Options

Sky removing RF2 voltage? (Merged)

stevem999stevem999 Posts: 508
Forum Member
✭✭
So, who knows anything? Apparently the Autumn firmware release will remove the voltage from RF2 outputs, immediately rendering magic eyes useless without further expense by users in inserting a power supply to make them work. There is even a suggestion that they may remove functionality for Magic Eye signals completely, therefore rendering them totally useless.

Sounds like an attempt to force people into buying extra boxes, using multiroom, or even the groundwork for planner sharing, but that would still require users to buy extra boxes. Seems those of us who are happy to be watching one programme at a time, but on different TV's at different times of the day aren't what Sky want?
«13456713

Comments

  • Options
    chenkschenks Posts: 13,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    and your source for this is ?
  • Options
    stevem999stevem999 Posts: 508
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Satcure blog - he's usually pretty on the ball.
  • Options
    chenkschenks Posts: 13,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    stevem999 wrote: »
    Satcure blog - he's usually pretty on the ball.

    but what's his source?
  • Options
    Nigel GoodwinNigel Goodwin Posts: 58,531
    Forum Member
    It sounds absolutely unlikely - and no point to it whatsoever.

    As Sky have stopped providing magic eyes (with CS's even denying they ever existed), it seems quite plausible that they 'may' remove magic eye capability (and indeed the RF modulator) from new PVR's in the future, just as they have from the multi-room only non-PVR box.
  • Options
    TiexenTiexen Posts: 602
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Think yourselves lucky to still have an RF feed at all - most other Sat/Cable boxes no longer have any RF sockets, I'm having to use an old VCR to feed a 2nd TV from my Virgin HD box
  • Options
    BatchBatch Posts: 3,344
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Hmm, can't see why they'd do this. It makes no sense really. Its not like you can watch anything that you couldn't watch anyway.

    Unless its purely so they can remove hardware on the next gen boxes for whatever reason (surely the cost saving isn't *that* much)..
  • Options
    ProDaveProDave Posts: 11,398
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Makes me glad my thomson box is unlikely to ever get this crippling update.
  • Options
    BKMBKM Posts: 6,912
    Forum Member
    ProDave wrote: »
    Makes me glad my thomson box is unlikely to ever get this crippling update.
    But, if you actually believe scares like this one, then your Thomson box would have been disabled LONG ago by Sky (as has been claimed many times!:D:D:D)
  • Options
    BKMBKM Posts: 6,912
    Forum Member
    stevem999 wrote: »
    Satcure blog - he's usually pretty on the ball.
    Sounds like he has seriously dropped the ball on this one!
  • Options
    MindeeMindee Posts: 22,975
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
  • Options
    chenkschenks Posts: 13,231
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Mindee wrote: »

    for me, that is simply conjecture.
    there is nothing there to back up the claim at all.

    how convenient though that the article links to a device that will solve the problem, which can be bought from the same place... suspicious am i ???
  • Options
    ProDaveProDave Posts: 11,398
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    chenks wrote: »
    for me, that is simply conjecture.
    there is nothing there to back up the claim at all.

    how convenient though that the article links to a device that will solve the problem, which can be bought from the same place... suspicious am i ???

    It would be really bonkers to simply disable the 9V power function, but still allow it to receive remote commands. so my guess is that IF they remove it, it won't work at all even with an external supply.

    But why waste effort removing working code? I can only think it's the "lowest common denominator" problem, i.e not all boxes have RF out 2 now, so remove that function from all of them so they can all run identical software?
  • Options
    Mystic EddyMystic Eddy Posts: 3,987
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    chenks wrote: »
    for me, that is simply conjecture.
    there is nothing there to back up the claim at all.

    how convenient though that the article links to a device that will solve the problem, which can be bought from the same place... suspicious am i ???
    Indeed! I'd side with you on that. They wouldn't remove it from boxes if they already have the feature.
    I'm guessing it probably was/is an issue with a beta release which has resulted in this misinformation.
  • Options
    Sky_TechSky_Tech Posts: 134
    Forum Member
    If they remove the 9V RF feed, Customer Services will be inundated with calls as well as Jeremy Darroch's In-Box when they get no satisfaction from Customer Services!
  • Options
    stevem999stevem999 Posts: 508
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Well we shall see.......
  • Options
    stevem999stevem999 Posts: 508
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    chenks wrote: »
    for me, that is simply conjecture.
    there is nothing there to back up the claim at all.

    how convenient though that the article links to a device that will solve the problem, which can be bought from the same place... suspicious am i ???

    Yes you are, that's not the way he does business.
  • Options
    Nigel GoodwinNigel Goodwin Posts: 58,531
    Forum Member
    ProDave wrote: »
    It would be really bonkers to simply disable the 9V power function, but still allow it to receive remote commands. so my guess is that IF they remove it, it won't work at all even with an external supply.

    But why waste effort removing working code? I can only think it's the "lowest common denominator" problem, i.e not all boxes have RF out 2 now, so remove that function from all of them so they can all run identical software?

    I think it's simply a completely and utterly wrong suggestion, and he put the wrong date on - should have been April 1st.

    The only current boxes without RF2 are the non-PVR multi-room boxes (because they had no need or use for it), so it would be incredibly stupid to cripple every other box to match it.

    Perhaps they should disable the HDD's in the PVR's as the multi-room box doesn't have one? :p
  • Options
    notachancenotachance Posts: 407
    Forum Member
    ProDave wrote: »
    Makes me glad my thomson box is unlikely to ever get this crippling update.

    There is no crippling update. There's just no update for them ever again which is where the problem with Thomson boxes lies.

    At some point, some services you receive as part of your subscription will be lost on Thomson boxes.
  • Options
    notachancenotachance Posts: 407
    Forum Member
    I think it's simply a completely and utterly wrong suggestion, and he put the wrong date on - should have been April 1st.

    The only current boxes without RF2 are the non-PVR multi-room boxes (because they had no need or use for it), so it would be incredibly stupid to cripple every other box to match it.

    Perhaps they should disable the HDD's in the PVR's as the multi-room box doesn't have one? :p

    I completely agree.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,391
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well it is an old technology.

    I hope they turn on the USB ports, at least just for power.
  • Options
    CTD101CTD101 Posts: 4,174
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Sky_Tech wrote: »
    If they remove the 9V RF feed, Customer Services will be inundated with calls as well as Jeremy Darroch's In-Box when they get no satisfaction from Customer Services!

    Why? Any Sky fitted magic eye is way out of warranty. I haven't heard the news the OP is posting but would certainly expect the next generation HD PVR to come without any RF connections
  • Options
    notachancenotachance Posts: 407
    Forum Member
    tothegrand wrote: »
    Well it is an old technology.

    I hope they turn on the USB ports, at least just for power.

    They are.
  • Options
    Gary_LandyFanGary_LandyFan Posts: 3,824
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    CTD101 wrote: »
    Why? Any Sky fitted magic eye is way out of warranty. I haven't heard the news the OP is posting but would certainly expect the next generation HD PVR to come without any RF connections

    New boxes not having them fair enough, but there is no point in disabling features in existing boxes.

    Yeah they may be out of warranty, but it wouldn't be a fault if they disabled the feature.
  • Options
    Nigel GoodwinNigel Goodwin Posts: 58,531
    Forum Member
    CTD101 wrote: »
    Why? Any Sky fitted magic eye is way out of warranty. I haven't heard the news the OP is posting but would certainly expect the next generation HD PVR to come without any RF connections

    As I said above, that sounds quite plausible - with the shared planner presumably due 'any time'.

    But disabling RF2 on 20 million odd existing boxes isn't going to happen, apart from magic eyes stopping working it would disable huge number of customers aerial systems, a great many of which are powered from Sky boxes,
  • Options
    CTD101CTD101 Posts: 4,174
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    As I said above, that sounds quite plausible - with the shared planner presumably due 'any time'.

    But disabling RF2 on 20 million odd existing boxes isn't going to happen, apart from magic eyes stopping working it would disable huge number of customers aerial systems, a great many of which are powered from Sky boxes,

    I don't think they will disable them, but even removing the 9v wouldn't render it useless for the aerial as it would still work like RF1 does. Certainly nothing has been mentioned in house regarding disabling the 9v.
Sign In or Register to comment.