Opinion on the HD200

[eded9698]

Originally Posted by tedson

I must admit it really bugged me when I found out that for the HD-200 to get the license it needs to run you MUST install the beta server software. And on the front page when you look at the information for the unit it says "Watching live or recorded HDTV requires optional SageTV Media Center Version 6.5 or later" notice how it doesn't mention that 6.5 is beta software. I was very reluctant to take my somewhat stable sage server and install a beta on it. Not a release candidate at the time, just a pure beta.

Having said that if you have one of these, install the beta everything. It fixes a lot of problems.

Not mine. I still have to unplug it for it to start.

[iammike]

Originally Posted by eded9698

Not mine. I still have to unplug it for it to start.

Have you tried the latest firmware? I had this issue until a firmware release about 3 weeks ago. I had a less critical issue with power cycling fixed in the 1230 firmware release. If that doesn't fix it, I'd suggest contacting Sage support. They've been very helpful with the issues I've encountered.

[paulbeers]

Originally Posted by iammike

Have you tried the latest firmware? I had this issue until a firmware release about 3 weeks ago. I had a less critical issue with power cycling fixed in the 1230 firmware release. If that doesn't fix it, I'd suggest contacting Sage support. They've been very helpful with the issues I've encountered.

OP does not feel he should have to use beta software so he refuses.

I am super happy with the 12/30 beta firmware. It is working rock solid!

[Taddeusz]

For large companies like Apple or Microsoft having a beta test program outside of the normal released product makes sense. However, for a small company like Frey they were under pressure to get a new product out to market before the software was out of beta. The HD100 had been out of stock for some time and the new product needed a software update to work as it was meant to. So, they had two choices. Get the product out before Christmas and release the software update as beta or release the new hardware and software after Christmas once it's all ready and be unable to capitalize on Christmas sales.

If I were them I would have done the same thing. Even though the software wasn't quite ready the HD200 still worked on the old software as long as you had a Placeshifter license and without one if you were willing to run the beta software. This might be a turn off for new customers. This was a calculated risk they took by releasing it before the software was ready. I would bet the number of sales they got by releasing it before Christmas far outweighs the number of returns based on unready software. Had they released it after Christmas they probably wouldn't have had as high sales.

[Chriscic]

Sage is a small company and all this stuff is a little bleeding edge. I can see why you might be dissatisfied if you were expecting a totally polished, mainstream product.

My expectations were lower and despite many problems (esp. with the Sage/HD-PVR combo) I really like my HD200 (and HD100). There's no other solution out there like it that can both stream live TV and play nearly any video file over a set-top box.

[Brent]

Originally Posted by eded9698

...selling a product that needed to be upgraded with a beta and slow interface. Sagetv's fix was to send it back and charge me a 10% restocking fee for a product that does not work...

So are you saying SageTV didn't offer to replace the HD200? Did you ever try the beta as suggested?

Just read through all of your past threads back to 2006. Seems to be a pattern of issues you've been dealing with.

[gplasky]

I think the other question is important. Did you ever install the beta? The beta should have solved most if not all of your problems. What other choice did they have but to take it back if you wouldn't install the fixes. As far as this beta thing goes your cable compannies and even Tivo have done updates to customer boxes that have broken or hosed features for them. And that wasn't beta, that was production code being rolled out. So I don't understand this aversion to beta code. If you did install the betas I apologize in advance.

Gerry

[eded9698]

Originally Posted by mdnttoker

did they offer to send a replacement?

NO.

[eded9698]

Originally Posted by Brent

So are you saying SageTV didn't offer to replace the HD200? Did you ever try the beta as suggested?

Just read through all of your past threads back to 2006. Seems to be a pattern of issues you've been dealing with.

Installed all the betas and the new release for this year.

I stop using Sagetv for a while thinking it would get better with time. And it did.

Telling customer to upgrade to beta software when they install the HD-200 is wrong. They did not do that with the HD-100. I don't care how small and cutting edge this company is, if the product isn't ready its not ready. They released it before christmas to cash in on the rush.

And again they did not offer to replace it.

[stanger89]

Did you ask for a replacement? Did you try the beta they suggested? If you didn't try their debugging suggestions, I'm not really surprised they weren't very helpful with your return.

[eded9698]

I'm no the only one having the lockup problem.

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38224

[iammike]

Originally Posted by eded9698

I'm no the only one having the lockup problem.

http://forums.sagetv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38224

According to the thread you referenced, nobody has ever filed a problem report with Sage on this issue. I can say from personal experience that the support folks are pretty good to work with. Judging by who posted to that thread last, I suspect anybody who submits a bug request on this issue will get a pretty rapid turn-around.

[paulbeers]

I am personally glad you returned the HD200. Means there are more for the rest of us as we want to buy more. You weren't willing to install the beta firmware (but forwhatever reason were willing to install the beta software?) even though everyone recommended this as a fix. It is my opinion that I would rather run a Beta firmware, than a non functioning piece of equipment. I have an HD200 now and it works flawlessly with the Beta firmware and I will be buying another one. Maybe I will specifically ask for yours, just so I can verify if the beta firmware fixed its problems.

[enterpryse]

Got to say I have problems too and it is frustrating BUT I am confident it will be fixed and have had a prompt response from the support guys.

I really don't mind putting Beta software on and I hope that my feedback can improve things for others'


Stuart

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by eded9698

Telling customer to upgrade to beta software when they install the HD-200 is wrong.

You keep talking about how what they did was wrong and how they should not have done it. What, in your opinion, should they have done instead? Bear in mind that they publicly promised to release the HD200 before Christmas, the hardware was in fact ready to ship before Christmas, the HD100 had been out of stock for months, and many, many users were clamoring for a replacement. So their choices were:

A. Hold the HD200 release until after Christmas, breaking their delivery promise, angering users, and probably motivating many potential buyers to spend their Christmas gadget budget elsewhere.

B. Rush version 6.5 of the software out of beta and into release before Christmas, bugs or no bugs, just so that HD200 users wouldn't have to suffer the indignity of being asked to install beta software. (Their unit still might not work properly, since the software wasn't actually ready yet, but at least it wouldn't be called "beta".)

C. Release the HD200 on schedule as promised, keep V6.5 in beta until it was ready, and offer speedy beta releases and firmware updates as needed to resolve issues.

Of the three choices, option C clearly satisfies the most users and maximizes HD200 revenue, while option A is just the reverse: minimum revenue and maximum user disappointment. Yet if I understand you properly, you're arguing that option A was the only right thing to do. Is that correct?

[eded9698]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

You keep talking about how what they did was wrong and how they should not have done it. What, in your opinion, should they have done instead? Bear in mind that they publicly promised to release the HD200 before Christmas, the hardware was in fact ready to ship before Christmas, the HD100 had been out of stock for months, and many, many users were clamoring for a replacement. So their choices were:

A. Hold the HD200 release until after Christmas, breaking their delivery promise, angering users, and probably motivating many potential buyers to spend their Christmas gadget budget elsewhere.

B. Rush version 6.5 of the software out of beta and into release before Christmas, bugs or no bugs, just so that HD200 users wouldn't have to suffer the indignity of being asked to install beta software. (Their unit still might not work properly, since the software wasn't actually ready yet, but at least it wouldn't be called "beta".)

C. Release the HD200 on schedule as promised, keep V6.5 in beta until it was ready, and offer speedy beta releases and firmware updates as needed to resolve issues.

Of the three choices, option C clearly satisfies the most users and maximizes HD200 revenue, while option A is just the reverse: minimum revenue and maximum user disappointment. Yet if I understand you properly, you're arguing that option A was the only right thing to do. Is that correct?

Yes A would have been the right thing to do. Companies always break their promise if it is not ready. They should have stated on the website about the beta situation. This way the customers can decided if they want to buy. But they didn't do that and when a customer has a problem they want he/she to pay a restocking fee.

Edit:We are all adults and can accept not getting what we want, when we want.

[gplasky]

Originally Posted by eded9698

Edit:We are all adults and can except not getting what we want, when we want.

You may want to go back and read the posts from everyone that didn't order the HD100 when it first came out and had to wait months for the next batch. And the posts after that when they ran out. And the next. And posts from users that wanted a HD100 and didn't want to wait for the HD200. And speculation from the users on if the HD200 would even be delivered on time. We're all adults EXCEPT for what we want when we want it.

Gerry

[reggie14]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

You keep talking about how what they did was wrong and how they should not have done it. What, in your opinion, should they have done instead?

Sometimes the best option still isn't very good.

Yet if I understand you properly, you're arguing that option A was the only right thing to do. Is that correct?

I think a lot of people on the forums cut Sage a lot more slack than they'd give other companies. It seems like large companies are criticized by the public fairly often for rushing products out for various reasons. But, people rarely criticize Sage on these forums when they do things that they wouldn't find acceptable from, say, Microsoft or Apple.

I think a big reason for that is that many of the participants on these forums feel like active participants in the development process of Sage. When we file bug reports its not uncommon to get responses from the lead developer- that's not likely to happen with a large company. And, most of us are very technical (geeky, really) people that like to tinker. SageTV has always attracted that following, and its popularity has largely been limited to that particular niche.

I'm sure the company always would have liked to expand their customer base to include less technical people, but the single biggest thing they've ever done in that regard is creating the HD200 with standalone mode. I think once you start marketing your product as offering plug-and-play type functionality you're definitely moving away from just the people that like to tinker and a different standard applies. Releasing the HD200 with beta software might have been the best option for them, but I still think its a relatively irresponsible one. It turns out I was wrong- the HD100 was not released with beta software. Sage v6.3 came with the HD100, although the quick maintenance releases after that tells me it was probably effectively a beta.

I'm not really sure what eded9698 did, what Sage asked him to do, and what they offered to do for him. While I'm been bashing Sage a bit over the beta software and firmware issue, it seems like that's something he should have been willing to do (though, I think potential customers should have been warned more prominently). But, I've done some fairly in-depth debugging for Sage before. I wouldn't say I enjoyed it, but I was happy to do it to try to help them make a better product. However, I don't think its reasonable to expect every customer to do that sort of thing. If this guy was having problems and Sage wanted him to telnet into the HD200 to get capture the event log to fix it, I think its perfectly reasonable for him to return it and expect a full refund.

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by reggie14

Sometimes the best option still isn't very good.

Agreed, but compare this situation with the HD100 release. Here you have a couple of users grumbling about having to use beta software. When Sage missed the HD100 release date, they had dozens of users screaming bloody murder on the forums for months. It just mystifies me how anybody could think a repeat of that fiasco would be preferable, given that the HD200 hardware was ready to ship on schedule.

[joelinkup]

Here is a thought... I am not a youngster... I have been a basement experimenter all my life... I am retired now but have traveled the world as an engineer... SageTV is a small company... They absolutely RELY on you people to beta test their product... and I TOTALLY understand your frustrations and also your joys when you beta testers have some success... I GET THAT... I have been doing that for 60 years... Given all that... IF SageTV ever goes broke ALL OF US will be holding the bag with the units we have to the degree we have them at that time... However, if SageTV gets to be the BIG cheese and gets bought out by some MAJOR player then the founders and startups will get SUPER RICH... and all the little beta testers (us/you folks) will just go back to our basements and our soldering irons unrewarded, except in our own minds while the BIG boys sail the seas in their Yachts... So be it... It is the WAY IT IS... Just a thought...