BTW for those who want to hear what Dish has said about the DishWire ports click on the link below. 
http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=12467
http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=12467
IT'S OFFICIAL NO FIREWIRE ON 921!
- Thread starter Scott Greczkowski
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 214
- Views 33K
SpenceJT said:You may have read my post 'Bob', but it didn't quite sink in. I had stated that I haven't gotten a 921. That kind of makes selling something that I don't have on eBay an ethical issue!
First of all, most buyers don't care how much Dish Network may or may not be losing on the 921 debacle. That would be a "Dish's problem" and not that of the consumer.
Second of all (I don't know if you are in the PC industry) 250GB Maxtor (as well as other brand) 7200RPM drives regularly sell "over the counter" for under $200 (lower after rebates)! "1/3-1/2 of the cost"? I think not. Also keep in mind that Dish Network would receive OEM pricing on "bulk" quantities which would further lower the price.
As witnessed by one of your earlier posts
You need to get out shopping more often!
The fact of the matter remains, if Dish cuts back on the functionality of the unit, they should have a corresponding cut in the selling price.
An earlier poster used a great automobile analogy. If I were to purchase a Cadillac that was advertised to have (for fun, let's say...) a "microwave oven" to re-heat pizza from the night before, and I ordered that vehicle with that option (no matter how trivial others may think it is), I would expect to get what I pay for! If for some reason Cadillac cannot make this "microwave oven" work and decides to remove the option from the vehicle that I plan to buy at a particular price, that price should (and in Cadillac's case "would") be reduced, due to the feature's removal.
This is all I'm saying (and I think some other potential 921 buyers would agree), unless Dish lowers the price to reflect the reduction in features, I "won't" be buying (which goes back to your suggestion that I sell something that I don't have on eBay for a profit).
As for the 921 owners who are happy with the product and accepting of the reduced feature, good for them. But keep in mind, for each one of these satisfied owners, there are more 921 owners who are furious over Dish's design failure and are not in denial over spending too much for a product that does not deliver on it's advertised features.
Perhaps you are in denial for having paid so much?
1. Sorry, with your emphatic statement that you wanted a refund I assumed you had one.
2. As far as it being "Dish's problem", you're being naive if you don't think that those costs will be eventually passed on to all of us in some way or another.
3. As for the costs of the drive, I'll agree with your statement as I haven't priced individual components in a while. Last year when we were all arguing about the anticipated costs of the 250 GB drives most agreed that $350-400 was the cost which was the basis for my percentage statement. Also, don't forget R & D as a portion as well....... As this is a limited run item compared to a 301, the cost must be amortized over all the units as well..... Whether or not they have adequately designed and tested it (I can hear you all snickering), they still spent money developing it which has to be recouped somewhere.
4. As for demanding a lower cost... OK. I think there MAY be a price break if the components have fallen in cost, but I doubt it. We all waited for the 721 to drop in cost and it has rarely dropped below the $500 mark until recently when I saw DishDepot.com had run a sale. I'm not counting discontiued items.... E* has actually cut some great deals on receivers that they have discontinued (I remember the deal I got on my 2nd Dishplayer which came with the elimination of the Personal TV fee)
5. Before the 921 I had two requirements that weren't being met..... I had an HD Monitor with no HD programming and a steadfast resolution that I would never buy a non-PVR receiver for my primary receiver ever again. The 921 is the only E* receiver that satisfies both of those needs and it was worth $1000 to me. Internet access on my Dishplayer was occasionally useful (a 56" TV made reading text easy) but it wasn't a dealbreaker when it went away on the 721. Ditto for the DVHS port on the 921. Once again, though.... I "understand' the anger that is out there if this was the core reason for you getting one, but most of the people I've talked to in the non-enthusiast world don't even know what DVHS is, but they do want to be able to watch HD content and record it on a PVR.
I apologize if I am "projecting" my needs onto the product and seem to be ignoring other negative viewpoints, but many of those storming the castle with torches raised are also guilty in the other direction of blocking out the good things that this receiver DOES do well.
That being said, I'm going to start distancing myself now from this whole debate for a while. I've got Bob Haller using my name as a poster child for for all E* apologists, so I need to back off this debate for a bit. I'm a counterpuncher who tries to dispel anger when I come across it, but I seem to be generating MORE of it so I'll let the rest of you folks skirmish for a bit now without me.
OH MY GOSH!!! RUN MURDOCH RUN!!!!BobMurdoch said:
As you can see (and my wife can attest) I enjoy a health argument. You make some valid points on the overall cost of bring the 921 to market. If Dish doesn't lower the price (admittedly wishful thinking on my part), I'll be feeling sad because I was really looking forward to purchasing one, but as Dish has now shaken my confidence I'm once again stuck playing the waiting game to see what comes around from all of this.
Regards,
Spence
Not sure if this adds fuel to the already raging fire, but saw a link on vssll.com about an FCC rule here:
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.pdf
of which part caught my attention.
Quote: Pg 50:
(4) Cable operators shall:
(i) Effective April 1, 2004, upon request of a customer,
replace any leased high definition set-top box, which does not
include a functional IEEE 1394 interface, with one that includes a
functional IEEE 1394 interface or upgrade the customer's set-top
box by download or other means to ensure that the IEEE 1394
interface is functional.
end quote:
Now E* might be lucky that the 921's were'nt leased to customers (that I know of!), but what about the newer 811 customers on lease plans? Should they now be demanding "functional" 1394 interfaces?
The whole document is heavy going... and my my quick reading "Cable Operators" would include E*.
Like I say, possible fuel to the fire?
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-03-225A1.pdf
of which part caught my attention.
Quote: Pg 50:
(4) Cable operators shall:
(i) Effective April 1, 2004, upon request of a customer,
replace any leased high definition set-top box, which does not
include a functional IEEE 1394 interface, with one that includes a
functional IEEE 1394 interface or upgrade the customer's set-top
box by download or other means to ensure that the IEEE 1394
interface is functional.
end quote:
Now E* might be lucky that the 921's were'nt leased to customers (that I know of!), but what about the newer 811 customers on lease plans? Should they now be demanding "functional" 1394 interfaces?
The whole document is heavy going... and my my quick reading "Cable Operators" would include E*.
Like I say, possible fuel to the fire?
Cable operators are not under the same set of rules. They are forced to carry broadcast networks from two areas sometimes while DBS is prohibited from doing so. Plus, last I checked the cable companies don't pay for those feeds while satellite does (unless they designate themselves must carry and take no compensation)
true but that rule does kinda make it impossible for dish to blame the firewire diaster on copyright issues if the fcc are forcing it on cable companys
If a Dish 921 was a Cadillac
If a Dish 921 was a Cadillac then:
Your Cadillac would stall out for an unknown reason while driving down the highway every 10-20 miles. You can stop and restart it, but then somewhere down the road it will stall again.
You take it back to the dealer where they say they fixed it, so now the wipers don't work and it still stalls out intermittently.
Your Cadillac would have power windows but to cover a problem with the wiring, they decided to cover over the controls so you couldn't roll the windows up or down. The also don't install manual cranks either. Hope the AC never goes out.
Your Cadillac was ordered because they offered rich Italian Leather seats. Something you could sit back and sink into. When it was delivered, you notice they are vinyl. You call the dealer and they say that they will send the Leather seats sometime in the future, but not sure exactly when.
Cadillac comes with OnStar. When you press the OnStar button, the CSR that comes on, can't help you, puts you on hold, or has to get a supervisor to help solve your problem. They talk you in circles and never really help you. You push the button again and get another CSR and get the same run-around again. (Good thing its not life threatening huh???)
Now, if Cadillac and it was akin to a 921, then it would only take about 90 days before Cadillac was bankrupt, or facing so many lawsuits that it would make Johnnie Cochran commit himself to Bellvue.
So why is it since this is just a consumer electronics device that none of the normal Federal Trade Commission rules apply to Dish Network? Are they exempt? Why as consumers do we let big business push our buttons and let them get away with it?
There is no such thing as CAN't get Dishwire/Firewire on the 921 to work. It boils down to profit. It would cost more to FIX the 921 with a possible whole redesign from the ground up than to just cover up the 1394 port and pretend like it was never there.
This mentality reminds me of my kids when they were 3 or 4 years old. If they broke something, they would take it and hide it under the covers of their bed or under the couch cushion. That is EXACTLY the mentality Dish has with the 921. THey broke it and now they are cramming it under the covers where they hope that no one will find it.
The only problem is that this is reality and the same logic doesn't apply for the grownup real world.
Dish - Grow up! Take responsibility for your actions. Fix the problem and replace the 921's that already hit the market.
If a Dish 921 was a Cadillac then:
Your Cadillac would stall out for an unknown reason while driving down the highway every 10-20 miles. You can stop and restart it, but then somewhere down the road it will stall again.
You take it back to the dealer where they say they fixed it, so now the wipers don't work and it still stalls out intermittently.
Your Cadillac would have power windows but to cover a problem with the wiring, they decided to cover over the controls so you couldn't roll the windows up or down. The also don't install manual cranks either. Hope the AC never goes out.
Your Cadillac was ordered because they offered rich Italian Leather seats. Something you could sit back and sink into. When it was delivered, you notice they are vinyl. You call the dealer and they say that they will send the Leather seats sometime in the future, but not sure exactly when.
Cadillac comes with OnStar. When you press the OnStar button, the CSR that comes on, can't help you, puts you on hold, or has to get a supervisor to help solve your problem. They talk you in circles and never really help you. You push the button again and get another CSR and get the same run-around again. (Good thing its not life threatening huh???)
Now, if Cadillac and it was akin to a 921, then it would only take about 90 days before Cadillac was bankrupt, or facing so many lawsuits that it would make Johnnie Cochran commit himself to Bellvue.
So why is it since this is just a consumer electronics device that none of the normal Federal Trade Commission rules apply to Dish Network? Are they exempt? Why as consumers do we let big business push our buttons and let them get away with it?
There is no such thing as CAN't get Dishwire/Firewire on the 921 to work. It boils down to profit. It would cost more to FIX the 921 with a possible whole redesign from the ground up than to just cover up the 1394 port and pretend like it was never there.
This mentality reminds me of my kids when they were 3 or 4 years old. If they broke something, they would take it and hide it under the covers of their bed or under the couch cushion. That is EXACTLY the mentality Dish has with the 921. THey broke it and now they are cramming it under the covers where they hope that no one will find it.
The only problem is that this is reality and the same logic doesn't apply for the grownup real world.
Dish - Grow up! Take responsibility for your actions. Fix the problem and replace the 921's that already hit the market.
Great post Mark.
I hope Dish listens to what you have to say.
Somehow, I feel your points will fall on deaf ears @ Dish.
I hope Dish listens to what you have to say.
Somehow, I feel your points will fall on deaf ears @ Dish.
90% of the complants wouldnt be so bad if dish just leveled with us i dont think its much to ask
beast37799 said:90% of the complants wouldnt be so bad if dish just leveled with us i dont think its much to ask
As I am sure many others have done, I just got off the phone with C.J. Meany who works for Mark Duffy at Echostar.
Here is what he said:
1) Firewire on the 921 will NEVER be enabled.
2) He is trying to find out WHY this is the case.
3) He does not agree with the decision since it hurts their competitive position with the Cable companies. Directv is not a concern because they also do not have a Firewire PVR for customers.
4) He will be letting us know the reason for no firewire as soon as he finds out.
He reads avsforum,dbstalk and this forum on a regular basis and knows all about our concern but obviously can not post. He said he could let Mark over at dbstalk know as well as putting an anouncement on dishnetwork.com
5) He is not happy that Echostar has not come out with a public anouncement yet and understands our frustration. He said that his emails to upper management as to why are going un-answered.
6) The most he has found out so far is that it has nothing to do with the MPAA nor is it a HW problem. He has read all about the rumors in the forums as to why and is just as frustrated that he can not get a straight answer from upper management.
His finishing statement was " As soon as I find out why , it will be published ASAP".
Take this for what it is worth.
Item #1 is all I need to know as I am now going to return the JVC deck that I bought in anticipation of being able to archive.
Joe
Well, we're certainly getting conflicting "inside" reports:
--Matt Stevens reports his contacts say it's definitely a HW problem.
--Someone on AVS says that JVC blames it on the MPAA.
--And now this report that E* "customer support specialists" are saying it's neither, but aren't being told what it is exactly.
All I can say is, based on their track record recently, statements from E* employees have little credibility with me. My gut-feel favorite conspiracy theory is still that E* wanted a cut of D-VHS sales, couldn't strike a deal with JVC.
Coming soon to Dish Network... Introducing a new Firewire interconnectivity, available for only $4.95 per month.
That's the only reason not being banter about. If it's not legal, nor HW limited, it'll be connected to money.
Additional Receiver Fee $4.99
DVR Fee $4.98
Firewire Activation $4.95
The stockholders should be proud.
That's the only reason not being banter about. If it's not legal, nor HW limited, it'll be connected to money.
Additional Receiver Fee $4.99
DVR Fee $4.98
Firewire Activation $4.95
The stockholders should be proud.
gpflepsen said:
Don't forget.. many of us pay the $5 access fee for not having a SD package.. and only get HBO/Showtime/HD package
I just became one of those. I used to pay about $95/month now I am down to $28. I signed up for comcast platinum with the dish win back deal ($25 credit per month) so in essence, I get it free.
FREAK!
BobMurdoch said:
The actual costs to manufacture have very little to do (in as much as the costs are convered) with the price as sold. It's all about the marketing. E* may be able to make one 921 at "cost" for say $100 (or less) but you will never find them for sale for $200.
lovswr said:
It's a lot more than marketing. Design, Development, Engineering and Support costs must be recovered.
NightRyder
Another reason to dump Dish over the firewire debacle and go back to Cable
I missed sirlurkalot's post of 4/21, reproduced below; but yesterday phoned Comcast in Chicago after reading a note in The Perfect Vision about the FCC requirement that cable companies provide Firewire output for HD customers who request it. Comcast had never heard of this rule; and I wasn't speaking to a CSR, I had been transferred to someone who deals with government affairs.
Anyway, after we talked, I did some searching and through a link on Usenet, found the same document sirlurkalot mentioned.
I missed the stuff on page 50, but was very interested in page 12-13, section D, paragraph 24.
D. High Definition Set-Top Boxes
24. Cable subscribers owning unidirectional digital cable televisions or DTV
monitors that wish to receive advanced, interactive services will need a separate set-top box in order to do so. As a means of ensuring the connectivity of these devices, the proposed rules would obligate all cable operators, effective December 31, 2003, to replace or upgrade subscriber-leased high definition set-top boxes upon subscriber request to ensure that such boxes have “functional” 1394 interfaces. For these purposes, a “functional” 1394 means a 1394 interface with appropriate software support.61 Starting July 1, 2005, all high definition set-top boxes acquired by cable operators for distribution to subscribers would need to include a 1394 interface and either a Digital Visual Interface (“DVI”) or High Definition multimedia Interface (“HDMI”). High definition set-top boxes provided to subscribers pursuant to these deadlines would also need to comply with certain technical standards. No comments were received objecting to these proposals. We believe that these interface and technical requirements will set a baseline for connectivity ensuring that cable subscribers are able to fully enjoy the range of services offered by their cable provider in a secure, digital format. As such, we adopt these high definition set-top box obligations and defer the December 31, 2003 obligation to April 1, 2004.
I will continue to press Comcast, and encourage others to do the same with their local cable companies.
I missed sirlurkalot's post of 4/21, reproduced below; but yesterday phoned Comcast in Chicago after reading a note in The Perfect Vision about the FCC requirement that cable companies provide Firewire output for HD customers who request it. Comcast had never heard of this rule; and I wasn't speaking to a CSR, I had been transferred to someone who deals with government affairs.
Anyway, after we talked, I did some searching and through a link on Usenet, found the same document sirlurkalot mentioned.
I missed the stuff on page 50, but was very interested in page 12-13, section D, paragraph 24.
D. High Definition Set-Top Boxes
24. Cable subscribers owning unidirectional digital cable televisions or DTV
monitors that wish to receive advanced, interactive services will need a separate set-top box in order to do so. As a means of ensuring the connectivity of these devices, the proposed rules would obligate all cable operators, effective December 31, 2003, to replace or upgrade subscriber-leased high definition set-top boxes upon subscriber request to ensure that such boxes have “functional” 1394 interfaces. For these purposes, a “functional” 1394 means a 1394 interface with appropriate software support.61 Starting July 1, 2005, all high definition set-top boxes acquired by cable operators for distribution to subscribers would need to include a 1394 interface and either a Digital Visual Interface (“DVI”) or High Definition multimedia Interface (“HDMI”). High definition set-top boxes provided to subscribers pursuant to these deadlines would also need to comply with certain technical standards. No comments were received objecting to these proposals. We believe that these interface and technical requirements will set a baseline for connectivity ensuring that cable subscribers are able to fully enjoy the range of services offered by their cable provider in a secure, digital format. As such, we adopt these high definition set-top box obligations and defer the December 31, 2003 obligation to April 1, 2004.
I will continue to press Comcast, and encourage others to do the same with their local cable companies.
sirlurkalot said:
"The whole document is heavy going... and my my quick reading "Cable Operators" would include E*."
May ask how you could possibly construe a Satellite company as a Cable operator?
Also, I keep reading in the various forums about firewire enabled Cable PVR's for archiving to D-VHS.
How can one make that assumption?
The 1394 connection can merely be a way of connecting the PVR to your TV set.
I know one person personally who uses a firewire STB to connect to his TV set and it has nada to do with dumping to tape. Can't even do it.
Joe
May ask how you could possibly construe a Satellite company as a Cable operator?
Also, I keep reading in the various forums about firewire enabled Cable PVR's for archiving to D-VHS.
How can one make that assumption?
The 1394 connection can merely be a way of connecting the PVR to your TV set.
I know one person personally who uses a firewire STB to connect to his TV set and it has nada to do with dumping to tape. Can't even do it.
Joe
