<phil-news-nospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:fvfnee111hu@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Thu, 1 May 2008 20:17:34 -0500 Deke <no spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> | Yes. And, at the same time, watch a program already recorded from the
hard
> | drive, SD or HD. So you are recording 3 HD programs, two from
satellite,
> | and one from OTA, while watching something else from the Hard Drive.
> | Its an amazing machine. It kicks sand in the face of every other DVR
that I
> | know of. Plus you can add an external
> | hard drive, up to 750gb, without losing the use of the built-in hard
drive.
> | I'm using mine in single mode, by the way. The above features may not
be
> | available in dual mode, but who cares?
>
> I noticed that 750GB limit. I'd like to have a talk with the
programmers
as
> to why they put that limit in place (or the managers if they are the
ones
who
> did that). I happen to have a 1TB USB drive spare right now. There are
2TB
> drives out now (they say the 722 does not support array drives, but
those
can
> be set up to appear as one drive, so I don't know what the issue with
that
is).
>
> What good programmers should do (and good managers not get in the way
of)
is
> simply accept whatever size gets plugged in. I do understand why they
are
> encrypting the recordings keyed to the subscriber account. If the drive
is
> a 16TB drive that the USB standard _can_ handle NOW, and _will_ show up
at
> some point in the future, then their firmware code should just accept it
and
> use it all.
>
> Maybe they are limiting their code to 32 bit integers to index sectors?
If
> they did, they could do up to 2TB. Even if they were dumb and used only
> signed 32 bit ints to do that, they could still go up to 1TB. The 750GB
> limit just doesn't make sense from a technical perspective. Someone had
to
> have made an aritificial decision to set that limit.
>
> I have a 1TB drive that is actually less than 1TB expressed in binary.
Even
> with signed 32 bit ints indexing sectors, the whole drive can be
accessed
as
> it is just short of the full binary 1TB size.
>
> USB supports multiple drives connected through a hub. Why can't they
handle
> that? Bad programmers or bad managers again?
>
> Features I'd like to see that COST THEM MONEY (so I don't expect they
would
> do for that reason): connectivity for Firewire drives, eSATA drives, CF
cards,
> SDHC card, ... and even allow BURNING onto attached DVD or BR-DVD
recorders
> in the encrypted form that can only play back on the same account (not
on
the
> regular players unless the player is attached through the recivers
associated
> with that account).
>
> --
> |WARNING: Due to extreme spam, I no longer see any articles originating
from |
> | Google Groups. If you want your postings to be seen by more
readers |
> | you will need to find a different place to post on Usenet.
|
> | Phil Howard KA9WGN (email for humans: first name in lower case at
ipal.net) |
(shrug) I use multiple external hard drives. That way if one of them
bites
the dust, only what was stored on that HD is lost. Plus theres the
transfer
speed to consider. It takes awhile to transfer a movie from the internal
HD
to another.
You can go on and on about coulda-shoulda-woulda, but the fact remains,
the
DN 722 is hands down the best on the market.
You could just get a bunch of computer stuff, and build your own.
|
