receiver test bull sh*t

[eme]

don’t you just get feed up with lame duck receivers and the testers before them, i was just reading about problems with the Disad- Vantage HD800, the pre testers find some receivers great, the real people get them and find problem after problem, now either some of the pre testers are blind or thick i don’t know which it is but this is the third receiver on the trot that i have been looking at and it has problems, even one is advertised with sata hard drive and it does not even work yet. Why are they released on the market for the user to wait and sometimes never get sorted?

[xanadu]

The trouble is a lot of these testers have self interest in promoting these new products with backhanders and free samples/sponsorship etc.

The DM800 HD is one example of a receiver that was awarded 'Best HD receiver' even though it still has tuner problems and lots of other bugs.

[Detlef]

I sympathise but only to a certain degree.

After getting my fingers burnt on several must have, new bits of kit, I now wait for the first revisions. That way you can read actual user reports and not the ones by self interested testers.

So poor equipment is the price you can pay for being too eager to get into new technoogy.

[hudsoft]

Disad- Vantage HD8000

I was hopping to get a reaction, someone to say no your wrong you can do this or that. I'm a retired gent that took up this hobby a year ago, I have no motivation other than getting the best out of my purchase. Regards rushing in, I thought being endorsed by DR Dish this was the one to have. Even the TM6900 claimed blind scan when it first came out and is shown in the manual, but this has lots of support on many sat sites which helps blind thicko's lick me.

[Angelacr]

Hudsaoft wrote:- ...which helps blind thicko's lick me...

Helps blind thickos lick your what?

[hudsoft]

told you i was thick --- like me

anyway any help on the vantage hd8000 would be helpful

who's Hudsaoft