A Sky, cable and digital tv forum. Digital TV Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Digital TV Banter forum » Digital TV Newsgroups » uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.tech.digital-tv (Digital TV - General) (uk.tech.digital-tv) Discussion of all matters technical in origin related to the reception of digital television transmissions, be they via satellite, terrestrial or cable. Advertising is forbidden, with no exceptions.

Slow Humax PVR 9200



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 25th 10, 06:30 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 19:18:26 -0000, "Steve Thackery"
wrote:


"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
.. .

I don't think so. AFAIK all UK DTT transmissions used a 2k carrier prior
to DSO. Some multiplexes used 16QAM modulation and others used 64QAM.


Ah, thank you! I bet that is what I was getting it mixed up with.

I understand about QAM, but what does the 2k and 8k refer to?

The number of subcarriers.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
Ads
  #12  
Old March 25th 10, 07:59 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 867
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:22:04 -0000, "Ivan"
wrote:

When I upgraded my Humax PVR 9200 (to a PVR 9300) I passed it on to my son
and it has worked fine until a couple of days before the DSO here in the
West region, since when it has now become so slow as to be virtually
unusable, I appreciate that this isn't a new or unknown problem with this
model, however does anyone know if there is a fix now available, or if there
will be one arriving in the not too distant future. TIA


They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?
  #13  
Old March 25th 10, 09:12 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul_Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?


I have the same here. Remote response was slow before DSO but is now
unusable. Nothing helps (not resetting or removing and adding channels
manually).
IMO Humax are now officially crap.
Going to swap mine for a Topfield or similar. I know they have problems
too but they seem to be a bit more up-front, honest and proactive about
resolving them.
The way Humax have delayed getting the 9200 update out is unforgivable!
  #14  
Old March 25th 10, 09:16 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:22:04 -0000, "Ivan"
wrote:

When I upgraded my Humax PVR 9200 (to a PVR 9300) I passed it on to my son
and it has worked fine until a couple of days before the DSO here in the
West region, since when it has now become so slow as to be virtually
unusable, I appreciate that this isn't a new or unknown problem with this
model, however does anyone know if there is a fix now available, or if there
will be one arriving in the not too distant future. TIA


They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?


It has been reported that the software is being tested by a few
customers. It is not yet ready for general release.

I suspect that the problems that people have reported cannot be
reproduced in the laboratory.


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
  #15  
Old March 25th 10, 09:23 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:12:59 +0000, Paul_Jones
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?


I have the same here. Remote response was slow before DSO but is now
unusable. Nothing helps (not resetting or removing and adding channels
manually).
IMO Humax are now officially crap.
Going to swap mine for a Topfield or similar. I know they have problems
too but they seem to be a bit more up-front, honest and proactive about
resolving them.
The way Humax have delayed getting the 9200 update out is unforgivable!


It would be even more unforgiveable if Humax released an update that
still contained major flaws from the previous version!

As a Humax PVR-9200T owner I would like to have the update as soon as
possible.

As a retired computer programmer I know that sometimes there are nasty
bugs in software that can be absolute pigs to fix.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
  #16  
Old March 25th 10, 09:31 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Paul_Jones
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:23:43 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:12:59 +0000, Paul_Jones
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?


I have the same here. Remote response was slow before DSO but is now
unusable. Nothing helps (not resetting or removing and adding channels
manually).
IMO Humax are now officially crap.
Going to swap mine for a Topfield or similar. I know they have problems
too but they seem to be a bit more up-front, honest and proactive about
resolving them.
The way Humax have delayed getting the 9200 update out is unforgivable!


It would be even more unforgiveable if Humax released an update that
still contained major flaws from the previous version!

As a Humax PVR-9200T owner I would like to have the update as soon as
possible.

As a retired computer programmer I know that sometimes there are nasty
bugs in software that can be absolute pigs to fix.


Well I suspect as it is an older product they have next to no resources
working on this. They have released updates for all the newer boxes.
I for one am buying a new box, It will not be a Humax.
  #17  
Old March 25th 10, 09:41 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Ivan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 683
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200



"Peter Duncanson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:12:59 +0000, Paul_Jones
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?


I have the same here. Remote response was slow before DSO but is now
unusable. Nothing helps (not resetting or removing and adding channels
manually).
IMO Humax are now officially crap.
Going to swap mine for a Topfield or similar. I know they have problems
too but they seem to be a bit more up-front, honest and proactive about
resolving them.
The way Humax have delayed getting the 9200 update out is unforgivable!


It would be even more unforgiveable if Humax released an update that
still contained major flaws from the previous version!

As a Humax PVR-9200T owner I would like to have the update as soon as
possible.

As a retired computer programmer I know that sometimes there are nasty
bugs in software that can be absolute pigs to fix.



Let's hope that that it is due to software and not hardware, i.e. processing
power or memory related, similar to what allegedly killed off the 250,000
Daewoo Labgear STBs with the Split Nit problem.





  #18  
Old March 25th 10, 09:43 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Scott
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 867
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:31:21 +0000, Paul_Jones
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:23:43 +0000, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:12:59 +0000, Paul_Jones
wrote:

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 20:59:41 +0000, Scott
wrote:

They have been promising an update for a long time. How difficult is
to update the software? Does anyone know?

I have the same here. Remote response was slow before DSO but is now
unusable. Nothing helps (not resetting or removing and adding channels
manually).
IMO Humax are now officially crap.
Going to swap mine for a Topfield or similar. I know they have problems
too but they seem to be a bit more up-front, honest and proactive about
resolving them.
The way Humax have delayed getting the 9200 update out is unforgivable!


It would be even more unforgiveable if Humax released an update that
still contained major flaws from the previous version!

As a Humax PVR-9200T owner I would like to have the update as soon as
possible.

As a retired computer programmer I know that sometimes there are nasty
bugs in software that can be absolute pigs to fix.


Well I suspect as it is an older product they have next to no resources
working on this. They have released updates for all the newer boxes.
I for one am buying a new box, It will not be a Humax.


Exactly. I people have a bad experience with Humax this time round
they won't be inclined to buy again. So it seems a curious business
strategy to p**s off your customers.
  #19  
Old March 25th 10, 09:52 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Steve Thackery[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,552
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200


I understand about QAM, but what does the 2k and 8k refer to?

The number of subcarriers.


Ah. So 8k has 8000 sub-carriers in the mux, rather than 2000? In other
words, the "teeth of the comb" are closer together?

Wouldn't that mean they have to slow down the data rate on each sub-carrier
so it's sidebands don't interfere with its neighbours?

SteveT



  #20  
Old March 25th 10, 10:10 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,272
Default Slow Humax PVR 9200

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:52:44 -0000, "Steve Thackery"
wrote:


I understand about QAM, but what does the 2k and 8k refer to?

The number of subcarriers.


Ah. So 8k has 8000 sub-carriers in the mux, rather than 2000? In other
words, the "teeth of the comb" are closer together?

Wouldn't that mean they have to slow down the data rate on each sub-carrier
so it's sidebands don't interfere with its neighbours?

Yes, but because the total information to be carried is divided into
8000 streams rather than 2000 the amount to be carried by each
sub-carrier is reduced to a quarter (8000/2000).[1]

This and the material it links to have much more information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OFDM

[1] According to that article 2k is actually 1,705 and 8K is 6,817 for
DVB-T (which is the standard for the current SD transmissions).


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 Digital TV Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.