Review of the HR10-250 HD Tivo

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Got it last week. The OTA antenna works much better than expected and I'm
getting almost all the digital OTA signals locally available (and using
them). There is more local content available than I expected. The HD
stations look great, and the tivo functions (pause, ff, rew) operate well,
although the on-screen guide takes too long to load, and changing channels
takes longer than with my prior SD receivers. The hacker functions I tried
worked (s-c-s). One feature I really like is being able to switch from
480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i at the touch of one button. The remote also
allows you to change the aspect ration from 4:3 to 16:9 at the touch of a
button. One big disappointment is the availability of HD prgramming over
the Directv satellite. But, that is Directv, not the receiver's fault.
Prior to getting this unit, I did not have HD reception, therefore have no
basis for comparison between non-tivo HD receivers, like the Sat-HD300.
That said, I am very pleased and wanted you all to know. gg

 

[Poldy]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <9GgCc.73541$2i5.71376@attbi_s52>, "gg" <gg@annon.com>
wrote:

> Got it last week. The OTA antenna works much better than expected and I'm
> getting almost all the digital OTA signals locally available (and using
> them). There is more local content available than I expected. The HD
> stations look great, and the tivo functions (pause, ff, rew) operate well,
> although the on-screen guide takes too long to load, and changing channels
> takes longer than with my prior SD receivers. The hacker functions I tried
> worked (s-c-s). One feature I really like is being able to switch from
> 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i at the touch of one button. The remote also
> allows you to change the aspect ration from 4:3 to 16:9 at the touch of a
> button. One big disappointment is the availability of HD prgramming over
> the Directv satellite. But, that is Directv, not the receiver's fault.
> Prior to getting this unit, I did not have HD reception, therefore have no
> basis for comparison between non-tivo HD receivers, like the Sat-HD300.
> That said, I am very pleased and wanted you all to know. gg

S-C-S? The 30-sec skip?

Yeah the slow guide is really a turnoff. Would it kill Tivo to update
it's design to get better performance?

It would be forgiveable for a $200 box to have the same performance as a
5-year old box that they first released.

But unforgivable in a $1000 box.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"poldy" <poldy@kfu.com> wrote in message
newsoldy-A71553.21123923062004@netnews.comcast.net...
> In article <9GgCc.73541$2i5.71376@attbi_s52>, "gg" <gg@annon.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Got it last week. The OTA antenna works much better than expected and
>> I'm
>> getting almost all the digital OTA signals locally available (and using
>> them). There is more local content available than I expected. The HD
>> stations look great, and the tivo functions (pause, ff, rew) operate
>> well,
>> although the on-screen guide takes too long to load, and changing
>> channels
>> takes longer than with my prior SD receivers. The hacker functions I
>> tried
>> worked (s-c-s). One feature I really like is being able to switch from
>> 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i at the touch of one button. The remote also
>> allows you to change the aspect ration from 4:3 to 16:9 at the touch of a
>> button. One big disappointment is the availability of HD prgramming over
>> the Directv satellite. But, that is Directv, not the receiver's fault.
>> Prior to getting this unit, I did not have HD reception, therefore have
>> no
>> basis for comparison between non-tivo HD receivers, like the Sat-HD300.
>> That said, I am very pleased and wanted you all to know. gg
>
> S-C-S? The 30-sec skip?
>
> Yeah the slow guide is really a turnoff. Would it kill Tivo to update
> it's design to get better performance?
>
> It would be forgiveable for a $200 box to have the same performance as a
> 5-year old box that they first released.
>
> But unforgivable in a $1000 box.

Actually my year old SD Hughes Tivo is about twice as fast as my new HD
Tivo. I don't care about channel changing speed...it's the slow guide that
gets me. No way to scroll the guide, it's much faster to turn it page by
page with the channel key.

I'm also a bit disappointed with the placement of the (-) key for direct
entry of digital sub channel numbers on the remote. They should have put it
right below the number pad so you could find it without looking. There's
just no way to hit that key reliably in the dark. In fact, with all of the
hullabaloo about how Tivo's remote is so ergonomically perfect, I find that
it has a number of problems, the biggest of which is the fact that it
"feels" the same in your hand upside down or rightside up. They should have
made it so you could feel which end is the top in the dark.


Charles Tomaras
Seattle, WA

 

[David]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"gg" <gg@annon.com> wrote in message news:9GgCc.73541$2i5.71376@attbi_s52...
> Got it last week. The OTA antenna works much better than expected and I'm
> getting almost all the digital OTA signals locally available (and using
> them). There is more local content available than I expected. The HD
> stations look great, and the tivo functions (pause, ff, rew) operate well,
> although the on-screen guide takes too long to load, and changing channels
> takes longer than with my prior SD receivers. The hacker functions I
tried
> worked (s-c-s). One feature I really like is being able to switch from
> 480i, 480p, 720p, and 1080i at the touch of one button. The remote also
> allows you to change the aspect ration from 4:3 to 16:9 at the touch of a
> button. One big disappointment is the availability of HD prgramming over
> the Directv satellite. But, that is Directv, not the receiver's fault.
> Prior to getting this unit, I did not have HD reception, therefore have no
> basis for comparison between non-tivo HD receivers, like the Sat-HD300.
> That said, I am very pleased and wanted you all to know. gg
>

Thanks for the comments on this. I still have mine on order.

Burns my butt that this box doesn't have VGA output, though. (thanks to
Jack Valenti and crew)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote in
news:H4ednbJfDvTN9EfdRVn-hA@comcast.com:

> In fact, with all of the
> hullabaloo about how Tivo's remote is so ergonomically perfect, I find
> that it has a number of problems,

Mine keeps rolling into the crack between the cushions on the sofa. Very
irritating!

 

[Poldy]

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

In article <H4ednbJfDvTN9EfdRVn-hA@comcast.com>,
"Charles Tomaras" <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:

> Actually my year old SD Hughes Tivo is about twice as fast as my new HD
> Tivo. I don't care about channel changing speed...it's the slow guide that
> gets me. No way to scroll the guide, it's much faster to turn it page by
> page with the channel key.

That is too bad to hear.

Coincidentally, looks like one of my DTivos died today. Can't acquire
satellite at all and I know the connection is good because I swapped it
with my Samsung and it worked in the Samsung and still didn't work in
the DTivo.

I could try to hunt down the DTivo and try to get the credit from DTV
that everyone is talking about.

But I'm thinking it would be better to get another DTivo for $100-200.

Of course, when I do that, DTV will probably activate a half dozen more
HDTV channels.