Poll for those that have 811 upgrade to 289

ride525

SatelliteGuys Pro
Original poster
Sep 7, 2003
443
0
SF Bay Area, California
Poll for those that have 811 upgrade to 2.89

For those of you that have upgraded their 811 to version 2.89, I would like to hear how it has worked for you. Better, about the same, or worse. If better or worse, please add your comments.
 
The Dish Network website shown 2.89 as the only software for the 811. I can't get mine to download 2.89 It still has 2.84 Any suggestions?
 
Worse for the reason posted in the 2.89 mega thread - occasional loss of audio on S/PDIF while tuned to digital OTA.
 
As far as stability, my 811's worked fine with L2.87 and work equally well with L2.89; I have no sat or OTA issues. I'm glad to be able to get a signal reading from the VOOM transponders, but it takes much longer to lock a signal on any of the sats. I voted about the same.
 
Scanning for OTA freezes

When I scan for OTA digital, it gets to the first channel (this is in NY, CH22)
doesn't go any further.!!!! Get's stuck
 
I just got back in town and since I got the 289 download,I can't get any sat. signal.Check switch shows all x's.All connections seem ok.Dish say's they can have someone out NEXT monday.I'm about done with E*.
 
I voted as better with 289 vs 284 (the last upgrade my receiver took).

No noted problems and the guide seems to load licky split, WAY faster than before and I don't seem to get as many "downloading Guide" boxes.
 
Well, thanks to the poll, I did allow 2.89 today....haven't yet noticed much change from where it was at 2.84

Although screen has not frozen yet.....and it used to before 2.89 once in awhile.
 
I'm using a Richard Gray RGPC 400 MK II. Power conditioners remove noise from the electric lines allowing your components to work at their peak performance. Another very good one that is cheaper is the PS Audio UPC 200. Both have 4 outlets so you can plug your whole system into it. They both also have built in surge protection.
 
better poll?

I think the poll would have been better if it asked which s/w version they had previously... I'm currently at 2.84 and it seems to be working fine so I haven't decided to accept 2.89 and knowing if other 2.84 users found 2.89 better or worse would make my decision easier. Will I be forced to take 2.89 at some point in time?
 

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

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)

Latest posts