Major DIRECTV Rumor Alerts

Status
Please reply by conversation.
Always thought it was at&t
Well, thats an interesting discussion ...

When I started with them it was AT&T/ Ohio Bell ... now that they have become at&t again, yes they have changed to the lower case at&t.
Theres talk that they are actually considering doing away with the & and going with just att.
 
A user at DBStalk reported that the new lnb does support 22 tuners
Yep, it's a proverbial "plumbers nightmare" the poster has setup there as a test, but all the receivers are working with 22 tuners supported for the Slimline-3D2 (P/N 3D2LNBR0-02) DSWM2 LNB.

http://m.ebay.com/itm/131637084569?_mwBanner=1

The 13 tuner count must be erroneous....

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
 
More correctly, the DSWM2 LNBs can support up to a total of 22 satellite tuners if needed by the combination of receivers.

Whether or not support for that many are required in an installation is another issue.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
 
Just a small warning. Unless things have changed, if two tuners are recording from the same transponder they only use one SWM channel. I would need to see that the 22 tuners were working with 22 different transponders before being convinced on this....
 
Now here's an interesting question. If you're recording two channels and both channels are on the same transponder, does it require two tuners to record those two channels? Both channels are technically part of the same digital bitstream coming from the satellite, it would just be a matter of picking out what bits you want out of the larger bitstream.
 
Now here's an interesting question. If you're recording two channels and both channels are on the same transponder, does it require two tuners to record those two channels? Both channels are technically part of the same digital bitstream coming from the satellite, it would just be a matter of picking out what bits you want out of the larger bitstream.
Yes, it still requires the use of two separate tuners since it wouldn't gain you anything having one tuner freed up by designing the DVR to use only one tuner the record two separate streams from whenever both programs are on the same xpndr.

The limiting factor for DVRs are the number of simultaneous recording streams the HDD can accommodate. Not the number of tuners that can be built into the box to generate them.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
 
Now here's an interesting question. If you're recording two channels and both channels are on the same transponder, does it require two tuners to record those two channels? Both channels are technically part of the same digital bitstream coming from the satellite, it would just be a matter of picking out what bits you want out of the larger bitstream.
What do you think a tuner does? The bitstream from the transponder occupies a certain frequency band. The tuner extracts the data in the frequency band for a particular channel. You could of course record the complete transponder and then you would only use one tuner for recording but you would drastically increase the amount of data you would need to store and you would still need "tuners" for playback, although only one per viewable data stream (I.e. one per channel being watched or streamed.) .
 
Considering you can record five programs and watch two or more programs that have been recorded before I think that the hard drive in the DVR can handle far more data in terms of reading and writing than it does now.
 
Considering you can record five programs and watch two or more programs that have been recorded before I think that the hard drive in the DVR can handle far more data in terms of reading and writing than it does now.
Sure, but the Genie for example is only designed to handle a maximum of 5 program recording streams (or 7 for the HR54 when 4K broadcasting begins) received from it's satellite RF tuners.

So even if you create more available satellite tuners to generate additional streams through the sharing method you suggest, it would be created for nothing since you're still limited to only 5 streams total to the HDD from the tuners regardless how many are available.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
 
I figured that the bitstream coming from the satellite is one gigantic blob of data and that the receiver simply slices and dices out the relevant data out of the larger bitstream.
 
I didn't think it was actually locking onto an actual frequency, I figured that when the data is coming in on a transponder is just a gigantic blob of data in which the MPEG streams for the channels that the transponder carries is multiplexed into.
 
I didn't think it was actually locking onto an actual frequency, I figured that when the data is coming in on a transponder is just a gigantic blob of data in which the MPEG streams for the channels that the transponder carries is multiplexed into.
It is essentially. ..

In fact a SWiM is sometimes technically referred to by some as an "STS" for "Satellite Transponder Switch."

The receiver sends requests to the SWiM to tune and place the entire transport stream multiplex of a particular satellite xpndr on one of it's assigned SWiM programming channels. The receiver then demodulates the TS coming in over that channel and then filters out only the packets pertaining to the desired program within the multiplex while ignoring all the rest.

But then when these filtered out 5 or 7 (for the Genies) max. individual much lower rate program packet streams are multiplexed together making for a much larger data rate stream for application to the R/W circuitry of the HDD, the drive of course has data rate limitations on how much it can handle.

Sent from my SGH-M819N using Tapatalk
 
So if one tuner in the receiver is locked in on one particular transponder. For the sake of this conversation we're going to say that the receiver is locked onto your particular market's spotbeam for local channels along with the idea that the spotbeam also carries three channels. Yes, I know they carry more than that but for sake of making this conversation easier to understand we're going to say that it only carries three.

OK, so if you're recording from one of your local channels your receiver is locked in on your spotbeam thus one of your tuners is being used. Your receiver is basically only taking the required bits and pieces of the entire glob of data that your spotbeam carries for that particular channel. OK, you then tune to another one of your local channels that, you guessed it, is carried on not only the same transponder/spotbeam but is also contained in the same big glob of data that your first tuned channel is part of. So, with that being said... do both channels only require the use of one tuner or does it require two tuners?
 
Depends how you do it. You could as I mentioned use just one record tuner and record all the data from a transponder onto the disk. Let's say that's four channels. Then when you wanted to playback just one channel you would need a device that extracted the data for one channel from the transponder data on the disk and played it back - let's call it a playback tuner. But unless all the channels you wanted were on a small group of transponders, you would need at least as many as many "record tuners" as today, and you would have four times as much data being recorded to the disk. Not only would that be problematic in terms of data rate, your disk capacity in terms of hours of recording would only be a quarter of what it is today.
 
I'm assuming that what gets recorded to the disk is nothing but a raw MPEG-4 h.264 data stream. Am I correct in assuming this? I'm also assuming that if you were to look at that glob of data that's coming from the satellite and were able to dissect it much like the satellite receiver does you would find multiple raw MPEG-4 h.264 data streams multiplexed into the stream, one raw stream for each channel that's on the transponder.

So when you tune into a channel not only does the receiver have to tell the SWM module to tune to that particular transponder but it also, once it's receiving the appropriate data stream, dissect said data stream and pick out the particular raw MPEG-4 h.264 data stream that's needed for the channel you're watching and then pass that raw MPEG-4 h.264 data stream onto the MPEG decoder chip and then it's played. So, if that's the way things work (and I'm assuming that's how it works), you could then (in theory) have the tuner be locked into one transponder and have one tuner used to record multiple channels (as long as they're all on the same transponder) and then have the individual raw MPEG-4 h.264 data streams picked out and written to disk as needed.
 
The key to all of these ideas is "all on one transponder". If the channels were distributed across transponders, you would still need one tuner per channel. So why bother?
 
Depends how you do it. You could as I mentioned use just one record tuner and record all the data from a transponder onto the disk. Let's say that's four channels. Then when you wanted to playback just one channel you would need a device that extracted the data for one channel from the transponder data on the disk and played it back - let's call it a playback tuner. But unless all the channels you wanted were on a small group of transponders, you would need at least as many as many "record tuners" as today, and you would have four times as much data being recorded to the disk. Not only would that be problematic in terms of data rate, your disk capacity in terms of hours of recording would only be a quarter of what it is today.

Uh, that's what the Dish Hopper does with the 4 PTAT channels.
 
Status
Please reply by conversation.

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)