Are people still getting sound drops/variance and synchronization problems with their boxes. I f so, can we now conclude that this is a problem with the box itself and not signal transmission?

See the following post:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showpost.php?p=131926&postcount=2

If the issue is with MCHD, those issues have been recently documented to death if you do a search.

See also the Digital Home FAQ (under help) "Motorola STBs"

Yea,but its about time someone started a problem thread for 6416 Motorola box,as you only have 6412 thread which is getting a little long.I know they are very simuilar except for the hard drive size,but they should have thier own thread.

Thanks 57.................. Is there any consolidation process that lists all valid/repetitive problems and passes it along to Shaw. I know they lurk here, but they see scattered non confirmed problems like we all do. Confirmation seems to be by repetition, which I think is valid and perhaps should be recognized as so and identified after say ten people raise the same problem. Maybe a special sticky for the ten problem threads or something like that.

I thought that the Motorola STB FAQ thread had a link to a post listing "known issues" and workarounds when available.

Anyone wishing to summarize other known issues may do so in one of the Motorola threads (as I've been known to do in the SA STB threads)

This is YOUR forum and it's up to YOU (people) to prepare summaries, for anything that "other volunteers" do not do.

All it takes is for someone to take an hour perhaps to review the main STB threads and copy/paste the issues into a Word document or similar, and then create a post from that.

I've done it many times in various threads, but I've really got no interest in doing it for Motorola/Shaw, other than the FAQ I've already created.

Heres a wikipedia page thats pretty good, with a list of quirks with the Motorolla dct. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/How_to_use_a_Motorola_DVR/Bugs

Doubt its ethical to copy and paste all thats on there:eek: but worth a look.