New Manhattan RS-1933 info

[sergei]

In my case I'm going to buy two of the S10 receivers and I'll end up saving my self around 55 dollars and will have two new units instead one Manhattan.

 

[brentb636]

Not a bad strategy, but I'm selling one of my Openbox units, to acquire a Manhattan, hoping for at least as good a reciever, and that the remotes don't collide so that I can use both , at the same time.

 

[Anole]

no expectations

Oh Green One !
I know you remember the way that Brian of SatAV worked with us to get the obvious flaws out of the Visionsat IV-200.
The problems were addressed, one by one, until at the end, it was a quite competent receiver and PVR.
Hopefully, we'll see a similar mechanism on the Manhattan box.
Then , it will be the best it can be , which will serve my purpose just fine.

That was one outstanding example of support. :up
There have been few if any others.
So, I have no expectations.
Kinda like the southern California weather: 99% chance today will be just like yesterday.
Talk is cheap. Call me Xmas and tell me how it worked out. -

 

[ikki]

Did any one get one of these yet and actually use it?

 

[brentb636]

There are some Beta testers who've used it, but they still haven't shipped . Read on another site that they still haven't cleared customs.

 

[Davage]

They've cleared customs and Mike Kohl has got some in hand.. I talked with Mike a couple of days ago, and he said that he's going to do a 'burn-in' for 48 hours on a few of the units to make sure that they don't fail right out of the box before he ships. I am getting mine next week

 

[Anole]

See if you can get the FCC ID number (sticker).
We can look up the unit on the FCC database.

 

[greg harris]

Here is what Jeff posted today:

Product is in and shipping!

Thank you to everyone in helping make this happen.

Regards,

Jeff Schumann

I just wanted to let you know that we tested 4.2.2 and it does not perform on this receiver. Sorry!

But that does not mean we will not try to get this right. We are seeing the speed is just not there with this processor.

Jeff Schumann

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I appreciate Jeff being honest.

I may pick one up. If Jeff would like us (us meaning Iceberg) to review one and feature it on the homepage he should contact me.

 

[yankee495]

Several months ago I read the manual (and the other day) for this receiver. I know there have been some changes. It appears to be a S9 work-a-like so to speak. I mean, it has all the same features, jump and everything. Menus look like re-skinned S9 menus.

BUT, software can make or break a receiver. Maybe all the features will work (correctly) on this one!

 

[mr3p]

I don't think anyone truly expected it to be able to decode 4:2:2 but I don't understand Jeff's comments:

"But that does not mean we will not try to get this right. We are seeing the speed is just not there with this processor."

The two statments seem to be contradictory...

Looking forward to reading the reviews.

 

[SatelliteAV]

The processor speed has nothing to do with a receiver being capable of processing a signal encoded with 422 profile. The codec for 422p decoding is either included in the chipset or it is not.

ALI processors support the decoding of several MPEG Profiles, but 422p is not a supported profile. There are several chipsets which support the 422 profile decoding, but no ALI SoC supports the 422 profile.

 

[stanleyjohn]

Looks like AZbox can breath easier! As long as no other satellite receiver manufacture is willing to add 4:2:2 AZbox dont need to worry so much about the competition.4:2:2 may not be very popular but i see it enough on my sso to be glad i also have a AZbox.Still i wish the manhattan well! Been following its threads since the beginning and may get one someday.

 

[mr3p]

The processor speed has nothing to do with a receiver being capable of processing a signal encoded with 422 profile. The codec for 422p decoding is either included in the chipset or it is not.

ALI processors support the decoding of several MPEG Profiles, but 422p is not a supported profile. There are several chipsets which support the 422 profile decoding, but no ALI SoC supports the 422 profile.

Thanks Brian. I sort of knew it wasn't capable of 4:2:2 but now I know why

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

It was my understanding that from a few people that PMed me that they were trying to get 4:2:2 running by using a software codec in the background. That might be why the processor wasnt fast enough.

 

[stone1150]

It was my understanding that from a few people that PMed me that they were trying to get 4:2:2 running by using a software codec in the background. That might be why the processor wasnt fast enough.

Correct.... That said, it was mentioned about a higher end receiver with more features in the future. Let's let them get this one down first. After all, everyone crawls before they walk, and they walk before they can run. Have a great day!

 

[neftv]

Looks to me like another unremarkable box for $200, wow.

 

[brentb636]

Looks to me like another unremarkable box for $200, wow.

So you've tried it out, or know someone who has ? What receiver do YOU consider a remarkable box ?

 

[stone1150]

So you've tried it out, or know someone who has ? What receiver do YOU consider a remarkable box ?

It will be tried out next week my friend.. Have a great day!

 

[brentb636]

It will be tried out next week my friend.. Have a great day!

I hope me, too. Haven't heard yet from Mike Kohl on shipping, but I talked with his wife and know that he has the boxes. I'll be quite happy if it's as good as the Openbox S9 . There's even room for more happiness yet, if it happens to be better at meeting it's specs.