Sling Extender

[SQUEEZON]

You are entitled to your opinion. It all started with Dish. If you like the other providers then by all means dump Dish.

 

[SQUEEZON]

Its called "loyalty" something taught in the Marines. Its a dying concept but some of us are clinging onto it.

 

[Dishman1978]

I waited and waited on the 222 to become a DVR. Charlie said it would but that didn't happen. Then they decided to up the fee for the 222 to $14. I traded it in for 2 211's ($7 fee per receiver) and now have one of them as a DVR. It also gives me HD on the second T.V. I really don't see why they even still have a 222 receiver. Why would anyone want one? I guess if you didn't want DVR, and had it as your only receiver it would be cost effective for getting a signal to the second T.V. without another receiver fee, but that would be about it.

Some folks dont have all hd tvs......less cable runs into the home.....Unknowledgeable customers.

But i agree.

 

[AlaJoe]

Well I just did it. I ordered Directv. I paid a $200 upgrade fee to get a 922 because this was "coming Soon". I would have paid another $200 to get this product because I really like everything else about dish aside from no HD on TV2. My Directv install is scheduled for Friday. In the next week I hope I do not come to regret this but I guess time will tell. I will write an unbiased review in the next few weeks comparing the two services.

 

[SQUEEZON]

Good luck Alajoe keep us posted and wishing you a Merrry Christmas!

 

[DishSubLA]

I seem to remember that is had more to do with the actual chips they used in the 222 and 222K models. Granted not every USB controller is fast and reliable. I fail to see how not having an eSATA port was the magic bullet that killed DVR functionality. If the processors you stick into box are not fast enough to read/write data over USB 2, why would it be fast enough for eSATA?

The processors are fast enough to read/write the data. In fact, Scott has said the "K" models are almost identical to the 922 and have the same processor. I don't think the processor was the problem. I think the older chips could handle 7 streams, and the current chips can handle 12 strams? I think the problem with the 222/222K was handling the traffic of 4 HDTV channel streams and "chasing play," etc. with anything less than the bandwidth eSATA provides going back to 2006 (this is why EVERY other DVR maker included eSATA in their DVR's for external HDD's), although today USB 3.0 would work just fine, but even the XiP's are slated to still have the older USB 2.0. Sometimes Dish is just CHEAP! And now we have the consequences.

 

[DishSubLA]

But the 222 & k (especially the non-k) were never really meant to be DVRs, so it's not really a fair comparison, who else puts sata ports on their non-DVR boxes?

Bandwidth may have been an issue, but they probably could have addressed that somehow, or limited the DVR functionality to the K. More likeley it came down to a marketing decision as much as anything else.

The 211 makes marketing sense. For the very price conscious 211 only users, you get an extra $40 up front, and I bet end up moving some of them to a 722 or 612 once they realize how nice it would be to watch one show and record another. For account with a 211 as a second or third receivers you get the the $40 and make the account little more sticky.

A DVR enabled 222 is hard to fit into the pricing model. You end up with a box functionally equivalent to a 722 - do you undercut the 722 by not charging a DVR fee? If you charge the DVR fee, then what's the point?

Dish was VERY CLEAR from day 1 that these 222's were designed to be DVR units using external HDD, as well as non-DVR units, and that such feature was coming. They affirmed this a few more times as time went on, and even Ergan was telling us on the Tailgate Charlie Chat how the 222's were going to be just like the 211's and all they had to do was send a firmware update and we could all record using an external HDD. Such a feature could also SAVE Dish money as having to replace otherwise perfectly good boxes just because the HDD is bad is VERY expensive and accounts for a big part of his 2 (last I knew) massive equipment return and repair centers. You get the box, and you pay for the HDD and you pay to replace it. If that does not bring in enough money, Charlie can always increase or invent a new fee, just as he jacked us all up with the current fee structure.

I think that so much time has passed since the intent of the 222's being external HDD DVR's, that now the focus is on whole home DVR set-ups, and any money on R&D is best spent getting HDTV in many rooms of the house and really focusing on that as the primary competitive technology, just like so much time has passed since the inception of the Sling Extender, it is now anachronistic compared to the XiP technology. I just wish Dish would confirm that the 222/K DVR feature is dead, like the Sling Extender, so we can move on from there, as well. But, honestly, I have already made up my mind that they killed it a long time ago, anyway.

 

[JM42]

Dish was VERY CLEAR from day 1 that these 222's were designed to be DVR units using external HDD, as well as non-DVR units, and that such feature was coming.

I don't remember it from the beginning - but could easily be wrong. I do remember it being mentioned on several chats - and also remember you could almost hear everyone else on the set cringe when he said it, so I never really expected it to come to be. First and foremost the 222 was probably meant as a mass replacement for 322s in EA markets and the many "one HDTV" homes, and they will continue to have plenty of accounts the 222 will be a good fit for going forward.

Savings on replacing drives is the ONLY real benefit a DVR enabled 222 would have been to Dish. Support issues with multiple USB drives would offset that some. The extra DVR and receiver fees more than make up for the hardware repair costs.

I still think the final decision more marketing driven than anything else. I don't believe you would have ever seen a 222 DVR without a DVR fee. Again, if you charge the fee, what's the point?

 

[drwatson618]

Its called "loyalty" something taught in the Marines. Its a dying concept but some of us are clinging onto it.

You can't compare this to the Marines. Loyalty works both ways. Why should we continue to be loyal to them when they don't deliver on their promises? There number one objective is to increase subscriptions. They don't care about satisfying current subs until their contacts are up.

 

[navychop]

.... There number one objective is to increase subscriptions....

No. Their number one objective, their fiduciary responsibility, is to increase profits. They have clearly shown that this can be done by reducing the number of subs. Of course, they will later need to stabilize or increase sub numbers. But adding subs just to increase that number is certainly not their objective.

 

[mike123abc]

No. Their number one objective, their fiduciary responsibility, is to increase profits. They have clearly shown that this can be done by reducing the number of subs. Of course, they will later need to stabilize or increase sub numbers. But adding subs just to increase that number is certainly not their objective.

Of course the objective of any successful business is to make a profit - and if that means getting rid of some customers than it is a good idea. Perhaps before the downturn these low end subs ordered lots of PPV making them profitable, and now they are all late on their bills and causing red ink.

But, Dish is falling behind on the high end. Everyone (DIRECTV/cable/FIOS/Uverse) is up with Dish in HD offerings now and quality of service (well in most of the country). They are all offering the next big thing in multiroom viewing. Dish was going to have a solution in the sling extender. They hyped it for a couple years before pulling the plug. How many profitable subs will be mad now and leave Dish? Especially if things go as Scott has hinted that the new XIP will be for new installs only? Dish is making it better to leave for a couple years and maybe come back than to stay with them...

 

[SQUEEZON]

As I said earlier, its a great country! You have the right to choose.

 

[ksbuie]

In my opinion, Dish could make this right by offering us, the leading edge customers, free upgrades to the XIP system once available.

 

[navychop]

In my opinion, Dish could make this right by offering us, the leading edge customers, free upgrades to the XIP system once available.

By "us" you mean people hoping for the Sling Extender? All SatGuys?

The XiP813 appeals to me as something to mess with, to "put it thru it's paces" if you will. But as for functionality, I think my ViP722 units will suffice nicely. Maybe the whole house idea will win me over one day, to consolidate and have common access to EHDs. As it is, I must admit, I have certain series on more than one EHD and that will make it a bit more challenging when we start to view them. The UI would be nice, but isn't a driver in the decision. More HD to more TVs, consolidated, has value. Of course, that's what has made the Sling Extender OBE.

I just have this nagging feeling that we're missing something, something important as to functionality and appeal....

 

[rglore]

The new Boxee Box functions as a sling extender, maybe it will work with Dish boxes?

Slingbox.com - SlingPlayer for Boxee Box

 

[MikeD-C05]

Works the same as the sling application on the google revue unit. It is the sling extender we wanted but you have to pay MORE for the sling pro hd or solo unit to pair it with the google box. I just bought one during the Best Buy Christmas sale and it was $60.00 off of the $299.99 price as well as used my $50.00 gift card and the $15.00 off Sliver rewards coupon. SO I only had to pay $175.00 for it. I can't wait to see how it works and if it works well. The one question I have ,after watching the video demonstration is this: Does the sling remote allow you to do trick plays like pause,skip back ,skip forward,etc.?

 

[DishSubLA]

The new Boxee Box functions as a sling extender, maybe it will work with Dish boxes?

Slingbox.com - SlingPlayer for Boxee Box

No it won't work with the Sling Adapter, but it will with the stand alone Sling Box product, and that's the rub. To make this work for us Dish Net subs would cost about as much as a new 922: over $200 for Sling HD Pro and about another $200 for the Boxee Box. OUCH! This is why I said in an earlier post that Dish could make up the death of the Sling Extender if it OPENED the Sling Player using the Sling Adapter that is designed for Dish Network boxes, but that is currently NOT the case.

I presume the 922 Sling Loaded won't work with the Sling Player app either (I am guessing the key is from which site this goes through: either the Sling site for the stand alone boxes or Dish Online or whatever the bloody site is now that is has changed often enough for Dish subs using Sling Adapter or Sling Loaded 922). If the Sling Adapter would function with the Sling Player App, I would get a Boxee Box and use it as my 2nd HDTV and for all the other apps (Amazon and podcasts, etc.) for the full value of the Boxee Box, although Roku still has more "channels," I think. But I just don't see Dish opening it up to us, sadly.