Live from Team Summit

Does anyone think the X813 resembles an XBOX360? Hope this becomes more than another suit, this time from Microsoft. I wonder how soon the nick name for the 813 will become the XBOX813?
 
Rg6 is the easiest way to get Hd to every tv because it is already in people's homes.
Coax might be perfect if it didn't rule out backfeeding and diplexing of OTA. Given the relative explosion of TV networks (AntennaTV, RetroTV, MeTV) and subchannels this year, that's not such a happy situation.
 
Coax might be perfect if it didn't rule out backfeeding and diplexing of OTA. Given the relative explosion of TV networks (AntennaTV, RetroTV, MeTV) and subchannels this year, that's not such a happy situation.

Does it? I just asked that question in the pics thread. This would be VERY interesting to know.
 
Another thing I am curious about is the three tuners in this receiver. Current LNB's have three receiver outputs plus a fourth for another satellite dish. They have the separator to split the one wire to two tuners. What about the third tuner? Do you have to run two wires to the receiver then? If you have two of these receivers then that would result in a total of four wires needed and the lnb's only have three. Does this mean that an external switch is needed in such a case? Or do they have a new solution where there is a separator for three tuners instead of two? Or perhaps a third separator is used for the third wire to one receiver and third wire to the other receiver?

Maybe they will do like some of the FTA receivers do that have the input from the lnb but an output of that to a tuner on another receiver.

If you look at Scotts photos, I see a thing called an XIPDUO, If you zoom in is has 3 sat in on one side on the other it has 4 out puts one to the main receiver and the others are labeled thin client. So it looks like you can put that XIPDUO box where your home runs are, then a single coax to each box
 
What I am curious about is why Dish Network does not have a digital coax signal go out instead of an analog coax signal from this new receiver to the televisions just like how you get a digital signal from an outdoor antenna and connect it directly to the television using the built in digital tuner.
That's an easy one.

ATSC modulating is VERY expensive.


ATSC modulation requires getting ahold of a stream and transcoding it to MPEG2 (much of the installed base of DTVs probably can't handle H.264) without losing track of the digital audio information and then modulating that.

Copy protection would be a very sticky wicket

While ATSC supports a form of copy protection, it isn't clear that the installed base of devices are capable and whether or not digital copying can be effectively prevented.
 
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Scott Greczkowski
No full hd using moca.
Then what is the point?

At the point that this setup might be introduced, SD and EDTVs will be in a decided minority. Nobody is going to want to toss out their XiP series equipment when one of the TVs is replaced with a bona fide HDTV.

Read it this way: "No. MoCA allows full HD"

MoCA allows up to 175Mbps.
 
That's interesting that Sling would not be built-in, just like the 922.

What about Homeplug??

My guess is that the sling added a layer of complexity that they didn't want to deal with. What is going to be interesting is how the sling adapters are handled with this setup. I see that the 110s have USB ports so maybe you just plug the adapter into that and the signal that would go to that TV is used by the sling. It would be better if you could just plug it into the master unit and any available stream could be used for the sling. That way you don't interupt someone at home who may be trying to watch TV in the room where the sling adapter is plugged in.
 
Does it? I just asked that question in the pics thread. This would be VERY interesting to know.
If the cable is to be used for both satellite and MoCA, yes, it will cut out a pretty good swath of the <1GHz band. DIRECTV's implementation of MoCA 1.1 (DECA) suffers this drawback; radio frequencies in the lower 3/4 of the UHF band (channels 14-40) are effectively off the table.

DISH's implementation looks to be quite a bit different from DECA but it must still rely on a >100MHz band somewhere in the cable's spectrum.
 
Then what is the point?

At the point that this setup might be introduced, SD and EDTVs will be in a decided minority. Nobody is going to want to toss out their XiP series equipment when one of the TVs is replaced with a bona fide HDTV.

I think you misunderstood Scott's comment. I believe it should have read 'No, full hd using moca.' The no was in response to another member's question. I think he is affirming full hd using moca.
 
If the cable is to be used for both satellite and MoCA, yes, it will cut out a pretty good swath of the <1GHz band. DIRECTV's implementation of MoCA 1.1 (DECA) suffers this drawback; radio frequencies in the lower 3/4 of the UHF band (channels 14-40) are effectively off the table.

DISH's implementation looks to be quite a bit different from DECA but it must still rely on a >100MHz band somewhere in the cable's spectrum.


Excuse my ignorance please, but where does cable internet fall into that spectrum?
 
If the cable is to be used for both satellite and MoCA, yes, it will cut out a pretty good swath of the <1GHz band. DIRECTV's implementation of MoCA 1.1 (DECA) suffers this drawback; radio frequencies in the lower 3/4 of the UHF band (channels 14-40) are effectively off the table.

DISH's implementation looks to be quite a bit different from DECA but it must still rely on a >100MHz band somewhere in the cable's spectrum.

MoCA 2.0

Throughput

Baseline Mode

400+ Mbps MAC throughput
700 Mbps PHY Rate
Single 100 MHz Channel
Enhanced Mode

800+ Mbps MAC throughput
1.4 Gbps PHY Rate
Dual bonded 100 MHz Channels (“Channel Bonding”)
“Turbo” mode for a point-to-point configuration that allows

500+ Mbps MAC throughput between two connected devices when operating in Baseline mode
1+ Gbps MAC throughput when operating in Enhanced mode.
 

Dish Team in the Forum

Your Voices HAVE been heard!

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 2)

Latest posts