Currently I have a 1 original Hopper and 2 Joeys setup and I am thinking of replacing the Hopper with a HWS and replace one of the Joeys with a second HWS before the fee increase kick in on 5/23. My question is how well will the two Hoppers integrate? Will the two Hoppers look like one Hopper? How would they work with each other? How will the Joey work with both?
How well do 2 hoppers integrate?
- Thread starter avion
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 33
- Views 7K
Not like one. Yet. They can see each other's DVR but not EHD. Joeys can connect to either Hopper. Tuners are separate- Joey can, again, see either.
The other thing that is separate is the timers. You need to manage recordings between the two Hoppers manually. If you set up a timer for one Hopper and recording/viewing conflict occurs, you need to manually move the recording to the other Hopper.
Joey attaches to one Hopper at a time, so if you want to watch live TV, you need to attach to a Hopper with a free tuner.
Good answers from all.
Like - I have 8 tuners and can see all recordings on either
Don't Like - I have to set timers on each machine and cannot do it from one.
Like - I have 8 tuners and can see all recordings on either
Don't Like - I have to set timers on each machine and cannot do it from one.
So if I am in front of Hopper #1, I cannot set timers on Hopper #2? I have to physically be in front of #2 or use a Joey in order to create timers on it?
is there something new that was posted that might indicate this could change?
Hope on this forum for further integration has pretty much been dead since last summer.
Early on, there were comments that there already was more integration done, but backed away from as maybe being too complicated for everyday use.
Thin. Just a glimmer. But possible.
Thin. Just a glimmer. But possible.
It doesnt really bother me though. I get on Zap2it every Friday and make my schedule notes for the next week. I break them out between DVR's (I put satellite programming on one and OTA programming on the other usually), then I sit down at each one and spend 5 mins putting them in. No biggie.
Id prefer to see a combined playlist before shared timers.
Id prefer to see a combined playlist before shared timers.
The only real thing I can think of that would make programming full integration difficult is if one of the hoppers were to go down how the over all system would handle that. I do think that a combined list of all the recordings should be done at the very least ASAP, and that would make 2 hoppers "seem" more integrated because you won't have to think "was that recording on hopper a or hopper b???"
I guess a way to handle integration and a hopper to go down just for recordings is when a recording for Hopper a is set, and it sees a conflict, to pass that request to Hopper b and completely transfer the timer to that Hopper, that way if a Hopper goes offline, the two still have separate timer lists. From the Joey which hopper to link to aspect maybe let the Joey auto link to a different Hopper if there is a tuner conflict on the currently linked Hopper. Hmm... just ideas.
I have no problem with my 2 Hoppers Integration that exist.. EXCEPT not being able to see my External Hard Drive on all Hoppers and Joeys. Fix that And I would be satisfied.
Agreed... Sharing these resources isn't significantly different than sharing the internal drives.
Also, I sure don't understand why the Sling cannot see the EHD. One of the reasons why I reinstalled my old SlingBox Pro. Four damn Hoppers with Sling and I had to reinstall an old SlingBox!! Really nice, no telling won't work when Sprint gets married to the Hopper!
Except that you could have 4 Hoppers with (how many?) attached Joeys all trying to access the same EHD at once. Sharing timers would be much less bandwidth intensive.
Well its not that different in theory. Depending on what kind of processor the Hoppers have (don't recall off hand), trying to process & then stream the data can be quite a work load for any single or dual core chip.
You can do that with the internal drives too -- maybe they should have made the decision to go with USB 3.0 instead of USB 2.0.
We are back to paying the piper for the choices that have been made.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF700T using Tapatalk HD
