Saorview Connect

tsue921i8wljb3

The box fulfills the purpose that was stated at time of purchase i.e. it receives and displays Saorview signals. I doubt any promised upgrades are part of consumer protection legislation. Therefore any retailer would only refund on a purely good will basis and I don't think there would be any obligation on them to do so.

clfy39tzve8njq

Don't think it does there are lots of reports of it constantly needing to be rebooted. Also there was a time given when it would record.

Tony

That would be true save for the fact that the recording feature was advertised in advance with a definite implementation timescale.

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote: »

The box fulfills the purpose that was stated at time of purchase i.e. it receives and displays Saorview signals. I doubt any promised upgrades are part of consumer protection legislation. Therefore any retailer would only refund on a purely good will basis and I don't think there would be any obligation on them to do so.

The high horse brigade

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote: »

The box fulfills the purpose that was stated at time of purchase i.e. it receives and displays Saorview signals. I doubt any promised upgrades are part of consumer protection legislation. Therefore any retailer would only refund on a purely good will basis and I don't think there would be any obligation on them to do so.

But to use your own words, it's not a promised upgrade, it's a promised purpose.

STB.

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote: »

The box fulfills the purpose that was stated at time of purchase i.e. it receives and displays Saorview signals. I doubt any promised upgrades are part of consumer protection legislation. Therefore any retailer would only refund on a purely good will basis and I don't think there would be any obligation on them to do so.

No thats not the selling point of the box at all. The features of the box is included in the powerpoint flyer, linked earlier.


It promised that it would record (by Mid 2018). Its a reasonable expectation so. What's not reasonable is when these promises are not fulfilled. Coupled with the random reboots reported on this thread, I'd be fairly píssed to have spent €220.



Is how much Saorview have spent on this boxes development in the public domain ??

tsue921i8wljb3

Miranda Muscular Pigeonhole wrote: »

Don't think it does there are lots of reports of it constantly needing to be rebooted. Also there was a time given when it would record.

That is a separate matter and if true would be a demonstrable fault.

Tony wrote: »

That would be true save for the fact that the recording feature was advertised in advance with a definite implementation timescale.

Tony as a retailer would you be left out of pocket by customers returning the boxes? If so I don't think that is particularly fair. I'd have no problem with the manufacturer taking the hit.

The high horse brigade wrote: »

But to use your own words, it's not a promised upgrade, it's a promised purpose.

That is definitely an argument that can be made. I don't have one of the boxes obviously so I'd be interested to hear how anyone who tries to return one now (outside of normal return time) gets on.

tsue921i8wljb3

STB. wrote: »

No thats not the selling point of the box at all. The features of the box and selling points are included in the powerpoint flyer, linked earlier.

It promised that it would record (by Mid 2018). Its a reasonable expectation so. What's not reasonable is when these promises are not fulfilled. Coupled with the random reboots reported on this thread, I'd be fairly ped to have spent €220.

Is how much Saorview have spent on this boxes development in the public domain ??

Someone should try a FOI to RTÉ to get the development costs and sales numbers.

clfy39tzve8njq

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote:

That is a separate matter and if true would be a demonstrable fault.

Don't agree, it needs constant rebooting and the recording feature due middle of last year still not available. People bought them because of the promise of ability to record otherwise they could have bought a €50 box to receive the channels.

STB.

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote: »

Someone should try a FOI to RTto get the development costs and sales numbers.

Navi, I just check in on this thread to see if the box has moved on in terms of development and to see what user experience has been.

My views on what basic requirements (like dvb channel integration) should have been on it from are well known. That's not the developers fault. They were sent a different direction.

However, the problem with getting your own hardware and software to enable recording 2 years after you have started development has to be questioned. The brand Powerpoint (Shomar) advertised the product would record, and the initial deadlines, and extended deadlines have passed a few times. Many people who bought this thinking they could record, find that is not the case.

I could buy the most basic non approved combo box for less than €50 that would give me a recording facility from the getgo.

If you dont mind me asking, are you a retailer yourself ?

Tony

I would be seriously out of pocket if that were the case. I agree with you , not fair at all but as the law stands the contract is between the retailer and the customer. The retailers are being hung out to dry in my opinion in the current circumstance especially the small independents.

Lincoln Important Syllable wrote: »

Tony as a retailer would you be left out of pocket by customers returning the boxes? If so I don't think that is particularly fair. I'd have no problem with the manufacturer taking the hit.

tsue921i8wljb3

STB. wrote: »

Navi, I just check in on this thread to see if the box has moved on in terms of development and to see what user experience has been.

My views on what basic requirements (like dvb channel integration) should have been on it from are well known. That's not the developers fault. They were sent a different direction.

However, the problem with getting your own hardware and software to enable recording 2 years after you have started development has to be questioned. The brand Powerpoint (Shomar) advertised the product would record, and the initial deadlines, and extended deadlines have passed a few times. Many people who bought this thinking they could record, find that is not the case.

I could buy the most basic non approved combo box for less than €50 that would give me a recording facility from the getgo.

If you dont mind me asking, are you a retailer yourself ?

I'm not a retailer. I've no skin in this game at all, just playing devil's advocate.

STB.

Well then I think even retailers should be talking to Shomar and warning them that a high return scenario could arise.

This product has dropped €70 which signals that they are not shifting. And that price is across the board at powerpoint, soundstore, harveynorman, euronics etc.

Lot of stock out there ?

Someone needs to tell them that its not just the price point.

cranefly

How long ago was this thread started, and this is the endpoint, What a box, looks like i will be staying with sky for the foreseeable. I will take a look at this thread again in another 6 years.

Former Former

cranefly wrote: »

How long ago was this thread started, and this is the endpoint, What a box, looks like i will be staying with sky for the foreseeable. I will take a look at this thread again in another 6 years.

Lol, five and a half years. If they'd released the box on the day the thread was started, it would have been out of date even then.

This is a project that needed someone to say, at some point, this is not fixable, let's just cut our losses and pull the plug. That should have happened after TV3 bailed out, if not before.

I've sympathy for anyone who bought one, but anyone reading this thread should have known what was coming. I've some sympathy for Saorview/RTE who probably never had any real interest in pursuing it and were probably working off a peanuts budget that could never deliver the goods.

Think all concerned have to just chalk it down to experience at this point.

FreudianSlippers

STB. wrote: »

Someone mentioned the SOGA from 1983 which is the consumer protection legislation in Ireland.

Under this Act the purchaser of goods has a number of rights - the main ones are

• Goods must be of merchantable quality – goods should be of reasonable quality taking into account what they are meant to do, their durability and their price
• Goods must be fit for their purpose – they must do what they are reasonably expected to do
• Goods must be as described - the buyer must not be mislead into buying something by the description of goods or services given orally by a salesperson or an advertisement.

LOL I think you'll find that's the Sale of Goods Act 1893, whereas I posted the current legislation from 1980 in which, as I pointed out, delay is a significant issue here.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have been able to return the box when recording wasn't made available in mid-2018 (or whatever was sold to you) but it's the end of January 2019 now...

FreudianSlippers

Tony wrote: »

I would be seriously out of pocket if that were the case. I agree with you , not fair at all but as the law stands the contract is between the retailer and the customer. The retailers are being hung out to dry in my opinion in the current circumstance especially the small independents.

You would also potentially have recourse from whomever you purchased from. You're not as protected as the consumer is under the 1980 Act, but I'd suggest you have a look at your contract and contact a solicitor.

Tony

Thanks for the advice but none of this applies to me as I never stocked the connect box. I do have sympathy for other small retailers, as you say nowhere near the same protection as the consumer when its a business to business issue

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

You would also potentially have recourse from whomever you purchased from. You're not as protected as the consumer is under the 1980 Act, but I'd suggest you have a look at your contract and contact a solicitor.

breeno

I'm in two minds as to try to return it. I'm not one for causing a scene but the box really is poor.

I tried it again last night out of interest and the on demand wouldn't work without a reboot, the changeover from Saorview to Satellite was crazy slow and the box crashed at one point too.


Another thing I noticed on satellite was that the now/next took 5 to 10 seconds to appear for each channel. Is this normal behaviour? If I replaced this box with something else (maybe the newest Walker combo box) would satellite now/next always take this long to appear? It's a bit frustrating not being able to see the details while flicking through the channels.

Tony

The now/next on the newest walker box comes up pretty quickly

breeno wrote: »

If I replaced this box with something else (maybe the newest Walker combo box) would satellite now/next always take this long to appear? It's a bit frustrating not being able to see the details while flicking through the channels.

maximus02

Is there another Saorview box which has series link?

TIA

STB.

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

LOL I think you'll find that's the Sale of Goods Act 1893, whereas I posted the current legislation from 1980 in which, as I pointed out, delay is a significant issue here.

I'm not saying that you shouldn't have been able to return the box when recording wasn't made available in mid-2018 (or whatever was sold to you) but it's the end of January 2019 now...

Oh I know what it was. Its the 1980 Act I was referring to (I know that the 80 Act restates some stuff from the 1893 Act), so it was a typo on my part. And of course it still exists as we kept the longer protection periods (rather than the minimum set down by the EU Consumer Law of 2 years when transposing).

The reasoning for returning is different from advertised. The manufacturer and brandname indicated that it would be able to record Mid 2018. The retailers had given earlier dates. Saorview then made statements that it would be later. None of the deadlines were met, nor have the expectations of the consumers.

All of these meet the criteria for return.

FreudianSlippers

breeno wrote: »

I'm in two minds as to try to return it. I'm not one for causing a scene but the box really is poor.

I tried it again last night out of interest and the on demand wouldn't work without a reboot, the changeover from Saorview to Satellite was crazy slow and the box crashed at one point too.


Another thing I noticed on satellite was that the now/next took 5 to 10 seconds to appear for each channel. Is this normal behaviour? If I replaced this box with something else (maybe the newest Walker combo box) would satellite now/next always take this long to appear? It's a bit frustrating not being able to see the details while flicking through the channels.

Just to be clear - I think you should absolutely try to return it on the basis that (i) you purchased it for a feature which is not available despite advertisement that it would be by Q2 2018 and (ii) it's not of merchantable quality (as you outline in your post).

I'm just saying that it wouldn't necessarily be within your rights to demand that they accept it as a return due to the time delay. I'd be interested to see what would happen if they refused and this question went to the District Court though.

FreudianSlippers

STB. wrote: »

Oh I know what it was. Its the 1980 Act I was referring to (I know that the 80 Act restates some stuff from the 1893 Act), so it was a typo on my part. And of course it still exists as we kept the longer protection periods (rather than the minimum set down by the EU Consumer Law of 2 years when transposing).

The reasoning for returning is different from advertised. The manufacturer and brandname indicated that it would be able to record Mid 2018. The retailers had given earlier dates. Saorview then made statements that it would be later. None of the deadlines were met, nor have the expectations of the consumers.

All of these meet the criteria for return.

That doesn't answer the key delay question. Why'd the consumer wait for 8 months to return the product?

Johnboy1951

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That doesn't answer the key delay question. Why'd the consumer wait for 8 months to return the product?

Were not the promises re-issued during that time?

FreudianSlippers

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Were not the promises re-issued during that time?

If they did and time has expired, great.
If they have extended beyond the current time, then I'd suggest there'd be a problem as you purchased something without functionality and they still say it will have it.

Again, try to return it - by all means, I'm encouraging it. But it's not a cut-and-dry issue.

Johnboy1951

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

If they did and time has expired, great.
If they have extended beyond the current time, then I'd suggest there'd be a problem as you purchased something without functionality and they still say it will have it.

Again, try to return it - by all means, I'm encouraging it. But it's not a cut-and-dry issue.

No its not cut & dried, these things rarely are.
BUT there is a good case to be made for a full refund on returning a Saorview Connect box.
(I am not affected as I did not purchase this POS )

The Cush

maximus02 wrote: »

Is there another Saorview box which has series link?

Unbelievably there isn't.

The one and only Saorview approved PVR, the Walker WP6500TTR disappeared off the market last year.

Tigerandahalf

Do LG tvs allow you to pause/rewind live tv with a hard drive connected?

thatwilldopig

It does but telly has to be on to record, one channel at a time etc. EPG fairly clunky as well ..

Tigerandahalf

thatwilldopig wrote: »

It does but telly has to be on to record, one channel at a time etc. EPG fairly clunky as well ..

I presume if it is in standby it is ok. I would only use the tv for saorview so recording not working because of a switch to satellite shouldn't be an issue. I presume the recordings would work away even if you were using the tv's apps?

It is crazy really that these tvs don't do series link. Surely if the 7 day epg is there it can't be too complex.