dish dual tuner for HD?
- Thread starter VaDavid
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 22
- Views 4K
So for the record, all the dual tuners boxes that we have right now are dual HD *tuners*, there are not dual HD *output's* though.
I know that is what you were asking, for dual HD output, but both tuners in all the dual HD boxes can record HD shows, it's just that HD will only output on TV1
I know that is what you were asking, for dual HD output, but both tuners in all the dual HD boxes can record HD shows, it's just that HD will only output on TV1
Correct. However, if you can get either an HDMI cable or component/audio cables to a 2nd TV you can view TV1/HD on that TV as well. Same channel/same time of course. You can also pick up a powered HDMI splitter for about $40 from monoprice.com and use HDMI on both TVs. Leave the coax hooked up from the TV2 tuner to use that (SD) when separate viewing choices are required.
Ed
Depends what you call expensive and what you mean my distant. You can get quality 40ft HDMI cables for about $30. That is considerably cheaper than paying some monthly fee for an extra HD DVR
So I guess there are no technilogical limitations to having dual independant HD output.
Why not have a second HDMI or set of component outs for those that want to run the longer cables to other rooms?
1) Because it would make the boxes cost more (because I doubt the chips inside can support streaming two HD-quality videos).
2) Because by only have one HD output DISH can get a lot of people install and second box that requires an additional monthly fee (thus boosting DISH's profits).
Does your house really need the capability to stream two different HD programs at the same time? I know our family does just fine with a single 722 with TV1 driving 3 HDTVs (one via component and two via HDMI) and TV2 driving 2 SDTVs as well as the 3 HDTVs (all via coax).
In single mode you just use the TV2 remote as you have been. In dual mode pick up another 6.3 or 21.0 UHF remote to control TV1.
Ed
I built a IR distribution system combing a couple designs I found on the web. With my setup, I have four remote eyes -- one for each remote location. Commercial units are available from companies like Xantech and Buffalo, but since I have a EE degree I wanted to build something (and save some money while I was at it).
Technical limitations aren't there, but practical limitations trump most everything in consumer electronics gear.
Because it is relatively expensive compared to the $15 store-bought 50' coax that the old timers and cable sufferers are used to. Imagine what they would charge at Best Buy for a 50' HDMI cable if the 12' version is $99.99 Blue Jeans and Monoprice remain relatively well kept secrets. All of the sudden that $7 charge doesn't seem so bad.
Just because you can do something on paper doesn't mean that it is optimal or even nominal.
Finally, STL's point about the chipset not necessarily supporting two HD streams should not be ignored.
Good points but the cost arguments are only speculative at this time compared to the known cost of DISH supplying 2 separate boxes to accomplish this currently.
I don't foresee an electronics manufacturer being concerned that Best Buy is ripping people off on cables as a limitation on adding features to a product. Early adopters are always willing to pay too much to have the greatest features or newest technology first, we'll see that here when the 922 is released.
I didn't expect anyone to really know what the changes in the outputs and possibly the chipset would cost. I was more interested in finding out if there was a technological reason making it not possible.
Thanks for the replies.
Your lack of vision doesn't change the physics or the economics of the situation. When people find out that it is going to cost $100 just for a cable to connect their new toy, they're not amused. See more at XBox 360 HD cabling.
A pretty relevant case in point is DIRECTV's HR21 Pro HD DVR. It feeds a single signal through either HDMI and Component -OR- fiber optic connection. The mating part of the fiber optic connection (Owlink FO2800DTV, not included) is not a large fraction less expensive than the receiver itself (which could only be purchased). They are both still available and being blown out at somewhere around cost.
Condescend much? Your example proves my point. MS did not hesitate to put out the XBox and does not care if the cable is expensive.
Similar threads
