Terry wrote in
:

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 07:00:43 -0700, "
wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:46?am, Joe Smut wrote:
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Oren wrote:
My comment was directed: that yes, the provider of digital
satellite would dicuss various units with the customers.
HallerB's comment (cut out) was not bull****

It appears he's talking about his experience with Dish Network
while I am referring to mine with DirecTV.

They both suck

You need to realize cable is way better today thanks to satellite
competition.

I waited 3 years for TVLAND on TCI cable then switched to dish and
havent looked back.

Dish has nice DVRs that have changed the way we look at tv forever.
what few rain fades we get in only blinding thunderstorms is way less
than cable outages from power failures and car accidents taking down
lines, heck we had some bad channels for MONTHS only in extreme cold
of nite. cable refused tio send out a tech unless it was a major
outage, it would of been overtime. yet the trouble went on for months
and right after we cancelled they finally found and replaced a bad
neighborhood amplifier, that was cold sensitive.

so why do you think satellite sucks? you work for a cable company?

I have had Dish and Direct TV and was happy with both. The big
drawback in using either service is that you have to have a tuner box
in every room

No,you have to have a tuner box for each chammel you want to watch(at the
same time);you can have a number of tuner boxes feeding your own little
"cable" system to all your TVs. That's how my local sports bar feeds their
30 TVs with only 10 converter boxes.Each TV has a choice of 10 channels.

I changed to Charter when broadband became available in our area (I
was one of the first customers) I have 3 sets and am glad I have no
tuners to rent. Tuners suck

One interesting thing I have noticed is that with cable I get my
signal about 2 seconds sooner than my sister. She lives in an area
where Satellite is all she can get.



In that same sports bar,two adjacent TVs getting the same channel from
different converter boxes often are out of synch by a noticeable amount.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Terry wrote in
:

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:21:36 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:


dish offers 2 receiver boxes which help cut the cost of extra boxes

Although one of those does require RF remote control, which interferes
with connecting it to a stand-alone DVR.

I tried one of those RF remote extenders once. It was crap.
The Radio Shack pyramid transmitter/receiver setup is the best way to
go to control a tuner box from another room.

http://www.x10.com/automation/pm5900_s.html


Not what he was referring to;I think he was referring to RF box
controllers(an RF channel clicker!),not RF transmitter/receiver to
wireless-connect the box to a TV.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

I have had Dish and Direct TV and was happy with both. The big
drawback in using either service is that you have to have a tuner box
in every room

No,you have to have a tuner box for each chammel you want to watch(at the
same time);you can have a number of tuner boxes feeding your own little
"cable" system to all your TVs. That's how my local sports bar feeds their
30 TVs with only 10 converter boxes.Each TV has a choice of 10 channels.


no the dish 322, 522, 625 and some others are dual tuner outputting 2
different channels at the same time, provided you keep a phone line
connected the 2 tuner box has NO 2nd tuner fee

although you can match satellite boxes with stand alone DVRs like TIVO
the intergrated 2 output boxes are way better and easy to use.

We have 625s that are gettng upgraded for free to go from 100 hour
recordings to 150 hour capacity at no extra charge

dish tried a VOD service but it was never popular. so subs get more
recording time

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 19:47:52 -0400, Terry
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:21:36 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:


dish offers 2 receiver boxes which help cut the cost of extra boxes

Although one of those does require RF remote control, which interferes
with connecting it to a stand-alone DVR.

I tried one of those RF remote extenders once. It was crap.
The Radio Shack pyramid transmitter/receiver setup is the best way to
go to control a tuner box from another room.

http://www.x10.com/automation/pm5900_s.html

1. It isn't. I've had both the Radio Shack and X10 versions, they're
BOTH crap.

2. These are intended for operating IR-controlled equipment from a
distance. They will NOT work for RF-controlled equipment.
--
66 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"God was invented by man for a reason, that
reason is no longer applicable."

On 20 Oct 2007 01:12:40 GMT, Jim Yanik wrote:


[snip]

No,you have to have a tuner box for each chammel you want to watch(at the
same time);you can have a number of tuner boxes feeding your own little
"cable" system to all your TVs. That's how my local sports bar feeds their
30 TVs with only 10 converter boxes.Each TV has a choice of 10 channels.

I have a similar setup, although not that extensive. I put whatever
(DirecTV, etc...) channel I want on 70 and can then tune any TV to
channel 70 to watch it. A second receiver (to allow watching different
a channel at the same time) uses72. Then I have a security camera (at
the front door) on channel 74. RF remote controls with a RF-to-IR
translator (NOT those highly unreliable "pyramids") solve the control
problem.

I have had "multi room viewing" long before ReplayTV or TiVo offered
such a thing. In fact when I got up this morning I started watching a
show in my bedroom, and am continuing to watch if from the computer
room. After finishing with the usenet-reading, I'll watch the rest of
that show in the living room.

ALL of my DirecTV receivers (2 RCA DRD420RE and a HR10-250) are in the
same place. The DVD player is there too.


I changed to Charter when broadband became available in our area (I
was one of the first customers) I have 3 sets and am glad I have no
tuners to rent. Tuners suck

One interesting thing I have noticed is that with cable I get my
signal about 2 seconds sooner than my sister. She lives in an area
where Satellite is all she can get.



In that same sports bar,two adjacent TVs getting the same channel from
different converter boxes often are out of synch by a noticeable amount.
--
66 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"God was invented by man for a reason, that
reason is no longer applicable."

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:32:22 -0400, Terry
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 07:00:43 -0700, "
wrote:

On Oct 19, 3:46?am, Joe Smut wrote:
Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
Oren wrote:
My comment was directed: that yes, the provider of digital satellite
would dicuss various units with the customers. HallerB's comment (cut
out) was not bull****

It appears he's talking about his experience with Dish Network while I am
referring to mine with DirecTV.

They both suck

You need to realize cable is way better today thanks to satellite
competition.

I waited 3 years for TVLAND on TCI cable then switched to dish and
havent looked back.

Dish has nice DVRs that have changed the way we look at tv forever.
what few rain fades we get in only blinding thunderstorms is way less
than cable outages from power failures and car accidents taking down
lines, heck we had some bad channels for MONTHS only in extreme cold
of nite. cable refused tio send out a tech unless it was a major
outage, it would of been overtime. yet the trouble went on for months
and right after we cancelled they finally found and replaced a bad
neighborhood amplifier, that was cold sensitive.

so why do you think satellite sucks? you work for a cable company?

I have had Dish and Direct TV and was happy with both. The big
drawback in using either service is that you have to have a tuner box
in every room


I guess you've never considered having ONE receiver (one receiver for
each channel you watch or record at the same time) and distributing
the output to all the TVs.

I changed to Charter when broadband became available in our area (I
was one of the first customers) I have 3 sets and am glad I have no
tuners to rent. Tuners suck


Yes, particularly an extra tuner you don't really need. Any tuner will
lower the quality of what you get.

One interesting thing I have noticed is that with cable I get my
signal about 2 seconds sooner than my sister. She lives in an area
where Satellite is all she can get.

It takes a long time for an EM signal to travel 50,000 miles., and it
has to go about that far to get to he satellite and back. For that
reason, any service requiring fast interaction (like action games)
won't work well with satellite.
--
66 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"God was invented by man for a reason, that
reason is no longer applicable."

On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:20:28 -0400, "JimR"
wrote:


"Jeff Dieterle" wrote in message
...

[snip]

What is the phone audit all about anyway, are you saying you get a call
from DTV wanting s/n's from your receivers?

Yes -- we have four receivers (Living Room, 2 Bedrooms, hobby room), and
about two months after installation we got a call auditing our use of the
receivers, asking for a couple of code numbers out of the software for each
receiver. This required going to each room, turning on the system and
getting setup info on the screen. Being careful and not sure who was
actually calling, I wouldn't answer their questions and asked for their
phone number. Then I called Dish TV (my provider) but their customer
service wasn't aware of what was happening (so I didn't return the auditer's
phone call). Two days later my satellite service was shut off, even though
I was paid up. I called CS again, they transferred me to the audit company,
and we went through our system receiver by receiver. They told me at the
time that they would shut down any receivers that couldn't be audited and
would start charging a monthly fee to have them reinstated. Within an hour
of the end of the audit satellite service was restored.

The audit was not particularly friendly (I won't go into details, but they
appeared to be starting from the position that I was cheating on them by
having receivers spread out in several houses.) There have been a few times
when I have seriously considered terminating the Dish TV service, and this
was one of those time. If I hadn't had a lot of my money already tied up by
purchasing the Dish receivers, I probably would have moved to Direct TV at
that time. I did make a formal complaint to Dish TV Customer Service about
this procedure, and it hasn't happened to me since.

It may be that if you only have two receivers you're a less visible
target -- certainly someone with four receivers is in the top few % of their
business and anyone trying to get away with having receivers in multiple
houses is likely to have four or more receivers, so we were an obvious
target --


Which really shows just how poorly the one box per room design is. 4
TVs is not an uncommon thing. Paying rent to the satellite company
for 4 is. It is a very unfair charge.

The unscrambling design could have been done on the incoming signal
before splitting it to the rooms. It was a conscious decision on the
part of the satellite company to charge more. Most people don't pay
extra and are inconvenienced by having to watch the same show in more
than one room. The tuner and the remote control for the TV are
useless.

It is the main reason I am still using Cable.

On Nov 14, 2:16 pm, Terry wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:20:28 -0400, "JimR"
wrote:







"Jeff Dieterle" wrote in message
...

[snip]

What is the phone audit all about anyway, are you saying you get a call
from DTV wanting s/n's from your receivers?

Yes -- we have four receivers (Living Room, 2 Bedrooms, hobby room), and
about two months after installation we got a call auditing our use of the
receivers, asking for a couple of code numbers out of the software for each
receiver. This required going to each room, turning on the system and
getting setup info on the screen. Being careful and not sure who was
actually calling, I wouldn't answer their questions and asked for their
phone number. Then I called Dish TV (my provider) but their customer
service wasn't aware of what was happening (so I didn't return the auditer's
phone call). Two days later my satellite service was shut off, even though
I was paid up. I called CS again, they transferred me to the audit company,
and we went through our system receiver by receiver. They told me at the
time that they would shut down any receivers that couldn't be audited and
would start charging a monthly fee to have them reinstated. Within an hour
of the end of the audit satellite service was restored.

The audit was not particularly friendly (I won't go into details, but they
appeared to be starting from the position that I was cheating on them by
having receivers spread out in several houses.) There have been a few times
when I have seriously considered terminating the Dish TV service, and this
was one of those time. If I hadn't had a lot of my money already tied up by
purchasing the Dish receivers, I probably would have moved to Direct TV at
that time. I did make a formal complaint to Dish TV Customer Service about
this procedure, and it hasn't happened to me since.

It may be that if you only have two receivers you're a less visible
target -- certainly someone with four receivers is in the top few % of their
business and anyone trying to get away with having receivers in multiple
houses is likely to have four or more receivers, so we were an obvious
target --

Which really shows just how poorly the one box per room design is. 4
TVs is not an uncommon thing. Paying rent to the satellite company
for 4 is. It is a very unfair charge.

The unscrambling design could have been done on the incoming signal
before splitting it to the rooms. It was a conscious decision on the
part of the satellite company to charge more. Most people don't pay
extra and are inconvenienced by having to watch the same show in more
than one room. The tuner and the remote control for the TV are
useless.

It is the main reason I am still using Cable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Clearly you have a very poor understanding of how the Satellite
systems work and more importantly how the descrambler works. I sure
don't think you would be willing to pay the price of a descrambler
that would have to descramble all the signals for hundreds of channels
and post them on different frequencies on your internal wiring.

On Oct 15, 10:05 am, Terry wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:21:06 -0700, "

wrote:
providers call and ask for unique numbers from each box they change by
satellite, if you cant walk around your home and give them numbers
from each box you get shut down.

doing thisa is the same as going in a store and stealing merchandise

No it is not. If you steal something from a store then the store no
longer has it.

It is NOT the same thing.

Yes, it most definately is and you lame defense proves it. I would
put your argument in the same category as claiming Rape is ok because
the victim still has her pussy. You are stealing something that does
not belong to you. Theft of service is no different than any other
from of stealing.

On Oct 15, 1:39 pm, Terry wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:28:49 -0500, Mark Lloyd





wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 12:05:29 -0400, Terry
wrote:

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:21:06 -0700, "
wrote:

providers call and ask for unique numbers from each box they change by
satellite, if you cant walk around your home and give them numbers
from each box you get shut down.

doing thisa is the same as going in a store and stealing merchandise

No it is not. If you steal something from a store then the store no
longer has it.

It is NOT the same thing.

Right. Is it even something wrong?

1. You paid (the sat company) to see the game. Didn't you?

2. The sat signal is already available both places. The losses
experienced by the provider are not affected by WHERE you are when you
watch the game.

I think that idea of it being "stealing" is corporate propaganda,
repeated by people who haven't really thought about it themselves.

Some people are going to be saying something like "your local stadium
lost a ticket sale because of it". Then what the [expletive deleted]
are they doing with YOUR money, so as to be able to lose it.

The RIAA is going after people making copies of mp3's while 2 million
people are crossing the border illegally each year. It boggles my
little mind.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I just love the old tried and proven but remains stupid as ever
argument that somehow my sin is the lesser sin so therefore it should
be excused. BOTH are wrong and both deserve to be treated as wrong.
You can not excuse your act based on anothers act no matter how hard
you might try. WRONG is WRONG!

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:16:05 -0500, Terry
wrote:

[snip]


Which really shows just how poorly the one box per room design is. 4
TVs is not an uncommon thing. Paying rent to the satellite company
for 4 is. It is a very unfair charge.

The unscrambling design could have been done on the incoming signal
before splitting it to the rooms. It was a conscious decision on the
part of the satellite company to charge more. Most people don't pay
extra and are inconvenienced by having to watch the same show in more
than one room. The tuner and the remote control for the TV are
useless.

It is the main reason I am still using Cable.



Descrambling multiple channels simultaneously requires equipment per
channel. The number of channels available is normally much greater
than the number of channels being watched at any one time.
Unscrambling all channels as they enter the house would therefore be
much more expensive.
--
41 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups"

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:49:17 -0000, BobR
wrote:

On Oct 15, 10:05 am, Terry wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:21:06 -0700, "

wrote:
providers call and ask for unique numbers from each box they change by
satellite, if you cant walk around your home and give them numbers
from each box you get shut down.

doing thisa is the same as going in a store and stealing merchandise

No it is not. If you steal something from a store then the store no
longer has it.

It is NOT the same thing.

Yes, it most definately is and you lame defense proves it. I would
put your argument in the same category as claiming Rape is ok because
the victim still has her pussy. You are stealing something that does
not belong to you. Theft of service is no different than any other
from of stealing.

It is NOT theft of service, or theft of any kind no matter what the
businesses and business-controlled government say.

Of course this is in no way calling it good or acceptable.

Hope that brain regrows someday ...

On Nov 14, 12:16 pm, Terry wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:20:28 -0400, "JimR"
wrote:







"Jeff Dieterle" wrote in message
...

[snip]

What is the phone audit all about anyway, are you saying you get a call
from DTV wanting s/n's from your receivers?

Yes -- we have four receivers (Living Room, 2 Bedrooms, hobby room), and
about two months after installation we got a call auditing our use of the
receivers, asking for a couple of code numbers out of the software for each
receiver. This required going to each room, turning on the system and
getting setup info on the screen. Being careful and not sure who was
actually calling, I wouldn't answer their questions and asked for their
phone number. Then I called Dish TV (my provider) but their customer
service wasn't aware of what was happening (so I didn't return the auditer's
phone call). Two days later my satellite service was shut off, even though
I was paid up. I called CS again, they transferred me to the audit company,
and we went through our system receiver by receiver. They told me at the
time that they would shut down any receivers that couldn't be audited and
would start charging a monthly fee to have them reinstated. Within an hour
of the end of the audit satellite service was restored.

The audit was not particularly friendly (I won't go into details, but they
appeared to be starting from the position that I was cheating on them by
having receivers spread out in several houses.) There have been a few times
when I have seriously considered terminating the Dish TV service, and this
was one of those time. If I hadn't had a lot of my money already tied up by
purchasing the Dish receivers, I probably would have moved to Direct TV at
that time. I did make a formal complaint to Dish TV Customer Service about
this procedure, and it hasn't happened to me since.

It may be that if you only have two receivers you're a less visible
target -- certainly someone with four receivers is in the top few % of their
business and anyone trying to get away with having receivers in multiple
houses is likely to have four or more receivers, so we were an obvious
target --

Which really shows just how poorly the one box per room design is. 4
TVs is not an uncommon thing. Paying rent to the satellite company
for 4 is. It is a very unfair charge.

The unscrambling design could have been done on the incoming signal
before splitting it to the rooms. It was a conscious decision on the
part of the satellite company to charge more. Most people don't pay
extra and are inconvenienced by having to watch the same show in more
than one room. The tuner and the remote control for the TV are
useless.

It is the main reason I am still using Cable.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

To make Bob and Mark's explanation a bit clearer.

Each 'unscrambler' can only do one channel at a time. You tune to
channel 24, 24 is all that is unscrambled. You want just one box, no
problem but every tv in the house would have to watch the same
channel.

Harry K

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:18:07 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:


Each 'unscrambler' can only do one channel at a time. You tune to
channel 24, 24 is all that is unscrambled. You want just one box, no
problem but every tv in the house would have to watch the same
channel.

Harry K

Of course you could have an (expensive) stack of 40 unscramblers,
each set to a different channel, connected to an RF modulator
operating on a different channel, and combine their outputs. Then you
could watch any of those 40 channels on any TV at the same time
without additional unscramblers.
--
40 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Never underestimate the power of stupid
people in large groups"

On Nov 14, 5:04 pm, Gary H wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 20:49:17 -0000, BobR
wrote:





On Oct 15, 10:05 am, Terry wrote:
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 06:21:06 -0700, "

wrote:
providers call and ask for unique numbers from each box they change by
satellite, if you cant walk around your home and give them numbers
from each box you get shut down.

doing thisa is the same as going in a store and stealing merchandise

No it is not. If you steal something from a store then the store no
longer has it.

It is NOT the same thing.

Yes, it most definately is and you lame defense proves it. I would
put your argument in the same category as claiming Rape is ok because
the victim still has her pussy. You are stealing something that does
not belong to you. Theft of service is no different than any other
from of stealing.

It is NOT theft of service, or theft of any kind no matter what the
businesses and business-controlled government say.

Of course this is in no way calling it good or acceptable.

Hope that brain regrows someday ...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, it is theft and all the denial in the world will not change it.
You are taking something that does not belong to you without
compensation to the person or persons who own the rights to the
product / service. Those companies have invested huge sums of money
to provide that service and must pay to receive the content for
distribution. The only way they can continue to provide the service
is if people pay for that service.

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:33:12 -0800 (PST), BobR
wrote:

[snip]


Yes, it is theft and all the denial in the world will not change it.

I am NOT "denying" anything. I just never accepted that garbage. It's
simply not the same thing as theft.

You are taking something that does not belong to you without
compensation to the person or persons who own the rights to the
product / service.

And NOT DEPRIVING THEM of something they had. That is what "theft" is.
If you believe otherwise, you could try to explain. If it's my money,
what the **** are they doing with it in the first place!

Those companies have invested huge sums of money
to provide that service and must pay to receive the content for
distribution. The only way they can continue to provide the service
is if people pay for that service.

True. Note that I IN NO WAY said it wasn't wrong as you seem to be
assuming.

On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:07:58 -0600, Gary H wrote:

On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 17:33:12 -0800 (PST), BobR
wrote:

[snip]


Yes, it is theft and all the denial in the world will not change it.

I am NOT "denying" anything. I just never accepted that garbage. It's
simply not the same thing as theft.

You are taking something that does not belong to you without
compensation to the person or persons who own the rights to the
product / service.

And NOT DEPRIVING THEM of something they had. That is what "theft" is.
If you believe otherwise, you could try to explain. If it's my money,
what the **** are they doing with it in the first place!

Those companies have invested huge sums of money
to provide that service and must pay to receive the content for
distribution. The only way they can continue to provide the service
is if people pay for that service.

True. Note that I IN NO WAY said it wasn't wrong as you seem to be
assuming.

Thief is wrong. I also happen to think lying is wrong.

When the RIAA and others talk about "pirates" the tell us they lost
xxx,xxx,xxx money last year due to unauthorized copying.

I would really like see the creative math they use to come up the
number.

I bought Dark Side of the Moon at least 3 times. I paid my royalties
each time. I also paid for the media. I figure I should get a refund
from the other two royalties and I should be allowed to download
"Money" as often as I please.