Input on New Feature Development for GEOSATpro Receivers

Status
Please reply by conversation.
Brian, with my DVR1100c if I have a number of recording, they are listed in order of the date and time of the recordings. However, if I delete a few recordings, the new recording are put in the places where the deleted ones were. It would be nice to have the recordings sorted, at least by date and time. Also lacking is a preset time recording feature. i.e. Press the record button a number of times to record 1/2 hour, hour, 1 1/2 hours etc..
 
Wow, what an interesting thread. I find myself excited, frustrated, and a little disappointed in reading the comments here.

First, I want to commend Brian on his endeavors to improve the products he sells. If he was purely a marketing troll I would be suspicious about his motives. However, Brian offers help and support to many people here - especially in his Glorystar forum. Likewise, Sadoun offers a lot of help to people. I don't recall anyone taking him to task when he wrote about the new bandstacked LNB he offered...

There are some really great folks here who have helped me over the years as I have struggled to learn about programming, receivers, dishes, and other equipment. The list is long, but includes Iceberg, Anole, Stogie, Mike G, Brian, and many others. I don't have the time or resources to embrace the hobby as they do, but live a bit vicariously through them and many others here. And I do putter a bit with my mini-dishes and bandstacked LNBs. ;)

I would describe myself as a newbie with aspirations. Maybe this is why the GEOSATpro equipment is so appealing. Someday I will own a GSp receiver, but for now am using used receivers I picked up at auction. All this to say that while I aspire to the advanced hobbyist side of things, the reality is that I probably fit the customer profile for SatelliteAV much more closely.

I have been a member here at SatGuys for quite a while now and truly value the resource and try to contribute when I can. Perhaps it is just my perception, but it seems to me that the general trend is to be less "friendly" to the newbies - unless they are wholeheartedly embracing the extreme hobbyist approach - than in years past.

Even if Brian's request for ideas does not match your personal needs, isn't there something you have picked up in your discussions with potential FTA folks that would be helpful? (The concerns about WUT programming and such are very valid, but I think Brian addressed them fairly.)

It seems to me that Brian is looking to bring more people into FTA at a basic level that is relatively pain-free for the purposely open programming. These are the types of users who may look to become more of a hobbyist if their initial experience is positive. If my interpretation is correct, then that should be a good thing. How could we not welcome that? Saying that we are here to help new users while also lamenting the potential loss of programming if too many users start viewing it is conflicting.

Now, I have defended Brian in his request for information. In fairness, I have to also concede that he is not always interested in the input he receives. I have responded to past solicited and unsolicited requests for features. From that experience I can conclude that he places a much different value on certain features than I do! I don't always like the answers I get from him, but respect his position as a knowledgeable person in the field with a business to run. In fact, while frustrating, these differences are part of what makes this hobby and site interesting and I am very glad that we have our differences.

In airing and discussing our differences, though, let's be sure to not create an environment where someone feels unwelcome to seek or offer input.

Respectfully,
Red

PS: I sure hope the future MPEG4 receivers are capable of many of the features debated here in other threads. Maybe I will finally be able to purchase a GSp receiver when they are released. Keeping my fingers crossed for my own personal wishlist of features... :D
 
Wow, what an interesting thread. I find myself excited, frustrated, and a little disappointed in reading the comments here.
Well, may be after such interesting introduction you would want to add some feature suggestions to your post, even risking repeat yourself? ;) As to your frustration, sure you understand position of some FTA fans who see such open invitation for brainstorming a one way street that may provide for free significant fiscal benefits only to the OP, but for the rest of FTA fans may only result, as other voiced concern, in further truncated FTA channels choice. I felt, true outcome if any as always will be mixed, and hence posted own suggestions. :)

However, recalling recent open Sadoun's invitation for anyone to test his new products that never materialized with regards to anyone, except traditional very narrow ad testers pull (I doubt this either), some will think twice about posting personal data and valuable technical suggestions in reply to such invitations. For some there is no personal or public gain to do it any way they look at it.
 
Well, may be after such interesting introduction you would want to add some feature suggestions to your post, even risking repeat yourself? ;) As to your frustration, sure you understand position of some FTA fans who see such open invitation for brainstorming a one way street that may provide for free significant fiscal benefits only to the OP, but for the rest of FTA fans may only result, as other voiced concern, in further truncated FTA channels choice. I think, the true outcome if any as always will be mixed, and hence posted own suggestions. :)

However, recalling recent open Sadoun's invitation for anyone to test his new products that never materialized with regards to anyone, except traditional very narrow ad testers pull (I doubt this either), some will think twice about posting personal data and valuable technical suggestions in reply to such invitations.


Post of the year, right here. Maybe next year, too. Well done, Zamar!
 
Red,
Sorry if I have given the impression that we are not interested in feedback and suggestions. I should nod my head and say yes a lot more ..... rather than explain the rational behind implementation or declining projects. I would love to incorporate many more of the suggestions, but alas, one must often make difficult choices based on time and $$$. :mad:

Took us a while longer than we anticipated, but we finally released the DiSEqC 1.1 switch support that you requested! :D The units now support switch types, 22khz, DiSEqC 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, Dish Network 21, 42, 44 and 64.

Larry1,
The recorded file naming is best when used with an EPG, but without the program name, the receiver defaults to naming by the channel name and date/time. We will see what renaming and sorting options could be implemented for non-EPG recording. Most USB receivers don't support subfolders, unfortuantely that is not possible. Interesting observation regarding deleting recordings and changing the displayed file ordering. We will look at the file table to determine if the list could sorted in a different manner.

Really like the idea of multiple record button presses changing the manual record timing! Should be able to be easily implemented. :up
 
Really like the idea of multiple record button presses changing the manual record timing! Should be able to be easily implemented. :up
I have a stand-alone DVD recorder that does that.
At first, I thought it was a silly idea.
But, in the heat of battle (noticing that your show is coming on NOW and you have no time to fiddle with a timer), it really does work well!

With each press, the record time came up on the display for a few seconds.
I think the times were: 30, 60, 90, 120 minutes (?)
You might want to think what happens for the fifth press of the button. :)
I believe it went back to 30...?
 
With each press, the record time came up on the display for a few seconds.
I think the times were: 30, 60, 90, 120 minutes (?)
You might want to think what happens for the fifth press of the button. :)
I believe it went back to 30...?

No go to a non-timed record for the 5th press, then back to 30 for the 6th press.
 
Well, may be after such interesting introduction you would want to add some feature suggestions to your post, even risking repeat yourself? ;) As to your frustration, sure you understand position of some FTA fans who see such open invitation for brainstorming a one way street that may provide for free significant fiscal benefits only to the OP, but for the rest of FTA fans may only result, as other voiced concern, in further truncated FTA channels choice. I felt, true outcome if any as always will be mixed, and hence posted own suggestions. :)

However, recalling recent open Sadoun's invitation for anyone to test his new products that never materialized with regards to anyone, except traditional very narrow ad testers pull (I doubt this either), some will think twice about posting personal data and valuable technical suggestions in reply to such invitations. For some there is no personal or public gain to do it any way they look at it.
Fair enough!

My wishlist is rather long and driven by some desires that are not exactly "hobbyist".

That said, the first one that comes to mind are modular tuners. Brian has explained his differing view on this, but I would really like the ability to mix and match DVB and ATSC tuners. My view is that the FTA viewer prefers to watch free television, whether via satellite or terrestrial broadcast. I acknowledge that this can be done with multiple pieces of equipment, but prefer the integrated approach.

I would also like ethernet support. This opens up possibilities for streaming television, sharing recorded material within the home network, and NAS. I would not rate WiFi as a high priority since bandwidth is less and bridges are easily added to an existing box with ethernet port (for those who absolutely want a particular flavor of 802.11).

Along with the ATSC modular tuner, I would like to see PSIP EPG data. Brian says that PSIP data is poor, but my LCD TV seems to get it okay. Apparently this is a technical difficulty that exceeds my understanding. Having ethernet support could solve this, though, if a source such as TitanTV (or similar) could be accessed by the box to display EPG data. Heck, this may even be a part of the EPG solution for satellite.

Other features such as blind scan, 4:2:2, 8PSK, and others would be interesting for hunting feeds. However, for a mainstream box I would not rate these as highly.

So there you have it! In a nutshell, I would like a single box that allows easy viewing of FTA and OTA programming - with DVR capability. I guess this is a good a place as any to make a distinction between the FTA installer and the FTA viewer. On the installer side of things messing with dishes, motors, switches, and so on are not an issue for me since I enjoy the technical nature of the hobby. However, a lot of my comments here reflect my desire for a high WAF for FTA viewing. (I'm technical, she's not... :D)

Cheers,
Red
 
Red,
Sorry if I have given the impression that we are not interested in feedback and suggestions. I should nod my head and say yes a lot more ..... rather than explain the rational behind implementation or declining projects. I would love to incorporate many more of the suggestions, but alas, one must often make difficult choices based on time and $$$. :mad:

Took us a while longer than we anticipated, but we finally released the DiSEqC 1.1 switch support that you requested! :D The units now support switch types, 22khz, DiSEqC 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, Dish Network 21, 42, 44 and 64.
Brian,

I respect your position, we just don't see things exactly the same (I'm okay with that!). :cool:

I did see the recent release notes about 1.1 support in the latest firmware! I've kinda been hoping for a holiday sale like you did two or three Christmases ago, but in these economic times... Anyway, thanks for adding this feature, it will be very helpful when I am able to order a GSp receiver. When I move next summer I should be relatively stable for 4 years or more, so my dream of planting "real" dishes at various orbital slots may finally materialize!

Right now I am using three stacked linear LNBs and a circular LNB through a DPP34 switch (see sig). Would it be safe to assume that this is also supported?

Thanks again,
Red
 
Most USB receivers don't support subfolders, unfortuantely that is not possible. Interesting observation regarding deleting recordings and changing the displayed file ordering. We will look at the file table to determine if the list could sorted in a different manner.

The Visionsat IV-200 can do subfolders, but there are bugs that can cause serious issues. Firstly, if your recording goes over the 4 GB limit and a .1 file is created, that file will not be moved to the subfolder when the master file is moved. Also, the .1 file (and any subsequent files, for that matter) will not be renamed when the master file is renamed. Annoying bugs like this aside, however, the Visionsat was (is) a great little receiver. Since the Geosat DVRs have many of the same features, I find them very interesting.
 
The Visionsat IV-200 can do subfolders, but there are bugs that can cause serious issues. Firstly, if your recording goes over the 4 GB limit and a .1 file is created, that file will not be moved to the subfolder when the master file is moved. Also, the .1 file (and any subsequent files, for that matter) will not be renamed when the master file is renamed. Annoying bugs like this aside, however, the Visionsat was (is) a great little receiver. Since the Geosat DVRs have many of the same features, I find them very interesting.

We worked on the IV-200 recording feature development and agree that the subfolder issues are similar with the DVR1100c. These file naming issues are not easily addressed and is why subfolders are not supported. No known workaround. :eek:
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.

Special Feed: Lake Champlain Bridge Implosion

Managed obscurity?

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)