|
||||||||
Foxsat-HDR: missing schedule |
![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hatfield, Herts
Posts: 72
|
Foxsat-HDR: missing schedule
Yet again my foxsat-HDR has dumped the entire list of programs scheduled to record
I've emailed Humax support so I'm awaiting a response, I was wondering if anyone else has had this issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Worcester
Posts: 4,185
|
Quote:
Yet again my foxsat-HDR has dumped the entire list of programs scheduled to record
I've emailed Humax support so I'm awaiting a response, I was wondering if anyone else has had this issue? |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St Albans
Posts: 282
|
Missing Schedule
GaseousClay is spot on with this one. I kept losing my schedules and was getting really annoyed, and then I realised it only happened after a scan in NON FREESAT mode.
I Found it was the scanning that was causing the problem and not just viewing in NFS mode. In other words you can view NFS without losing the schedule. Hoping this helps |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hatfield, Herts
Posts: 72
|
It would appear this is the reason...
Bob_Cat how about getting this fixed in a software update sometime soon? |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 237
|
I also reported in the bug thread that the schedule disappears when just viewing non-freesat mode. ie not scanning at all. That happened three times to me, and I vowed not to use non-freesat again because of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Posts: n/a
|
My box keeps the planner when I view in non-freesat mode.
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: belgium
Posts: 292
|
Quote:
My box keeps the planner when I view in non-freesat mode.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 237
|
Quote:
My box keeps the planner when I view in non-freesat mode.
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 1,302
|
Non-freesat mode has never been a priority for us because we do not yet have extensive feedback that it is an important feature to a wide range of consumers. If people consider it to be a truly significant then they should email support some encouragement, we will note this feedback and consider the resources for development. Please respect that resources cost money, only where a feature is important to a majority of consumers is it worth applying resources and if resource is applied here another feature could be delayed.
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Co. Donegal
Posts: 797
|
Quote:
Non-freesat mode has never been a priority for us because we do not yet have extensive feedback that it is an important feature to a wide range of consumers. If people consider it to be a truly significant then they should email support some encouragement, we will note this feedback and consider the resources for development. Please respect that resources cost money, only where a feature is important to a majority of consumers is it worth applying resources and if resource is applied here another feature could be delayed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: staffs
Posts: 3,808
|
Quote:
Bob_Cat. It is bad news that you have posted this. I take it as a warning that nothing is being done concerning the problems that non-freesat mode causes. Non-freesat mode may not be a priority, but that is badly missing the point. It is freesat mode that has the problem in that it is its schedules that are being lost. Not everyone is going to have read this forum and will know that the problem can be avoided by not using non-freesat mode.
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,524
|
Quote:
Non-freesat mode has never been a priority for us because we do not yet have extensive feedback that it is an important feature to a wide range of consumers. If people consider it to be a truly significant then they should email support some encouragement, we will note this feedback and consider the resources for development. Please respect that resources cost money, only where a feature is important to a majority of consumers is it worth applying resources and if resource is applied here another feature could be delayed.
If a low priority function is negatively impacting a core function, I would say that fixing it should be considered important. It's not the fact that non-freesat mode may or may not be important to customers, it's the fact that it's screwing up something that is. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 237
|
Quote:
It's not the fact that non-freesat mode may or may not be important to customers, it's the fact that it's screwing up something that is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Co. Donegal
Posts: 797
|
It is very good that Bob_Cat frequents this forum and provides us with a channel into Humax as well as dropping snippets of information here and there. But we mustn't lose sight of the fact that his main purpose is marketing. As such, a significant part of his job will be to put a positive spin on things from Humax's point of view.
His last post really takes the biscuit when it comes to spin. Have you noticed that the missing freesat schedules are no longer Humax's fault? Just a minor issue that Humax can't be expected to waste valuable resources on because non-freesat mode isn't a valuable feature. No, it's our fault for not sending enough email to Humax support about it! Can you believe it? |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,524
|
Quote:
It is very good that Bob_Cat frequents this forum and provides us with a channel into Humax as well as dropping snippets of information here and there. But we mustn't lose sight of the fact that his main purpose is marketing. As such, a significant part of his job will be to put a positive spin on things from Humax's point of view.
His last post really takes the biscuit when it comes to spin. Have you noticed that the missing freesat schedules are no longer Humax's fault? Just a minor issue that Humax can't be expected to waste valuable resources on because non-freesat mode isn't a valuable feature. No, it's our fault for not sending enough email to Humax support about it! Can you believe it? I don't agree with his view on this particular topic, but I don't think it's right to use that to try and undermine his presence altogether. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Surrey, UK
Posts: 1,302
|
While my presence here might enhance our profile in the eyes of some, my primary purpose for being here is clarification. I originally started to post because of wildly inaccurate postings made by persons and it is my wish to continue to post my understanding of the situation.
Bob |
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 237
|
Quote:
my primary purpose for being here is clarification. I originally started to post because of wildly inaccurate postings made by persons and it is my wish to continue to post my understanding of the situation.
Bob |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 60
|
Quote:
While my presence here might enhance our profile in the eyes of some, my primary purpose for being here is clarification. I originally started to post because of wildly inaccurate postings made by persons and it is my wish to continue to post my understanding of the situation.
Bob
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St Albans
Posts: 282
|
Non freesat scans
I think we are going off the point now. It is good that Bob_cat reads our comments and that they are passed on, but our problem remains: We have a week's worth of scheduling on our machines and then we lose it all by carrying out a bona-fide scan + dont forget series recording is lost too.
Why should we have to reschedule every time we want to scan for a new broadcaster. Humax owe it to the consumers who have had the confidence to buy the HDR to put the matter right and quickly too. Last edited by theShadowman : 19-01-2009 at 14:55. Reason: spelling |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 237
|
Quote:
our problem remains: We have a week's worth of scheduling on our machines and then we lose it all by carrying out a bona-fide scan + dont forget series recording is lost too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St Albans
Posts: 282
|
Non freesat scans
That makes it even worse, doesn't it? Humax do owe it to us to put the matter right immediatly. After all we do have the right to scan with the machine, and we have the right to look at other broadcasters. Why should that facility spoil things for us. Why have a non FS mode if you cant use it at any time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Co. Donegal
Posts: 797
|
Quote:
While my presence here might enhance our profile in the eyes of some, my primary purpose for being here is clarification. I originally started to post because of wildly inaccurate postings made by persons and it is my wish to continue to post my understanding of the situation.
Bob |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: St Albans
Posts: 282
|
Here, Here, awo1949
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: staffs
Posts: 3,808
|
Well ive just renamed uktv doc to eden incase i forget next week as i have my sky sub card in and that also wipes your schedule arghhhhhhhhhhhh this needs sorting truly cheesed off now 3 pages off shedule set up.
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 135
|
Schedule deleted without a scan
Okay, as I suspected it is definitely possible for the freesat schedule to be wiped without actually scanning.
I just went into non-freesat mode and re-ordered the channels a bit. The result was an empty schedule. It may well be that if you don't scan and leave the channel list alone the schedule will stay intact. (Time will tell.) But I just wanted to make clear that this isn't just a scanning issue. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:18.


I've emailed Humax support so I'm awaiting a response, I was wondering if anyone else has had this issue?

