Social Feed

We were active in providing wish list items, testing and marketing of the Coolsat 4000 / 5000 and the Visionsat IV-200 STBs. These receivers had potential, but were initially very unfriendly towards the true FTA hobbyist market. We saw potential in the hobbyist market for the units if features were developed and implemented. The manufacturer saw additional sales potential in a niche market.

What the manufacture needs is a potential market backed by commitment and input from knowledgeable and reliable individuals. If they invest R&D to develop features for a specific market, there needs to be a guaranteed return.

Development outside the Manufacture: Firmware is compiled, so it is highly unlikely that the firmware can be modified outside of the inhouse firmware development team. Firmware development kits are available from chipset manufactures, but the programmer would start from a very basic GUI and will need to design and refine most components of the firmware. Many units are incapable of Blind Scan on either the chipset level or the choice of the tuner. It isn't necessarily a firmware coding solution. Blind Scan and channel sorting is one of the largest development challenges.

How to be Involved: Contact a manufacturer and volunteer to provide wish lists, perform tests and provide detailed reports on firmware operation. Receiver testing can be very frustrating as a simple change in on function may degrade an unrelated function, but it can be very rewarding when introducing a success! Don't be surprised if you do not initially receive a response. Often you will become a valuable development resource just by providing consistent debugging testing and results. A single request for a feature probably will not produce the feature, but repeated request from a diverse community might catch the developer's attention.

There is some limited info out there as far as modding firmware. With the help of an individual at another site, I was able to modify my CS5000 to change the remote device code - my sound system remote conflicted with it. I then used a JP1 remote and changed to the new device code on it. No more conflicts for my remotes. I posted some info on the JP1 forums JP1 Remotes :: View topic - Changing the device code

So some basic modification can be done with a hex editor, but adding blndscan would be next to impossible (even if the tuner supported it). Modifying the ATSC section of firmware to change the way channels are sorted may be possible, but would require a ton of work.

We do not have source code to work with for most of these receivers. We can only hope that as the pirate industry continues to crash and burn we will start to see source code leaked, more help from some of the firmware experts of the hacker crowd, and hopefully true FTA support from manufactures.

That was quick - I just did a google search and it appears some source code for the cs5k-6k has been leaked in the last few weeks. It is hackware, but this is still good news for FTA enthusiasts. Unfortunately cs5k-6k is not laking many features that can be added in firmware IMO but if someone can think of a missing feature, we should now be able to add it!

SatelliteAV said:

What the manufacture needs is a potential market backed by commitment and input from knowledgeable and reliable individuals. If they invest R&D to develop features for a specific market, there needs to be a guaranteed return.

Click to expand...

That's a nice thought Brian, but not really practical. It becomes the chicken/egg thing. No one is going to guarantee they will lay out a hefty fee for a box full of promises. If the Uberbox is already built to the consumer input recomendations, the R&D will have already been done.

SatelliteAV said:

Development outside the Manufacture: Firmware is compiled, so it is highly unlikely that the firmware can be modified outside of the inhouse firmware development team. Firmware development kits are available from chipset manufactures, but the programmer would start from a very basic GUI and will need to design and refine most components of the firmware. Many units are incapable of Blind Scan on either the chipset level or the choice of the tuner. It isn't necessarily a firmware coding solution. Blind Scan and channel sorting is one of the largest development challenges.

Click to expand...

As has been noted, RE'ing compiled FW is virtually out of the question. Without source code, or a good memory dump of the FW, not many would even attempt to tackle minor mods, much less feature additions/enhancements. Current production FTA FW is also encrypted in it distrubuted state, and is only decrypted internally when written to the chip. The mfgrs have the (justifiable) need to protect their product design from being copied. Since most of the desireable boxes are not JTAG compliant, a dump of the 'running FW' would be the first challenge.
The comments about blind scan compliant confuse me. I could see that a chip could be made to be more 'friendly' to blind scan, and do the lions share of the work as a dedicated hardware/emmbeded FW blind scan, [aka hardware based blindscan] removing the inherient overhead of the main uP loop from the equation. This is what the VS Extreme is *supposed* to have. It would be slower than a dedicated ASIC type system, but a blind scan based on scanning all freq/sr combos within a given range from a main FW [flash] sub routine should be achievable. After all, the tuner accept the same commands and parameters when tuning thru the pre-programmed set of freq/sr combos.
There is supposed to be a bind scan difference between a VS 2K Plat and a VS Extreme. I have both and I see no difference, speed or accuracy. The CS 6K accuracy is on average the same as the Viewsats and it runs circles around them in speed. I mean c'mon, after all, if a lowly Panny 2500 can do it [blind scan], it cant be that hard to implement.

SatelliteAV said:

How to be Involved: Contact a manufacturer and volunteer to provide wish lists, perform tests and provide detailed reports on firmware operation. Receiver testing can be very frustrating as a simple change in on function may degrade an unrelated function, but it can be very rewarding when introducing a success! Don't be surprised if you do not initially receive a response. Often you will become a valuable development resource just by providing consistent debugging testing and results. A single request for a feature probably will not produce the feature, but repeated request from a diverse community might catch the developer's attention.

Click to expand...

That would be great. It would likely be a much better received proposal if there was some grass roots organization and structure to the contact. Who would spearhead such a venture? The site here? Your company? I had hoped that Sonicview would have gotton off their DA's and developed a true S2 compliant revision of their Turbo board. All I've read, the 8000 is a well stable, peforming and reliable box, with functional PVR FW now, not "we are working on it". Some one here on the board contacted them last year regarding true S2 and they were advised the R&D group was looking into it and they expected something by years end. I havent heard anything else on the subject.
I think if we had to pitch a new kid our love and support, I'd look at the Vantage line. They may well want a foothold in the Western market and could be open to some Western FTA users expertise input. Since it is a void the rank and file Asian boxes builders are apparently not interested in, the Vantage has a shot IMHO. I still see it is a bit buggy on a few things but as you pointed out, a group (potential new customers) that shows an interest in the product may well have some ability to steer and encourage fine tuning at the mgfr level.
What a world, we are already headed for the Arabs having to eat their oil and when N2 comes down, the Asians will have to eat those millions of lost sales STBs. Breaks my heart...............

melgarga said:

That's a nice thought Brian, but not really practical. It becomes the chicken/egg thing. No one is going to guarantee they will lay out a hefty fee for a box full of promises. If the Uberbox is already built to the consumer input recomendations, the R&D will have already been done.

Click to expand...

STBs are built to meet the needs of the market. As we have developed receivers, we have often discovered or modified features to meet the desires of the hobbyists. Manufactures know where the money comes from and most importers only request the needs that are voiced by the eye patch crowd. Uber chipsets exist, but they are hidden behind the GUI of the hackbox.

You are correct, R&D has been done by the chipset manufacturer, but usually not implemented by the manufacturer or requested in the OEM request. You would be surprised by the lack of knowledge of the general satellite market by developers. They code based on the perceived needs of the market. Most of the Chinese coders cannot own satellite reception equipment at home and they often have limited access to systems at work! Most do not test with motors or switches and code using recorded TS files. They usually provide a very bare bones GUI and rely on the OEM importer to provide feedback on their product to refine. As we have seen in recent years, many boxes are being brought to market by persons who may have either purchased a container based on the promises of what it can do and do not have the knowledge to test or care to implement features that do not support their primary market.

melgarga said:

The comments about blind scan compliant confuse me. I could see that a chip could be made to be more 'friendly' to blind scan, and do the lions share of the work as a dedicated hardware/emmbeded FW blind scan, [aka hardware based blindscan] removing the inherient overhead of the main uP loop from the equation. This is what the VS Extreme is *supposed* to have. It would be slower than a dedicated ASIC type system, but a blind scan based on scanning all freq/sr combos within a given range from a main FW [flash] sub routine should be achievable. After all, the tuner accept the same commands and parameters when tuning thru the pre-programmed set of freq/sr combos.
There is supposed to be a bind scan difference between a VS 2K Plat and a VS Extreme. I have both and I see no difference, speed or accuracy. The CS 6K accuracy is on average the same as the Viewsats and it runs circles around them in speed. I mean c'mon, after all, if a lowly Panny 2500 can do it [blind scan], it cant be that hard to implement.

Click to expand...

You may think that implementing features would be easy ..... Providing an accurate blindscan with speed and sensitivity is a challenge. A hardware based scan provides the most accurate repeatable data. If blindscan feature was only reliant on brute power, PCI cards should have been blindscanning years ago...... I know of one company who spent nearly nine months 24/7 with a team perfecting scanning on their STB. This resulted in a great receiver that is still a measurement of performance and features, but it came at a hefty price (only to be copied by the manufacturer on other OEM models).

melgarga said:

That would be great. It would likely be a much better received proposal if there was some grass roots organization and structure to the contact. Who would spearhead such a venture? The site here? Your company?

Click to expand...

Why don't you consider forming the grassroots group? Why look to others to organize? Consider starting the group here on the SatelliteGuys forum! Satellite AV has repeatedly developed STBs with OEM importers for the hobbyists market. We are now focusing on developing our own products.

melgarga said:

I had hoped that Sonicview would have gotton off their DA's and developed a true S2 compliant revision of their Turbo board. All I've read, the 8000 is a well stable, peforming and reliable box, with functional PVR FW now, not "we are working on it". Some one here on the board contacted them last year regarding true S2 and they were advised the R&D group was looking into it and they expected something by years end. I havent heard anything else on the subject.

Click to expand...

Exactly.... one person contacted the OEM importer last year..... now everyone waits! This is the reason that the hobbyists probably won't see desired features introduced. Sonicview is selling a box that fits the needs of their market.

This thread is the first step to forming an advisory organization.

Brian,
I have been at FTA for about two months now. I have been following this thread and I would like to tell you (as a supplier of FTA equipment with influence in the market), that I am in the market for a good receiver that can do real HD and Dolby sound and have an HMDI output. Also a good DVB-S and DVB-S2 PCI card with HMDI output, which has Linux drivers. I'm dissatisfied with my present 36 in dish and I am looking to down size to a good quality 30 to 33 inch dish.

So far I have not been able to track down a good, reasonably price HD receiver and PCI card (the last satellite PCI card I purchased was such a disappointment I sent it back) that would work well with FTA. I will be looking to make these purchases within the next two months as hobby money becomes available.

Hoping my FTA wants will help your organization understand my marketing needs.
mikelib



So many signals so little time!
Fortec Star Dynamic Receiver - WS9036 - 90cm Dish - Invacom QPH031 LNB - Fortec Star HH42 Motor.

mikelib said:

I have been at FTA for about two months now. I have been following this thread and I would like to tell you (as a supplier of FTA equipment with influence in the market), that I am in the market for a good receiver that can do real HD and Dolby sound and have an HMDI output.

Click to expand...

I have been into FTA satellites for over 25 years and like you, wish that this type of equipment were readily available! There are several HD receivers that have received a nod of approval from your fellow hobbyists. They may not be the ideal unit, but are available and stable.

mikelib said:

Also a good DVB-S and DVB-S2 PCI card with HMDI output, which has Linux drivers.

Click to expand...

Please elaborate on requesting a PCI DVBS / S2 with a HDMI output. A high end video card has my vote. Let the processor and an off board chipset crunch the display data.

mikelib said:

I'm dissatisfied with my present 36 in dish and I am looking to down size to a good quality 30 to 33 inch dish.

Click to expand...

Rather than degrading your system with a smaller 30 - 33" reflector, your system would greatly benefit from a larger reflector with higher efficiency rating. Consider upgrading to a larger dish if signal integrity and PQ is important. The increased HD bandwidth and high FEC signals demand reduced data errors.

mikelib said:

Hoping my FTA wants will help your organization understand my marketing needs.

Click to expand...

Satellite equipment distribution companies need to balance the desires of the hobbyist with the realities of the market. We have developed and approved a S2, 4:2:2, blind scan receiver for manufacturing. The broadcaster, who had committed to the base model lost their start-up capital with the current economic downturn. When the project has viability or a new project is finalized we are planning a hobbyist edition of the STB. Until then, I just have to continue playing with manufacturing samples....

If this wasn't my career, it would be my hobby! Oh, wait...... it is!