NO Telephone Line [Text View]

litzdog911

05-05-2006, 02:03 PM

stevel

05-05-2006, 04:17 PM

But you WILL need to make that initial phone call. The installers may refuse to install without a phone line, since DTV says they require it. The call need not be made from your house - you can take the box elsewhere, hook it to a TV and phone line, press the DirecTV button once it is searching for a satellite, then tell it to make a call.

wmcbrine

05-05-2006, 07:41 PM

DTV is installing my movers connection order today. What is the effect of not having a phone line connnected to the HR10-250?
It will explode. (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/74092) :p

annenoe

05-31-2006, 05:47 PM

You only need an analog phone line for the first initial Guided Setup. If your HR10-250 has already been through Guided Setup, then you don't really need a phone connection. Here's what you'll miss ....

* Cannot order PPV movies using your remote control (just order via Web site instead)
* No software updates (none are likely anymore)
* You'll get an on-screen "nag message" about lack of phone line that you can safely delete

Yeah!! My HR10-250 just arrived!!!

Clarification plz...

So, none of you HR10-250 owners are getting software updates? Ever?

Why would we get a nag message? I understand the guide is updated via satellite and if there are no more sw updates, why is it nagging? Is it trying to make calls? And why?

I don't order PPV so not worried about that.

gotta go try and set it up.

A J Ricaud

05-31-2006, 06:38 PM

Yeah!! My HR10-250 just arrived!!!

Clarification plz...

So, none of you HR10-250 owners are getting software updates? Ever?

Why would we get a nag message? I understand the guide is updated via satellite and if there are no more sw updates, why is it nagging? Is it trying to make calls? And why?

I don't order PPV so not worried about that.

gotta go try and set it up.

The most current firmware end with an "f". If yours end with an "e" you will probably be nagged.

rminsk

05-31-2006, 07:19 PM

The most current firmware end with an "f". If yours end with an "e" you will probably be nagged.You will get nag screens even with "f".

stevel

05-31-2006, 07:41 PM

rminsk

05-31-2006, 07:53 PM

Why would we get a nag message? I understand the guide is updated via satellite and if there are no more sw updates, why is it nagging? Is it trying to make calls? And why?.There are two phone calls a DirecTiVo makes. The "DirecTV" call reports pay-per-view purchases and may possibly be used for certain sport packages. This call can not be "forced" by the user. DirecTV can signal this call over the satellite. This call is to a toll free number.

The "TiVo" phone call activates software releases, uploads debugging data, and uploads anonymous viewing data. This is the call you can force from the menus and is the one you set during setup. Anonymous viewing data can be opted-out of. It also sets the TiVo time but the time is quickly reset by the satellites transponder downlink time.

They may still be software updates. The Series 1 DirecTiVo just got an update out of the blue.

rminsk

05-31-2006, 07:56 PM

As for the "why" - it's partly an artifact of when the guide data didn't all come from the satellite and because TiVo wants you to keep calling in. But there's no functional reason on your end for the call.The DirecTiVo guide data has always come over the satellite, at least as far back as the 2.5.x days/

stevel

05-31-2006, 08:56 PM

Some of the service data (maybe not guide data) came over the phone originally.

fmowry

06-01-2006, 02:09 PM

I've been running with nags for about 8 months now. I finally got sick of it because every time you pull up "Now Playing" you get the nag. I connected a wireless phone line from ratshack and not only are the nags gone, but I swear my season pass and record program times have greatly sped up since I don't have 100 "failed call" mails in my box. Season passes were really bogged down taken a minute or more at "please wait". now they're a 20 second effort.

Might be coincidence but I don't think so.

Frank

joetoronto

06-01-2006, 07:05 PM

i can see allot of nag messages slowing it down.

i usually clear them when i'm waiting for the old lady to finally park her arse to watch a movie with me.

ShiningBengal

06-01-2006, 10:20 PM

It will explode. (http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/74092) :p

No, it won't explode, but having every DirecTV receiver "continuously connected to a land telephone line" is a requirement for DirecTV service.

The new TOS that DirecTV sent out with your last bill specifically states, in addition, that such connection is also required to qualify for mirroring your service to multiple receivers. They further state that DirecTV may charge full subscription fees for each receiver not so connected. So if you have a $75.00/mo DirecTV subscription (excluding mirroring fees), and 3 receivers, their TOS allows them to charge you $225.00/mo rather than the $85 you would pay for 1 receiver plus 2 mirrored receivers.

It would seem to me that DirecTV has the means to enforce this if they choose to do so, and they could probably also legally bill you retroactively for receivers not continuously connected to a land telephone line.

The fact that some have not been so billed in the past does not "grandfather" you into the special mirroring charge per receiver.

It may not be nice, it may not be fair, but you agree to the TOS, legally, by continuing to use DirecTV services.

joetoronto

06-02-2006, 06:06 AM

No, it won't explode, but having every DirecTV receiver "continuously connected to a land telephone line" is a requirement for DirecTV service.

The new TOS that DirecTV sent out with your last bill specifically states, in addition, that such connection is also required to qualify for mirroring your service to multiple receivers. They further state that DirecTV may charge full subscription fees for each receiver not so connected. So if you have a $75.00/mo DirecTV subscription (excluding mirroring fees), and 3 receivers, their TOS allows them to charge you $225.00/mo rather than the $85 you would pay for 1 receiver plus 2 mirrored receivers.

It would seem to me that DirecTV has the means to enforce this if they choose to do so, and they could probably also legally bill you retroactively for receivers not continuously connected to a land telephone line.

The fact that some have not been so billed in the past does not "grandfather" you into the special mirroring charge per receiver.

It may not be nice, it may not be fair, but you agree to the TOS, legally, by continuing to use DirecTV services.

do you really think directv will knowingly lose thousands upon thousands of paying customers because they're not plugged in to a phone line?

things must be going really well for them. i feel sorry for all those truckers, RV owners and people living in trailers. not to mention those who use cell phones now instead of land line phones. :rolleyes:

let's face it, it's NOT going to happen.

ShiningBengal

06-06-2006, 09:12 AM

do you really think directv will knowingly lose thousands upon thousands of paying customers because they're not plugged in to a phone line?

things must be going really well for them. i feel sorry for all those truckers, RV owners and people living in trailers. not to mention those who use cell phones now instead of land line phones. :rolleyes:

let's face it, it's NOT going to happen.

Err...

How many truckers, RV owners, and people living in trailers (?) have mirrored receivers? (Is there some reason that people living in trailers can't have land phone lines? They have electricity, don't they?)

If it's not going to happen, why did DirecTV insert this new language into their TOS? Just to make certain customers squirm? I don't think so. :rolleyes:

joetoronto

06-06-2006, 10:09 AM

Err...

How many truckers, RV owners, and people living in trailers (?) have mirrored receivers? (Is there some reason that people living in trailers can't have land phone lines? They have electricity, don't they?)

If it's not going to happen, why did DirecTV insert this new language into their TOS? Just to make certain customers squirm? I don't think so. :rolleyes:

the fact is that more and more people are living a mobile life, bengal. thanks to cellular air time becoming cheaper and cheaper over the years, land phones are becoming a thing of the past.

as far as the lingo in the TOS, this is nothing new. every once in a while they harp about being hooked up to a phone line, all because they're missing out on some PPV money.

no big deal.

annenoe

06-06-2006, 11:21 AM

No, it won't explode, but having every DirecTV receiver "continuously connected to a land telephone line" is a requirement for DirecTV service.

The new TOS that DirecTV sent out with your last bill specifically states, in addition, that such connection is also required to qualify for mirroring your service to multiple receivers. They further state that DirecTV may charge full subscription fees for each receiver not so connected. So if you have a $75.00/mo DirecTV subscription (excluding mirroring fees), and 3 receivers, their TOS allows them to charge you $225.00/mo rather than the $85 you would pay for 1 receiver plus 2 mirrored receivers.

It would seem to me that DirecTV has the means to enforce this if they choose to do so, and they could probably also legally bill you retroactively for receivers not continuously connected to a land telephone line.

The fact that some have not been so billed in the past does not "grandfather" you into the special mirroring charge per receiver.

It may not be nice, it may not be fair, but you agree to the TOS, legally, by continuing to use DirecTV services.

We've had D*TV for years and have not been connected to a phone line for the last 3. One of the main reasons we purchased the Series 2 - we got tired of having that extra long phone cord snaking thru the LR into the kitchen. We lost our ability to use those wireless jacks when we installed our burglar alarm. Never heard a peep from D*TV.

ShiningBengal

06-07-2006, 08:46 AM

the fact is that more and more people are living a mobile life, bengal. thanks to cellular air time becoming cheaper and cheaper over the years, land phones are becoming a thing of the past.

as far as the lingo in the TOS, this is nothing new. every once in a while they harp about being hooked up to a phone line, all because they're missing out on some PPV money.

no big deal.

Of course lots of people have wireless only. My response was directed at the supposition that people who live in RV's (I don't know of anyone who does, do you?) and mobile (sure they are!) homes certainly CAN have land lines. So can cabin cruisers who are docked at marinas when they are watching TV. (TiVo's, after all, can play back without even being connected to an antenna!)

Perhaps you know what Rupert was thinking when he inserted the requirement for a permanent land line connection to DirecTV receivers into his TOS. I must confess, I don't.

The fact is, this is a requirement. Whether or not it is now, or may be, enforced--either currentely or retroactively--is an entirely different matter, isn't it?

joetoronto

06-07-2006, 01:04 PM

Of course lots of people have wireless only. My response was directed at the supposition that people who live in RV's (I don't know of anyone who does, do you?) and mobile (sure they are!) homes certainly CAN have land lines. So can cabin cruisers who are docked at marinas when they are watching TV. (TiVo's, after all, can play back without even being connected to an antenna!)

Perhaps you know what Rupert was thinking when he inserted the requirement for a permanent land line connection to DirecTV receivers into his TOS. I must confess, I don't.

The fact is, this is a requirement. Whether or not it is now, or may be, enforced--either currentely or retroactively--is an entirely different matter, isn't it?

that's my whole point, how could they possibly enforce it is beyond me.

i never disputed whether it was in the agreement or not, bengal.

MisterEd

06-07-2006, 06:35 PM

Well, I have online paperless billing from DTV and have never received any terms (original or changed) so I assume I haven't (legally) agreed to anything. I even wonder how their really dumb 2 yr agreement requirement would hold up in court. I never signed or verbally agreed to it but found it on my account info online.

They are also losing many H/D and DVR customers who take short leases (6mos to a yr) in apartments complexes serviced by companies such as the one I work for. I myself lose 2-3 DVR/HD sales every DAY because of the 2yr agreement that is required.

bhang

06-15-2006, 10:55 PM

the fact is that more and more people are living a mobile life, bengal. thanks to cellular air time becoming cheaper and cheaper over the years, land phones are becoming a thing of the past.

as far as the lingo in the TOS, this is nothing new. every once in a while they harp about being hooked up to a phone line, all because they're missing out on some PPV money.

no big deal.

NOPE, it has to do with Sub. sharing, mailing 2 active boxes to you granny in timbuk to who just lost her dtv sub but has the dish.

They will probably start making calls like charlie, they call and ask for a number from the menu of each box and each one is different, called a "location id" Im sure dave has this implemented, since this is the closest you can come to piracy on dave's stream...

thats what its about, and dave thinks its a big deal...

bhang

nsdp

06-15-2006, 11:32 PM

I mentioned this in another thread but DTV's marketing people are a little too agressive in this area. There are provisons in the terms of the acquisitions of USSB and Primestar that prohibit some of the things like the two year contract extension for customers existing on the date of those acquistions. The land line rule violates the terms of the USSB agreement. That was something in the old Directv Hughes agreements that weren't in USSB. so DTV had to remove the clause to get FCC approval for the acquistion. I went round and round on the two year contract term with the CSRs and the executive office personnel. Since I am still a commisioned member of the Federal Public Defenders office , I was able to get the general counsel's office and one of the attorneys there had to dig out and research the FCC limitations . He called me back a few days later really put out and admitted in my case they were not authorised to add the two year contract term. I suspect that this is being pushed for accounting purposes since they can count the future revenue on a double declining balance basis . that means if then contract provides for it they can count revenue earned under the contract before they receive it. Perfectly legal under GAAP as long as it is footnoted. BSkyB is highly leveraged and needs income to cover certain lending covenants. I suspect that DTV would not want to try to enforce them since that would be fertile grounds for the class action lawyers.

pintnight

06-16-2006, 12:32 AM

I hope the next box (the MPEG4 DVR) has been updated to use the 21st century technology to register the box over the internet, not phone line. :rolleyes:

wmcbrine

06-16-2006, 10:52 AM

I hope the next box (the MPEG4 DVR) has been updated to use the 21st century technology to register the box over the internet, not phone line. :rolleyes:That would negate the purpose. It's not about registering the box (there's no need for that at all). It's about making sure the box is at the same location as your other boxes, so you don't share an account.

Cable companies don't need to do this, because the cable lines themselves are the limiting factor. DirecTV uses the phone line as a substitute. But personally, I think they're losing more than they gain by this.

joetoronto

06-16-2006, 12:03 PM

That would negate the purpose. It's not about registering the box (there's no need for that at all). It's about making sure the box is at the same location as your other boxes, so you don't share an account.

Cable companies don't need to do this, because the cable lines themselves are the limiting factor. DirecTV uses the phone line as a substitute. But personally, I think they're losing more than they gain by this.

exactly, they'd be throwing out the baby with the bath water and that's my whole point.