Popularity of Mt2 off air tuner?

[Jimmerinwi]

I guess it really doesn't matter much now anyways does it? because that's the way the 722k,922,222k are designed now.I just believe that's a prime example of how Dish Network can take one step forward in design while taking two steps backwards at the same time when it comes to making products that are consumer friendly.But what do I know I'm only a consumer,not a suit.

Don't think it's " the one step forward" theory. They simply discovered people weren't using them and decided to make the module for the newer receivers. I have one in each of my VIP receivers and really like them.

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[SaltiDawg]

...

The thought of having to purchase something for a receiver you are leasing is an obstacle alot of Dish Network subscribers will not make simply because to them it makes no sense to buy something for a receiver Dish Network wants to lease.

I suspect many of us got the OTA module for no cost - just for the (polite) asking.

 

[Tampa8]

I guess it really doesn't matter much now anyways does it? because that's the way the 722k,922,222k are designed now.I just believe that's a prime example of how Dish Network can take one step forward in design while taking two steps backwards at the same time when it comes to making products that are consumer friendly.But what do I know I'm only a consumer,not a suit.

Couldn't disagree more. Business decision, 100%. Not making it available at all would be step backwards. This seems like a win win, it doesn't cost dish for those who do not even want it, (or keeps the receiver costs lower) and those that really want it can get it.

 

[DishSubLA]

The MT2 seems to appeal to and only known to "power users." That is unfortunate, as Dish would seem more appealing to quite a number of people I know. But they aren't motivated to go through the trouble of setting it up.

 

[KazooGuy]

I love mine! I seldom use the sat version of my locals to watch or record anything in my DMA. I have a couple of stations that have sub channels that DISH does not carry. It is nice to have the ability to record 4 shows at the same time. About the only time I use the sat channel version is during a thunderstorm. Digital OTA does not work well with electric in the air!

 

[Hall]

I love mine! I seldom use the sat version of my locals to watch or record anything in my DMA.

I used to do the same, on the premise that the OTA was "better" quality picture-wise. When comparing them though, yes, they look a bit different, but I can't say one is better or worse than the other. In addition, the satellite-delivered version can take up to half the disk space when recorded.

 

[lparsons21]

The MT2 seems to appeal to and only known to "power users." That is unfortunate, as Dish would seem more appealing to quite a number of people I know. But they aren't motivated to go through the trouble of setting it up.

Once you have the antenna and cable in place for OTA, setting up the MT2 is trivial and only takes a few minutes. The only real 'trouble' might be the antenna installation if you can't use an indoor antenna.

 

[Hall]

Once you have the antenna...

Installing antennas, running cable... Does the average TV viewer do that nowadays ? Nope, they call the cable or satellite company to get them their channels !

I know many, many people who had roof or pole-mounted antennas and they had them taken down !

 

[DishSubLA]

Once you have the antenna and cable in place for OTA, setting up the MT2 is trivial and only takes a few minutes. The only real 'trouble' might be the antenna installation if you can't use an indoor antenna.

That's for you and me, but the masses just see it as a hassle and just one more thing to do in an already busy life. They view the OTA antenna, if they don't already have one or if it is too old and damaged, as an unnecessary expense, even if it a good $30 one.

These things just cause most people to go "uhhgh. Too complicated. I'll live with what I have." Now if Dish set it up at the time of install or were willing to do it for a small fee, that might appeal to some.

 

[DishSubLA]

Installing antennas, running cable... Does the average TV viewer do that nowadays ? Nope, they call the cable or satellite company to get them their channels !

I know many, many people who had roof or pole-mounted antennas and they had them taken down !

Ironically, I was one of those who had our Dish installer take down the large, but fallen over and damaged and ugly OTA antenna down thinking I would never need it again. That was 1999. Now, I do regret that decision. I am now looking at having someone--I can't do it due to medical condition--to mount a new OTA (that I have connected in the office as an experiment to confirm it good quality reception) on the roof and run cables to at least FOUR rooms for integration in the ViP Dish DVR's. I have put it off because of the cost. I really thought that one could get all the channels from cable sat. DBS does not offer some of the multi-plexed that I have come to enjoy. Doh! I was a big dummy.

 

[SaltiDawg]

...
I know many, many people who had roof or pole-mounted antennas and they had them taken down !

I live in an affluent sub-division in the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC. I am the only person on my street with a roof-top antenna and as to the neighbors that I actually know, none view OTA with an attic or inside antenna. (I installed my own directional antenna with rotor on my chimney about 15 years ago - two artificial knees later means no more rooftop trips for me. lol)

 

[Peter Parker]

Once you have the antenna and cable in place for OTA, setting up the MT2 is trivial and only takes a few minutes. The only real 'trouble' might be the antenna installation if you can't use an indoor antenna.

But that is EXACTLY the thing that many peole do not want to deal with.

 

[KAB]

Here's the point. The "enlightened of us" will know the advantage. The rest, too bad. Dish provides for both.

 

[whatchel1]

I record 720p OTA and 1080i sat. Reason is the 1080i is MPEG 4 and the OTA 720p is a bit smaller file than 1080i OTA. This way can keep the file size down on both. MPEG 2 OTA is just to large as far as I'm concerned. To bad we aren't MPEG 4 OTA over here like Europe is.

 

[Jhon69]

I record 720p OTA and 1080i sat. Reason is the 1080i is MPEG 4 and the OTA 720p is a bit smaller file than 1080i OTA. This way can keep the file size down on both. MPEG 2 OTA is just to large as far as I'm concerned. To bad we aren't MPEG 4 OTA over here like Europe is.

But are you really?.Here's how I see things now that I'm HD.Both Fox and ABC are 720p(are they cheap or what?!) but when you watch with the VIP722k/wMT2 it upconverts the signal to 1080i.

This would be a great discussion for our tech wizards to solve?.

P.S. And yes to me there is a big difference.

 

[SaltiDawg]

... but when you watch with the VIP722k/wMT2 it upconverts the signal to 1080i.
...

It up converts the signal for display. (As it does all recordings that are not already 1080i.)
(Not to mention then your TV then takes that 1080i signal and converts it to the native panel display of your set. )

 

[Hall]

...but when you watch with the VIP722k/wMT2 it upconverts the signal to 1080i.

Just to repeat what SaltiDawg stated, it only up-converts the OUTPUT to the display. It does NOT re-encode to 1080i.

 

[whatchel1]

But are you really?.Here's how I see things now that I'm HD.Both Fox and ABC are 720p(are they cheap or what?!) but when you watch with the VIP722k/wMT2 it upconverts the signal to 1080i.

This would be a great discussion for our tech wizards to solve?.

P.S. And yes to me there is a big difference.

I do this strictly for file size, not rez difference. BTW see what SaltDawg & Hall are saying. They are correct.

 

[digiblur]

But are you really?.Here's how I see things now that I'm HD.Both Fox and ABC are 720p(are they cheap or what?!) but when you watch with the VIP722k/wMT2 it upconverts the signal to 1080i.

This would be a great discussion for our tech wizards to solve?.

P.S. And yes to me there is a big difference.

720p is not cheap. 1080p is just unreachable on a MPEG2 ATSC stream.

 

[navychop]

720p has twice the frame rate of 1080i and in theory can be better for fast motion. Many other factors apply. It was not a decision driven by costs.