No Satellite Signal, but only on some channels.
Vincent
Thompson Sky HD box. The Signal Test indicates 80% to 100% signal strength,
and 100% quality, as normal. But, I noticed some channels say No Satellite
Signal.
So, I went through channel 101 to 682, and made a note of which channels
have this problem. I'd guess it's about 1 in 3 or 4 channels are out. Here
is the list of channels that have no signal:
106 Sky1
107 Sky2
108 Sky3
130 Sci Fi +1
156 Biography
157 Film24
188 Showcase TV
196 Nuts TV
198 Bet +1
207 OBE
210 Nuts TV +1
252 Travel Ch +1
256 Sky Arts 1
269 Diva TV
277 Diva TV +1
279 Travel & Liv +1
280 Horse & Country
301
...to...
312
321 True Movies
322 True Movies 2
327 movies24
328 movies24+
361 Kiss
364 Q
365 ChartShow TV
366 The Vault
367 Flava
370 channel U
372 Bliss
374 Scuzz
376 Flaunt
382 NME TV
385 Brit Hits TV
417 NASN
430 Setanta Ireland
446 Realmadrid TV
502 Bloomberg
506 CNN
512 Russia Today
515 Press TV
526 Nat Geo
527 Nat Geo +1hr
529 History
534 UKTV People
539 CommunityChnl
545 History HD
555 Crime HD
582 Wonderful
594 KICC TV
601 Cartoon Network
602 CN Too
603 Boomerang
604 Nickelodeon
616 POP
617 Tiny Pop
618 Boomerang +1
623 BabyTV
625 Tiny Pop +1
627 Kix!
640 QVC
644 Ideal World
645 price-drop tv
646 Pitch TV
654 bit tv
657 Pitch World
665 speedauctiontv
670 Gens.tv 3
680 Screenshop2
682 Entrepreneur
(got bored at this point)
All other channels work fine and have a clear picture.
I tried the usual mains power off/on, but this didn't have any affect. I
also tried forcing a firmware update. The firmware stayed the same at:
Operating System Version 1.32AOE
EPG Software Version 5.10.j HD
...but, even though it didn't change, suddenly all of the channels came
back. Two days later, and roughly half of the above channels are out again.
Some of the HD channels (History HD for example), instead of being out
completely show massive break-up.
Yet, checking the signal strength and quality again and they're fine.
Any ideas? Is this a dreaded symptom of the Thompson HD power supply
failure? If so how come there are so many that are fine?
What else could it be?
Thanks in advance.
--
Vincent
chunkyoldcortina
>
> Yet, checking the signal strength and quality again and they're fine.
>
Which channel did you check the signal strength and quality of? If you
use the "signal strength" indicator on the system menu it only shows you
the signal strength on the default transponder, and as you can receive
some channels fine you are probably receiving that fine as well.
Use the "other channels" menu with the frequency & other details of some
of the channels you can't get to check their signal strength.
Vincent
I just tried removing my Sky Viewing Card (which I did previously before
performing the firmware update), and put it back in. When I did this all of
the channels have come back.
So what's that about?
--
Vincent
Vincent
news:ghthci$piq$1...@south.jnrs.ja.net...
> Which channel did you check the signal strength and quality of? If you use
> the "signal strength" indicator on the system menu it only shows you the
> signal strength on the default transponder, and as you can receive some
> channels fine you are probably receiving that fine as well.
It was just the default transponder check.
> Use the "other channels" menu with the frequency & other details of some
> of the channels you can't get to check their signal strength.
Thanks - I was unaware of this trick. What is the frequency/polarisation/fec
of Sky 1 and 2 for example?
I'm not sure if you saw my own response to this thread, but I noticed that
the channels came back if I simply remove and re-insert my viewing card.
This suggests that it's not a signal strength issue at all. It is odd
though, as when History HD last went out it showed massive break-up and
intermittent sound, but you could see stuff. This implies it is a signal
issue and not viewing card related...
And one other thing I noticed, it's not just removing/inserting the viewing
card that fixes it. If I flick between 106 and 107, 106 has no signal about
9 out of 10 times I flick to the channel, and 107 has no signal about 1 in
10 times.
From further testing, it seems that removing/inserting the viewing card,
then trying several times to change to a broken channel results in it
appearing. Just removing/inserting the viewing card doesn't always fix it,
and just changing channels doesn't always fix it, but doing both seems to
nearly always work.
Whenever a channel does come back the picture is fine (no break-up). If you
stay watching it for 10 minutes it remains fine. If you then change channels
and come back to it it's back to no signal.
--
Vincent
Vincent
"Paul Martin" <p...@zetnet.net> wrote in message
news:slrngk4k...@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk...
> * Skew.
>
> * Dish movement.
>
> * LNB duff on one combination of polarisation and band.
>
> * Receiver fault.
>
> Try turning off the power and swapping the LNB connections at the back
> of the Sky HD receiver. Does the problem then go away for live viewing?
Hi Paul - thanks for the suggestion. I've just tried removing both LNB
connections and trying various combinations. Having either connected to
socket 1 on its own results in the same issue - sometimes a channel works,
sometimes it says no signal, occasionally it just shows massive break-up.
Changing to/from a channel that is on my list sometimes fixes it and
sometimes breaks it. The channels not on my original list are always fine. I
wonder if there's anything in common with the channels - such as all on one
transponder, or all one polarisation.
I have 100% signal strength and quality on the default transponder currently
on both LNB feeds. Also, as when the channels do work they look perfect, so
it would seem dish movement or skew is unlikely otherwise the quality would
be pretty consistent.
I also notice that if I flick between channels that are broken and not
broken, sometimes the channel comes back fine, other times it's extremely
distorted or "No satellite signal is being received.". It doesn't seem to
change once you're on a channel though it'll stay in whatever quality it
chooses (fine, broken, or in no signal) forever. I've waited several minutes
on a no signal message, and the picture never appears. I've also waited
several minutes when it's been working and the signal never disappears. A
change in behaviour only seems to happen when changing channels.
--
Vincent
Conor
--
Conor
I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't
looking good either. - Scott Adams
Vincent
"Conor" <conor_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6qf7h9F...@mid.individual.net...
>> I just tried removing my Sky Viewing Card (which I did previously before
>> performing the firmware update), and put it back in. When I did this all
>> of
>> the channels have come back.
>>
>> So what's that about?
>>
> Heh-heh. Isn't sky feckin marvellous?
Well, I think it was more that removing/reinserting the viewing card, among
other things, is like changing the channel to/from the channel. This
sometimes restores the channel too. There's more details elsewhere in this
thread.
--
Adam
Vincent
> Sounds like a receiver fault, then.
>
> Usual drill: £65 to Sky will get anything fixed. You might be able to
> weedle a free visit if you claim poverty, "I can't afford that. Not
> now. I'd better cancel, then."
One further update, it does sometimes start displaying after getting the No
Satellite Signal message. I'd left it on Sky 1 with this message displayed,
and after about 5 minutes it suddenly came on - perfect picture + sound.
Thanks for the advice Paul. If the problem persists or gets worse I'll
contact Sky.
Summary of problem for anyone catching up:
* A shed load of channels (see original post) show "No satellite signal is
being received.".
* Changing channels to another channel, and back again sometimes fixes it.
* Sometimes, after a time (several minutes), the picture comes back fine.
* If the channel works, or starts working, then it seems to stay working
unless I change channels again.
* Some channels always work. Only the channels on my original list ever seem
to have this problem.
* Signal strength + quality is at 100% on both inputs.
* Swapping inputs doesn't change anything.
* Forced firmware update didn't help.
--
Vincent
Bob Lucas
news:ghtn5...@news4.newsguy.com...
Firstly, you will find lists of Sky channels at
http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/skyuk.html (sorted by frequency) and at
http://www.lyngsat.com/packages/skyuk_chno.html (sorted by EPG number).
However, I could not find some of these frequencies on my receiver, so
I'm not sure whether Lyngsat is completely up to date.
Your Sky HD will test the signal against the default transponder on the
Astra satellite at 11.778 V (SR 27.5, FEC 2/3) at 28.2 degrees East.
Signal strength and quality from other transponders may be very
different (particularly transponders on the Eurobird satellite at 28.5
degrees East).
However, an analysis of the problem channels in your list indicates
points to the following transponders:
Transponder Frequency Polarisation
41 10714 H
C1U 11261 H
C6L 11390 V
C6U 11426 V
D7S 11585 H
D8S 11604 V **
D9S 11623 H
D10S 11642 V
1 11720 H **
7 11836 H
8 11856 V **
15 11992 H
17 12032 H
18 12051 V
21 12110 H
25 12188 H
27 12226 H
28 12246 V **
29 12266 H
30 12285 V
40 12480 V
F6L 12691 V
** indicates frequencies that I could not locate on my Sky+ receiver.
Many of the problem channels are clustered onto the same transponders.
However, there is no obvious pattern, which might point to a switching
fault between Horizontal and Vertical polarity - or between High & Low
Band. I suspect you probably have a problem with your dish alignment,
LNB, or cabling (such as water penetration).
However, before spending any money, you could carry out a few more
tests.
If you have access to another Sky, Sky+ or Sky HD Sky receiver (or can
borrow one), try connecting it to your dish and LNB. If the second
receiver exhibits the same symptoms, you definitely have a problem with
your dish alignment, LNB and/or the co-ax cabling.
On the other hand, if the other receiver works OK at your address, then
your receiver has probably developed a fault. If so, you could take
your Sky HD receiver to a friend or neighbour (one who subscribes to
Sky+ or Sky HD). Connect your Sky HD receiver to the friend's dish and
LNB. If your receiver still exhibits the same symptoms at a different
location, then you definitely have a defective receiver.
If you require professional assistance, Sky would charge a flat rate of
£65 for a service call (service calls are free of charge, if your box is
under 12 months old).
For that price, they will check your system. If the engineer decides
your receiver is defective, he will replace your receiver with a
reconditioned one at no extra cost. Labour materials are guaranteed for
3 months and if you are lucky, you might even receive a brand new
receiver (it depends what is on the engineer's van). If your Sky HD
receiver is less than 12 months old, insist upon a brand new
replacement.
There is one downside to getting a replacement receiver. You will lose
any recordings on your hard drive.
Vincent
news:ghu5h5$kmk$1...@news.motzarella.org...
> If you have access to another Sky, Sky+ or Sky HD Sky receiver (or can
> borrow one), try connecting it to your dish and LNB. If the second
> receiver exhibits the same symptoms, you definitely have a problem with
> your dish alignment, LNB and/or the co-ax cabling.
I do have access to another old standard Sky Box. I'll be able to check that
in a week or so.
The one point I've noticed which inclines me to think it's not a
cabling/dish/LNB issue is this:
If I flick to a channel that has "No satellite signal is being received.",
every time, after typically about 45 seconds to 1 minute 10, the picture and
sound appear, with perfect quality. And they stay like that for at least an
hour (I've now watched 3 sets of hour long shows on different "no signal"
channels). This is repeatable on every channel I can find with "no signal",
every time.
If it was cabling/dish/lnb issues, I'd expect to see the quality fade in and
out, or cut out during a show. It seems too much of a coincidence that the
cable gets wet, or the dish moves out of alignment, at the exactly moment I
change channel, then be perfectly ok 1 minute later and for the duration of
a program, and then faulty again as soon as I change channel again.
Could it be the LNB having trouble switching between H and V? Is this
something that can take some time (e.g. a mechanical movement)? Or is it
solid state? I'm also not convinced it's a polarisation issue as, as you've
also indicated, there's no pattern to the channels that are having problems.
I can flick between so many channels that must be on different
polarisations, in any order, without any problems. It's just the ones on my
list that have issues.
Very puzzled...
--
Vincent
Charles Ellson
<nos...@reply.to.newsgroup> wrote:
>"Bob Lucas" <b...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:ghu5h5$kmk$1...@news.motzarella.org...
>> If you have access to another Sky, Sky+ or Sky HD Sky receiver (or can
>> borrow one), try connecting it to your dish and LNB. If the second
>> receiver exhibits the same symptoms, you definitely have a problem with
>> your dish alignment, LNB and/or the co-ax cabling.
>
>I do have access to another old standard Sky Box. I'll be able to check that
>in a week or so.
>
>The one point I've noticed which inclines me to think it's not a
>cabling/dish/LNB issue is this:
>
>If I flick to a channel that has "No satellite signal is being received.",
>every time, after typically about 45 seconds to 1 minute 10, the picture and
>sound appear, with perfect quality. And they stay like that for at least an
>hour (I've now watched 3 sets of hour long shows on different "no signal"
>channels). This is repeatable on every channel I can find with "no signal",
>every time.
>
You'll get that if the EPG channel has a marginal or intermittent
signal but the channel being watched has sufficient bits arriving that
there is no noticeable effect on the picture or sound. My own
experience of that involves dishes which weren't aimed properly. If
you can put any of the affected services into "Other Channels" and
afterwards select them immediately then that will often point at that
and other faults (e.g. local interference) affecting the EPG channel.
>If it was cabling/dish/lnb issues, I'd expect to see the quality fade in and
>out, or cut out during a show. It seems too much of a coincidence that the
>cable gets wet, or the dish moves out of alignment, at the exactly moment I
>change channel, then be perfectly ok 1 minute later and for the duration of
>a program, and then faulty again as soon as I change channel again.
>
>Could it be the LNB having trouble switching between H and V? Is this
>something that can take some time (e.g. a mechanical movement)? Or is it
>solid state? I'm also not convinced it's a polarisation issue as, as you've
>also indicated, there's no pattern to the channels that are having problems.
>I can flick between so many channels that must be on different
>polarisations, in any order, without any problems. It's just the ones on my
>list that have issues.
>
>Very puzzled...
Alba \\ // charles AT ellson.demon.co.uk
Gu ><
Brath // \\ Posting Mince Since the 20th century
Bob Lucas
A universal quad LNB converts different transmission modes from the
satellites, which are situated at slightly different locations (28.2 and
28.5 degrees East):
Low band, vertical polarisation
Low band, horizontal polarisation
High band, vertical polarisation
High band, horizontal polarisation.
The webpage at http://www.satcure.co.uk/tech/lnb.htm explains how the
Sky receiver sends the signals, which enable the LNB to interpret low
and high band transmissions - and also vertically and horizontally
polarised transmissions.
I agree that a defective Sky HD receiver is a distinct possibility.
There is a well-documented problem with the poor quality capacitors that
Thomson have used on the Power Supply Unit of Sky HD receivers. See
http://www.satcure.com/reviews/review114.htm#01. If the PSU is failing,
the Sky HD receiver will not send the correct switching signals to the
LNB.
You will definitely experience problems, if the receiver sends incorrect
switching signals to the LNB - or if the switching signals are
intermittent. However, you will experience similar symptoms, if the LNB
has developed an intermittent fault, and does not respond correctly to
the switching signals. Incidentally, a dodgy LNB can be affected by the
ambient temperature. Similarly, the effects of water in the co-ax cable
can also be exaggerated by temperature changes.
I would have expected switching problems to affect ALL horizontal or ALL
vertically polarised channels - OR all high band or low band channels.
However, you reported that reception of some channels is perfectly
satisfactory. The concentration of problems on a handful of
transponders suggests that your dish alignment should be viewed as a
possible culprit, particularly as many of the problem channels seem to
be transmitted from the Eurobird satellite at 28.5 degrees East.
At this stage, we are speculating. You will be much closer to a proper
identification of the problem, once you have connected a different
receiver to your dish - and if necessary, have connected your Sky HD
receiver to a different dish and LNB.
critcher
Vincent
news:ghufjc$5ji$1...@news.albasani.net...
> by any chance has sky phoned you up about insurance or any other issue
No - I have Anonymous Call Rejection - people calling from call centres
can't get through to me. I get maybe 2 or 3 marketing calls a year that get
through - all from "International" numbers. They tend to go a bit like
this..
[10 seconds of silence, followed by the quickly rising pitch of a real of
tape coming up to speed] (Assume a very strong US accent)
"Caaarrngratrellayshuns!!! You have been selected to win....." [I hang up]
Haven't these "Sky" insurers been on Watchdog a few times this year?
--
Vincent
Bob Lucas
> "critcher" <dennis...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ghufjc$5ji$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> by any chance has sky phoned you up about insurance or any other
>> issue
>
>
> --
> Vincent
>
Yes - they have been on Watchdog
but
No - these callers aren't from Sky, They are independent companies that
phone lots of numbers on a "fishing expedition", in the hope that some
"sucker":
a) Might believe the call really has come form Sky and
b) Might decide to pay for an over-priced maintenance contract
critcher
My box is a pace vers 1 and has been pretty good for a while.
Suddenly in the last 4 days I have been having a screen saying "technical
problem with this channel" with bbc1,2, itv1,2,3.
Also I note that BBC1 quality has been a bit low, it could be due to the
weather.
But it could also be due to engineering works etc.
What I do know is that it is Xmas, and the time to make a bit of money.
People on this group have said that sky can't influence individual boxes,
but I still believe they can.
Please prove me wrong and explain why they can't influence reception on
individual boxes.
Bob Lucas
If that is what you believe - that is your prerogative!
However, I doubt whether you can provide any proof for your theory.
Equally, how do you expect me to disprove a fallacy?
Realistically, the Pace PVR1 Sky+ receiver is a very early model. By
now, it is probably nearing the end of its useful life.
If it really is failing, you might consider paying £65 for a service
call. Then, if you smile sweetly, the engineer might agree to supply a
PVR3 - in exchange for your old receiver.
Vincent
> My box is a pace vers 1 and has been pretty good for a while.
> Suddenly in the last 4 days I have been having a screen saying "technical
> problem with this channel" with bbc1,2, itv1,2,3.
> Also I note that BBC1 quality has been a bit low, it could be due to the
> weather.
> but I still believe they can.
> Please prove me wrong and explain why they can't influence reception on
> individual boxes.
Technically, it is perfectly possible for Sky to influence individual boxes.
The unique serial number of the Sky box, and your Sky viewing card number,
are both available to the firmware (you can see them displayed on screen in
one of the menu options). Hence, it would be very easy to include a piece of
code into a firmware update that looks for your specific number (serial or
card), and performs some action such as introducing random glitches or
crashes, etc.
However, if you think that Sky would actually implement something like what
I've described above then I'm sorry, but you're totally paranoid and
probably crazy.
Think of the complications involved...
The design for the code would have to be passed through various people, and
all code involved would need to be checked by various people along the
route, so lots of people would know about it. As with any company that needs
to developed software they'll use some kind of repository for the code to
allow multiple people to work on it at the same time (e.g. CVS). All code
changes will be visible by all other programmers. You just couldn't keep
stuff like this quiet or hidden. Someone along the line would blow the
whistle, or get fired and spill the beans, or need some money in the credit
crunch and try and blackmail people. No way at all would this kind of code
remain hidden for long.
But, even assuming Sky had a whole bunch of totally loyal staff and could
keep it a secret, there are a huge number of people out there who, for
whatever reason, have decompiled the Sky firmware just to see what it does
and how it does it. Some of these people would have definitely noticed such
dubious malicious code, and reported it to forums or newsgroups like this.
It would not stay hidden. Think about it - the firmware is continuously
broadcast (that's how we can perform a forced firmware upgrade at any time),
so anyone in the UK with the know-how can analyse it at any time.
Finally, what could their motive possible be that would out-weigh the huge
risks involved if such code ever became public knowledge (think scandal on a
mass scale, law suites, huge fines, etc). Sky will charge £65 at most to get
you up and running again if you're having problems. Do you know how little
profit they probably make from that? Think of the cost of the van,
maintenance of it, insurance for any staff to drive it, pay for the
engineer, time not spent doing more profitable jobs, cost of having to
employ enough staff to cover the extra callouts to these people, and add on
the cost of the equipment (new dish? new box? new cabling? new fixings?),
and you'll end up with a figure somewhere between about £60 and £500. So,
usually, Sky make a loss from the £65 call out, sometimes a very big one.
Tell me what could they possible gain, overall, from introducing malicious
targeted code like what you're describing?
Short of visiting your premises, there is no other way Sky can influence
individual boxes. All other methods would affect everyone, or large numbers
of people (e.g. deliberately misaligning the transmission coverage area).
The problems you describe with your Sky box sound typical and common, with
well known real causes. I put it to you that it's not Sky targeting your Sky
box and deliberately affecting it in a negative way, but just the weather,
or age of the setup, or normal wear and tear, or interference.
--
Vincent
Bill Wright
"Vincent" <nos...@reply.to.newsgroup> wrote in message
This is a good and well reasoned explanation, but it is a complete waste of
time. The OP has made his mind up, and that's that. It's one of the big
failings of the human psyche that there is a great ability to believe what
the individual wants to believe, irrespective of the evidence. In fact, it
is hard for many people to discipline their thoughts enough to have a
balanced view on subjects where they have strong feelings, even if they want
to at an intellectual level. Very few people are completely free of paranoia
or self-delusion.
Sometimes you can explain the true facts to someone, giving irrefutable
evidence, and they will smile sweetly and seem to listen and consider. But
in fact your words do not penetrate the firewall they have around their
mind.
Sometimes evidence that contradicts core beliefs will be met with
aggression, and this can even lead to violence.
People who share a general set of unsupportable beliefs normally group
together if they can find each other. The grouping can be informal or it can
extend to highly formal arrangements.
Bill
Bill Wright
"Vincent" <nos...@reply.to.newsgroup> wrote in message
This is a good and well reasoned explanation, but it is a complete waste of
critcher
"Anthony R. Gold" <not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote in message
news:n0dbk4p5705i8c340...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:14:55 -0000, "Bill Wright"
> <insertmybu...@f2s.com> wrote:
>
>> This is a good and well reasoned explanation, but it is a complete waste
>> of
>> time. The OP has made his mind up, and that's that. It's one of the big
>> failings of the human psyche that there is a great ability to believe
>> what
>> the individual wants to believe, irrespective of the evidence.
>
>
> Tony
critcher said..................................
the op has not made his mind up,
but posters have now said on here that it is possible for sky to target
individual boxes or even groups of boxes.
Till now everyone on here said it was impossible.
Granted my ver 1 is a very old box, but it behaves impeccably for months and
then glitches hit
particular channels. Not every channel, sometimes bbc 1 itv1 itv3 etc.
Now my box is back to normal and is recording ok, and probably will be for a
long time to come.
As has been said before, if your box lasts for the first 3 months it will
probably last for years.
It could be weather, atmospherics etc.
It is a discussion point not for any psychiatric assessment, but for
knowledge and learning.
Ian Dalziel
<dennis...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>but posters have now said on here that it is possible for sky to target
>individual boxes or even groups of boxes.
>Till now everyone on here said it was impossible.
Oh, FFS...
No they haven't. They have said that it is possible to make an
individual box do something IF the box is programmed to do that thing
when a code is broadcast.
Which is what you were told in the first place.
They can't send anything to one box only, they can't affect your
reception.
AND THE INSURERS HAVE FUCK ALL TO DO WITH SKY!!!!!!!
Hello? Earth calling critcher?
--
Ian D
critcher
"Ian Dalziel" <ianda...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:foadk4l3ggqvaak6l...@4ax.com...
critcher said ........
language timothy.
Technically, it is perfectly possible for Sky to influence individual
> boxes. The unique serial number of the Sky box, and your Sky viewing card
> number, are both available to the firmware (you can see them displayed on
> screen in one of the menu options). Hence, it would be very easy to
> include a piece of code into a firmware update that looks for your
> specific number (serial or card), and performs some action such as
> introducing random glitches or crashes, etc.
snipped from vincents post.
Ekul Namsob
> critcher said ........
> language timothy.
>
> Technically, it is perfectly possible for Sky to influence individual
> > boxes. The unique serial number of the Sky box, and your Sky viewing card
> > number, are both available to the firmware (you can see them displayed on
> > screen in one of the menu options). Hence, it would be very easy to
> > include a piece of code into a firmware update that looks for your
> > specific number (serial or card), and performs some action such as
> > introducing random glitches or crashes, etc.
>
> snipped from vincents post.
If you choose to read only small parts of individual posts, you can read
whatever you like. If you choose to ignore what follows the 'However',
you demonstrate yourself to be a troll.
Cheers,
Luke
--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
Vincent
"Ekul Namsob" <notmyaddress...@wronghead.com> wrote in message
news:1is5jt6.1aqzcqg661kdsN%notmyaddress...@wronghead.com...
> If you choose to read only small parts of individual posts, you can read
> whatever you like. If you choose to ignore what follows the 'However',
> you demonstrate yourself to be a troll.
But if you know he's doing that, you'll also know he may well have just
ignored most of what you said above and read it as:
> If you choose [snip], you can [snip]
> [snip] ignore what follows the 'However'
> [snip]
--
Vincent
critcher
"Vincent" <nos...@reply.to.newsgroup> wrote in message
I didnt ask if they would, only is it possible, AND IT IS ACCORDING TO
POSTERS ON HERE. goodnight and godbless
Adrian
>
> I didnt ask if they would, only is it possible, AND IT IS ACCORDING TO
> POSTERS ON HERE. goodnight and godbless
According to just *one* poster, who could easily be wrong.
Adrian
> matter for him. OTOH I don't believe it is possible.
>
> Sky can target changes to individual subscriptions, which relates to
> card data and which channels are available and their lineup in the
> Planner. And Sky can target boxes by type for any software updates
> and firmware changes. I do not believe that Sky has the facility to
> target individual boxes by serial number for firmware changes, which
> this weird claim would require.
>
> Tony
I'm sure you're right, some people will never change their absurd beliefs.
Vincent
> He found someone to support his prejudices, so that settles the matter for
> him. OTOH I don't believe it is possible.
>
> Sky can target changes to individual subscriptions, which relates to card
> data and which channels are available and their lineup in the Planner.
> And
> Sky can target boxes by type for any software updates and firmware
> changes.
> I do not believe that Sky has the facility to target individual boxes by
> serial number for firmware changes, which this weird claim would require.
I think it's me who Critcher is referring to, and I do NOT support his
prejudices. He chose to ignore the majority of my post that explained why,
although it's technically possible, it just wouldn't happen in practice, as
too many people would become aware of it - not least anyone who fancies
decompiling the firmware, which numerous people (claim to) have done to find
out how it all works. The firmware is continuously broadcast from Sky and
thus viewable by anyone with the technical know-how. The risks to Sky of
this kind of malicious code becoming public knowledge is far too great.
In response to you directly Andrew, Sky do not need to send a targeted
firmware to specific boxes in order to achieve this. My original post has
more details, but both the box serial number and the sky viewing card number
are available to the firmware. This is obvious because the firmware displays
both of these numbers in one of the Services menus. In order to display them
it must have access to them.
Therefore, all Sky would need to do is add a small section of code to
everyone's firmware which does something like this (not real code of course,
pseudo code, but the same principal applies):
if serialNumber equals "12345ABC" then...
[Code to cause lots of random glitches and errors]
else
[Code the rest of us uses]
This is a very basic example, and would only affect the one Sky box with the
serial number 12345ABC, but it's also very easy to check if the serial
number is in a list of serial numbers if you want to affect multiple boxes.
But, before fanning the flames any further, I'd like to refer anyone even
remotely thinks Sky might implement such code to my previous post where I
explained how Sky could not do this without someone noticing, how they would
actually lose a large amount of money on it, and how you'd be crazy if you
believed anything to the contrary.
Just because the hardware is capable of it, and just because firmware
changes can be sent to the hardware to make it do different things, doesn't
mean Sky would add such code, want to add such code, or get away with adding
such code. When it's a widely used service that a whole load of geeks have
access to, anything malicious just isn't going to go past unnoticed.
--
Vincent
Ian Dalziel
<dennis...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>"Ian Dalziel" <ianda...@lineone.net> wrote in message
>news:foadk4l3ggqvaak6l...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:58:12 -0000, "critcher"
>> <dennis...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>but posters have now said on here that it is possible for sky to target
>>>individual boxes or even groups of boxes.
>>>Till now everyone on here said it was impossible.
>>
>> Oh, FFS...
>>
>> No they haven't. They have said that it is possible to make an
>> individual box do something IF the box is programmed to do that thing
>> when a code is broadcast.
>> Which is what you were told in the first place.
>> They can't send anything to one box only, they can't affect your
>> reception.
>> AND THE INSURERS HAVE FUCK ALL TO DO WITH SKY!!!!!!!
>>
>> Hello? Earth calling critcher?
>>
>
>
>critcher said ........
>language timothy.
>
>Technically, it is perfectly possible for Sky to influence individual
>> boxes. The unique serial number of the Sky box, and your Sky viewing card
>> number, are both available to the firmware (you can see them displayed on
>> screen in one of the menu options). Hence, it would be very easy to
>> include a piece of code into a firmware update that looks for your
>> specific number (serial or card), and performs some action such as
>> introducing random glitches or crashes, etc.
>
>snipped from vincents post.
>
" include a piece of code" - snipped from *your* post.
i.e. the box would have to be programmed to do it.
"They can't send anything to one box only, they can't influence your
reception." - snipped from my post.
Now we've done snipping, how about *reading* the thread?
--
Ian D
Vincent
>
> " include a piece of code" - snipped from *your* post.
>
> i.e. the box would have to be programmed to do it.
>
> "They can't send anything to one box only, they can't influence your
> reception." - snipped from my post.
Actually, while the first quoted line above was snipped from his post, he in
turn was quoting me. It was me that said that.
Just playing devil's advocate here...
What you say is correct - they can't just send anything to one box only.
But, as I said in another of my posts, they could send the code to
everyone's box that behaves differently on a specific box, or list of
specific boxes. All the code would need to do would be to check for a
specific serial number (i.e. box) or card number (i.e. customer), and run
normal code (what you or I see the end result of) or alternative/malicious
code accordingly. This is very easy to program. It's literally one line of
code to perform such a check.
...and of course I'll reiterate again that there's no way Sky could do this
unnoticed or get away with it. All I'm saying is that it's technically
possible for Sky to convert a single specific box into a Space Invaders
console if they wanted to. The hardware is perfectly capable of it, and the
firmware can be changed to do it, and if they chose it would only affect the
box with the specific serial number as having any other serial number would
mean the Space Invaders code is not executed.
--
Vincent
Ian Dalziel
<nos...@reply.to.newsgroup> wrote:
>
>"Ian Dalziel" <ianda...@lineone.net> wrote in message
>news:9ca0l4hsk61pfsh7p...@4ax.com...
>>
>> " include a piece of code" - snipped from *your* post.
>>
>> i.e. the box would have to be programmed to do it.
>>
>> "They can't send anything to one box only, they can't influence your
>> reception." - snipped from my post.
>
>Actually, while the first quoted line above was snipped from his post, he in
>turn was quoting me. It was me that said that.
>
>Just playing devil's advocate here...
>
>What you say is correct - they can't just send anything to one box only.
>
>But, as I said in another of my posts, they could send the code to
>everyone's box that behaves differently on a specific box, or list of
>specific boxes. All the code would need to do would be to check for a
>specific serial number (i.e. box) or card number (i.e. customer), and run
>normal code (what you or I see the end result of) or alternative/malicious
>code accordingly. This is very easy to program. It's literally one line of
>code to perform such a check.
>
Indeed. And I've said so several times. It would be rather more
complex to program the box to produce "poor reception" in response to
a code, though.
Possible, but more unlikely than an extremely unlikely thing.
Then, if we consider the probability of the third-party scam insurance
vendors successfully programming the box for "poor reception"...
--
Ian D
Ato_Zee
> Indeed. And I've said so several times. It would be rather more
> complex to program the box to produce "poor reception" in response to
> a code, though.
> Possible, but more unlikely than an extremely unlikely thing.
>
> Then, if we consider the probability of the third-party scam insurance
> vendors successfully programming the box for "poor reception"...
Targetting a specific box, or group of boxes, is no problem
for Sky, they can turn Sky+ recording on or off, as well as
subscribed packages according to what you have subscribed to.
It is only a small step to a subroutine that changes the tuning,
gain, or any other software controllable parameter.
If box has a number, or number in a range then a, go to/jump
subroutine in code.
Keeping it secret another matter. It is unlikely that
3rd party insurers could initiate such code and insert it
into the data stream. Rogue states might have the
resources to influence the uplink, then take control,
but that's a way out possibility.
But since the satellites are controlled from ground stations
by uplinks, there is an obvious vulnerability in the system,
take control of the uplink, take control of the system.
Once you have cracked the encryption and protocols,
and that requires significant resources.
Ian Dalziel
wrote:
But they can't TARGET an indivdual box - they can broadcast an
instruction which only that box will react to.
Of course they can instruct a box to do anything it's programmed to do
- but it has to be programmed first.
Critcher thinks that since they can "send" permissions and updates to
an individual box, they can interrupt the signal to that box as wel -
waggle the wires, or somethingl.
The rest of what you say is exactly what I have been telling him for
some considerable time. I was polite about it to start with - I only
started swearing at the twunt when he refused to read what I (and
everyone else) had said.
--
Ian D
Ato_Zee
> Of course they can instruct a box to do anything it's programmed to do
> - but it has to be programmed first.
>
> Critcher thinks that since they can "send" permissions and updates to
> an individual box, they can interrupt the signal to that box as wel -
> waggle the wires, or somethingl.
They wouldn't have to wiggle any wires, they can address individual
boxes, Sky tell the box the parameters for each channel
(or you can do this yourself with add channels) and if Sky were
to deliberately send slightly off-spec data, that specific box
or group of addressed boxes would have problems with that
or those channels.
AFAIR there was a brief spell of problems with BBC and
it affected some not all boxes, an official statement at
the time was that the signal was within operational
parameters, which didn't help the affected, it however
soon got corrected. Think it originated with a transponder
change, there was a lot of speculation in this group.
IF the press were to get hold of a story that Sky were
deliberately nobbling some boxes to generate insurance
or service revenue I would expect some very embarassing
questions, and it would be political dynamite if they
attempted it.
I doubt if Sky's flat fee generates much or any
profit.
Bob Lucas
news:hTv4l.35506$i_6....@newsfe11.ams2...
I doubt whether the flat fee for service calls generates ANY profit
whatsoever. £65 is inadequate to cover the cost of parts, labour and
other overhead expenses (such as maintaining the vehicle fleet, etc).
Sky's only justification for capping the charge at £65 is to retain
subscribers and thereby, discourage viewers from moving to Cable or
Freeview.
That is yet another reason why Sky have no motive for "nobbling"
individual boxes (or groups of boxes), which would trigger additional,
loss-making service calls..
Vincent
nws:giu46h$qb5$1...@news.motzarella.org...
> I doubt whether the flat fee for service calls generates ANY profit
> whatsoever. £65 is inadequate to cover the cost of parts, labour and
> other overhead expenses (such as maintaining the vehicle fleet, etc).
I agree. There's so much involved with a callout. As you said, parts
(possibly a Sky HD Box, Dish, cabling), labour and pay for the engineer,
vehicle maintenance, but also insurance for both the installer (he's going
up ladders and dealing with electrical devices) and the vehicle (insurance
for any driver is expensive, also a percentage of the engineer's training,
loss from not doing more profitable jobs (such as a new setup), etc, but
also it's a guarantee that your Sky setup will work for 3 months. Any
additional work and callouts during that period are free. If any further
work is done then I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong) that the 3
months begins again from the most recent callout.
Just curious - how much are these insurance policies for a Sky HD setup? At
worst, assuming you had a serious problem once every three months, then
getting Sky to come out would cost £22 per month.
--
Vincent
critcher
I only wanted to initiate a response, and I think I have.
It is possible for Sky to influence a boxes' responce.
Whether they would or not is a matter for conjecture.
6 mths ago no one would have agreed that sky were able to do such a thing,
that it was outside their ability, now people on this most august of
newsgroups think it
is a possibility, IF sky wanted to.
And if you all want to, check your reception over xmas and see if you have
any problems after this strong ripost to Skys ability to cause problems on
reception...............................
The Wizard
Imagine the insurance companies offering cash to Sky to send updates to out
of warranty boxes??
So more the questions is "Have you ever known $ky to refuse money?"
Ian Dalziel
<dennis...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>critcher said........................
>I only wanted to initiate a response, and I think I have.
>It is possible for Sky to influence a boxes' responce.
>Whether they would or not is a matter for conjecture.
>6 mths ago no one would have agreed that sky were able to do such a thing,
>that it was outside their ability, now people on this most august of
>newsgroups think it
>is a possibility, IF sky wanted to.
>
If you had bothered to read it - if indeed you can read - you would
know that what is being said now is *exactly* what I told you in the
first place.
They can't *send* anything to an individual box, they can't affect the
reception of an individual box - they can send a code to *all* the
boxes in a region which a particular box can recognise, which can tell
it to do anything it has been programmed to do.
And the bit you are still ignoring - that insurance is a scam, it is
not Sky who are peddling it.
--
Ian D
Bob Lucas
There are two important points regarding extended warranty / insurance
cover.
1. It is important to log onto your account at My Sky and edit your
profile. Unless you are happy for Sky to sell your details to other
companies, you should remove the tick from the box that allows: "... the
information you have given to us to be shared with companies outside the
BSkyB Group for sales, marketing and market research".
2. Visit
http://mysky.sky.com/portal/site/skycom/skyhelpcentre/contactus and
scroll down to "Sky Protect". The Sky website states "If a company
other than Domestic and General has contacted you trying to sell you
extended warranty please email the details to us.".
critcher
Ian stop being such an obnoxious twat.
Try being a nice guy and helping not hindering.
>
>
Vincent
> Over the past week (possibly more), I've noticed a strange problem with my
> Thompson Sky HD box. The Signal Test indicates 80% to 100% signal
> strength, and 100% quality, as normal. But, I noticed some channels say No
> Satellite Signal.
>
> So, I went through channel 101 to 682, and made a note of which channels
> have this problem. I'd guess it's about 1 in 3 or 4 channels are out. Here
> is the list of channels that have no signal:
>
> 106 Sky1
> 107 Sky2
> 108 Sky3
> 130 Sci Fi +1
> 156 Biography
> 157 Film24
> 188 Showcase TV
> 196 Nuts TV
> 198 Bet +1
> 207 OBE
> 210 Nuts TV +1
> 252 Travel Ch +1
> 256 Sky Arts 1
> 269 Diva TV
> 277 Diva TV +1
> 279 Travel & Liv +1
> 280 Horse & Country
> 301
> ...to...
> 312
> 321 True Movies
> 322 True Movies 2
> 327 movies24
> 328 movies24+
> 361 Kiss
> 364 Q
> 365 ChartShow TV
> 366 The Vault
> 367 Flava
> 370 channel U
> 372 Bliss
> 374 Scuzz
> 376 Flaunt
> 382 NME TV
> 385 Brit Hits TV
> 417 NASN
> 430 Setanta Ireland
> 446 Realmadrid TV
> 502 Bloomberg
> 506 CNN
> 512 Russia Today
> 515 Press TV
> 526 Nat Geo
> 527 Nat Geo +1hr
> 529 History
> 534 UKTV People
> 539 CommunityChnl
> 545 History HD
> 555 Crime HD
> 582 Wonderful
> 594 KICC TV
> 601 Cartoon Network
> 602 CN Too
> 603 Boomerang
> 604 Nickelodeon
> 616 POP
> 617 Tiny Pop
> 618 Boomerang +1
> 623 BabyTV
> 625 Tiny Pop +1
> 627 Kix!
> 640 QVC
> 644 Ideal World
> 645 price-drop tv
> 646 Pitch TV
> 654 bit tv
> 657 Pitch World
> 665 speedauctiontv
> 670 Gens.tv 3
> 680 Screenshop2
> 682 Entrepreneur
> (got bored at this point)
>
> All other channels work fine and have a clear picture.
>
> I tried the usual mains power off/on, but this didn't have any affect. I
> also tried forcing a firmware update. The firmware stayed the same at:
>
> Operating System Version 1.32AOE
> EPG Software Version 5.10.j HD
>
> ...but, even though it didn't change, suddenly all of the channels came
> back. Two days later, and roughly half of the above channels are out
> again. Some of the HD channels (History HD for example), instead of being
> out completely show massive break-up.
>
> Yet, checking the signal strength and quality again and they're fine.
Well, the Sky man is coming today to attempt to fix this problem. So I'll
let you know the result.
Some other things I've noticed are:
* When changing to a channel that claims it has no signal, a couple of weeks
ago if you waited 50 seconds the picture would always appear, with perfect
quality, and remain fine unless I changed channels again.
* Now, if I change to a channel with no signal, it will still appear with
perfect quality as above, but it takes 5 to 10 minutes.
* The channels which have or don't have this no signal problem seem to move
around. For example for two weeks solid 106, 107, and 108 always had no
signal, but yesterday it was just 106. Now it's all three again. Some other
channels have since appeared with no signal.
* After selecting a channel with no signal, if I then browse through my
favourites with the blue button, or otherwise navigate the channel titles
with the arrow buttons, every few seconds it flicks back to the channel I'm
on. E.g. if I select 106 and get no signal, then use the arrow key to go
107, 108, 109, 110, etc... after a few seconds suddenly it's back on 106
again. And before anyone says, it's not be waiting several seconds and it
resetting naturally. It happens even if you hold the arrow key down and
rapidly scroll through the channels titles.
--
Vincent
Vincent
the engineer announced it was my box that was at fault. The replacement box
certainly does not have this issue.
The engineer said he'd seen this same problem a number of times. In each
case, the signal strength reported by the box was at 100% like with my box,
and that a high signal strength is also shown on the stand-alone meter. He
hypothesised that perhaps the Sky boxes can't handle a very strong input
signal over a long period of time, but admitted it's just a theory and could
be a co-incidence.
--
Vincent (patiently trying to get series links on all the stuff in his
planner)
Ian Dalziel
Try reading what I say, then?
--
Ian D
Ato_Zee
On 27-Dec-2008, Paul Martin <p...@zetnet.net> wrote:
> > The engineer said he'd seen this same problem a number of times. In each
> >
> > case, the signal strength reported by the box was at 100% like with my
> > box,
> > and that a high signal strength is also shown on the stand-alone meter.
Signal quality is the important parameter, is that 100% as well?
Signal quality is a measure of error correction, high error correction
correlates with reduced signal quality. Maybe a faulty LNB not
reponding to polarisation correctly, LNB skew wrong, can also
be a receiver fault, early Pace boxes with front end Zero IF(ZIF)
modules tended to suffer from this, hence the many vendors of
reconditioned ZIF modules. Sometimes they fixed the fault,
except when it was a PSU capacitor or some other box problem.
Some of the chips inside get quite hot.
Vincent
> Signal quality is the important parameter, is that 100% as well?
Yes - it always was at 100%, just like the signal strength.
> Maybe a faulty LNB not
> reponding to polarisation correctly, LNB skew wrong,
Neither of these, otherwise the replacement box would have identical
problems.
There was no pattern to H or V channels being out. There was about 50/50 of
each.
> can also
> be a receiver fault, early Pace boxes with front end Zero IF(ZIF)
> modules tended to suffer from this, hence the many vendors of
> reconditioned ZIF modules. Sometimes they fixed the fault,
> except when it was a PSU capacitor or some other box problem.
> Some of the chips inside get quite hot.
This was an 18 month old Sky+ HD Thompson box. Had no problems with it at
all until this problem started appearing about a month ago.
Anyway, a replacement box seems to have fixed the issue.
--
Vincent
Vincent
I forgot to say... usually you'd be correct, but this is not the case with
this problem. We're not talking about signal quality, we're currently
talking about signal strength and how too high a signal strength (i.e. peak
voltage) may or may not be damaging Sky HD boxes.
--
Vincent
Bob Lucas
news:slrngldd...@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk...
> In article <2Dv5l.58325$AL7....@newsfe14.ams2>,> No I didn't. Be careful with your attributions. The quote below is
> from
> Vincent.
>
>>> > The engineer said he'd seen this same problem a number of times.
>>> > In each
>>> > case, the signal strength reported by the box was at 100% like
>>> > with my box, and that a high signal strength is also shown on the
>>> > stand-alone meter.
>
>> Signal quality is the important parameter, is that 100% as well?
>> Signal quality is a measure of error correction, high error
>> correction
>> correlates with reduced signal quality. Maybe a faulty LNB not
>
> error rate of the received signal. You can have massive signal level,
> with nothing that is decodable. On the other hand you can have a much
> smaller signal level but with the modulation being perfect.
>
> It may be that Vincent's signal is so strong that it's overloading the
> front end of his receiver. This could happen with a particularly
> sensitive LNB, a very short run of downlead and a sensitive receiver.
>
> It's more likely to be a problem with the stability of the tuner or
> the
> LNB power supply. If the tuner is not initially landing on exactly the
> correct frequency it might cause the symptoms described. (Playing with
> the LNB offset setting might prove useful in that case.)
>
> --
> Paul Martin <p...@zetnet.net>
Let's get back to basics.
The LNB does not have its own power supply. It is powered by the
digibox (so is mode switching).
The OP experienced problems with a Thomson HD receiver, which had been
in use for 18 months. It is well-documented that Thomson Sky HD and
Sky+ receivers of that age often suffer problems with the PSU. PSU
failure can also damage other components of the receiver.
The signal test menu on Sky receivers provides an rough indication of
signal strength & quality from the default transponder. Nothing more
and nothing less.
I suppose that in theory, the signal from the dish & LNB could cause an
overload. However, the original symptoms suggested impending failure of
the PSU in the OP's receiver - or a failing tuner module.
Sky have replaced the receiver, and the problems have disappeared.
There really is little point in speculating further (unless Bill Wright
can offer any pearls of wisdom).
David Taylor
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:42:32 -0000, "Adrian" <an...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> critcher wrote:
>>>
>>> I didnt ask if they would, only is it possible, AND IT IS ACCORDING TO
>>> POSTERS ON HERE. goodnight and godbless
>>
>> According to just *one* poster, who could easily be wrong.
>
> him. OTOH I don't believe it is possible.
>
> Sky can target changes to individual subscriptions, which relates to card
> data and which channels are available and their lineup in the Planner. And
> Sky can target boxes by type for any software updates and firmware changes.
> I do not believe that Sky has the facility to target individual boxes by
> serial number for firmware changes, which this weird claim would require.
Why not? They could easily send a software update that includes code
that checks the serial number of the box before executing.
It is _entirely_ possible, technically speaking.
--
David Taylor
Bill Wright
"Paul Martin" <p...@zetnet.net> wrote in message
news:slrngldd...@thinkpad.nowster.org.uk...
> In article <2Dv5l.58325$AL7....@newsfe14.ams2>,
> front end of his receiver. This could happen with a particularly
> sensitive LNB,
>a very short run of downlead and a sensitive receiver.
No, a receiver with poor ability to deal with high signal levels.
In both cases 'sensitivity' has been used to mean, in essence, low front end
noise. This has nothing to do the gain of the LNB or the dynamic range that
the receiver can deal with. In fact, given that low front end noise and the
ability to deal with strong signals are 'quality' issues, there's some
chance that the relationship might be the opposite to what you would expect.
By the way, many strange things can happen when the LO in the LNB is
slightly off tune. One receiver won't notice; another will say 'no signal',
another will display intermittent 'faults'
Bill
Vincent
> Let's get back to basics.
>
> The LNB does not have its own power supply. It is powered by the digibox
> (so is mode switching).
>
> The OP experienced problems with a Thomson HD receiver, which had been in
> use for 18 months. It is well-documented that Thomson Sky HD and Sky+
> receivers of that age often suffer problems with the PSU. PSU failure
> can also damage other components of the receiver.
>
> The signal test menu on Sky receivers provides an rough indication of
> signal strength & quality from the default transponder. Nothing more and
> nothing less.
>
> I suppose that in theory, the signal from the dish & LNB could cause an
> overload. However, the original symptoms suggested impending failure of
> the PSU in the OP's receiver - or a failing tuner module.
>
> Sky have replaced the receiver, and the problems have disappeared. There
> really is little point in speculating further (unless Bill Wright can
> offer any pearls of wisdom).
>
Well, you guys will love this... Here's something new to speculate about...
As Bob stated above, the replacement Sky HD box fixed my no signal issue -
all 80 odd channels that had the problem worked again fine. Firmware update
worked fine. In fact everything worked fine again...
But, a few hours later there was a couple of seconds of massive picture
break-up, and the Sky box crashed.
When it powered back up again there was No Satellite signal on any channel.
Going into the services menu shows 0 signal and 0 quality, and No Lock on
both inputs. Powering the box off and on again makes no difference. Keeping
it off for ages (two days) and powering it back up still makes no
difference.
Unfortunately, the whole local Sky team are on holiday until Monday. I
complained and did get a full £65 refund, and I'm not going to be charged
for Sky for the time I am without my HD box (about another £10 saving).
But not being one to give up, I got my old Pace box (the one I had before I
bought a Sky+ or Sky HD box) and plugging it in. It shows 80% Signal
Strength and 100% quality when either of the two feeds are connected. It has
worked absolutely fine since Saturday. No crashes, no break-up.
Anyway - did my LNB blow up my new Sky HD box's receiver? Or was it just a
"Dead Shortly After Arrival" syndrome?
--
Vincent (sad without his HD, dual receivers, Dolby digital, and recording)