Manhattan's Future 4K Receiver Discussion

[Shicks4]

Since a "professional" PCIe card runs in the $200 range, high end video card in the $400 range, plus the PC with decent MB and processor can be in the $800 range... Then there is software and configuring everything... This can become more than a career very quickly.

$300 for an STB that does 4:2:2 is not a bad deal as long as it works... Certainly wouldn't expect to pay less for a new STB that does that and 4K well. I really don't care about IPTV or U-tube, or even ATSC since I already have a network receiver for that (would upgrade for ATSC-3 eventually anyway). Just a satellite receiver that's up-to-date with modulations and formats we are now seeing show up, and CSA/FCC certifications etc for this part of the world (NA).

Where im irritated is Jeff posted in June

"This chipset will support
Dolby ATMOS,
USB 3.0
802.11 a/c
Bluetooth
Several different remotes including air remotes.
Android
3500 IPTV channels and we have over 2000 loaded.
13k satellite channels. We can increase this number if needed.
Will have KODI loaded. waiting for 4.2.2 from Kodi or we can perform our own SW for this.

These are just some of the features for this unit.

A question to the board. The model name. Any suggestions of a person in the industry to dedicate this too. We welcome your suggestions.

We are very excited about this unit and look forward bring this unit out for people who are looking for an all in one box at a high level.

Regards,

Jeff Schumann
Manhattan-Digital"

Talk remained positive, and questions were asked, input was asked for and received. He even said the receiver would probably be north of $200 but they would try to keep it at or below $200. Then there were delays from the factory, which isnt anyones fault as it does happen. but then 6 days ago he says

"Not every consumers situation is the same. Some of you may not want a function now, but in the future that may change. Then lets look at 4.2.2 around the world. Oh, we are the only continent that is using this, that would be correct. I have not heard of any Mexicans asking for 4.2.2. But we are up for the challenge!

Thank you,

Jeff Schumann
Manhattan-Digital"

This didnt go over well. Especially after he discussed 4.2.2 at length middle of last year. then a few days later


"First, if I missed something as I try and address these comments and suggestions, please let me know.
Second, yes I was misinformed as several factories asked me what 4.2.2 is and they never had request for this type of broadcast. But then again they have lied to me before. I talked with Eurosat London and Abbas indicated he never received a request for this equipment. Plus I have been to several shows over there and never heard of these channels or request for this type of hardware.

So I my apologies for this ignorant comment. If anyone has more information on channels over there, let me know since we now I can market this product over there under the Manhattan name.

We were verbally told from several sources that 4.2.2 was going to go away. Reliable sources from broadcasters, transmit companies and station engineers. So these new channels are a surprise to us. Plus if there are 4.2.2 station in H-265, 4K or in HD. How long they will be on, one would think with all this effort to be on 4.2.2, it would continue."

I mean you can go to various other forums and read all about the history of the new box and the discussions but basically I kinda feel like they are back pedeling. I mean i can live with hey we just cant get it to work, or hey we can do it but its gonna cost a ton more instead of basically changing your tune and acting like its a huge surprise that 4.2.2 is kinda sought after, especially when they actively engaged in public conversation about 4.2.2 for months.

Now am i saying the new receiver will be a peice of junk? No not at all, and really a decent 4k receiver is needed, and im sure they have put a lot of effort into design and manufacture. I, like several others, were just rubbed wrong with what appears as a complete 180. Its always still possible it might still do 4.2.2 but i sure feel like now they are more concerned with an ATSC 3.0 tuner that they cant get until summer and most of us wont be able to utilize for close to a year, especially after a lot of potential users arent that interested in the ATSC tuner. Im pretty much gonna shut up about this now, and probably shouldnt even post this, but some context as to why im not happy about the upcoming 4k box feels warranted. Im sure it will be a good box when it does come out, just not what we had hoped, and were told.

 

[JFOK]

Hi All,

Personally I'm going to wait for the "right" receiver to come along, that gives the biggest bang for the buck.
I'm not in a rush to buy as my microHD is purring along nicely and the wait will give me a chance to build up my FTA finances.
I'm not one of those, "got to have it yesterday" people. I can wait.

John

 

[Lehman bud farm]

First I want to say Thanks for putting all this into a new thread on this specific receiver.
I believe it only took away from the other receiver they put out that took some by surprise..

now back to the new not yet released receiver....

Now am i saying the new receiver will be a peice of junk? No not at all, and really a decent 4k receiver is needed, and im sure they have put a lot of effort into design and manufacture. I, like several others, were just rubbed wrong with what appears as a complete 180. Its always still possible it might still do 4.2.2 but i sure feel like now they are more concerned with an ATSC 3.0 tuner that they cant get until summer and most of us wont be able to utilize for close to a year, especially after a lot of potential users arent that interested in the ATSC tuner

I believe you hit the nail directly on the head here.
We were told many things this receiver would do and now it "APPEARS" to be an about face on several issues that were reported it would do.
The 3.0 tuner issue is a craw in the backside for many it seems including myself. I am not interested in an OTA receiver as OTA has nothing I am interested in. I want a satellite based receiver. Something that seems to fall on deaf ears with Jeff.
The more that comes out about the receiver it seems the less it is going to do.
Not a good start as I just do not see any input from users coming into play just what one person is demanding that may or may not ever take place. That is my .02cents.
Hopefully many of these things will turn around and not occur and hopefully it turns out to be a real decent receiver and is released before the end of the year.
(remember it was originally supposed to be released in Feb.) now by fall???
Sure hope it is not vaporware.

 

[Shicks4]

not to flog a dead horse anymore or anything but i read this article just now and it irritates me even more.http://www.pcworld.com/article/3164...step-toward-over-the-air-4k-broadcasting.html basically it says ATSC 3.0 standard will be voluntary not required.

 

[Cham]

Think this ATSC 3 thing is aggravating many in the industry right now. Some broadcasters are talking again of dropping their OTA rather than going through another "upgrade".

 

[mr3p]

Until there are ATSC 3.0 broadcasts in your area that are 4k AND current ATSC 1.0 tuners become obsolete there is little need to get an ATSC 3.0 tuner at this time. This is especially true if Jeff's comments about 4k OTA broadcasts not becoming a reality are factual. At least in my area, it makes no sense to purchase ATSC 3.0 hardware yet so I'll wait until dust settles. I'm inherently skeptical about stability and performance of an Android based device for FTA and it's still unclear whether this box has DRM to allow support streaming services in HD/4k. Other than Wetek, nearly all of the Chinese "Android" boxes do not have necessary certification to stream premium services like Netflix in HD. When a FireTV stick costs 40 dollars, its unlikely the online streaming on this device will be competitive.

Unfortunately there has been a lot of confusion regarding the capabilities of the Hi3798C V200 based FTA box which Manhattan initially targeted and may still release. It is a high end chipset which is quite capable as a network media player that's not the of major interest for most. I don't think Jeff fully appreciated or understood the desire for FTA 4:2:2 support including that those feeds are not limited to NA. Hopefully the feedback on the other forum clarified the topic. I'm going to take the high road and suggest that some of the contradictory statements made regarding the chipset capabilities and need for 4:2:2 support were related to incorrect information provided by the parties who produce the box. If you have ever purchased goods from the other side of the Pacific directly, you likely know what I am referring to. Most of us have been looking for a high end 4k FTA box that supports 16/32 APSK, ACM, 4:2:2, etc but as of now its unclear what this proposed device can do.

 

[Lehman bud farm]

Most of us have been looking for a high end 4k FTA box that supports 16/32 APSK, ACM, 4:2:2, etc but as of now its unclear what this proposed device can do.

It was my understanding that this box was being tested out by a few people over here according to Jeff but even that no longer sounds correct from his more recent posts.
Maybe it is due to his medication he has been taking and right now he may not be at his best.

Apparently he is talking about 2 different 4k receivers so maybe it would be best to sit back and wait till others jump in and report back before throwing away a few hundred $$$ on something that will not do the task.

Sad to say any hopes of a decent 4k FTA receiver coming to market over here this year is diminishing rather quickly.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Think this ATSC 3 thing is aggravating many in the industry right now. Some broadcasters are talking again of dropping their OTA rather than going through another "upgrade".

If they do that then they are not considered broadcasters anymore.

 

[Shicks4]

I hadnt considered that he was on pain medications. I was and am still irritated from the conversations he was engaged in as early as last summer, as well as recent questions and answers i had with him on other forums. I was never under the impression that there were 2 boxes being developed, I was aware that different chipsets were being looked at. I think a lot of frustrations I have is it appeared there were key clear points announced to the public and discussions openly about them and now several of them have changed, or it appears hes either forgotten (very possible with as many projects going on) arent possible (the socket tuner so that unit could be shipped with atsc 1.0 and later changed to atsc 3.0), they have changed direction, manufacturer wont comply with design specs, or a combination of all of them. I have learned recently that infact you cant do the same socket for 1.0 and 3.0, which as early as last summer was something developers had hoped would be a possibility. Also the new issue is atsc 3.0 is not compatible with atsc 1.0 and it appears it will never be. The new tvs that are slated for production this summer will have 2 separate tuners. I think there is a lot of confusion as to the timetable for when broadcasters will be required to cease 1.0 and fully transition to 3.0. From my current research there isnt any set date, but have been told its 18 months but have yet to see anything that corroborates this.

After a few days to really think about this from a business owners standpoint (which I am, just not in electronics) I think they have set the bar of manufacturing a 4k box that is 4k in all aspects, and to be real fair thats not an easy task. I think this is the main goal for this STB as well as 16 & 32 aspk and everything else is a bonus if they can get it to work. Its obvious that 4.2.2 hasnt been pursued by very many STB makers, making it a sought after option by hobbyist. My irritation, and it was quite severe and I now apologize, was in conversations with Jeff about the 4.2.2 issues and he blew them off like it wasnt a big deal and was almost as if he hadnt talked about and said it would be available. Then to add it insult talked about how it was only used in north america (clearly its more sought after in Europe where apparently there are way more tp in 4.2.2 then in North America if posts in European forums are any indication). After reading those forums again im sure it was as if several people kinda ganged up on him and he went on the defensive, and in unfortunately one of the guilty parties. To clear the air here I will say that Manhattan clearly makes quality products, the new receiver that was recently released filled a needed void and appears to be performing well (much better then the cheaper (china) boxes) and again im sure that the 4k box will do what it is designed to do, and may possibly be the best (and if past quality of Manhattan receivers are any indication will be the only) option for 4k content from satellite signals. I can sit here and say oh it should do this or that but at the end of the day I aint the guy putting the time money and effort into building the box. So while im unhappy about the delays and less optimistic about the eventual release of the new 4k box ill go back to the wait and see category. Never know they might still have some option of 4.2.2 in some aspect.

Lastly Ill ask why is 4.2.2 so hard to add to a STB? Is it a royalty issue? Processor issue? Ram? Coding? Loss of some other needed feature to add? Some combination of all of the above? Hopefully someone that knows way more then I do can kinda shine the light on why 4.2.2 is elusive in stb's

 

[Cham]

I am not sure what CRTC considers broadcasters up here anymore. They obviously don't require an OTA transmitter in all areas, as long as they have at least one or more token transmitters to cover one or more major markets, otherwise you pay for Bell or Shaw to provide your local programming. I think in the US it's a bit different...
Sorry for the tangent
-C.

If they do that then they are not considered broadcasters anymore.

 

[Shicks4]

I think there would be at least 2 low power broadcasters that would cease operations in the Wichita Kansas market when atsc 3.0 is the only standard as they didnt begin operations until they acquired used equipment to begin with in the first place. ABC NBC CBS and Fox all have the highest powered transmitters here followed by PBS then several lower powered broadcasters many of which if your more then 10 miles from the tower you wont get signal with out drastic measures. Id suspect NBC or ABC to be one of the first adopters of 3.0 in our area as this was the case in the digital transition. PBS was the last in this area to start transmitting digital, but it was still well before the deadline. Im really wondering how well the ATSC 3.0 will work long range compared to the current signals. I know in the analog days you could still kinda get a snowy picture if you were extreme fringe but now you either get it, get it and it drops or dont get it at all. Seems to me the meter on the tv we have has to be over 35% before you even get a signal that it will display. Then the big question will be how many will actually broadcast in 4k, as only one of the stations i receiver ever sends a 1080 picture and thats only if the program is in 1080. even Fox is only 720p.

 

[mr3p]

Recent article on current status of ATSC 3.0

 

[Lehman bud farm]

I see now that Jeff from Manhattan is saying it will do 4:2:2 but maybe not all the formats we want?
To me it seems a contradictory statement. ??
I totally don't get it.

I did not see him so focused on the 3.0 tuner this go around but he does not like internal sata drives.
Don't know why as they work seamlessly on other receivers and never heard complaints about them.
(would have thought they might say, "hey guys, we appear to have internal sata drives in the units they are delivering how would you like that?").
Still stuck on the IP stuff even though many have expressed no desire for IP.

Since he says he sent them back I guess the wait continues.

I am left wondering if this is for real or is it just vaporware ....

Maybe it is time for someone who actually understands the satellite FTA industry to stand up and bring out a 4k receiver.
Sadly it does not appear from the rantings coming from the Manhattan project that they do not understand much about FTA and what is up there.

 

[Radioguy41]

I would hope he comes to his senses about the 3.0 tuner. What is the point of holding up production just so you can include a tuner no one can use? No one, except a couple of test broadcasters, are equipped to transmit in 3.0 nor will there be anytime in the near future. The fact is, if you brought a box out tomorrow with a 3.0 tuner the box itself would likely be obsolete before the 3.0 tuner became usable. That is incredibly poor foresight IMHO.

Here's another point, why do people assume 3.0 means 4K OTA? What it means is reduced bandwidth for current formats. When broadcasters have shown a disdain for full 1080 HD and opt for 720 what makes anyone think they're now going to jump on the 4K bandwagon using more bandwidth just to produce a better image when they don't do it now? For all those folks who think 4K OTA is in the future I would suggest they don't hold their breath.

 

[Lehman bud farm]

I would hope he comes to his senses about the 3.0 tuner. What is the point of holding up production just so you can include a tuner no one can use? No one, except a couple of test broadcasters, are equipped to transmit in 3.0 nor will there be anytime in the near future. The fact is, if you brought a box out tomorrow with a 3.0 tuner the box itself would likely be obsolete before the 3.0 tuner became usable. That is incredibly poor foresight IMHO.

I have to agree 100% here.

I don't know where 4k will go, could end up like 3d and you see what happened there.
If it produces a better FTA receiver now, I am all for it.
The mixed signals that are being given by them on this receiver is disturbing.

 

[Shicks4]

I have to agree 100% here.

I don't know where 4k will go, could end up like 3d and you see what happened there.
If it produces a better FTA receiver now, I am all for it.
The mixed signals that are being given by them on this receiver is disturbing.

I dont know i like my 3d tv, dont use 3d all the time but i do enjoy watching some movies in 3d. I do see more things coming out in a higher format like 4k and 8k in the future, that ball is rolling full steam it seems. One thing I do like with the UHD and 4k tv's is the refresh rate tends to be higher. As far as the new receiver we are still in the same boat we were before, in a wait and see mode. By my reckoning maybe we will see them mid to late fall if they are still waiting on the 3.0 tuner as all the tv manufacturers will use them before they offer them to anyone else. I kinda was wondering why they are doing this receiver first when they have such a long wait for components when they could do the entry level 4k receiver he was talking about as it didnt appear it had the tuner. They could scoop up a nice niche of people that are wanting a 4k receiver. I was just looking today and the crop of "cheap" receivers appears to be dwindling as i have a couple of neighbors that have asked for a few of my spare dishes that i will never probably use and they would need a receiver. Right now I been telling everyone to look at the linkbox 9000I local as most of these folks are doing kinda the same thing I am and cutting the cord and going OTA, looking at my FTA possibly for themselves and internet provided content since we have real internet (fiber up to 100 mbps) here now. Sure would be nice if there was a newer receiver out right now that did some 4.2.2 and 4k out there that wasnt way north of 200 bucks and was user friendly. Im pretty disappointed in the wetek play 2 and its anything but user friendly.

Like i said im just in a wait and see mode. Been tinkering with an old dish 500 seeing what i can get, and how well i can get some ku with about 12 bucks worth of stuff i got at the hardware store. Been pretty successful so far and even did a 3 lnbf setup and get 91w 97w and 105w all at around 50% Q on a tripod in my drive. Looking for a more oval dish like one of the HD dishes and see how they work. This will bee about the extent of my dish tinkering until this spring. Figure id figure out multi feeds on something at ground level first and maybe this fall there will be something out there i can play with receiver wise.

 

[mikekohl]

Did anybody actually digest what I wrote a few weeks back, with a request from Jeff on priorities given the confusing situation with the FCC and the industry adoption of ATSC 3?
Some of you are being extremely negative about Jeff, and have no idea about what it really takes to get a new product onto the market. He has gone through hell and back to get this far, and the majority of what I have read since my post has consisted of Monday morning quarterbacking that is neither positive or productive. After a few posts initially, we decided to concentrate on producing a satellite/IP combo of the 4K variety first, and when a combo 3.0 and 1.0 ATSC tuner actually becomes available (perhaps beginning in midsummer), introduce a triple play version of same that has the ASTC added. The RC-1978 model receiver is now available for sale from our latest container shipment, and software improvements will be made available as things are developed. If you have any favorite working IP channel URLs to share for the purpose of adding them to all of our receivers, I would be thrilled to receive such information at globalcm@mhtc.net

In the meantime, some of the challenges include but are not limited to worrying about whether our idiots in Washington will provide unintended consequences of destroying this fragile industry with a sizeable import tariff on Chinese imports, so we can have more American jobs in some industry other than our own. Also in dealing with Chinese manufacturers that are often not on the same page, chapter, or book on what we need here in North America. A salesman will promise the moon, and when you ask for any information on 4:2:2 availability for a satellite receiver, and/or the ASTC 3.0 situation, the room becomes very quiet all of a sudden, after earlier answers in the positive are later met with either outright denial or "unexpected delays from the factory, a chipset maker, or (name your own scapegoat)". Jeff has tried to be the messenger all of this time, maybe trying to please too many of you at the same time, and then being caught in the lurch of having to explain changes in availabilities that have been caused by factors not under his control. If you only knew how much time, surprise expense and bureaucracy has to be dealt with to bring in a legitimate product, and then to be dissed by a few novices that happened to get lucky (or unlucky) with an unknown new product in the sub 25 dollar range that never went through the payment of royalties, taxes and licensing---I will bet that most would run away after facing such a hostile environment. QUIT criticizing and be thankful that Jeff and I are still trying to fly the flag of the satellite industry behind the scenes, in the hopes of still having something to do as we head towards what would have normally been our retirement years. Mud does not stick to the wall as often as it used to when pitching new products and ideas, and when you are little guys without the backing of a major investor, all that you can do after a deal falls through is to step up and try again. We are still trying, but I will be the first to suggest that not everything is meant to be once the total cost of creating is matched to that actual numbers of units will actually be purchased.
Everything can not be sold on the cell phone pricing model---most things actually need to make a profit in order to stay in production, unless something else can be developed or found to subsidize them. (Finally off my soapbox)

Mike

 

[Titanium]

Thank you Mike. These threads at SatGuys, Rick's and LegalFreeToAir forums have been bothering me as well and have been discussed in several conversations with fellow hobbyists regarding the negative exchanges.

The hobbyist segment of the FTA market is quite segmented on our wants and requirements. We sometimes forget that we we are only a small fraction of the market and most typical satellite viewers have no need or desire for the functions and features that a hobbyist values. I fully recognize that developers do not understand the need to support 4:2:2 as no DTH services use this format. Same goes for servo polarity control, internal SATA drive, ATSC 3.0, etc. Why would a developer or distributor invest R&D and the extra $$$ for hardware capability in each and every receiver if only a few thousand units might be sold for folks using these features over the lifetime of the product? Maybe these features need to remain functions of sidecar equipment if it does not make financial sense to include.

It is very problematic to announce features and functions before the product is on the water. I think that much of the hobbyists frustrations have been over confusing and conflicting function and feature announcements. I have found it best to restrict comment on the product capabilities until it is ready for distribution. Easier to set realistic expectations on the final product rather than build hype that leads to disappointment.

It concur that it is extremely difficult to legally bring a desirable product to market. I agree that it is even more complicated to deal with international developers and manufacturers. I empathize with your comments as I have dealt with some of the same companies and individuals. Have experienced the promises, retractions, deceit and ultimately the dismissal of their services over terrible and corrupt business practices.

Ultimately, when you open the development process and solicit input from the end user, this type interaction seems inevitable. While it may ultimately result in producing a better product, many users will be unsatisfied unless every personal requirement is met.

Looking forward to the product release and hope that hobbyists will wait to review a real product rather than reaction to a wish list.

 

[KE4EST]

I can not hit the like button on what Mike and Brian have typed today enough times. I had a response wrote up saying pretty much the same thing the other day. Then I decided not to post to see if things kind of subsided.
...but I will post it now:


You guys need to be careful jumping the gun, and being so quick to judge. I have talked to Jeff, I assure you this is not vaporware.
The way I see it is there are essentially two problems.

Dealing with a company in China to produce a receiver with what one may want here in NA. Most of these guys don't have even close to a clue what they are doing. They are just wanting to produce the next box of some sort just to make a buck. All they care about is getting an order out the door. If it is not the hottest thing, like say just a box that does Kodi, no Satellite HW, it is hard to get them into it. They do not have the same passion.
Then we have the guys that want cutting edge and that is not enough. Everybody wants a box that does what THEY want. One guy all he wants is a box that does 4:2:2(not sure what it is, but damn it, he wants it). Next, says don't do 4:2:2, it is going away so you are wasting you time, but can you put a dish mover in the box? Third, wants just a plain box, as long as it works and decodes 4K. Forth guy hates android and wants something else, 5th guy, 6th guy. etc. Do you get the picture.
I will add a third, and that is: getting the proper licensing for all of this stuff. This is something the end user mostly never thinks about, because they do not have to ever deal with it. Sometimes licensing can be a real bitch!

Jeff is getting overwhelmed with the requests from the community, and then getting screwed by the factory at times. Unless, one just grabs and off the shelf box and stamps their company logo on it, it is a hard row to hoe.
Let's not forget, it takes time to get all this developed, so by the time a company thinks they have something ready for market, two newer faster chip-sets are out.
The only way to remedy part of this(not all but part), is have tons of money to hire a team to work on what a company wants and only that product. This would get things done much quicker, but the market for what Jeff is doing is far to niche to have that kind of investment.
Remember, Jeff is the only one that is trying to get us a 4K box with NA support, so we should stay more positive and be more understanding.

 

[Shicks4]

I was guilty of having been pretty angry, thought about it and decided I was being overly harsh and rude and apologized. The scale of this is pretty huge and I see that. I'm just gonna waiting to see what the performance of the box is before i go passing anymore judgement. Even if it doesn't do 4.2.2 or have an internal hard drive I'm sure the 4K aspect will work well and will more then likely have a more user friendly interface I'm more familiar with. I never once thought it was vapor ware though. I feel kinda bad for getting bent outta shape over this whole deal. I kinda been staying away from reading post about this receiver too as I have heard production on the atsc 3.0 wasn't until this summer. Now i don't think atsc 3.0 is neccisarry now, but they want it in the receiver and it will be something that could be used in the next few years. I'm also betting they hope they hope that this receiver will be around for awhile. I'm hoping for the best and am sure it will be more one heck of a receiver, we just have to wait for the samples to see how it performs. I'm done being critical of someone that's trying to develop something for me to potentially use that's better then what we have now.