How difficult can it be?

Pepper

DVR Addict~Mad Scientist
Original poster
Supporting Founder
Mar 16, 2004
8,191
1,060
Satsuma, AL
[Warning: RANT contained below. You have been warned.]

Based on careful observation and experimentation, I think I have determined how a Dish Network receiver will decide which to tune, when the same channel is on two satellites in your dish configuration. Although it may seem that the answer is "random" or "based on some sort of priority list" I believe it to be more along the lines of "whichever is most likely to cause the customer to miss what they wanted to see." There are many factors that go into a customer wanting to see something, such as: is it a new episode; will it be repeated often, rarely, or never; does the network allow you to watch full episodes online. If the answers to these questions are yes, never, no - I can pretty much guarantee that the receiver will choose whichever instance of the channel currently has the weakest signal, especially if there is bad weather involved. Signal loss is much less likely on shows that you have seen before and for which the same episode will be on multiple times this week.

[OK, I exaggerate a little. But I have earned that right. I fight with technology all day for a living, I should not have to fight with it trying to enjoy my time off.]

For example, I have a 1000.4 dish for Eastern Arc. I also have a standalone "wing" dish pointed to 110 to get the SD versions of my local channels. This results in a configuration in which several channels are duplicated. For example SyFy HD is on 110tp7 and 72.7tp17. Due to storms tonight, 110tp7 has a signal strength of 3 (on 125 point scale), while 72.7tp17 has a strength of 40+. Guess which one it decided to use for the things I scheduled to record.

[OK, rant over. Almost. Here's my useful, polite suggestion to Dish software development team.]

How difficult can it be to add a simple test in the code: if there is a signal loss but the same channel exists on another satellite/transponder you have access to, at least F$&#ING TRY TO USE THE OTHER ONE, before sitting there forever with a "signal has been lost" error message.
 
Last edited:
How difficult can it be to add a simple test in the code: if there is a signal loss but the same channel exists on another satellite/transponder you have access to, at least F$&#ING TRY TO USE THE OTHER ONE, before sitting there forever with a "signal has been lost" error message.

Come on Pepper. That would be too logical for them to do. :)
 
I believe your assessment to be 100% correct.;) LOL. Used to have the same crap when I had a 1000.2 and a wing dish on 61.5 for HD locals. Because of woods to my SW, 129 would be marginal in the Summer, 61.5 would be good. As you already know, my receivers would seem to always choose 129--especially in bad weather. Fortunately, a 1000.4 solved the problem. My SD locals are also on 110, which I no longer receive but I could care less. I get 'em in HD from Dish as well as OTA. That may not be in option for you..........

Ed
 
Yep, my fix was to disconnect the 110 dish and run check switch. HD locals only, means the wife is gonna fill it up real quick with the daily fix of "Today" and "Oprah" - that's the main reason I kept 110 around so I could record that stuff in SD.

Sorry for the rant, obviously I was quite PO'ed at the time. But this should be something extremely easy to fix, if they even considered it.
 
They would have to totally rework the way the receiver downloads the satellite tables. And this would only affect the small crowd of hobbyist that do not have a pure EA or WA setup. I don't see them doing this at all since it could have negative effects on regular subs with the bugs introduced.
 
Yep, my fix was to disconnect the 110 dish and run check switch. HD locals only, means the wife is gonna fill it up real quick with the daily fix of "Today" and "Oprah" - that's the main reason I kept 110 around so I could record that stuff in SD.

Sorry for the rant, obviously I was quite PO'ed at the time. But this should be something extremely easy to fix, if they even considered it.

There's little difference between MPEG4 HD and MPEG2 SD as far as file size goes, heck, given the right circumstances, the HD may be a little smaller than the SD... If all you're using 110 for is SD locals, you may be doing yourself, and your drive space, a favor by disconnecting it :)
 
I thought that too at first, did a few test recordings and compares. The MPEG4 HD versions run 2-2.5 times the old MPEG2 SD, for the specific things in question.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts