75 replies to this topic

[Erik Slagter]

Legal slippery grounds...

[zeros]

So what is the verdict? (Will you put the pau plugin back into the feed or not?)  I have listened both the arguments for and against. My opinion is that we have a free country, and such a restriction is also not correct. It shall discontinue the use of the hack rather the producer. Producer has willingly done something that is not correct (I understand that this hach comes from the manufacturer himself too). This kind of thing, it seems to me absurd. We are workind to do our boxes to do everything, and not vice versa, in order to limit the possibilities. I will examine how this plugin has been done. Plugin is available on the internet, who seeks finds it anyway. Taxes must be paid, the producer and we, it is my opinion. Perhaps it should be eliminated from sale it or will be sold with a fair price and full functionality.

[Erik Slagter]

Your reasoning doesn't make sense. If you buy something that has some features not working because the manufacturer explicitly disabled them, that does not give you "the right" to enable them with any means possible, just because you didn't inform yourself before you made the purchase. That has nothing to do with "a free country". It's a bit comparable to buying a Home Edition of Windows, then "find out" it doesn't support a domain controller, so you're going to hack it into an Enterprise Edition. If one individual does this, they won't get prosecuted, even though it's illegal. But if a whole organisation is found to practise this, they can expect a bill from Microsoft. Whether they "agree" or not.

 

Now I think of it, all these people that copy software from others because they deem it to be "too expensive", it's just as hypocrite as the above. Price is not something (luckily not (yet)) you can bargain. Like it or not. If you think it's too expensive, simply don't buy it. If the producer doesn't sell anything, they'll learn. If a manufacturer produces a receiver that is cheap but cannot record (exactly because of that), why would you buy it? Buy the one which is slightly more expensive and does record. It's all so simple.

Edited by Erik Slagter, 19 September 2015 - 14:52.

[zeros]

I've bought a lot of expensive things that do not do what is promised (or with which I am not satisfied). Also, I bought a lot of things what do all that was promised, but the support will disappear after a certain time, and again I can not use them. PLI is quite good, thank you for what you are doing! I'm not saying that the inclusion or non-inclusion of pau in feed somehow render me. I have, unfortunately one Vu+zero here, and fortunately a thing around the corner is clear to me.

[littlesat]

Pau is in the feed....??????

[zeros]

It seems that not, but there is the Internet, where it can be found..

[WanWizard]

Just checked the distribution server, "enigma2-plugin-extensions-pau_1.0" is in the feeds both both the Zero and the Solo SE.

[zeros]

Then I apologize, because I do not currently able to control it. I know that it was there at the beginning and then you eliminate it. If it is now back, then I think it is right. And I very much hope that all those who are planning to buy a box can read all that, and do not choose the zero, because it is such a zapper box...

[theparasol]

Why dont we all here order 5 zero boxes on the web and return it within 14 days to the reseller with the remark: "just zaps, no recording or streaming possible!"

[WanWizard]

I'm pretty sure you will get an "up yours" back, together with a "where does it say it's a PVR?".

[Erik Slagter]

I'm pretty sure you will get an "up yours" back, together with a "where does it say it's a PVR?".

On the other hand, if you have a decent reseller/shop, they should acknowledge that they didn't mention this fact.

[Jan Gruuthuse]

By the way, Sony disabled DV-in feature for the European market on their D8 cams like DCR-TR7000E. With a cable 'LANC control to PC LPT' you could reprogram (in XP) the registers and enable digital video-in. Panasonic and JVC did the same. Avoiding so the the extra levy (European import tax) for video recorders.

[theparasol]

I'm pretty sure you will get an "up yours" back, together with a "where does it say it's a PVR?".

 

Well, they might try but here in The Netherlands we have customer protection. We can just return anything we like within 14 days for any reason, even "Since I feel like it".

As long as we ordered remote (e.g. by webshop) this doesnt work for real stores in a local town. The law says: you should have inspect the product at the shop prior before buying it!

But anyone not reached the age of 16 can return anything at any time for whatever reason. Even more protection for minors

[Rob van der Does]

By the way, Sony disabled DV-in feature for the European market on their D8 cams like DCR-TR7000E. With a cable 'LANC control to PC LPT' you could reprogram (in XP) the registers and enable digital video-in. Panasonic and JVC did the same. Avoiding so the the extra levy (European import tax) for video recorders.

Yep, I referred to that earlier. Too bad to see we went back to the past, and that VU didn't learn from that (or maybe they learned the wrong thing from that ).

[Erik Slagter]

The only thing I don't like about the VU+Zero and the VU+SoloSE is the pau binary itself. It's perfectly good practise to disable some functionality and then drop the price a bit. A "value edition". Nothing wrong with that.

[Rob van der Does]

Indeed.

Provided it would have been clearly announced as such. Which is not the case.

Edited by Rob van der Does, 20 September 2015 - 09:47.