Certain receivers only good for...

[kstuart]

Hello,

I notice that certain receivers are "popular" - in terms of ebay sales and even being featured by some dealers - but no one here uses those receivers.

I then notice that people who get banned seem to use those receivers.

Are certain receivers popular for "test" use, but not all that good for real FTA use ?

 

[Mr Tony]

Every box out there will work for legit FTA. Now what people do after they get them is what can get them banned if they ask how to steal

But if I go to gosatellite site and check, here is a list of boxes they sell that I have worked with

Viewsat VS2000 (the orignal)
Coolsat 8000
Coolsat 5000
Coolsat 4000
Captiveworks CW-600
Pansat 2700
Pansat 3500
Pansat 6000
Neosat
Buzz
Fortec Classic
Neusat

Sonicview is like the Buzz so we could almost count that. I've seen a Traxis 4500 & 3500 but haven't had one in my possession

I think the problems with some of the boxes is sadly, they are not the best when it comes to legit FTA. We all know the issues with the Viewsat & a motor. Captiveworks isn't the most friendly with a motor and the "blind scan" doesn't work.

I like the Coolsats and the Pansat (have my Pansat 1500 from 3 years ago and wouldn't give that up)

 

[turbosat]

Kstuart you are right, some seem to be 'preferred', like the one I bought in Nov (viewsat ultra) Loads software updates easily by usb-flashdrive. I had a simple box almost a yr, wanted bigger faster more better>Ultra was one of the newest, boasted about having the faster processor, more ram, easy updating etc so I went for it. I actually didnt know about the other 'uses' for fta rec then. And if my first rec would've stored more than 16sats I prob would've just kept right on using it lol.
Like Ice said, prob all of them will do real fta ,some are better than others. . For what its worth though, this new Ultra DOES do FTA better than what I had, it is much faster scanning, will store tons of channels, without duplicating them on a rescan, and allegedly store about 100 satellites. There's been 2 firmware updates already from viewsat, and they are easy with the USB thing. My old rec was a coship and could not be upgraded. To address your post, I guess the software upgrade-ease is what attracts the thieves. Ultra still wont pass AC-3 though its supposed to, and I dont have it hooked to a motor so I cant tell about that. The sound thing is supposed to be fixed soon, they keep saying. But it does function very well as intended. Cant comment on any other use it might have, as I have no interest in theft.

 

[Das Hammer]

Those manufacturers will cater to where the money is, I don't think anyone can argue that. They know what they're doing.

I admire the Traxis brand because they aren't hackable. If the 3500 or 4550 would pass AC-3 on Ku I would buy a couple more. I don't know why that hasn't been fixed. It's really a huge blemish on an otherwise outstanding pair of receivers. Heck, even if they would just come up with some outlandish physical modification to the thing on the inside to get the ac3 output I'd do it because that's how much I like that receiver.

 

[SatinKzo]

What makes the Traxis brands "not hackable"? Granted I never see anything about them being used for that, but since I am not familiar with them I don't know why they are technically any different other than maybe they don't have the unofficial group of employees that make the other software.

 

[Das Hammer]

Something to do with the hardware rather than software. The hackable receivers have a way to legitimately receive subscription programming. This is usually done with cam slots or what have you, but it is not prevalent in this country. The Traxis (again, from what limited knowledge I have) do not have any physical means to view encrypted programming whether it be legitimately or otherwise.

 

[SatinKzo]

hmm, interesting. Learn something everyday.

 

[Tron]

Nice thing about the Traxis 3500 is the quality display on the receiver. It supposedly has a great picture too. Wish it had AC-3

 

[RVD420]

Traxis 3500 is a great FTA receiver. And is not supported with hack firmware (which is a plus)

Now some less reputable FTA makers cater to the hack market.

I have seen some FTA receivers get better support through hack firmware than factory.

Some FTA receivers have gotten UI overhauls (on 3rd party firmware) that was later implemented in a factory release. That tells me that either someone in the company "leaked" the UI improvments to hackers, or the factory software writers wrote the hack software, or the factory software writers stole the UI overhaul from the hackers.

 

[Mr Tony]

I have seen some FTA receivers get better support through hack firmware than factory.

Sadly. But in some cases, those really old firmware can work. I use to have old software in my Digiwave box. Didn’t get anything it shouldn’t but it did give me USALS and AC-3. Factory software didn’t.

 

[Tron]

Agreed... When the CS8000 first came out, 3rd party software was the only way to get DVB satellite functionality

 

[Mr Tony]

Agreed... When the CS8000 first came out, 3rd party software was the only way to get DVB satellite functionality

correct but as mentioned in the review it didnt get what it wasn't suppose to

 

[zippys]

Curious as what the problem is with Viewsat & Motor

Every box out there will work for legit FTA. when it comes to legit FTA. We all know the issues with the Viewsat & a motor.

I have a Viewsat Ultra and planning on ordering a motor for the dish. I would like to know what is going on with this stb and motors. What kind of problems? Do they apply to the Viewsat Ultra?

Thanks

zippys

 

[Tron]

Variety of problems, from intermittent movement to no movement of the motor, improper stopping of the motor, losing USALS functionality, etc.

Motors and Viewsats do not work well together...