|
||||||||
Humax Foxsat HDR to 1000S |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 452
|
Humax Foxsat HDR to 1000S
Hi,
I've had a Foxsat 320 HDR for four years and now getting to the stage where it is so slow on the EPG and channel changing I've had enough. Is the 1000S slicker on this? A nice price in managers specials and if the answer is yes I'll go for it and sell the old one. Hoping for a favourable reply. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 533
|
I have had a 1tb one for almost a year, bought as a refurb from Humax Direct. It replaced a Foxsat which is still used for backup recordings in another room. It's been rock solid and is much slicker than the Foxsat it's also been very handy with the remote recording App for iOS. Have had an occasional failed recording but can't tell whether that's a Humax or a transmission problem. Son has Sky and although I don't use that very often I find the Humax much slicker to use.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 452
|
Thanks Victor,
Bit the bullet and bought a 1010S 1tb mainly as it's got wifi for the same price and for £139 it's £30 less than I paid in 2011. It should be here today so something to play with later. Thanks again |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 452
|
Update
I've had this a few days now and not sure about keeping it. Comparing it to the HDR my thoughts are:-
The remote control is badly set out and less easy to use. The mute button should be easy to reach as on Panasonic remote, in the middle. Subtitle button is one press unlike previously which is good for me. It takes 30 seconds from standby to screen but why does it include a mini EPG on start up? More faffing about. The EPG is fast, much better but it is transparent with a display behind and no partitions between the programmes. Channels on the EPG are shown with their own logo which in some cases are tiny and hard to read. Recording display has too many unnecessary options which don't add anything except more clicks on the remote When playing a recording the display scrolls the name continuously, not a good feature. The only real problem with my old box was the slow EPG but I think having used this box the experience was far simpler and this new box has added nothing apart from more clicks to get what I want which is my recordings. Pausing now keeps the picture on the screen unlike the HDR which went to screensaver. I'll give it a couple more days and may update this and then decide but it looks like my HDR will be put back and this returned. Last edited by robbra : 22-08-2015 at 11:19. Reason: Update |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Redditch Worcs
Posts: 17,289
|
Quote:
I've had this a few days now and not sure about keeping it. Comparing it to the HDR my thoughts are:-
The remote control is badly set out and less easy to use. The mute button should be easy to reach as on Panasonic remote, in the middle. Subtitle button is one press unlike previously which is good for me. It takes 30 seconds from standby to screen but why does it include a mini EPG on start up? More faffing about. The EPG is fast, much better but it is transparent with a display behind and no partitions between the programmes. Channels on the EPG are shown with their own logo which in some cases are tiny and hard to read. Recording display has too many unnecessary options which don't add anything except more clicks on the remote When playing a recording the display scrolls the name continuously, not a good feature. The only real problem with my old box was the slow EPG but I think having used this box the experience was far simpler and this new box has added nothing apart from more clicks to get what I want which is my recordings. Pausing now keeps the picture on the screen unlike the HDR which went to screensaver. I'll give it a couple more days and may update this and then decide but it looks like my HDR will be put back and this returned. To move to a different channel in the epg tap in the channel number (this also works on the freetime boxes). Surprised you haven't noticed the superior HD picture quality on the freetime boxes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 452
|
Thanks for your reply.
I can't say I've noticed any difference in HD on the new box, probably due to me finding programme content more important but will do a comparison and see. Tapping in the channel number is fine but often I want to scroll through the EPG to see what's on of an evening as I'm not continuously aware of what is on each night. That is when the slowness is very apparent. I do like it as a receiver but they do seem to have made it too "complicated" with too many alternatives instead of keeping it simple. Will let you know how the comparison goes. Last edited by robbra : 24-08-2015 at 08:27. Reason: ommission |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Perchede, France
Posts: 1,936
|
I find the P.Q. on the Humax freetime units much improved over the 'soft' Foxsat picture HD and SD. The upscaler is also very good , mine is set to 1080p.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 452
|
I've done a comparison on my 720 Panasonic plasma and can't say there seems to be much difference in picture quality.
I did use the 1010s extensively yesterday and found the number of stages to get around was to me, more frustrating than the slowness of the EPG on the HDR and returning to the HDR today was a relief. Turn it on and there is the last channel tuned to and no mini EPG. Also playing recordings is easier. The 1010s also needed unplugging twice after freezing and one recording was full of picture breaking up. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:05.

