I've had a really tough time getting what i wanted from Rogers... it's frankly been a nightmare. just when i thought everything was resolved, apparently the tech that was here doing the installation said that i need to subscribe to a service to have the whole home PVR. is this correct, I cannot find anything on the rogers website.
thank you for your help.
Solved! Solved! Go to Solution.
yes and no.
You need to call rogers, and say you want the whole home PVR.
You must have at least 1 8642 and 4642 box to do it.
When you call them, they will sort of set it, to allow for whole home PVR to be enabled on the account. So yes, they need to enable this from the phone end.
After that, you need need to get a tech out, specificaly to set up the whole home PVR. This costs $50, as they have to add a special filter (so your box is not viewable by your neibours down the street ) and make sure that the TV lines are wired correctly in the right sequence, etc for it to work.
While they are there, since the 'allowed' whole home PVR will be on the account, they give a call into their support line, and the people there, will do a PUSH out to the box, to push the update for the whole home PVR module for the boxes.
The tech doing the setup, likely couldnt do anything then and there, as they didnt have it on the work order, and may not have had the filter, etc.
For your troubles, etc.. when you call in.. see if you can talk to a manager or customer relations, and see if they can waive the $50 install fee.
(I had the WHPVR installed on the first day it was available, as well as adding a 2nd hd box, so have seen the process)
GDkitty, it sounds like you have WHPVR set up. Does it deliver what it promises?
I've been scouring the internet for reviews of it and it seems like most people are confusing Nextbox 2.0 and WHPVR. They slag off WHPVR because the guide sucks or there is not frame by frame slow motion. That's all related to Nextbox 2.0, all of which are legit criticisms but have nothing to do with WHPVR.
I understand that Rogers had a very rough rollout of WHPVR resulting in many failed installation attempts for people but most of those posts are dated 2012. Assuming those installation growing pains have been sorted out, is WHPVR worth the effort? Does it perform adequately to deliver on the promise of using one PVR for multiple TVs? Given all of the limitations of the Nextbox 2.0, I find it surprising that it can handle showing two recorded shows at the same time.
My goals are pretty simple: Right now I have two TVs, one HD TV in the living room with a NextBox 2.0, one SD TV in the basement/exercise room, no PVR. I just bought an HDTV for the basement and would like WHPVR to facilitate watching TV/hockey in either room.
I'm debating between WHPVR or getting a second PVR. WHPVR would be very convenient and eliminate fast forwarding games I'm in the middle of, which is a real pain. And it would be cheaper. But it's gotta work seemlessly. It has to result in no degradation in quality. I don't want to have to deal with a huge lag starting a show from the non-PVR TV. And I don't want any negative effect on the main TV. (Performance, viewing restrictions, interference, picture quality, etc)
I will do my best to answer And yes, i have had whole home PVR since the first day it was offered, so i know most of the ins and outs of it.
(just to answer the part of the slow motion, etc... all the nextbox 2.0 PVRs should have been updated to the 3.0 software update, which does include this now).
First off.. this is not a sales pitch or anything.. i dont work for rogers in ANY capacity.
But, if your 2.0 pvr is NOT purchased (that its a rental or rent to own).. i HIGHLY reccomend switching to the nextbox 3.0. It may cost up to 2.50 more per month... but it is highly worth it. Regardless of the being able to record up to 8 things at once, the hardware alone on the box, makes the the whole experience better. There is pretty much ZERO lag compared to the 2.0 box sometimes.
This box, DOES improve speeds slightly on the whole home setup as well, i have found.
Now, i will give my experiences with the 2.0, as that is what you have (and incase you dont switch your PVR).
Setup: This i guess you can still have a bad experience, if you have a BAD tech. As long as you have a decent tech, it should be fine. They need to come out and install a MOCA filter.. this is just a little in line filter, which prevents the twoway communication between boxes, from going outside the house (dont want the neibours watching your recordings!
This group of TV lines, should be segrigated from the lines for internet, etc. (ie: no modem on the inside end of that filter)
The tech can hopefully help, but your SIGNAL has to be good to the other locations, etc. If you have a weak signal, it can really screw up the whole home passing of info. As long as your signal is good, your ok.
The tech will call in, and have them push out the whole home addon software to the box.. it will enable a little house icon on the box.
Usage: Unfortunately, its NOT quite like that old commercial for it, where the guy is PAUSE, PLAY, PAUSE, PLAY. But, in the end.. it really works, like your other HD box, is a PVR there as well. On the other box, you hit the list button. Will maybe take a second or so longer than the main box, but the list of shows will come up.
Select your show, and start playing it.
Now, it takes a few seconds to start it up. Its not like BAM instant.. but i have never had more than 5 seconds. There is a little loading message, then away you go. Pause, stop, etc as normal.
I often would start watching something in the living room.. then go i am to tired to sit here, but want to finish it. Turn the PVR off, stoping the playback.
Then go upstairs, and start it, it resumes from right where you stoped.
I only once or twice have ever ran BOTH at the same time.. playing/recording on the PVR, and playback on the other.. so dont have alot of experience with if there is much more lag or other issues in that way by doing so.
Again, that is one thing i would say for why the 3.0 would help alot. The 3.0's hardware, is MUCH MUCH higher specs, and could handle stuff like that much better.
Awesome response, thanks so much.
WHPVR sounds like what I want/expect, the ability to stop playing a recording on one TV and resume playing at the same spot on another. I don't need the pause/play in different rooms like the commercial implies.
Any issue with watching live TV on both TVs simultaneously? Does the non-PVR box include its own tuner?
Also, fair to assume the non-PVR box uses HDMI output?
Btw - the only thing keeping me from jumping straight into the Nextbox 3.0 is my daughter's 92 episodes of Dinosaur Train. The things we do...
HAHAHA, i totaly get that XD
We had the nextbox 2.0, with the extender.. and had about 20 hours of Stella and Sam, and Handy Manny for my son
We watched all the regular stuff on our 2.0.. and then i tried to download what i could for him from the web (unfortunately not much).
With the extender, and the larger capacity on the 3.0 to start.. i have just set it for 2 weeks now, to record EVERY episode and EVERY timeslot.. just need to filter duplicates.. but it think i have almost EVERY episode now
Comparatively to say something like the new FIBE setup, yes, each of the HD boxes for the other rooms, do have their own tuner.. so NO issues of watching live on both.
(not that with 8 on the nextbox 3.0, you would likely have one to spare anyways )
For the whole home PVR, you need to have a HD box on the other TV. the SD ones do not do whole home. All the HD boxes have HDMI output.
So even to start.. if you want them to come out and set it up.. go with it with the 2.0 to start.. you can always swap over later.
The only thing the terminal needs the PVR for is recorded programs.
The terminal box is its own stand-alone box, and gets its live tv independently of the PVR.
So I made the switch to WHPVR and I am very happy with it. It's exactly what I expected it to be and the performance is totally fine. Given that the installation took 10 minutes, they totally ripped me for the $50 installation fee but that was in large party to the 3 visits when initally setting up our services: All of our cable had been replaced so thie WHPVR tech only needed to apply the filter and everything just worked.
I did, however, make the jump up to the Nextbox 3.0. The Rogers store employee told me that upgrading later would have required another installation visit. This might not be true but I'm glad I made the jump.
This is the key takeaway: Everyone should upgrade to the Nextbox 3.0. It is SOOO much faster than the 2.0. I actually hit my remote the day before because of the lagginess of the 2.0. Granted, I've only had the 3.0 for a day but so far I see no hidden issues. Everything is completely identical: guide, list, playback, scheduling. Nothing has changed except for the speed. It's just so snappy.
So thanks again for the info and encouraging me to go with WHPVR. Bring on hockey season!
Glad that you like everything.. the 3.0 is pretty impressive
Even the majority of the 2.0 HATERS on this forum, are enjoying it.
Yeah.. the filter visit.. is a little overprices IMHO.. should be FREE. I GUESS there is a cost of the filter somewhere in there.. cant be much though.
The amount of work, all depends on HOW the house/lines are set up. Ours for instance, before that, had a TV split off a line where the modem, etc was.. was OK for then.. but not so, with the Whole Home setup.. did require about 30+ mins of the guy re-doing some lines, putting in a power boster (for our upstairs line, etc).
Question about whole home Pvr I am interested in getting it but if I get it now when I move do I have to pay the 49.99 again? And is it worth getting?