV retention guy" since no one else on this forum has news of this. I'm going to be calling "him" back in the next few days and will try and get some more info.


I think it is safe to say that 10 minutes of searching this site will show you that the forums are a far better resource of information thatn the CSR's. There are plenty of folks here who are in the "know". I also think it is safe to say that for the foreseeable future, there will not be a combo box, i dont think you can ever say never but the chances are at best slim and this is on life support. If you are interested you need to make a decision based on a comparison of HR2X and whatever TiVo you want to use with cable, pretty much the only options that you have. More than likely with the folks you talk to is the inability to differentiate between a dvr and a TiVo. To many people a dvr is a TiVo regardless of the actual brand. Unless I am wrong, to date TiVo does not have a box to decode Mpeg$4


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

RE: Your lifetime service.

Note that your lifetime DVR service is per *account* and not tied to any of your particular DirecTivo receivers. If you get an HR20/21 it will be covered by this lifetime DVR service. It's easier if you leave at least one DirecTivo active on your account when you activate the DirecTV DVR. Once it's active and all is working great then you should be able to deactive any DirecTivo's you have. However, why deactivate them if they are still useful for you. The HR10 in particular will still record OTA HD as well as the MPEG2 HD via sat for a little while yet and of course is a lot of space for SD.


----------



## agulfer (Dec 21, 2006)

Thanks for the advice. For the HR10-250 to HR20/HR21 swap the CSR wanted to charge me the $5.99/mo for the DVR service and said the "lifetime" wouldn't apply to the new HR20/HR21....I now know better (tied to your account and not hardware), so thanks ! I guess another inept CSR. Also from the forum I see that if pressed they will let you keep your HR10-250, which I will use for SD and OTA so I will request that also. Thanks for your help.


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

agulfer said:


> I guess another inept CSR.


Yep. Although I will give the benefit of the doubt. With high turnover in call centers I doubt any current CSR even worked at DirecTV when DirecTivo's were still available let alone lifetime service available. So they probably don't even know anything about it.

If you don't get what you want try and talk to retention. However this is probably one where you don't ask about the DVR fee. Most likely you won't have a problem with the lifetime and if you do you can call in and straighten it out later. Just be sure you have a copy of at least one bill with the lifetime listed on it so you have proof you had it.

Good luck.


----------



## wblynch (Aug 13, 2003)

Too bad no one offers a DirecTV Mpeg4 tuner to swap into the HR10-250. 

If I understand correctly the satellite tuner is a plug-in module. Wouldn't it just be sweet if we could upgrade the satellite tuner and be done with the whole mess?

ah.... but I guess that would be too easy


----------



## shibby191 (Dec 24, 2007)

wblynch said:


> Too bad no one offers a DirecTV Mpeg4 tuner to swap into the HR10-250.
> 
> If I understand correctly the satellite tuner is a plug-in module. Wouldn't it just be sweet if we could upgrade the satellite tuner and be done with the whole mess?
> 
> ah.... but I guess that would be too easy


And more expensive then just getting the new DVR. 

By the way, it's not just a MPEG4 decoder. It would also be the software to handle MPEG4 (which the HR10 software cannot) *and* the fact that the HR10 can't see the two new satellite slots at 99 and 103.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

wblynch said:


> Too bad no one offers a DirecTV Mpeg4 tuner to swap into the HR10-250.
> 
> If I understand correctly the satellite tuner is a plug-in module. Wouldn't it just be sweet if we could upgrade the satellite tuner and be done with the whole mess?
> 
> ah.... but I guess that would be too easy


Exactly so.

As it turns out, the "tuner" module has nothing to do with decoding, so there really is nothing that fits the definition of an "MPEG4 tuner". Sometimes a "tuner" refers colloquially (and incorrectly) to the entire signal path from input to output, but the plug-in tuner module actually has one job, and that is to selectively demodulate the DVB-modulated signal down to a baseband compressed digital signal. Theoretically, the tuner modules in the HR10 could be identical to those in the HR2x, as they perform the same exact function, and ignore the encoding algorithm altogether. IOW, the tuner neither knows nor cares how the encoding is done.

Before we ever get to the actual MPEG decoder, there is also demultiplexing (extracts the streams for the service or channel of interest from the transponder, which may have multiple streams modulated onto it), HDD writes, and HDD reads involved, so actual MPEG decoding and D-to-A is far removed from the tuner section, and in a PVR typically happens at playback time, not record time.

Were there a way to replace each MPEG2 decoder with one that was capable of both MPEG2 and MPEG4, well then we'd really have something, but those chips are part of the MB and even if they weren't would probably need supporting architecture that is more sophisticated than what the simple M2 decoders need, making the whole concept impractical.

So yes, that would be too easy.


----------



## CrashHD (Nov 10, 2006)

wblynch said:


> Too bad no one offers a DirecTV Mpeg4 tuner to swap into the HR10-250.
> If I understand correctly the satellite tuner is a plug-in module. Wouldn't it just be sweet if we could upgrade the satellite tuner and be done with the whole mess?


You understand incorrectly. The sat tuners are a very much integrated component on the mainboard of the tivo.

I think what you meant when you said "Mpeg4 tuner" was a "Ka Tuner". Mpeg4 has nothing to do with the tuner. All the new Mpeg4 HD channels just happen to be broadcast on the Ka sats, which is why Mpeg4/Ka are confused with each other.

Hypothetically, what the HR10 would need, would be tuners capable of tuning the Ka sats, and playback hardware capable of playing back the Mpeg4 video stream.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

nrc said:


> I think he meant that in a much broader sense. You used to be able to buy DTV equipment, including DVRs, from a variety of CE companies. That was one of the things that initially attracted me to DirecTV even before DVRs were available.


That wasn't totally open though (even cablecard isn't for a fact).

Each of those receiver manufacturers had to have an agreement with DirecTV that allowed them to include DirecTV's CA hardware/software. DirecTV just didn't renew or allow new agreements, in thei "DirecTV" brand hardware plan.


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

classicsat said:


> That wasn't totally open though (even cablecard isn't for a fact).
> 
> Each of those receiver manufacturers had to have an agreement with DirecTV that allowed them to include DirecTV's CA hardware/software. DirecTV just didn't renew or allow new agreements, in thei "DirecTV" brand hardware plan.


I never said that it was "open", only that DirecTV offered a choice of options. "Choice" was part of their marketing and for some of us it was part of the attraction of DirecTV.


----------



## TyroneShoes (Sep 6, 2004)

CrashHD said:


> You understand incorrectly. The sat tuners are a very much integrated component on the mainboard of the tivo...


Nuh-uh. The two tuner modules in a HR10 are each self contained, as anyone who has done a Weaknees upgrade (or 3) would know (part of the installation is to temporarily disconnect the internal RF cables connected to them). Each is about 3"x4"x1", and they each have RF inputs on one side and demod outputs on the other, which connect to the MB.



CrashHD said:


> ...I think what you meant when you said "Mpeg4 tuner" was a "Ka Tuner". Mpeg4 has nothing to do with the tuner. All the new Mpeg4 HD channels just happen to be broadcast on the Ka sats, which is why Mpeg4/Ka are confused with each other.
> 
> Hypothetically, what the HR10 would need, would be tuners capable of tuning the Ka sats, and playback hardware capable of playing back the Mpeg4 video stream.


Actually, it might be you who misunderstands this. The LNB converts all frequencies, both Ku and Ka, to the same L-band frequencies for transport to the receiver (the "B" in LNB stands for "block converter"). While Ka downlink frequencies may be higher than Ku, the use of a different local oscillator frequency in the LNB for Ka means that both Ka and Ku are heterodyne-converted and transported to the receiver within the same frequency band (with exceptions for "B-band" as explained below), and since they reach the tuners at ultimately the same frequency, any garden-variety L-band tuner module will see them as identical DVB-modulated signals living in the same band. IOW, it can't tell them apart and demodulates either in the exact same manner, since the modulation scheme for both Ka and Ku is also the same.

The entire Ku band converts to L-band (1450-1950 MHz), while the Ka band is actually wider, so it converts to a wider band than true L-band originally. Converted Ka frequencies then below 1450 are converted back up into L-band by the "B-band" converters, so all signals, both Ka and Ku, ultimately reach the tuners as DVB-modulated carriers in the L-band, with Ka being indistinguishable (by the tuners, at least) from Ku.

Again, it's not a tuner issue, it is a decoder issue, and there is no such thing as a "Ku tuner" or a "Ka tuner" in a DBS STB/DVR. They are more precisely "L-band" tuners, which is why they can be used for both. For instance, the HR2x does not have a pair of tuners for Ka and a pair for Ku with a system to route the input to one or the other, the two tuners for DVB are simply "L-band", and do double duty (and of course the HR20 OTA tuner is separate from that).

And actually, the NDS HD channels from LA are MPEG-4, yet are broadcast on the Ku sats. This was done to wean customers over to the HR2x while still allowing the legacy infrastructure of MDUs to have a grace period for conversion to Ka/5LNB.


----------

