I currently use one of these for a quick/dirty wireless connection to my wireless network. I haven't had a problem with it yet and I've seen it in the store for as cheap as 30 dollars.
Airlink101 : Products: AP421W
New 622 Feature Coming
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 263
- Views 39K
Airlink101 : Products: AP421W
It isn't that difficult to determine a general location by ip address. For instance, if you did a query using a website like dnsstuff.com, it'll tell you what city an ip address originates from. I just checked mine and it states the city where my provider's closest headend is-about eight miles away. They could then cross reference that location with the first three digits of the phone number your other receiver is connected to and as long as it's within a certain radius, you should be fine. Of course if you use a voip provider (like I do) and your phone number isn't even in the same area code as your residence, that makes everything I just said irrelevalent.
They know but they generaly are told not to admit that they know and not to discuss anything until the day of the release of anything that comes out.
Just curious, what do you want them to tell you ?? Think you'll find out something different than what's been told here ??
It is not released yet, therefore it is not in their trouble shooting flow charts. CSR's are not techs, they do not trouble shoot, they just read menus - give them a break.
Your IP address is localized just like your phone number used to be. With VOIP phone service numbers are now portable.
Next step will be to have the units actually communicate with each other and report who's home and who's AWOL. If a unit is AWOL, it gets automatically shut down.
We are almost there.
This is great news. I know we heard of this awhile back but thought it was on the back burner. I have one line running into the HT room now for the sling box. Never planned to run more. Instead, I planned to do as John Kotches suggested. add a simple 8 port switch in the HT and then plug all the devices into that. It's a workable solution for the single line people. I'm glad they didn't try to use the USB port as that is best suited for the new external HD.
This is one more reason less to stay with the land line phone. Now if D* and my security company could work somthing out, I can tell at& t to stuff it next time they badger me to add more phone lines for free if I add DSL.
This is one more reason less to stay with the land line phone. Now if D* and my security company could work somthing out, I can tell at& t to stuff it next time they badger me to add more phone lines for free if I add DSL.
I guess I am not losing sleep over this. For anyone who has "moved" they have a phone number that probably does not match the service address; we haven't seen evidence of them going after people for that. I think as long as Dish Network gets its monthly pile of money from you, it is generally happy.
Hopefully this will end the reign of terror of the Audit Nazi's and send them to Nuremburg for judgement...
Will we have to call Dish to get them to stop charging us the $5 phone fee when IP callback is available?
Last edited:
Cool. Glad I have a switch in my HT setup! Now I can pull the phone line that is tucked around the room. I can't stand when my phone rings to begin with, there's no way I would ever turn on the caller ID on screen to interrupt my TV viewing! So no worries for me there.
So what benefits apart from not running a phone line is there? Could remote scheduling ever be a possibility, Scott? That would be saaa-wheeeet!
So what benefits apart from not running a phone line is there? Could remote scheduling ever be a possibility, Scott? That would be saaa-wheeeet!
If I understand correctly, AT&T's re-labeled 622/722 already does or will support this, so that's clearly a good sign. The other thing is, I'll bet Dish's programmers are doing the work on AT&T's box so they know how to do it.
I asked about this situation as well back on the first page, but to no response so far.
To my knowledge, only the ViP receivers (211/222/622/722) have ethernet ports, so I can only assume that if you have receivers other than these that you'll have to continue paying the $5 fee since you cant hook up receivers via ethernet if they have no ethernet ports. Oh well.
Someone feel free to correct me if I wrong (and I hope that I am)
Double Edged Sword!
You all must have thought about the consequences of this....
1. There can be more piracy. You can have a few houses that share an intranet (a router with NAT) wirelessly that all transmit to Dish like it is in one household. I can see about five wireless networks from my neighbors. These neighbors can all split the bill. That isn't good! Our rates will go up!
2. Dish can save money, but what is the tradeoff? I'm assuming that the cost savings comes from reducing the number of lines that the 622s call to. They are 800 numbers, so dish pays for that call, which could be expensive in some remote areas.
The tradeoff is what you might want to be very concerned about. If you have your 622 connected to high bandwidh internet, dish can do a lot more spying on what you are watching. They can compile this information now, and sell it to advertisers. We might become a ratings system, which has some benefits. Ratings drive advertising as well. Dish could even potentially download commercials into your 622 to turn the box into a direct marketing device and even make more money!
I have read this thread, and I haven't seen any decenters. That is okay, I know in years past I wanted this feature, but it is also good to look at it from different angles too. Personally, I don't think I should have to connect the 622 to a phone line. I only have ONE receiver, the 622. How in the world can I pirate anything with just one box?? I shouldn't need to connect it to the phone line to avoid that fee - that would be an even better feature!
We are not lemings, we are customers!
You all must have thought about the consequences of this....
1. There can be more piracy. You can have a few houses that share an intranet (a router with NAT) wirelessly that all transmit to Dish like it is in one household. I can see about five wireless networks from my neighbors. These neighbors can all split the bill. That isn't good! Our rates will go up!
2. Dish can save money, but what is the tradeoff? I'm assuming that the cost savings comes from reducing the number of lines that the 622s call to. They are 800 numbers, so dish pays for that call, which could be expensive in some remote areas.
The tradeoff is what you might want to be very concerned about. If you have your 622 connected to high bandwidh internet, dish can do a lot more spying on what you are watching. They can compile this information now, and sell it to advertisers. We might become a ratings system, which has some benefits. Ratings drive advertising as well. Dish could even potentially download commercials into your 622 to turn the box into a direct marketing device and even make more money!
I have read this thread, and I haven't seen any decenters. That is okay, I know in years past I wanted this feature, but it is also good to look at it from different angles too. Personally, I don't think I should have to connect the 622 to a phone line. I only have ONE receiver, the 622. How in the world can I pirate anything with just one box?? I shouldn't need to connect it to the phone line to avoid that fee - that would be an even better feature!
We are not lemings, we are customers!
They already do this now. Where have you been??
All of your other concerns are not really valid, even ifpeople are stacking on the same ISP / IP address its OK, as when VOD comes people will be using that IP address to order shows and movies which will make Dish more money.
So it's all good from that prospective.
