Sling Extender
- Thread starter ZachS@DISH
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 76
- Views 15K
Obviously the XiP, from Dish's view, makes the continued cost and/or challenges with the Extender product no longer economical. Most people want a whole home solution now, not just a wireless (not with out its problems) extension of the TV2 experience with a small screen. And while that certainly would have fit perfectly in some home situations, not enough to justify the economics of such a seemingly sophisticated and expensive device.
However, very sad this could not have been made available 2 years ago. Agreed, Dish seemed to indicate that it was still coming. At least we all know it is dead now and can move on.
Now, Dish can go a long way to make it up to us by opening the Sling Player Apps to Dish Network boxes (via Sling Adapter) like it does to the stand alone Sling boxes (Boxee Box and Revue right now, but more to come?). The current restrictions STINK! It just enhances the value of the stand along Sling boxes and diminishes the Dish Network boxes to Dish subscribers. The XiP better not be $17 per month per 813 and the clients had better not be $14 per month or I will have leave Dish for DirecTV's far more reasonable monthly box fees. It's Dish's FEES that are killing me, otherwise I am happy with Dish, but I won't pay an extra $40 per month just cause I like Dish.
However, very sad this could not have been made available 2 years ago. Agreed, Dish seemed to indicate that it was still coming. At least we all know it is dead now and can move on.
Now, Dish can go a long way to make it up to us by opening the Sling Player Apps to Dish Network boxes (via Sling Adapter) like it does to the stand alone Sling boxes (Boxee Box and Revue right now, but more to come?). The current restrictions STINK! It just enhances the value of the stand along Sling boxes and diminishes the Dish Network boxes to Dish subscribers. The XiP better not be $17 per month per 813 and the clients had better not be $14 per month or I will have leave Dish for DirecTV's far more reasonable monthly box fees. It's Dish's FEES that are killing me, otherwise I am happy with Dish, but I won't pay an extra $40 per month just cause I like Dish.
Last edited:
What makes you guys think the XIP receivers will come to fruition? They'll get rushed to market with certain features "coming soon" and will fall by the wayside. I'm now victim of the 921 and now the 922. The only thing keeping me from switching to DirecTV is that they don't have Topeka's locals in HD.
dustinw82 said:
Are you too far from the broad cast tower to recieve them via over the air antennae?
Well, I saw the Charlie Chat that said we HOPE to make it a DVR. But guess what...Why would they make a 222 into a dual DVR but not charge the fees as with the 722/622/etc. I think they realized they outsmarted themselves. BUT, they got it in check, finally.
Charlie did indicate just that on the football Tailgate Charlie Chat, but Jim kept trying to cut him off by saying, "No, now, wait. Now...No...," but Charlie kept saying that all they had to do was send a software update.
I still believe the only reason DVR functionality hasn't come to the two tuner model 222 & 222K is Dish's STUPID cheapskate decision to have only USB 2.0 ports and not at least one eSATA port that would have provided the speed or bandwidth to give the same 2 tuner DVR experience as if the HDD were built in. Just my best guess.
You make a very good point. I guess I am putting more faith in Joe Clayton to make things happen at Dish. However, even if the XiP does come into being, we all know that it will only be available to NEW subscribers only for some period, then made available to us poor LOYAL customers some time down the line (to be fair, DirecTV's new HMC is $99 and up to 3 FREE HD boxes to view HMC in other rooms to new subs, but current subs have to PAY hundreds). When the XiP's come (I just feel they have to have to compete with DirecTV and others who have such a product) the deciding factor for me will be the FEES associated with it, or the BOTTOM LINE. So what if Dish's packages are the lest expensive if they are squeezing $17 per month per box (first box, fee, yes.) making the bottom line monthly bill FAR more expensive than DirecTV, as one example.
Last edited:
Well the single tuner DVR product using an external drive and CSR's often citing that product as an option indicates Dish does want to support such a product. I firmly believe that the reason the 222 & 222K are not DVR capable is because they only have USB 2.0 ports and no eSATA ports that have the bandwidth to accommodate a 2 tuner DVR w/external HDD experience just as if it were an internal HDD. USB 2.0 was/is cheap and ubiquitous, but every other DVR maker included eSATA as far back as 2006 EXCEPT for Echostar. and because of that, we have 222 & 222K that will probably never have DVR functionality.
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?
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?
I believe it was posted long ago that the ViP222 series had at least two different motherboards, and that the first mobo out wasn't able to support the DVR functions. So to avoid problems, none got it.
Dish always announces coming this sumer or Fall at every CES. They have never released hardware at CES(Your dreams on the XIP). If you are waiting on the XIP, just leave Dish and get on with your life. It ain't coming soon!
Boy! it does'nt take much to drop Dish! Sling extender? Like who else would have even taken the time to try to develop one? There is Nothing coming out from the cable providers
nor Direct TV---they are brain dead! When I look at all Dish as provided over the years it isnt even close. And for all of you who blame Charlie? Do you really think he sits there all day and dreams up this stuff? He is basically retired and only envolved in major network deals!
nor Direct TV---they are brain dead! When I look at all Dish as provided over the years it isnt even close. And for all of you who blame Charlie? Do you really think he sits there all day and dreams up this stuff? He is basically retired and only envolved in major network deals!
OTOH, Dish is the only major provider WITHOUT a multi-room HD DVR viewing technology.
Plus, ATT just introduced a wireless DVR.
So, your statement is kinda wrong. And, by "kinda", I mean totally.
USB2.0 is fast enough to handle 2 HD streams on Dish. At most they would be doing 36.4MB/s if they were doing 2 full bandwidth MPEG 2 channels at 19.2mbit/sec. Satellite feeds are closer to 5mbit/sec for HD and very few OTA stations are close to that since most stick in subchannels.
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.
There would actually be at least four streams at all times - two write and two read. Even "live tv" is probably being spooled off the drive. Add another couple of streams for a potential OTA adapter. Then add in whatever housekeeping data transfer is needed.
In raw mbps terms it still looks like it should work on paper, but with real world variability of chipsets and drives and i can see keeping up a properly responsive system could be a problem.
Its all moot at this point, I doubt it was solely a tech decision anyway.
Dishman1978 said:
I get PBS, CBS, and NBC very well. FOX and ABC signals are hit and miss. The guide information for FOX is wrong, so I can only set manual timers for it.
Similar threads
