Humax hdr1010s not responding to remote

My Humax Forum » Freesat HD » HDR 1000, 1010, 1100S

Humax hdr1010s not responding to remote

(252 posts)

damian

special member
Joined: Jan '12
Posts: 597
offline

JamesB - 1 hour ago »
Offered the choice between a box with beautiful defensive code that filled its maker's heart with pride, and a less expensive box which functioned satisfactorily for my purposes, I'd buy the latter.

they're not mutually exclusive, well written code is less clunky, has a smaller footprint, runs faster, easier to maintain and passes through the testing process quicker, in theory better code is cheaper. Investment should be in engineering and not manager's bonuses for cost savings, although shareholders will nearly always want to maximise profit.

I've seen developers beaten into submission by poor management and marketing whims, others will spend months writing bloated rubbish that'll need a complete rewrite.

I'm quite happy to pay a premium for better quality, the problem is it's all based on trust and none of us know for sure.
Forums like this help, although the help is frustrated at times by secrecy and the boxes being locked down so much that even very basic diagnostics are impossible.

The biggest problems for Humax seem to be hdcp and cec over hdmi which is an absolute nightmare and completely out of their control as are changes to freesat/showcase, youtube, iplayer, isp etc. etc. behind the scenes which again are completely out of Humax's control, but Humax are forced to carry the can for it.

Invariably the less expensive option comes at a price later on

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 14:19:22 #221 |
JamesB

special member
Joined: Dec '13
Posts: 1,717
offline

damian - 2 minutes ago »

JamesB - 1 hour ago »
Offered the choice between a box with beautiful defensive code that filled its maker's heart with pride, and a less expensive box which functioned satisfactorily for my purposes, I'd buy the latter.

they're not mutually exclusive, well written code is less clunky, has a smaller footprint, runs faster, easier to maintain and passes through the testing process quicker, in theory better code is cheaper.

Ah yes, theory.

In practice, nobody can be sure of the end costs until it's ready for market. Usually, the voices arguing for writing beautiful code aren't the ones who carry the can if it ends up over budget and over the deadline.

I'm quite happy to pay a premium for better quality.

Not I - not for invisible quality that doesn't actually make a difference to me but has made some programmer a happy man. If the box is fit for purpose, I'm happy. If not, I'll take it back.

Quality that makes a difference may be worth paying for. To me, it's not worth paying money for theory.

Invariably the less expensive option comes at a price later on

Invariably is a big word. Give us an example?

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 14:52:41 #222 |
damian

special member
Joined: Jan '12
Posts: 597
offline

JamesB - 53 minutes ago »
Not I - not for invisible quality

said the bean counter to the engineer.

budgets go over due to poor management, not to keep a programmer happy, that would be strange.
Good theory leads to good practice. Doing things on the cheap...?

You may or may not see any visible or invisible quality when you look at a cheap budget tyre compared to a branded one, good luck taking it back after you've proved it not fit for purpose.

Invariably cheaper products have poorer support and this most noticeable outside of the warranty period, this saving comes at a price later on. Classic example, the humax hd-fox-t2, five years old, still supported with a recent update and not ended in landfill like some of the less expensive products.

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 16:25:18 #223 |
REPASSAC

special member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 4,100
offline

damian - 2 hours ago »
...................
The biggest problems for Humax seem to be hdcp and cec over hdmi which is an absolute nightmare and completely out of their control as are changes to freesat/showcase, youtube, iplayer, isp etc. etc. behind the scenes which again are completely out of Humax's control, but Humax are forced to carry the can for it.
Invariably the less expensive option comes at a price later on

freesat also specified the UI. Control the EPG data (directly and indirectly with the broadcasters).

In many ways real time systems which update databases (are their any that don't? Yes, I guess a PVR is one) are in a way simpler to handle. They run on machines with masses of memory, and when processing a stream of related data, can commit or rollback, something a PVR cannot.

In the example I gave the unit rebooted, I can't know what rebooted the chipset or PVR code but perhaps that was by design to garbage data.

Edit: Damian - you must know full well that units at end of life should not go to landfill. Recycle.

think we are now a bit off topic.

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 16:47:59 #224 |
Ozzy

member
Joined: Feb '15
Posts: 49
offline

So if it is CEC causing problem HDMI CEC disconnect pin 13 adapter should solve it, shouldn't it?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lindy-HDMI-Less-Female-Adapter/dp/B00DL48KVI/ref=sr_1_10?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1427216262&sr=1-10&keywords=hdmi+adapter+no+pin+13

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 17:00:14 #225 |
JamesB

special member
Joined: Dec '13
Posts: 1,717
offline

damian - 14 minutes ago »

JamesB - 53 minutes ago »
Not I - not for invisible quality

said the bean counter to the engineer.

Yep, I do count my beans, most definitely.

budgets go over due to poor management, not to keep a programmer happy, that would be strange.

There are a lot of possible causes for overspending, not all of them foreseeable or manageable. A sensible manager has to tread a line between good enough / not fit for purpose.

Good theory leads to good practice.
It's a good theory that leads to good practice. Often, theory seems good, seems like the way things ought to be, but in practice it ends up costing more than expected.

Doing things on the cheap...?
You may or may not see any visible or invisible quality when you look at a cheap budget tyre compared to a branded one, good luck taking it back after you've proved it not fit for purpose.

That brings us back to the distinction between what's required for a life-critical product and what's required for a set-top box.

Invariably cheaper products have poorer support and this most noticeable outside of the warranty period, this saving comes at a price later on. Classic example, the humax hd-fox-t2, five years old, still supported with a recent update and not ended in landfill like some of the less expensive products.

The Fox-T is indeed a good product, and not expensive, in my view. Compare the YouView box - much more expensive than the Fox-T2, got whizzbang multicast capability, but came on to market years late, overpriced, bugridden, unreliable, minimal support other than revolving-door swaparounds. There's theory for you.

| Tue 24 Mar 2015 17:22:59 #226 |
Dave65

member
Joined: Mar '15
Posts: 10
offline

Hi
Ive read through these case and would like to add my bit. I have the Humax 1800T Freeview. Four months old and it froze up 4 times since January. Again no effect from remote and nothing happened when unit buttons on the front pressed. Had to switch off at the mains to get it up and working. Called Humax 2 weeks ago and he told me to do a disk format. No lock ups since then, but I dont watch with the Humax a lot. It always froze when pressing the Media button. I`m going to watch tv now always through the Humax to check it out. My purchase was from Richer Sounds.

| Wed 25 Mar 2015 16:35:46 #227 |
intellirat

new member
Joined: Mar '15
Posts: 1
offline

Hi,
Another freezing 1000s - I don't know that it's the same problem, but given the focus on internet connected/disconnected, I thought it might be relevant.

Before it started freezing up (no guide/small picture/no boot on power pull), there were flashes of a notification every so often (maybe once every 5 min) of "LAN disconnected" followed by "LAN connected". I replaced the network cable and rebooted the router and box, but no help. Then it went all the way, and froze up completely.

Booting with the LAN cable connected repeats this, but with it disconnected works fine - once the guide is loaded, I can connect the LAN cable and it all works fine. Power it with the cable connected (i.e. the "internet" connected), and it freezes within a few minutes, if it boots at all (stuck on <fre ime> on the front display).

So I wonder if it's negotiating with the network incorrectly or similar on boot?

I'm going to experiment with locking down the LAN port to forced speeds and duplexes (don't worry if that means nothing to you, I'm just eliminating), to see if that helps - but can other with freezes repeat this? I'm on Cat.6 Gig LAN to an Asus RT-AC68U router BTW.

| Thu 26 Mar 2015 9:32:14 #228 |
Ozzy

member
Joined: Feb '15
Posts: 49
offline

My HDR1000S, which I have had since January, did it for the first time last night. I switched it on with the remote, it had no programme guide and the only button on the remote that would work was the power button. Made sure the STB light was coming on on teh remote and pressed it just in case. Tried pulling out HDMI and Ethernet, made no difference. Switched it off with the remote control using the only button that worked, waited until I thought the hard drive had stopped then pulled the power out and put it back in, all perfect again. Hope iit doesn't do it again, its fine now.

| Sat 28 Mar 2015 11:35:19 #229 |
JayInBristol

member
Joined: Mar '15
Posts: 22
offline

I've got a replacement box waiting for me to pick up at Richer Sounds next week - but I'm wondering if there's any point?

I've had the "freeze" problem happen twice, when I first got the box - about ten days ago. But it seems increasingly unlikely, from what I've read here, that it's a hardware problem that would be solved with a replacement - it sounds rather like an occasional issue that may/may not happen with any box...

So I'm wondering - do you guys think I should replace the box or not? Other than those two occasions when it first froze it seems to be working perfectly.

I'd appreciate any feedback/views!!!

Thanks,
J.

| Sat 28 Mar 2015 12:25:20 #230 |