Only one dvr alllowed per house?

[Indy_1]

We got Uverse installed yesterday.  When we signed up the guy told us after we got everything set up, we could order a 2nd dvr for $15.  The installer said that isn't true and apologized for us being told that.  We had 3 two tuner Tivos with Directv, so odd we can only have one with Uverse.  Hopefully the installer was wrong and we can get another dvr.

[Pip_2]

---

Indy wrote:
We got Uverse installed yesterday.  When we signed up the guy told us after we got everything set up, we could order a 2nd dvr for $15.  The installer said that isn't true and apologized for us being told that.  We had 3 two tuner Tivos with Directv, so odd we can only have one with Uverse.  Hopefully the installer was wrong and we can get another dvr.

---

The installer was right Indy, sorry.

One DVR per house and down the road whole house DVR (WHDVR) will be available. When exactly though, is anyones guess.

Whoever signed you up was wrong.

[Indy_1]

Not what I wanted to read.  May be a short tenure with Uverse then.  Wife isn't happy, so I'm not happy   Tonight, when my son was to go to bed, he turned his tv on, and caused what I was watching to turn off.  I was recording 3 movies and watching a show, found out the hard way that it's 4 streams for all of the tvs.  Might have to go back to DirecTv, well, haven't really left yet, still paid thru the 17th. 

I know when Uverse first advertised here, it was for 3 dvrs, was it only 4 streams for all of them then too?

[skeeterintexas]

---

Indy wrote:

I know when Uverse first advertised here, it was for 3 dvrs, was it only 4 streams for all of them then too?

---

UV was NEVER advertised w/3 DVRs.  You're thinking 3 STBs...one of which is a DVR.  And yes, it's always been 4 streams (3SD/1HD OR 2SD/2HD), which works well for most.

[Indy_1]

I guess the question is why only allow one dvr, if the system can handle more?  At least then the kids could watch shows they've recorded, when I need all four streams.  I do recall posts on another forum where all the original units had hard drives, but all but one was disabled by AT&T, they showed how to take the unit apart and hook the hard drive back up and had multiple dvrs.

[skeeterintexas]

---

Indy wrote:
I guess the question is why only allow one dvr, if the system can handle more?  At least then the kids could watch shows they've recorded, when I need all four streams.  I do recall posts on another forum where all the original units had hard drives, but all but one was disabled by AT&T, they showed how to take the unit apart and hook the hard drive back up and had multiple dvrs.

---

We've been told that all STBs have that capability (watching vs. recording).  Whole House DVR is supposed to be initiated in the near (???) future...rumored timelines anwhere from Aug. 08 and beyond.

Hey, most of us are just happy to get the second HD stream for now! 

[lonestarjacket]

I don't think the system can handle more than one DVR and have WHDVR as well.

TiVo allows multiple DVRs that can share information with each other.   But then you have to know which DVR has the program you want.

Uverse is going a different route with a single DVR to be accessed by all boxes.  It is easy to imagine how this problem would be simpler to solve than managing an unknown number of DVRs and sharing information between them as well.

You can still buy Series 2 TiVo DVRs for your other STBs but the recordings for these boxes will be isolated.

When we have WHDVR I may even try to record from the Uverse DVR to TiVo.  TiVo can record whatever is playing manually.  Then I can save the recordings to my PC or DVD. So there is a value to the TiVo even after WHDVR is available.

[Indy_1]

Any idea if this can work with DirecTivo's, or just standalone Tivos?

[DouglasPHill]

DirecTivos can only record from Direct satellites.

[lonestarjacket]

It can only work with Series 1 or Series 2 TiVo that just record S-video or composite video.

Series 3 and HD are only for cable.  DirecTivo is only for DirecTV and I don't even think they support that anymore.  They certainly aren't updating it.

[Indy_1]

Now I'm just annoyed, just got off the phone with AT&T and they said a 2nd dvr would work, as I thought, but they're not allowed to give me one.  Basically they'd rather lose a customer then offer a 2nd dvr.  Just plain crazy if you ask me.

[spd2demun ACE - Expert]

1 DVR period, but maybe they were trying to explain the Whole Home DVR concept?  All the STBs (non-DVRs) are capable of recording/playback FROM the 1 DVR, it's just not turned on yet.

[randyl]

prolly meant in the semantics sense it would work ,but it doesnt sense at&t doesn't allow 2 ??

if they did then everyone (a bunch neway )  would want 2 ??

hence whdvr coming .....

my take

randy

[lonestarjacket]

I am guessing that a second DVR might work now, but it would probably screw up WHDVR when it rolls out.  It simplifies things to only have one DVR per household.

I wouldn't give them out either, even if you paid extra.  It just creates headaches they would need to clean up later.  (Plus, they probably don't have a way to bill you for it if it is disallowed.)

Hopefully we are only talking about a couple of months before WHDVR.

If you must have another DVR now, go on e-bay and buy a TiVo.  They finally work with Uverse. 

[billmich]

i have a scenario then if you are talking about streams

lets say i hook up 8 TV's in my living room to re-create the sports bar and i get 8 u-verse boxes and hook one up to each screen, are you saying that i can only watch 4 of the screens at one time?

[randyl]

---

billmich wrote:

i have a scenario then if you are talking about streams

lets say i hook up 8 TV's in my living room to re-create the sports bar and i get 8 u-verse boxes and hook one up to each screen, are you saying that i can only watch 4 of the screens at one time?

---

         all 8 tvs are on but some will have duplicate channels  to equal 4 diff streams total ...

[billmich]

1st of all, how do i quote previous posts, i dont see a quote option on my screen,

2nd of all, I appreciate the answer, it is definately NOT what I am looking for, I wouldnt set up 8 tv's unless i wanted to watch 8 different games at once. having duplication is a waste, I want 8 different games (like i had last year)

Message Edited by billmich on 07-28-2008 11:24 AM

[billmich]

---

billmich wrote:

1st of all, how do i quote previous posts, i dont see a quote option on my screen,

2nd of all, I appreciate the answer, it is definately NOT what I am looking for, I wouldnt set up 8 tv's unless i wanted to watch 8 different games at once. having duplication is a waste, I want 8 different games (like i had last year)

Message Edited by billmich on 07-28-2008 11:24 AM

---

ahhh.......got THAT part answered...LOL

[randyl]

then maybe u-verse isnt for u ??  (if u have to have 8)

pros and cons to any tv providers system..  as u know ..

your call for sure  imho

randy

[billmich]

well it IS for me as it gives me channels i cant get otherwise, and its cheap enough that if i add it and downgrade my comcast, i still end up paying the same.

ill just order the espn game plan thru comcast and watch the games via 6 of their boxed and use my 2 u-verse boxed for the other 2 screens

thanks for the info

[lonestarjacket]

Maybe ATT should/could offer adding a separate run to a house at some discount 25%, 50%  to add more streams?

[callmeox ACE - Professor]

Since that would require an additional clean pair from the VRAD to the home and then an additional RG, that wouldn't be practical IMHO. (at least until they roll out pair bonding to the close in folks)

Message Edited by callmeox on 07-29-2008 12:37 PM

[lonestarjacket]

I assumed there would be a separate run, but there is some service charge that makes it profitable.

It is a moot point as most probably aren't willing to pay as much as it would cost to be profitable.

The bottom line is that for those who absolutely must have unlimited streams and mutiple DVRs should probably stick with cable. Four streams would be enough for me if they were all HD so I don't have to sometimes record in SD to get around conflicts.

[RCSMG ACE - Expert]

But if they offered an additional drop there would be a good amount of people that would pay for it.  But I don't think it would be a very profitable service over all.

[callmeox ACE - Professor]

Pair bonding would accomplish the same thing for those who are close in.  There may be a lack of clean pairs in separate bundles (to prevent crosstalk interference) in many neighborhoods.

[capricorn_1]

Is four streams the limit for a pair of wires? It seems that fiber all the way into the house to the gateway (or to the STB) might raise that limit significantly. What would it cost AT&T to offer that as an option?

Perhaps that it where Verizon is going with their new TV services? Anyone know? 

[randyl]

---

capricorn wrote:

Is four streams the limit for a pair of wires? It seems that fiber all the way into the house to the gateway (or to the STB) might raise that limit significantly. What would it cost AT&T to offer that as an option?

Perhaps that it where Verizon is going with their new TV services? Anyone know? 

---

       as an option not practical imo  and cost for fiber was quoted in an article roughly 3 times the expense versus what they are doing now...

        randy

Message Edited by randyl on 08-01-2008 05:02 PM