Options
Humax Duovision Alternative.
![[Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/9f1799a3a421c2c557f4a9d5b92f56df.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 21 Forum Member
✭
Hi,
I have had Sky + for 3 years now and before that I had Tivo. But I have decided now that I would like to not pay for a service that I can get for free.
Anyway after looking into the issue for a number of months I decided that the New Hummy 9200 was going to be for me. But after reading the initial reviews it is no longer in the running as 20 entries just isn't enough.
Anyway I was thinking that surely buying 2 seperate Humax 8000t's represents better value. I do not need to connect the unit to my PC and this way I can have 40 timer entries and have the boxes in 2 seperate locations (if I desire) still have one box if one fails, set a recording on both boxes to ensure that it doesn't fail. All this for around £150 for both.
I probably won't do this but I was wondering what you thought. I know if both were in the same location I would have a problem with the remotes but other than that I think I would prefer this then spending more for the 9200t and at least alot of the software problems are already sorted on the 8000t.
What do you think,
de_deej
I have had Sky + for 3 years now and before that I had Tivo. But I have decided now that I would like to not pay for a service that I can get for free.
Anyway after looking into the issue for a number of months I decided that the New Hummy 9200 was going to be for me. But after reading the initial reviews it is no longer in the running as 20 entries just isn't enough.
Anyway I was thinking that surely buying 2 seperate Humax 8000t's represents better value. I do not need to connect the unit to my PC and this way I can have 40 timer entries and have the boxes in 2 seperate locations (if I desire) still have one box if one fails, set a recording on both boxes to ensure that it doesn't fail. All this for around £150 for both.
I probably won't do this but I was wondering what you thought. I know if both were in the same location I would have a problem with the remotes but other than that I think I would prefer this then spending more for the 9200t and at least alot of the software problems are already sorted on the 8000t.
What do you think,
de_deej
0
Comments
If I could pick one up for £75 I might be tempted just so I can have a PVR for the bedroom telly as well (I'll live with the single tuner limitation)
Cliff
However, the potential pitfalls which come to mind are:
1) Remote - (as you mentioned) although you could work around this by temporarily covering one or other IR receiver window.
2) Space - Personally I don't have room for another box under my tele but you might!
3) Scarts - Ideally you want both Humaxs going into an RGB scart socket on your tele, and looping one through the other only works when you've got the first one in standby (I think). So unless you have a spare RGB scart on your TV you're probably going to need a switcher.
4) Finding recordings - You'll have two lists of previous recordings to look through rather than one.
5) Splitting - With 2 8000's you can playback one recording whilst making another BUT only if they're on different boxes, which may be harder to manage than in sounds, unless you always know which recordings you've got on each box and which one you're going to record with that day.
Or then again I could eBay my own 8000T and put that £70 towards a more elegant dual recording solution!
Edit: Just reread the OP where you say you are aware of this.
de_deej
The 8000T will happily allow another signal to pass through regardless of whether it is in standby, switched on to a channel, or actually recording.
All you have to do is press the source button and the picture on the TV will swap between what the 8000T is doing and whatever is connected to it is doing.
Narrow-minded thinking...
Draw back the curtains, clean the dust off the telly, have a shave and a wash, then let some daylight back into your life.
You could have paid for 1½ 9200T's during the first 12 months for the cost of keeping sky+, with an 8000T per quarter from then on. You could then have a PVR in every room in the house (including bathroom) within 2 years.
Just think of it... multiple and duplicate recordings, the comfort of no lost programming, plus the bonus of one remote firing off commands to numerous devices spread liberally around the home, all at the touch of a button!
- What do you think?
I'll do that while you go to school to catch up on some much needed math lessons.
Sky+ will cost me £10 a month so that’s £120 for the year. The 9200t will cost around £210 and the new aerial around £25. Then it will become obsolete in a year and I will get £70 for it on the bay so really it will cost me £165 for the year. Just in case the math is to much for you that's £45 more.
All that for the lack of chase play the numerous other problems (such as noise) the lack of timer entries the lack of season passes.
If you are going to make unhelpful and stupid comments keep them to yourself.
de_deej
There is not much point in keeping sky at all if you are using a PVR9200, since it cannot record from sky. I think the assumption being made was that you would cancel sky altogether. This is a minimum saving of 25 per month or £300 per year if you are paying for sky plus - more likely £360 per year if you have the family pack.
Read the whole thread.
I will be keeping Sky+ with Sky's FreeSat so the only cost is £10 a month (a bit like a tivo sub).
So I will say again read the whole thread before you comment.
de_deej
There is no need for this sort of attitude. If you don't want an open discussion why post here in the first place?
Quaint,
I unserstand your point but I don't believe this sort of comment is useful to anyone:
Narrow-minded thinking...
Draw back the curtains, clean the dust off the telly, have a shave and a wash, then let some daylight back into your life.
de_deej