Scott, the real fact is how the 8PSK transponders WORKING, not the words from horse's mouth
.
I can't belive my ears - you're an apologet of Dish propaganda !

I can't belive my ears - you're an apologet of Dish propaganda !

Scott Greczkowski said:While this is true to a point, I am told that this is a software upgrade to a new version of 8 PSK turbo (Much like when you had Analog modems and were able to update them to 56k via a software update)
I am told that all HD receivers are getting a software upgrade to support this new version of 8PSK turbo within a week.
Is this true or not I don't know. I am only reporting what I am being told.
M Sparks said:I couldn't find a good thread about that Tech Chat here...what was the deal? There was a link to another thread that I posted in for a while before I realized it was on "the other guys".
Anyway, I kept asking for confirmation of this over there. (Or if Turbo was new, was the 40% improvement over QPSK or 8PSK?) The thread consisted of a few people like me asking for some more tech details, and a bunch of people saying "They're going to convert HD to 8PSK!" and "Will they replace my 811 with an 8PSK receiver?" The actual experts never showed.
The fact that Scott G and other "big dogs" (and not just the usual idiots) continue to dispute this means there will continue to be confusion. The supposed "8PSK-Turbo" software updates adds to the "stupid myth".
Personally speaking, my logic circuits tend to agree with you. But I know and trust Scott G and others, and I don't know you, so I tend to believe him.
So, the confusion will continue. I don't really care as long as they turn 'em on soon.
It's nice how these forums bring together people with different areas of expertise. I know a lot about creating digital video, but nothing about transmitting it. I had just finished explaining pixel aspect ratios to Hokienginer in another thread and was thinking "this guy can't be an engineer!" Then I come to another thread and he's schooling me on Forward Error Correction. But that can cause problems...I sometimes trust someone who helped me on one topic, and it turns out later they were dead wrong on a different topic.
CKNA said:I am not looking for anybody to believe me. I know Scott G and he just passes along what he was told by Dish. The problem is that whoever said this at Dish either does not know or says wrong info on purpose.
HokieEngineer said:Whoa now buddy. I'm not sure what happened in the past, but you seem to have an axe to grind.
no need to patronize me. i admit that this may not be the thread to talk about the past but when i here someone say scott only speaks the truth i need to tell my story. just ignore me and go on with your 8psk tc conversation.
oh and dont call me buddy. i am not your buddy. i dont even know you. you should really try to find the other thread before you pretend to be my buddy. thanks anyway though. i cant have enough buddies.
I hope this is what they are. With a 942 on the way, maybe I can drop Comcast and return their HD DVR. Shelling out way to much cash on a monthly basis for programming servicesScott Greczkowski said:MPEG2 East Coast High Definition Locals.![]()
dont24 said:I hope this is what they are. With a 942 on the way, maybe I can drop Comcast and return their HD DVR. Shelling out way to much cash on a monthly basis for programming services![]()
Past history of dish software testing, dish doesnt have a veary good track record on this.. Ie take a look at the 921 software and the 942 untill recently. And that was even with alpha and beta testing. Major Bugs were still present.
History has showed us that the channels that appear on these tables generally do appear. there have been some that has been on the tables to be taken off of months later. Generally that was becasue of contract negotations. In this case, Echostar has an agreement with voom months prior to this weeks updates. Also the recivers need acurate system tables as that is how the revciver tells what channels are what and other general information. Dish wouldnt release channels on the inaccurate system tables to the general public because that would cause problems.
I think you missed the point here.. my point is how buggy the 921 is and dish engenerring has not fixed the problems with that reciver. Thus leaving the coustomers who payed over 1000 for this reciver high and dry. I can tell you dont have a 921. as you would have understood my point. Also by that time that a mpg4 dvr comes out the deal that they offer 921 owners would allso apply to 942 owners as were all in the same boat for mpg4. 921 owners really got the shaft on that one.
I think having the lack of knowledge about the operations of the company you own is a veary bad thing. With out the proper knowledge someone can undermine you in a moment and before you know it the companys gone down the toobs.. There is a way of having the knowledge of your company with out micormanaging. A CEO's job is about 80 percent listing and 20% doing work. It is a CEO's ultimate responceablity to see that company succeed. If you dont have the knowledge of what your company is doing or how there doing it you cant run a company efficantly.. Dish network can be ran alot more efficantly but at the current moment the company is not. I know from personal experiance. The lower level employees do the actuall work that is set out by top management. middle managment supervises these employees.
John Kotches said:<snip>.....Assuming he reports the information he's given accurately (I have no way of telling if he does or not), then it's simply a matter of seeing if it comes to pass or not. If it does, it was a good tip, if not obviously it wasn't![]()
I believe we should get some facts straight here. First I don't know of the thread you speak about but I should let you know that I really had nothing to do with the VOOM forum, that was run by Sean Mota and Ilya, it was their baby to run as they saw fit and they did a great job (kind of like out FTA forum which Iceberg and PSB run) I myself did not move or rename anything.richmert said:i also used to believe that scott simply passed what he knew. as a matter of fact i was at dbstalk reading scott a year or two ago and i never faulted him for leaving and forming another site BUT......... it was not so long ago that i started a thread that said the wall street journal reported that the VOOM satellite was for sale and that E* was interested in buying it. All i was doing was reporting the WSJ and the thread got like 3000 hits in a day or two. suddenly the thread was renamed and moved to a different forum and the title was RUMOR ONLY
this kind of COOL AID VOOM attitude is what Scott and all the others are about here. when i want facts i go to dbstalk or avsforum. the facts are maniputated here and my VOOM post is proof.
HokieEngineer said:I think larger questions need to be asked. Such as, the new Voom channels on 61.5 were added onto 8psk transponders. The new Voom channels on 129 have been added to qpsk transponders! That is a step BACKWARDS actually. Now, we know they can do 8psk on 129. Is this, as Scott guessed, just them firing up the new equipment at the uplink? They haven't fully configured it yet? Or... as I might throw out for you guys to chew on... The bird at 129, Echostar 5... is not a fully functional satellite. Could it be that it will not support anymore 8psk transponders? Current data rates for the voom channels hover between 10-12Mbit/s, and they only have two HD channels per transponder.
Scott Greczkowski said:It must work as they added all those new HD channels up there.
I am sure we will be hearing a lot more about this in January.