AZBox DiSEqC 1.2 Error During Blindscan

[Magic Static]

Thank you all for your responses. I forgot that my AZBox Ultra does S2 so I abandoned the idea about getting the 3500. In the meantime I'm using the 4DTV to move the BUD. I've been thinking about getting the ASC 1 mover.

Just a reminder about a glitch in the AZbox. It likes to set motor limits on your DiSEqC Controller when you scan a satellite. I would just turn off the V/GBox when scanning to avoid the problem. But you can't do that with the ASC1. For me, the Ultra was a PITA and a new receiver is the way to go

 

[pwrsurge]

Just a reminder about a glitch in the AZbox. It likes to set motor limits on your DiSEqC Controller when you scan a satellite. I would just turn off the V/GBox when scanning to avoid the problem. But you can't do that with the ASC1. For me, the Ultra was a PITA and a new receiver is the way to go

Just to clarify that the glitch you are referring to only impacts the first (i.e. Elite & Premium) and second (i.e. Ultra & Premium Plus) generation series of AzBox HD receivers.

It does NOT impact the third generation of AzBox HD receivers which include the AzBox Me and miniMe American Edition.

 

[Titanium]

Thanks Magic Static for that information!

Every time you scan with the AZBox, the controller East/West limits are incorrectly set?

I have received support requests from AZBox owners with this same problem and never realized that this was a known bug! Unfrickin' believable!

So AZBox never released firmware to fix the DiSEqC command problems?

Edit: just saw AZBox reply. Glad to hear the problem only exists on 4 of the 6 AZBox models!

Too bad it was never fixed and continues until today. What a PITA...

 

[pwrsurge]

Thanks Magic Static for that information!

Every time you scan with the AZBox, the controller East/West limits are incorrectly set?

I have received support requests from AZBox owners with this same problem and never realized that this was a known bug! Unfrickin' believable!

So AZBox never released firmware to fix the DiSEqC command problems?

Edit: just saw AZBox reply. Glad to hear the problem only exists on 4 of the 6 AZBox models!

Too bad it was never fixed and continues until today. What a PITA...

Just to clarify that the issue only occurs during blind scan and NOT manual or satellite scan.

To be more specific, the issue consists of the east DiSEqC limit being set at the current motor position when the blind scan starts. The west limit is not impacted by this issue.

Workarounds for this issue include turning off the DiSEqC positioner before each blind scan or changing the Positioner setup field in Antenna setup from DiSEqC 1.2 to OFF before the blind scan and turning it back on once the scan is done. Fortunately, the assigned position number is not lost when doing this which makes it a viable workaround.

We would love to release a new firmware version in order to resolve this issue. Unfortunately, as we only have source code for certain parts of the legacy AzBox HD firmware which does not include the Antenna Setup or Blindscan sections, we are unable to do so.

 

[Titanium]

Only in Blind Scan mode? LOL!!! Is there any other type of scan for a hobbyist? Cant think of the last time I did a manual or satellite scan...

Understood about the limitations that you must experience when trying to support the AZBox products. As a developer and distributor, I speak out of frustration! I have had way too many hours on the phone, emails and lost sales trying to support AZBox customers with this problem. Customers are told by AZBox resellers support that the problem must be with the controller, because the customer didn't experience have problems before buying a controller.... We have had several product returns and very upset AZBox customers insisting that the problem was with the controller! We would get the unit back and find absolutely no problem with the soft limit function. In the past hour, I have been contacted by two customers after reading this thread. They had bought a G/VBox and had the same soft limit errors, so they knew the problem was with the AZBox. As Paul Harvey would say, "Now, the rest of the story". One of them purchased the ASC1, again!

I am finding that the majority of ASC1 owners previously used a 4DTV or an analog receiver to manually control the dish position and set the servo polarity control feeds. They may have owned the AZBox for several years and never knew about the DiSEqC coding error as they were never had the ability to automatically control their dish and polarity using the AZBox. I guess that knowing this, we either have to disable the ability for a receiver to set software limits in the ASC1 or wait for an AZBox fix. Guess I better get busy dumbing down the ASC1 and adding an AZBox DiSEqC Error FAQ....

Reminds me of a saying that an old neighbor used to say about problems, "You can either pick-up the piles of dog crap in your yard or keep scraping crap off the bottom of your boots". Yes, there are work-arounds, but keep the stick and water hose handy! LOL!

 

[T134]

Titanium,

Can't you just contact AZbox and the factory directly?

 

[pwrsurge]

Customers are told by AZBox resellers support that the problem must be with the controller, because the customer didn't experience have problems before buying a controller....

Which dealers are you referring to? All of our authorised North American dealers have been aware of this issue for at least 3 years now unless you are referring to customers outside of North America. Even the guy who's discussion forum is responsible for numerous feeds getting scrambled is aware of this.

I guess that knowing this, we either have to disable the ability for a receiver to set software limits in the ASC1 or wait for an AZBox fix.

As we don't have source code for the module which would be need to be revised and the models impacted have been discontinued for at least 2 years now, my recommendation is to add a user configurable option in the ASC1 to ignore DiSEqC limit set commands coming from the STB. Legacy AzBox HD users would then simply have to enable that option in order to avoid the issue from impacting them.

 

[Titanium]

Several times in the past year, when I suggested that the customer contact their AZBox dealer after we confirmed the software limit was working correctly. They responded that they had already discussed the matter with support and they were referred to contact the controller manufacturer. Since there has been much confusion as to which resellers were legit and who was distributing clones vs real AZBoxes, I would tend to leave the conversation just at that. Guess this DiSEqC coding problem isn't as common of knowledge if most owners and even myself were not aware of the problem. Maybe a FAQ on the AZBox website?

You have mentioned that a new company owns AZBox. Did this company only buy the AZBox name?

Does the new AZBox company support version 1, 2 and 3 STBs?

If not, is this the reason that you, as a regional distributor, must independently develop firmware fixes for the AZBoxes sold in the US and Canada? Seems like you are getting zero support from the company and it makes no sense that a regional distributor would need to code someone else's products.

Easy enough to implement "Ignore all DiSEqC" commands function or bypass and make the ASC1 a manual stand alone controller, but that defeats the purpose of an advanced controller offering and automatic dish positioning and polarity/skew control with any STB. After your previous post I was thinking about what would be required for coding the ASC1 to support AZBoxes and filter specific DiSEqC commands. Like you suggested, these legacy AXBox STBs probably should be used within their limitations and your suggested work-arounds. Likely not enough units in daily use to warrant special coding.

Thanks for your comments and additional information. Guess it is what it is and we now have the right information to educate AZBox owners.

 

[KE4EST]

Broke the last few posts off to a new thread, as y'all got way off topic.

 

[GreatFTA]

Dang. I never thought my AZBox Ultra receiver would have problems with the ASC 1 Controller. I'm gonna make the best of this situation. Probably get another receiver.

 

[waylew]

Just a stoopid question but,realistically,how many 4/5 year old receivers are actively being supported anymore ?I think I've had my Ultra since before I joined here and that was 4 years ago.And other than after I first got it,America-ized it and still running the 5020 firmware,I haven't done a thing to it.Granted I still use my DSR922's for moving the dishes,so I've never gotten in to using my FTA boxes for positioning.

 

[Titanium]

Weren't the Premium Plus units still being sold earlier this year? I just Googled a Canadian company selling them on their website and on Ebay.

Only two years ago we were being told about all of the counterfeit plus units flooding the Canada/US market.
http://www.satelliteguys.us/xen/thr...ing-sold-in-the-north-american-market.301177/

 

[Trust]

Interesting topic ! Here and in Germany are some users stuggleling with DrHD GrandTriple receivers with the same problem ( automatic setting motor limits )

 

[Keith Brannen]

Several times in the past year... Guess this DiSEqC coding problem isn't as common of knowledge if most owners and even myself were not aware of the problem.

http://www.satelliteguys.us/xen/threads/titanium-asc1-dish-positioner.326816/#post-3346676

 

[Titanium]

http://www.satelliteguys.us/xen/threads/titanium-asc1-dish-positioner.326816/#post-3346676

Thanks, Keith!

Yes, a member had mentioned this post to me yesterday. Unfortunately, a single post in the long thread mentioning the AZBox as a possibly of causing the user's problem didn't stand-out at that time. In hindsight, it was significant. Funny how everything in hindsight is 20/20!

Yesterday's posting by the same member suddenly registered with me!

 

[Keith Brannen]

Brian, so was the solution you mentioned which would have helped the problem (menu option to ignore software limit commands) ever implemented? Always curious in case I ever get a c-band dish and need a positioner!

 

[pwrsurge]

Weren't the Premium Plus units still being sold earlier this year? I just Googled a Canadian company selling them on their website and on Ebay.

Only two years ago we were being told about all of the counterfeit plus units flooding the Canada/US market.
http://www.satelliteguys.us/xen/thr...ing-sold-in-the-north-american-market.301177/

I assume you are referring to Tek2000 which has been identified as selling counterfeit AzBox Premium Plus units from their website since March 21st of this year. However, it appears that they recently started selling it on eBay as well. It's clearly obvious they are selling clones as the price they are selling them at are below the wholesale cost of authentic units when they were still in production!

It's companies like Tek2000 who are starting to ruin this satellite hobby for everyone by trying to screw all existing companies who have supported it until today just to make a quick buck! For those of you who did not know, Tek2000's discussion forum allows wild feeds to be openly posted without having to be logged in which will certainly increase the amount of normally unencrypted feeds getting scrambled as they get indexed on Google and other search engines on the Internet.

As you know, there aren't that many companies out there specializing in this niche market so the ones that do should respect their competition with a unified goal of supporting this hobby. For some of you who don't realize it yet, firmware development costs time and money so if it wasn't for all the clones being sold, perhaps this bug could have been fixed when the Premium HD Plus was still in production.

P.S. to Tek2000 aka satellites-gallore sic aka rooneysat aka cbandsat aka cbandguy aka tvroadmin aka fatso aka The Professor aka mountainman and all other alias users you are posting with in various forums: I would strongly recommend removing the AzBox Premium Plus listing you have in your ebay store. The last ebay account that was selling counterfeit AzBox Premium Plus units got permanently suspended with ALL the items he was selling removed back on January 2013 after we contacted ebay as per http://www.azbox.ca/cfm/azbox/unauthorised_info.cfm?ID=4 so we certainly won't hesitate doing the same for you as well! As I know you will be reading this post, this will be your ONLY warning!

 

[Titanium]

The DiSEqC filtering suggestion has not been implemented. It is on a list for future programming projects, but I have been quite busy on other projects that pay the bills.

Too bad the developers of these faulty products don't take responsibility for their own problems. Certainly would make life easier for the rest of us...

Clones don't have anything to do with the bad original AZBox coding. As was indicated earlier, the problem affects all version 1 and 2 AZBoxes.

 

[T134]

Too bad the developers of these faulty products don't take responsibility for their own problems. Certainly would make life easier for the rest of us...

Hugo took responsibility by grabbing all the $$$ and going into hiding on an undisclosed island somewhere. Probably the same one that Robby from WSI is hiding on.

Someone did mention and has a valid point about the age of the legacy boxes. They are years old and way out of date. Not many tech products in any category receive support much beyond a couple years, even if the company is still in business.

One suggestion for DiSEqC issues on the old boxes: try Enigma2. I have no idea how well it runs on the legacy units, only that it can be done. Most E2 has super fine settings for switching and motor controls in it if you dig around. No blindscan with E2 but since the old boxes can't bllindsan their way out of a wet paper bag most guys are probably using a less expensive, fast blindscan unit for that anyway.

 

[Titanium]

Curious, does the new "clone" AZBox has the same DiSEqC problem during blind scan as the originals. Anybody have one of these STBs and could comment?

If Tek2000 fixed the problem, maybe they could provide the firmware file release!