Here comes L2.19 for the 921

Toggle sidebar
L219heed-n

L219heed-n,
I'd like to know if there is a place at the FCC I can go to online and complain about DishNet. They charge me a $5 Access Fee and deny me EPG OTA programming in my Guide. They charge me a $4.98 DVR Service Fee and upgrade the DVR so it shows EPG OTA programming in the Guide and allows DVR use as more AUTO and less Manual. Then they take it away and screw up my HD channels that had guide info so they can't be watched. Then they fix the channel problem, but don't allow the EPG OTA programming to return. This is just totally wrong. Why am I being extorted into paying a DVR Service Fee, when there maintenance is used primarily to try and extort me into paying for the crappy Satellite SD channels that I can already get OTA for free (and in HD), just to enable a service that I know can already work without there crappy Satellite Channels.........
O.K.
Now I almost feel better....


Al
 
I don't think the FCC would have jurisdiction. If you wanted OTA channels with EPG from PSID, get a regular digital tuner. If you don't want to pay a $5 access fee, subscribe to a package that already has it included. If you don't want to pay for a DVR fee, don't have a DVR (or get a 501 or 508). That doesn't make these fees "right", but E* certainly has the "right" to charge them.
 
kavula said:
I don't think the FCC would have jurisdiction. If you wanted OTA channels with EPG from PSID, get a regular digital tuner. If you don't want to pay a $5 access fee, subscribe to a package that already has it included. If you don't want to pay for a DVR fee, don't have a DVR (or get a 501 or 508). That doesn't make these fees "right", but E* certainly has the "right" to charge them.
Click to expand...

yep, I agree completely. TV is not a necessity of life and we do live in a capitalist country where we are all entitled to charge what the market will support. I don't like the DVR charges either, but I don't have to have a dvr, I choose too and with my choice comes the fact that to have this, I must pay a fee. It's still way cheaper than a cable DVR in my area (that is the only part that keeps me from getting cable is I would be paying $25.00 month in DVR charges compared to $10 now for dish DVR's, everything else is equal between dish and cable in my area except cable has HD locals)

Oh and back to subject of the thread, my 921 has not downloaded 219 yet... is this release widespread?

Edit: 7:08pm, my 921 finally started downloading it.
 
Hope they have fixed the bug where a timer fires 24 hours earlyu and then doesn't record the show it was supposed to...
 
kavula said:
I don't think the FCC would have jurisdiction. If you wanted OTA channels with EPG from PSID, get a regular digital tuner.
Click to expand...
The FCC requires DTV stations to transmit at least minimal guide information. The intent is for viewers to see the free guide included with the free broadcast. The no-fee 811 already gets Dish's EPG for locals but the 921 and 942 do not. The business decision here is not which box the consumer buys but whether Dish implements a full PSIP solution or uses the more complete guide they already have and adds the missing channels. Their choice. One compromise proposal would have Dish adding PSIP and selling their own guide as an upgrade.
SatinKzo said:
we do live in a capitalist country where we are all entitled to charge what the market will support.
Click to expand...
Capitalism is not the right to swindle.
 
E* isn't swindling, and SatinKzo's post did not infer swindling. In any event, I still believe that the FCC has no jurisdiction over the actual digital tuners. They can regulate the digital OTA stations and make them broadcast PSIP info. I think your compromise is what should be, but it's E*'s choice.
 
I should have said "Capitalism is not the right to get away with anything you think you can." In addition to having to provide a product or service in return for revenue received, companies may have to meet regulatory obligations. I was trying to limit my response to the OTA EPG issue but it got colored by the part about DVR fees that I snipped because I didn't want to hijack the thread as it has nothing to do with the L219 download.
 
yeah, I think you read my post wrong, I was just stating the basic concept of capitalism in that if there is a market for a product, the seller is entitiled to charge what the market will pay, not saying that any business practice was acceptable. While controls must be in place to prevent gouging on a captive market. Enough econ though. :)
I agree on the regulatory part completely. The fact that the 921 can pull in ota guide data and it is being blocked is not acceptable to me, but I already sub to dish locals for my other receivers so I don't feel that I am being forced into something, but I can completely empathize with the others who are being forced to get dish locals for incomplete guide data.
 
I don't need the sd locals - I get them fine and HD OTA. I am very upset that they are trying to force me to order them to get the OTA and by the way, I'm all for capitalism but there are limits to permittable abuses. One, as outlined in the Sherman Anti-Trust acts, is that you cannot pair products - forcing a consumer to buy one product that they don't want (sd locals)in order to get the other (OTA guide). This is flat out illegal and more than the FCC should be looking into it.

BTW - since the latest update - L219, my SD picture has been getting stuck in stretch mode. 3X I have had to reboot b/c of the problem. I believe that this was an erlier problem fixed by updates that came before I got my 921, and now its back b/c they have rolled back good updates to stop the "problem" of people getting their proper OTA guides. I believe that these rollbacks have only come because people that were subscribing to locals just to get the OTA guide cancelled their locals package when Dish began to offer the OTA guide to everybody. When people cancelled, someone freaked and demanded these changes that have been screwing us for weeks.

Someone at Dish - Please stop the madness and just make my expensive 921 work right!!!!!
 
spiderg8r said:
I don't need the sd locals - I get them fine and HD OTA. I am very upset that they are trying to force me to order them to get the OTA and by the way, I'm all for capitalism but there are limits to permittable abuses. One, as outlined in the Sherman Anti-Trust acts, is that you cannot pair products - forcing a consumer to buy one product that they don't want (sd locals)in order to get the other (OTA guide). This is flat out illegal and more than the FCC should be looking into it.
Click to expand...

Yep, and I agree completely that this should not be allowed, but as we all have seen in this country, any good lawyer could fight it and tie it up for a long time till we all get our class action PPV certificates. :) Don't get me wrong. I don't agree with it and I think the only reason why this is not a huge issue with the public is not enough people own a 921 and get decent OTA reception.

The other part that burns me is the fact that because they are blocking the OTA guide data, they are blocking my guide data for my OTA subchannels too.
 
kavula said:
I don't think the FCC would have jurisdiction. If you wanted OTA channels with EPG from PSID, get a regular digital tuner. If you don't want to pay a $5 access fee, subscribe to a package that already has it included. If you don't want to pay for a DVR fee, don't have a DVR (or get a 501 or 508). That doesn't make these fees "right", but E* certainly has the "right" to charge them.
Click to expand...


Not quite correct. The FCC has jurisdiction, but at this time has chosen to request manufacturers to voluntarily comply with the Feb 1, 2005 deadline to implement PSIP EIT, the part of the PSIP that was adopted by the ATSC and FCC regulation for all broadcasters. The FCC stated that if the manufacturers fail to voluntarily comply with theui request they will have to revisit the regulation. In effect they want it to first be voluntary but if they don't comply, it will become mandatory. The same thing happened years ago with NTSC when the FCC requested UHF tuners be built into all TV sets. Later they were forced to regulate it and forbid any TV set designed to be a receiver for licensed broadcast television to include both VHF and UHF tuner capability.
So, with that said, understand that currently the FCC is not regulating the implementation of PSIP EIT in any receiver. But this fact should not stop any of you from complaining to the FCC because they want to know. If enough complaints against DishNetwork are received, the FCC will look into what's going on very seriously.
Part of the PSIP EIT implementation is that the manufacturer has a choice to offer a substitute that will equal or better the current PSIP featureset. Both D* and E* do offer this as the Tribune Media Service (TMS) but only E* charges extra for it. While this would seem to comply with the FCC's offer for a better substitute, the fact that Dish Network forces it's subscribers to purchase an unnecessary service (LIL for $5.99/mo.) to get it makes the practice somewhat unethical, IMO. And, it indeed may also violate the Sherman antitrust act as spiderg8r just stated but that is an area I'm not familiar with so I trust his statement is valid.

IMO, there are two ways change will happen with this, first is if E* realizes how silly their marketing strategy is and enough of us do what I recently did which is cancel a large portion of my subscription package as a way to demonstrate my stand against their practice of forcing LIL. I cancelled my AEP with an expressed reason I was moving my basic service to their competition because I did not agree with their policy in this area. The second thing to do is to write to the FCC and let them know that E* is using the PSIP EIT ruling to force a sale of unrelated service, in effect charging us to supply what the FCC has licensed for a free OTA broadcast. That E* is refusing to implement the EIT from the local OTA to force subscribers to pay for the value added TMS. Request that the FCC regulate the addition of PSIP EIT to all ATSC tuners for OTA broadcast signals.

Keep in mind that even if the FCC forces compliance with the regulation, this may not require E* to implement DVR features on the PSIP EIT populated grid as we all are now familiar with the TMS populated grid. Plus, the fact that the 921 only has one tuner could force the 921 to operate in a very sluggish manner as it would scan the airwaves for EIT data to populate the grid. Meanwhile the OTA function would be crippled or the guide uopdates put on hold while you actually watch or record programming. In effect, implementation of PSIP EIT will not be an elegant solution on any single tuner receiver such as the 921. The very fact that these requests are being begged for by 921 owners may become a rude awakening to the real world limitations in what PSIP EIT really can do in these tuners. Even the HD TIVO with it's dual OTA tuner would suffer some flexibility in being able to update the grid while a background recording is happening. It won't be near as ugly as the 921 or any single tuner DVR. So, the old saying goes, be careful what you wish for...

IMO, if E* did comply with the FCC request to implement EIT and then offered the enhanced TMS service as an isolated offering separated from the LIL service, they would not only be in complete compliance with the FCC guidelines, maybe free of that Sherman antitrust act violation, but also be giving customers what they really want while allowing others to opt out but would have to suffer the natural limits of the equipment they chose to buy.
 
Scott Greczkowski

DISH Network Will Launch One Lucky Winner's Name into Space

  • Scott Greczkowski
  • Replies: 11
C

Need some advice

  • CJPC
  • Replies: 11

Latest posts

Share this page

Share this page
Top
Back