Free to air Irish and UK channels

Gardening

Hi
Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish.
Thanks

Wanderer78

Gardening wrote:

Hi Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish. Thanks

I can only ever think of toner electronics in these situations, but I'd imagine there's other installers out there, even though I'm sure the folks in toner are just fine. I think I could be going for an android box myself soon

Johnboy1951

I strongly advise you to do a lot of research on the actual receiver before committing to allowing an installer to provide one.
There are lots of posts in the Satellite section about the receiver hardware and the cost & functions etc.

There are cheap receiver boxes which are very limited in functions, which might suit you, but there are other boxes which have more advanced functions such as recording capability, series recording, full 7 day EPG and so on. The more advanced boxes are more costly but well worth the cost if you require those functions.

Installers (generally) have a couple of boxes they hold in stock and supply, none of which might suit your needs. So do your research.

alta stare

Gardening wrote: »

Hi
Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish.
Thanks

As mentioned already there are loads of boxes out on the market. If you dont want the hassle of retuning boxes from time to time then id suggest a freesat box over a generic free to air box.

If you arent anyway tech savvy keep away from Linux based boxes as they can take some playing around with to get working the way you want so again id go with a freesat box.

Humax do a fantastic range of fresat pvrs with on demand players pre installed. Manhattan also do a good freesat non pvr box if pause/rewind/series link isnt your preference.

Combo boxes in this country are not really a reliable way of watching tv as there is no good box on the market. Unfortunately imo to have a good stable system without much maintenance or setup then a freesat box and a saorview box/tv is the way to go.

Johnboy1951

Gardening wrote: »

Hi
Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish.
Thanks

You will not get a 'Freesat' approved box that does what you specified unfortunately.

BUT, with a little effort you can get a Linux box, for which someone else has done most of the work, and write their image on the box, to get all and more than you have specified.

There is a lot of reading here if interested

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057827739

and an image provided by a Boards member

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057925678

All it requires is that you set up the correct Saorview mast and all should work.
If you have the box before the installer arrives you can have it prepared for testing.

padraig.od

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You will not get a 'Freesat' approved box that does what you specified unfortunately.

BUT, with a little effort you can get a Linux box, for which someone else has done most of the work, and write their image on the box, to get all and more than you have specified.

There is a lot of reading here if interested

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057827739

and an image provided by a Boards member

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057925678

All it requires is that you set up the correct Saorview mast and all should work.
If you have the box before the installer arrives you can have it prepared for testing.

Lad named Noel did our TV installation. Installed a satellite and a saorview receiver. I can PM his number if you want?

Johnboy1951

padraig.od wrote: »

Lad named Noel did our TV installation. Installed a satellite and a saorview receiver. I can PM his number if you want?

Two separate boxes?
Not one as specified?
Are both recordable?

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You will not get a 'Freesat' approved box that does what you specified unfortunately.

BUT, with a little effort you can get a Linux box, for which someone else has done most of the work, and write their image on the box, to get all and more than you have specified.

There is a lot of reading here if interested

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057827739

and an image provided by a Boards member

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057925678

All it requires is that you set up the correct Saorview mast and all should work.
If you have the box before the installer arrives you can have it prepared for testing.

To be fair its fine getting a Linux box already setup the issues arise when the image develops problems. Unless a person has the patience and know how these issues can be a pain in the ass. From my experience of doing satellite systems most people just want it in with minimal setup or configuration and Linux boxes can sometimes be well outside those requirements.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

To be fair its fine getting a Linux box already setup the issues arise when the image develops problems. Unless a person has the patience and know how these issues can be a pain in the ass. From my experience of doing satellite systems most people just want it in with minimal setup or configuration and Linux boxes can sometimes be well outside those requirements.

Yes sometimes they can ...... particularly when people attempt to do things like change settings they have no knowledge of, or use alpha and unproven software.

In my experience where users have access to stuff they can change they must take responsibility for their actions ....... it is not the fault of the box as if they left it as it was it would continue to work without problems.

In addition, the box I linked to has a complete setup provided by a Boards member, and quite well locked down, to help prevent this type of problem.

Having multiple boxes and multiple remotes and probably multiple HDDs to be able to record from more than one box, is anything but ideal, and does not fulfil the OP's initial request.

The ability to use one remote, one STB and have all the available channels on a list that is user configurable, 7 day EPG, autotuning when channels move frequency, sufficient tuners to allow record and view from different muxes/transponders and one HDD to record to, makes perfect sense.
If you can suggest a STB with proprietary software that provides those please post a link.
I know a lot of people who would be interested.

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Yes sometimes they can ...... particularly when people attempt to do things like change settings they have no knowledge of, or use alpha and unproven software.

In my experience where users have access to stuff they can change they must take responsibility for their actions ....... it is not the fault of the box as if they left it as it was it would continue to work without problems.

In addition, the box I linked to has a complete setup provided by a Boards member, and quite well locked down, to help prevent this type of problem.

Having multiple boxes and multiple remotes and probably multiple HDDs to be able to record from more than one box, is anything but ideal, and does not fulfil the OP's initial request.

The ability to use one remote, one STB and have all the available channels on a list that is user configurable, 7 day EPG, autotuning when channels move frequency, sufficient tuners to allow record and view from different muxes/transponders and one HDD to record to, makes perfect sense.
If you can suggest a STB that provides those please post a link.
I know a lot of people who would be interested.

Im not so sure why you are being so hostile when some one posts a reply which doesnt necessarily go with your suggestion? Another poster commented on what they had installed and by whom yet you say its not what the op is looking for. Well the funny thing is people are allowed come up with alternative solutions which the op might just sway toward.

I never said Linux wasnt the way to go. I use Linux on my laptop so i know the ways around a Linux based system. I said it can have issues, issues which most people may not have the know how to rectify therefore it may not be the best way forward for the op. Just because you can do it doesnt mean others can. I could do it but i dont as i don't feel it is worth the effort.

I have a freesat box and a saorview tv. Does me the finest. I have installed many systems like i have at home myself and i have only been back to one place due to an issue. That issue was due to rain fade not a tech failure. 5 mins to rectify instead of half and hour or more on a Linux box depending on the problem.

If the op wants to go down the road of Linux then fair play if they dont then we are merely giving suggestions as to what they could do.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

Im not so sure why you are being so hostile when some one posts a reply which doesnt necessarily go with your suggestion? Another poster commented on what they had installed and by whom yet you say its not what the op is looking for. Well the funny thing is people are allowed come up with alternative solutions which the op might just sway toward.

I never said Linux wasnt the way to go. I use Linux on my laptop so i know the ways around a Linux based system. I said it can have issues, issues which most people may not have the know how to rectify therefore it may not be the best way forward for the op. Just because you can do it doesnt mean others can. I could do it but i dont as i don't feel it is worth the effort.

I have a freesat box and a saorview tv. Does me the finest. I have installed many systems like i have at home myself and i have only been back to one place due to an issue. That issue was due to rain fade not a tech failure. 5 mins to rectify instead of half and hour or more on a Linux box depending on the problem.

If the op wants to go down the road of Linux then fair play if they dont then we are merely giving suggestions as to what they could do.

My post was not hostile.

Yes you suggest an alternative ...... but for some reason omitted to explain the compromises involved in accepting that alternative.
The same happened with another suggestion.

Information is empowering, so let the user decide what compromises they are willing to accept by detailing what they are.

Because I did that I was hostile?

OK.

For the OP ...... if you do decide to use a Linux box the main drawback of doing so is that you personally are responsible for the software on that box and not some seller somewhere that you can complain to.
The hardware is of course under warranty.

If you buy an alternative couple of boxes, as suggested, then the supplier is responsible for them being serviceable when you get them, and suited to the purpose for which they were bought. There will be usage compromises to be made with the alternatives as explained in previous posts.

Some people are willing to compromise on usage to not have the responsibility for the software themselves; others are not.
Apparently you cannot have both ..... or so far no one has suggested there is a box that provides what your stated needs are without personal responsibility.

I hope that clarifies things a bit.

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

My post was not hostile.

Yes you suggest an alternative ...... but for some reason omitted to explain the compromises involved in accepting that alternative.
The same happened with another suggestion.

Information is empowering, so let the user decide what compromises they are willing to accept by detailing what they are.

Because I did that I was hostile?

OK.

For the OP ...... if you do decide to use a Linux box the main drawback of doing so is that you personally are responsible for the software on that box and not some seller somewhere that you can complain to.
The hardware is of course under warranty.

If you buy an alternative couple of boxes, as suggested, then the supplier is responsible for them being serviceable when you get them, and suited to the purpose for which they were bought. There will be usage compromises to be made with the alternatives as explained in previous posts.

Some people are willing to compromise on usage to not have the responsibility for the software themselves; others are not.
Apparently you cannot have both ..... or so far no one has suggested there is a box that provides what your stated needs are without personal responsibility.

I hope that clarifies things a bit.

Im sure the op will see the difference in set up and maintenance for a Linux system in that thread you linked and i would not be surprised if they decided not to go down that route due to the steps involved.

The route i suggested is by far the easiest to install and maintain for the average end user. Again i am not saying the system you linked to is bad but it has far more pitfalls than a conventional setup.

You also say how a person becomes personally responsible for the software yet with an install by a pro there could be a warranty or after sales service which many folks would prefer. I work in a job where people dont want to know how a system works they just want it working. I guess the same can be said for tv systems.

Also your post to me came across as hostile as you wanted me to link to a box which could do something which i never claimed in the first place. All i suggested was a freesat/saorview system. I never said there was such a box i think you will find i said system.

padraig.od

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Two separate boxes?
Not one as specified?
Are both recordable?

Single box, recordable

Johnboy1951

padraig.od wrote: »

Lad named Noel did our TV installation. Installed a satellite and a saorview receiver. I can PM his number if you want?

padraig.od wrote: »

Single box, recordable

Apologies if I misunderstood your post as two boxes when only one was provided.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

Im sure the op will see the difference in set up and maintenance for a Linux system in that thread you linked and i would not be surprised if they decided not to go down that route due to the steps involved.

I hope the OP is properly informed by what they read as that was the purpose of providing the links.

I do not have any expectation of a particular decision by the OP ... that is entirely a matter for themselves. The decision can now can be based on the available information as well as the functions available in, and the limitations of, the various alternatives.

The route i suggested is by far the easiest to install and maintain for the average end user. Again i am not saying the system you linked to is bad but it has far more pitfalls than a conventional setup.

I have no doubt the route suggested is the easiest for the installer particularly if they are providing and setting up the the STB/s.

That does not make it bad and I never implied that, but it does make a huge difference to capabilities and functions.

You also say how a person becomes personally responsible for the software yet with an install by a pro there could be a warranty or after sales service which many folks would prefer. I work in a job where people dont want to know how a system works they just want it working. I guess the same can be said for tv systems.

Yes I did say all of that (emboldened).

Also your post to me came across as hostile as you wanted me to link to a box which could do something which i never claimed in the first place. All i suggested was a freesat/saorview system. I never said there was such a box i think you will find i said system.

Kristopherus

www.ferguson.eu make good boxes that are both saorview & FTA Satellite.

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I hope the OP is properly informed by what they read as that was the purpose of providing the links.

I do not have any expectation of a particular decision by the OP ... that is entirely a matter for themselves. The decision can now can be based on the available information as well as the functions available in, and the limitations of, the various alternatives.



I have no doubt the route suggested is the easiest for the installer particularly if they are providing and setting up the the STB/s.

That does not make it bad and I never implied that, but it does make a huge difference to capabilities and functions.



Yes I did say all of that (emboldened).

I 100% get what your intentions were and in some cases id agree that a Linux box is a good option so im not trying to dismiss what you are suggesting but i i just feel for some people a Linux box would be outside their comfort zone. All i wanted to do was suggest another alternative which would be easy to install and maintain.

greenspurs

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

I 100% get what your intentions were and in some cases id agree that a Linux box is a good option so im not trying to dismiss what you are suggesting but i i just feel for some people a Linux box would be outside their comfort zone. All i wanted to do was suggest another alternative which would be easy to install and maintain.

Of course I fully agree with that.
Administering/taking responsibility for the installation on any device is outside some people's (maybe probably a large number of people) comfort zone.

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Of course I fully agree with that.
Administering/taking responsibility for the installation on any device is outside some people's (maybe probably a large number of people) comfort zone.

But moreso on a Linux based system over a conventional system.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

But moreso on a Linux based system over a conventional system.

Hahahahahahaha

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Hahahahahahaha

See its good that we finally agreed.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

See its good that we finally agreed.

One of these days in another thread you must explain to me what your conventional system consists of.

alta stare

Conventional equals freesat/free to air software against a Linux system ie it is the norm compared to the latter. Pretty simple difference to be fair so the terminology is applicable dont you think.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

But moreso on a Linux based system over a conventional system.

I see where you’re coming from, but that’s not necessarily the case. The Linux based system that Johnboy1951 referred to is as simple to maintain as any system I’ve come across. The only setup required is to configure the local Saorview transmitter. Thats it - it only scans the correct frequencies. It updates the satellite channels automatically, and will also add any new Saorview channels. The only maintenance required is when the terrestrial frequencies change, even then it’s a simple operation.

The biggest issue with that box is that it appears to have ended productions d stocks are running low. I think you’d be pleasantly surprised if you tried one out. No reason why you couldn’t have even happier customers. -:)

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

I see where you’re coming from, but that’s not necessarily the case. The Linux based system that Johnboy1951 referred to is as simple to maintain as any system I’ve come across. The only setup required is to configure the local Saorview transmitter. Thats it - it only scans the correct frequencies. It updates the satellite channels automatically, and will also add any new Saorview channels. The only maintenance required is when the terrestrial frequencies change, even then it’s a simple operation.

The biggest issue with that box is that it appears to have ended productions d stocks are running low. I think you’d be pleasantly surprised if you tried one out. No reason why you couldn’t have even happier customers. -:)

Im not dismissing what Johnboy1951 suggested. At first he seemed to dismiss other peoples alternative suggestions. I was merely pointing out that a Freesat setup would be generally an easier to maintain system over a Linux system and that majority of end users want exactly that.

I know from using Linux based laptops how it operates and they are fine until something goes wrong or it needs to be re configured in some way and again most people would not have a clue nor do they care.

Im sure the system ye use to good so if it works for ye then good stuff. Some people might prefer to shy away from using it tho so alternative suggestions are good.

lassykk

Have to agree with Alta Stare on this.

I have a linux based machine running Openvix and the thing was a nightmare to set up and has locked up solid a couple of times which required a reflash of the firmware. This is not what 99% of the population want or are willing to deal with.

A decent freesat box and a separate saorview box is a far more manageable proposition.

lassykk

Have to agree with Alta Stare on this.

I have a linux based machine running Openvix and the thing was a nightmare to set up and has locked up solid a couple of times which required a reflash of the firmware. This is not what 99% of the population want or are willing to deal with.

A decent freesat box and a separate saorview box is a far more manageable proposition.

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

....

I know from using Linux based laptops how it operates and they are fine until something goes wrong or it needs to be re configured in some way and again most people would not have a clue nor do they care.

....

I know from the number of help requests I get from users of Windows based PCs that they are fine until something goes wrong or it needs to be re configured in some way and again most people would not have a clue nor do they care.

This is also true.

I have no idea what the relevance is though.

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I know from the number of help requests I get from users of Windows based PCs that they are fine until something goes wrong or it needs to be re configured in some way and again most people would not have a clue nor do they care.

This is also true.

I have no idea what the relevance is though.

The relevance is simple, Linux based systems are a bit more difficult to maintain for the average user compared to a Windows or Freesat based system. The platform is irrelevant its the OS i am referring to.

NewClareman

lassykk wrote: »

Have to agree with Alta Stare on this.

I have a linux based machine running Openvix and the thing was a nightmare to set up and has locked up solid a couple of times which required a reflash of the firmware. This is not what 99% of the population want or are willing to deal with.

A decent freesat box and a separate saorview box is a far more manageable proposition.

I agree fully, that setting up Linux-based boxes requires substantial technical expertise. However, the image referred to needs no setup, other than inputting the local transmitter, in a simple drop down menu. In that regard it is as simple to set up as any other Freesat or Saorview box. It is far more stable than the Freesat box I’ve retired. We are using it now for over 8 months with no lockup’s of any kind.

I can fully understand why some installers, without Linux skills, are reluctant to use them. However,this image is locked down to stop users fiddling with them. I know of six in daily use, for many months, with delighted users. It is far easier to use, especially for older customers, as all the main channels are on a single EPG.

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree fully, that setting up Linux-based boxes requires substantial technical expertise. However, the image referred to needs no setup, other than inputting the local transmitter, in a simple drop down menu. In that regard it is as simple to set up as any other Freesat or Saorview box. It is far more stable than the Freesat box I’ve retired. We are using it now for over 8 months with no lockup’s of any kind.

I can fully understand why some installers, without Linux skills, are reluctant to use them. However,this image is locked down to stop users fiddling with them. I know of six in daily use, for many months, with delighted users. It is far easier to use, especially for older customers, as all the main channels are on a single EPG.

And what happens if the image fails???

When they are stable they are good that i agree on but they can be outside most people's comfort zone during an install or of it develops an issue further down the line. You would very rarely have an issue with a Freesat box.

Also what happens when the image is no longer supported??? Where does that leave the end user then??

Johnboy1951

alta stare wrote: »

The relevance is simple, Linux based systems are a bit more difficult to maintain for the average user compared to a Windows or Freesat based system. The platform is irrelevant its the OS i am referring to.

Your "average" users do not maintain their operating system, be that Windows or Linux or MAC or any other.
They find someone with the capabilities to do so to help out.

All irrelevant to the subject of this thread.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

And what happens if the image fails???

When they are stable they are good that i agree on but they can be outside most people's comfort zone during an install or of it develops an issue further down the line. You would very rarely have an issue with a Freesat box.

Also what happens when the image is no longer supported??? Where does that leave the end user then??

Why would an image fail??? That’s like saying what happens when the Freesat software fails. (Both boxes use “Images”.) The answer is that once a Freesat image, or a Linux image is stable, it is stable. The difference is that the Freesat image is not (usually) updatable.

When an image is no longer supported, the customer is in the exact same position as with a Freesat box, once the supplier no longer provides firmware updates. In reality it won’t matter to the customer as the box (Freesat or Linux) will continue working away. Don’t get me started on so-called Saorview approved. My very expensive Smart TV does not retune automatically, or work with RTÉ Player. No sign of an new image in sight!

Have you ever used, or configured, a Linux box?

NewClareman

Gardening wrote: »

Hi
Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish.
Thanks

Hi,

My recommendation is to separate the installation of the dish and aerial, from the box you’re going to use. Get any reputable installer to install the dish and aerial.

Get some one with a (very small) level of technical knowledge to look at the posts Johnboy1951 gave above. The cost of the box, which includes record facilities, is around €220. Setting it up takes only a half hour, and you’re good to go.

We tried the Freesat route two different times and the family found it simply too bothersome to use two boxes. I was given an ultimatum- sort it or go back to Sky. We now have a setup that is simple to use and everyone is happy with.

Good luck with your search.

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

Why would an image fail??? That’s like saying what happens when the Freesat software fails. (Both boxes use “Images”.) The answer is that once a Freesat image, or a Linux image is stable, it is stable. The difference is that the Freesat image is not (usually) updatable.

When an image is no longer supported, the customer is in the exact same position as with a Freesat box, once the supplier no longer provides firmware updates. In reality it won’t matter to the customer as the box (Freesat or Linux) will continue working away. Don’t get me started on so-called Saorview approved. My very expensive Smart TV does not retune automatically, or work with RTÉ Player. No sign of an new image in sight!

Have you ever used, or configured, a Linux box?

Why would it fail??? It is software and software can fail at anytime. Iv said it already im not against the Linux setup for tv im only suggesting Freesat as an alternative.

Regarding Freesat not being supported, it is very rare Freesat OS gives any problems and it is a well supported system backed up by big companies. Support is generally very good and it gives an end user piece of mind.

I agree about Saorview.

Yes i have done Linux boxes. I dont encourage it to any person who asks me about an install. (I dont do sat installs anymore) Id give them the information about various set ups and its always the Freesat option with which they go with.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

Why would it fail??? It is software and software can fail at anytime. Iv said it already im not against the Linux setup for tv im only suggesting Freesat as an alternative.

Regarding Freesat not being supported, it is very rare Freesat OS gives any problems and it is a well supported system backed up by big companies. Support is generally very good and it gives an end user piece of mind.

I agree about Saorview.

Yes i have done Linux boxes. I dont encourage it to any person who asks me about an install. (I dont do sat installs anymore) Id give them the information about various set ups and its always the Freesat option with which they go with.

Stable images (software) doesn’t fail, at any time, unless a change has occurred. Linux boxes give trouble because the software users change settings, add plugins etc. That’s why commercial offerings, such as Freesat, have all the settings locked down. It is also why the image I made is locked down, to ensure long term stability.

However, I fully understand your reluctance to use these boxes. I have many years experience with software and it took me a lot of time to get an image that I was happy with at home, let alone recommend to others. I shared the image so that others could make use of that work. 🙂

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

Stable images (software) doesn’t fail, at any time, unless a change has occurred. Linux boxes give trouble because the software users change settings, add plugins etc. That’s why commercial offerings, such as Freesat, have all the settings locked down. It is also why the image I made is locked down, to ensure long term stability.

However, I fully understand your reluctance to use these boxes. I have many years experience with software and it took me a lot of time to get an image that I was happy with at home, let alone recommend to others. I shared the image so that others could make use of that work. 🙂

The first paragraph kind of backs up my thoughts exactly. A user can modify the system which can cause it to fail. That cannot be done too easily on a Freesat system.

Anyway i dont want to come across that i am dismissing Linux or what you have put into your own image. If it works for you and others and ye are comfortable working on it if needs be then fair play. I still stand by my original point that Freesat is a good alternative and it is something i will continue to encourage not so tech savvy people to use..... Otherwise id keep getting daft phone calls and im too busy in my paid job for that craic

Johnboy1951

Gardening wrote: »

Hi
Can anyone recommend an installer for the free to air Irish and UK channels that all come through one recordable box in Waterford city please. Need aerial and dish.
Thanks

Obviously not 'alta stare'.
He is insistent on a Freesat box which means a second device is needed for the Saorview channels.

NewClareman wrote: »

Stable images (software) doesn’t fail, at any time, unless a change has occurred. Linux boxes give trouble because the software users change settings, add plugins etc. That’s why commercial offerings, such as Freesat, have all the settings locked down. It is also why the image I made is locked down, to ensure long term stability.

However, I fully understand your reluctance to use these boxes. I have many years experience with software and it took me a lot of time to get an image that I was happy with at home, let alone recommend to others. I shared the image so that others could make use of that work.

As far as I am aware there is no STB with Freesat approval that can also receive Saorview channels.
All these posts about Freesat are a distraction from the original request.

Yes there are lots of alternatives available, but none of them are Freesat approved as far as I am aware. Lots of manufacturers produce 'combi' boxes with various tuner combinations and functions. It does not matter what OS those boxes use, the manufacturers determine their functionality.

The one alternative software that has the functions of Freesat without its limitations is one such as you (Clareman) have released.

It is great that the hardware exists that can use software images like yours. This must be one of the best tweaked images to be made available. Thank you for releasing your work on it.

It frees the user from artificial limitations placed on them by the manufacturer.

It is unfortunate that most installers apparently just want an easy life rather than providing the best experience possible for their customers.

But I suppose they might find it difficult to charge for something like doing an image such as yours as the 'average' customer would not appreciate the amount of work involved in preparing such an image.

Yet, over multiple installs that charge would not amount to much, so maybe there is something else that prevents them doing it?

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Obviously not 'alta stare'.
He is insistent on a Freesat box which means a second device is needed for the Saorview channels.



As far as I am aware there is no STB with Freesat approval that can also receive Saorview channels.
All these posts about Freesat are a distraction from the original request.

Yes there are lots of alternatives available, but none of them are Freesat approved as far as I am aware. Lots of manufacturers produce 'combi' boxes with various tuner combinations and functions. It does not matter what OS those boxes use, the manufacturers determine their functionality.

The one alternative software that has the functions of Freesat without its limitations is one such as you (Clareman) have released.

It is great that the hardware exists that can use software images like yours. This must be one of the best tweaked images to be made available. Thank you for releasing your work on it.

It frees the user from artificial limitations placed on them by the manufacturer.

It is unfortunate that most installers apparently just want an easy life rather than providing the best experience possible for their customers.

But I suppose they might find it difficult to charge for something like doing an image such as yours as the 'average' customer would not appreciate the amount of work involved in preparing such an image.

Yet, over multiple installs that charge would not amount to much, so maybe there is something else that prevents them doing it?

Jesus some one got triggered. Poor petal.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

The first paragraph kind of backs up my thoughts exactly. A user can modify the system which can cause it to fail. That cannot be done too easily on a Freesat system.

I think you missed the bit that said “It is also why the image I made is locked down, to ensure long term stability.”

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

I think you missed the bit that said “It is also why the image I made is locked down, to ensure long term stability.”

No i definitely didn't. You don't make all Linux images do you? Im not only referring to your version.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

No i definitely didn't. You don't make all Linux images do you? Im not only referring to your version.

That implies you were including my version, does it not.

Anyway, I think Freesat boxes are excellent solution for people living in the UK, for whom they are designed. For people living in Ireland, who also want to watch Irish channels, they are a very poor substitute for a fully integrated solution.

What cunsumer, given an informed choice, would chose a more expensive, cumbersome, two box solution, over a single box one? Of course, if they are told that one solution is only for techies, they will avoid it.

Oh, by the way, not all free channels of interest to Irish customers are on Freesat. The solution I recommended has no such limitation.

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

That implies you were including my version, does it not.

Anyway, I think Freesat boxes are excellent solution for people living in the UK, for whom they are designed. For people living in Ireland, who also want to watch Irish channels, they are a very poor substitute for a fully integrated solution.

What cunsumer, given an informed choice, would chose a more expensive, cumbersome, two box solution, over a single box one? Of course, if they are told that one solution is only for techies, they will avoid it.

Oh, by the way, not all free channels of interest to Irish customers are on Freesat. The solution I recommended has no such limitation.

Anyone i know who has freesat/saorview dont mind two boxes if two boxes are required. Some tvs have terrestrial tuners so there is only one box. Its not the end of the world having to change source. A good universal remote can control devices making the changing very quick and easy.

NewClareman

alta stare wrote: »

Anyone i know who has freesat/saorview dont mind two boxes if two boxes are required. Some tvs have terrestrial tuners so there is only one box. Its not the end of the world having to change source. A good universal remote can control devices making the changing very quick and easy.

I agree with you, of course they don’t mind. If you want something and the only way you can get it is an expensive, cumbersome, two box solution; then that’s what they’ll go for. What choice have they been given?

I also agree with you, in regard to the remote. When people get pi$$ed of with the two box solution, as many do, the next step, is to get them a fancy universal remote. They’re happy out.

Then the remote gets out of step with one of the boxes, or the TV, or both. Now they’re in an even worse position as they can even turn on the bloody thing. The solution is now an even more expensive, cumbersome, two box solution, with a tricky remote. I’ve been on that journey, even bought a fancy Harmony remote.

Compare that to a single box, and single remote solution, for around €230. Give people that choice and see what they choose. Better still, set one up for yourself, you’ll have a fantastic solution, that you can demo to others. You’ll never look back.

alta stare

NewClareman wrote: »

I agree with you, of course they don’t mind. If you want something and the only way you can get it is an expensive, cumbersome, two box solution; then that’s what they’ll go for. What choice have they been given?

I also agree with you, in regard to the remote. When people get pi$$ed of with the two box solution, as many do, the next step, is to get them a fancy universal remote. They’re happy out.

Then the remote gets out of step with one of the boxes, or the TV, or both. Now they’re in an even worse position as they can even turn on the bloody thing. The solution is now an even more expensive, cumbersome, two box solution, with a tricky remote. I’ve been on that journey, even bought a fancy Harmony remote.

Compare that to a single box, and single remote solution, for around €230. Give people that choice and see what they choose. Better still, set one up for yourself, you’ll have a fantastic solution, that you can demo to others. You’ll never look back.

Like all things tech will fail whether it is remote controls, tvs, stbs so there are pro's and con's for each setup. Again (im repeating myself) i am not saying Linux is bad (i use it on my laptop and have configured boxes and setup systems using Kodi etc) all im saying there are alternative set ups which work well and from experience many people are quite happy to swap sources as it isnt a big deal.

I have not once dogged your setup so i dont understand why Johnboy got triggered. I hope your set up continues to please yourself and others and i say fair play for the time and effort you have put in. With that said i am allowed to suggest other set ups irrespective of whether the op asked for one box or twenty. Having a choice is always good.

Johnboy1951

I got 'triggered' as you call it because of your insistence on suggesting a two box solution whereas the OP specifically asked for a one box solution.

There are many, proprietary (locked down), one box solutions available to cover the OPs requirements. I have owned some and they are good at what they do.

Why do you insist on a two box solution when it is unnecessary to cover the OPs requirements?

TBH, I began to believe this is just a troll fest!

alta stare

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I got 'triggered' as you call it because of your insistence on suggesting a two box solution whereas the OP specifically asked for a one box solution.

There are many, proprietary (locked down), one box solutions available to cover the OPs requirements. I have owned some and they are good at what they do.

Why do you insist on a two box solution when it is unnecessary to cover the OPs requirements?

TBH, I began to believe this is just a troll fest!

I suggested the two box solution due to giving the op another good option just in case they didd not know about the freesat range of boxes. Simple really.

Also just because i dont toe your line i am trolling grow up man we are all allowed have different opinions and suggestions.

treatyman

I've bought 3 of these boxes now for myself and other family members from these lads. I've also bought aerials etc necessary from them. Can't go wrong in my opinion.

https://www.freetv.ie/combo-receiver/

SAB™ Titan 4 Combo Receiver

Boooourns

treatyman wrote: »

I've bought 3 of these boxes now for myself and other family members from these lads. I've also bought aerials etc necessary from them. Can't go wrong in my opinion.

https://www.freetv.ie/combo-receiver/

SAB™ Titan 4 Combo Receiver

Whats the EPG ike on them?

treatyman

Boooourns wrote: »

Whats the EPG ike on them?

On the freetv.ie they have videos posted of the box working. You can see what it looks like. I only really watch it at weekends and even though the box is powered on the EPG isn't always up to date. If you change channels it seems to update then, only issue if even you can call it that. I am sure there is a way to have it get EPG over internet but i don't have it plugged in to broadband.