Milwaukee HDTV User Group

Looks nice! I'm very familiar with Simple Machines. Should work very well.

I only use TW at home for Internet. I use D* for programming.

I'm fearful of less speed, data caps and who knows what else.

I must chime in too. The Packer game looked horrid during any kind of fast motion. I watched Hawaii Five-O the other night too and it was literally almost unwatchable. It's crazy... Very poor use of spectrum for sure. Leave it to them to ruin a perfectly good technology.

Thanks for that... Can't wait for the HD interface.

But what is even better news in that link is that D* will be adding AMC-HD next week! I'll not have to wait on the BluRays of The Walking Dead this year to watch the show. Fantabulous!

Quote from: duncantuna;57382So .. what are the specs for Home Business Service?

Almost exactly what I'm getting. 15M down x 2M up for $49/mth.

I just got the 'home business service' which is their product for the 'home office' for existing business clients and their employees. It's only $49 a month, so it's pretty speed appropriate and a big improvement over what I had before (7M x 512). And all for the same price.

My install is complete. Woo hoo!



Had to upgrade my ancient router to be able to take advantage of the faster download speeds. It's always something... one thing leads to another.

Quote from: LoadStar;57365...Any information on whom/where I should contact, or is this something you obtained through a contact at your employer?

Yeah, I got it by asking our TW rep at work. Not sure how you'd go about it if you don't have BizClass service at your employer.

If anyone has TimeWarner Business Class service at work, I just found out that I can get a good deal here at home with their 'home business service'. Same price as the RR fee I was paying ($49) and I get BizClass support along with 15M down and 2M up. That's compared to the 7M down and 512M up I was getting. It was a no brainer here... better support and more than double the speeds for the same price.

I noticed it. Took me about three times before I put it together and figured out what was happening. It was a BIG difference in sound. I was listening in 5.1 and when they put the overlay up, it went to what seemed like just the center speaker. Very amateurish to say the least.

Quote from: Tom Snyder;56496I have 2 DVR's. The saved contents of each are displayed in a single list on both machines, as well as the non DVR unit in the basement.

Right, same here. ALL recordings show in the now playing on all DVRs, no matter where they were recorded or are actually saved at. That's the cool thing about the whole home feature. As you said earlier, it effectively gives you a 4 tuner DVR with additional storage space.

But, even though they all show on all now playing lists, the recordings actually live on the DVR where you set it to record.

Unfortunately, I don't think you can move them from on DVR to another. I think they get married to them in the setup process when you first add them. What happens is the internal drive is disabled and the operating system software is copied to the eSata drive. The DVR now uses that drive as it's only drive. I don't think it will work if you then plug it into another drive. I think the second DVR would want to format and setup that drive again, thus erasing all the stored data (shows).

I don't know if this would work or not, but maybe a full back up of the eSata drive to another eSata drive or NAS on your home network could be restored if the original drive were to fail. You'd have to do some research on the D* boards on that though.

The recordings save to the DVR where they are set to record. There is no central server. At least in my setup. I think that's a good thing. There is a small delay when selecting shows, using trick plays etc., when accessing recordings that are on a remote DVR. If they ALL where on a central server, that delay might be there for all of them.

Yes, you can add eSata drives to DVRs to increase space. I have a terabyte eSata drive on my main DVR in the theater.

Quote from: foxeng;56424If the cameras will do 16:9, you can transition to SD 16:9 for about 1/15th (yes one-fifteenth) of the cost of going HD. Most people will think they are HD anyway just because the full screen is being used.

Wow... If it's truly that big of a savings, then that's probably the reason behind it all. If they were still in need of equipment to do true HD, this gets them closer at a substantial savings.

Not saying I like it, but it likely explains the move.

Quote from: foxeng;56418It is general practice in the industry now to continue to use 4:3 safe title area even on a 16:9 raster due to the number of 4:3 analog sets that are still in the market (over 90% of homes still have at least one 4:3 analog still in use). The current FOX Sports 16:9/letterbox is a prime example. Cable doesn't want to do it because of the complaints they get from those with 4:3, even if they have HD sets in other rooms.

Right, I understand that. Again, I must not be expressing myself very well. I'm wondering why they bothered going with a 16:9 image when it's only SD. Why not way till they could provide an HD image as well? Seems like a half-assed move to me.