Follow Us On TWITTER | NEW LOOK | PDA MODE
Those listed below are our PROUD SatelliteGuys GOLD Sponsors!
Applied Instruments DishStore.NET

» Advertising
Register Today and many of these ads go away!


Welcome to SatelliteGuys.US - America's Most Popular Satellite Information Forum!!

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest which gives you limited access. By joining our free community you will have access to post & reply messages in our forum, play in our fun arcade and communicate privately with other members as well as enjoy many other members only features.

Also as a registered member you will also see much less advertising!

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

Go Back   SatelliteGuys.US > SatelliteGuys Archives > The Archives > 2008 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) Forum
Sponsored Links

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 10:47 AM
mike123abc's Avatar
Supporting Founder
 
 Supporting Founder
Join Date: Sep 25th, 2003
Location: Wichita Falls, TX
Posts: 6,471
Sponsored Links
The real advantage of this receiver is that you would not have to have it connected to a phone line to avoid the 2nd TV surcharge fee.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 11:13 AM
SatelliteGuys Junkie
 
Join Date: Jun 30th, 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike123abc View Post
The real advantage of this receiver is that you would not have to have it connected to a phone line to avoid the 2nd TV surcharge fee.
Good point. I have two locations that need HDDVR's now but no phone or internet, currently only connected to TV2's from my 622's.

Everything being equal (in hardware, not HD content), the 621 will be better than the HR21 because of the OTA HD tuner.

As far as HD content, they told us by the end of 2008 they will be equal to D* in national HD's, the question is then if you can wait that long, if not go to D*.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 11:22 AM
tnsprin's Avatar
SatelliteGuys Junkie
 
Join Date: Sep 27th, 2003
Posts: 1,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neutron View Post
What's the point of this receiver??
Hopefully it counts as only 1 instead of 2 so you can have more of them.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 11:57 AM
vegassatellite's Avatar
SatelliteGuys Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 5th, 2007
Posts: 2,561
Send a message via Skype™ to vegassatellite
I imagine they plan to allow customers to have two of these in their home as an option to just a 622 or 722. With the x22's, you only have one HD setup and the second output is SD. So, if you have two HDTVs you have to get a 722/211 or similar setup, which leaves people with a second HD that doesn't have DVR. That sucks for some people who have an HDTV in their living room and in their master bedroom. Those customers have to either give up HD in one of those rooms or get a 211 and have no DVR.

Hopefully, DISH will allow the promotion to include a 622/612 as a valid configuration. Then we can put the 612 in the living room and the 622 in the master and backfeed to little Johnny's room. Maybe put a 311 or 211 in another room. Easy to do with a 1k2.

Also, will be a neater install if DISH is smart enough to put the DP Separator inside the box this time. Then it could be one cable in from dish, one HDMI out to TV. Wouldn't that be sweet?
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 12:06 PM
Jim S.'s Avatar
Pub Member / Supporter
 
 Pub Member / Supporter
Join Date: Jan 2nd, 2006
Location: Montgomery (Lycoming Co.), PA
Posts: 1,981
Send a message via Yahoo to Jim S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnsprin View Post
Hopefully it counts as only 1 instead of 2 so you can have more of them.
But wouldn't it be easier, as well as more sensible, to just get rid of that arbitrary limit in the first place? It makes about as much sense as having you have a phone line connected to your 622 to avoid having to pay for a 2nd receiver -- i.e. none at all.
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 12:57 PM
gbjbany's Avatar
Pub Member / Supporter
 
 Pub Member / Supporter
Join Date: Sep 4th, 2005
Location: El Dorado Hills, CA Nr Sacramento
Posts: 1,452
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike123abc View Post
The real advantage of this receiver is that you would not have to have it connected to a phone line to avoid the 2nd TV surcharge fee.
I thought the charge is for the second tuner, not the 2nd tv

I agree with othersm I have 2 622's that i run in single mode only, so for the user this is much simpler to use, less documentation needed.

For the average user "kiss" is always best. Just look at the threads on here on how to use dual mode vs single mode and the tuner vs TV confusion
__________________
If You Benefit from this site
Join the Satelliteguys.US folding team: http://folding.stanford.edu/English/Download Enter Team # 55236
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 01:26 PM
hrxtreme's Avatar
SatelliteGuys Regular
 
Join Date: Sep 11th, 2007
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 323
I have another twist on this receiver... now that Echostar is open to sell hardware to other content providers, given that other cable companies/sat companies may not want to deal with the hassle that can sometimes be caused by the dual tuner boxes, they now have a perfect single TV box to sell to those clients.
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 02:02 PM
allargon's Avatar
SatelliteGuys Junkie
 
Join Date: Aug 2nd, 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,445
Send a message via AIM to allargon Send a message via Yahoo to allargon
If E* wanted to make something useful, they would make something like the 222 with TV being able to broadcast or transmit ATSC or QAM, or an HD feed or some sort.
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 02:18 PM
SatelliteGuys Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 16th, 2007
Location: Schaumburg, IL
Posts: 51
I came on here expecting to see a new receiver with 1TB internal HDD and capability of at least 1TB EHD. Oh wait that would be something that a "TRUE" HD Enthusiast would want. Why would I expect that from E*
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2008, 02:21 PM
mdonnelly's Avatar
Supporting Founder
 
 Supporting Founder
Join Date: Aug 26th, 2004
Location: Mustang, OK
Posts: 4,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeckinp View Post
I came on here expecting to see a new receiver with 1TB internal HDD and capability of at least 1TB EHD. Oh wait that would be something that a "TRUE" HD Enthusiast would want. Why would I expect that from E*
And you want that for free, without a commitment.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

  SatelliteGuys.US > SatelliteGuys Archives > The Archives > 2008 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) Forum

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Sponsored Links

Search Google


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 PM.


Get SatelliteGuys News Flashes on

SatelliteGuys.US is Proud to be relaxed home of the DirecTV Cutting Edge (CE) Program.
SatelliteGuys.US is also a PROUD SPONSOR of the Newington Little League - Newington, Connecticut
SatelliteGuys.US is not affiliated with any cable or satellite television company
The opinions expressed here at SatelliteGuys.US are those of our members and may not reflect the opinions of our staff, our sponsors, or any Satellite/Cable Company.

All trademarks are property of their respective owners.
The SatelliteGuys Logo and the "G Satellite" Icon are Trademarks of SatelliteGuys Incorporated

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.0 RC2
Copyright 2003 - 2010 SatelliteGuys Incorporated - All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.14800 seconds with 13 queries