Edit by 57: Please use the link below to discuss the IPG/Firmware. Use this thread for Whole Home discussions.

New Firmware / (HD) IPG for 8642, 4642 Discussions - Read Post 1 and Links There - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums


Things to know about WHPVR post: Whole Home PVR in Ontario Discussions (NextBox 2.0/3.0) - Page 21 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums


Additional discussions re Filters: WHPVR filters - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums


Adding a STB summary: Whole Home PVR in Ontario Discussions (NextBox 2.0/3.0) - Page 43 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums


The new NextBox 3.0 model 9865 can also be incorporated into the WHPVR

Stand-alone 9865 (NextBox 3.0) Discussions: NextBox 3.0 (Cisco 9865) Discussions - Read Post 1 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums


The maximum used to be 2 Cisco PVRs and 6 Cisco STBs in the WHPVR system, but it now appears you can have at least 3 PVRs - Contact Rogers for limitations at your specific installation. Stand-alone STBs or PVRs can be "outside" the WHPVR inside your home. For example you can have stand-alone SA STBs/PVRs in your home, but not incorporated into WHPVR. Or Cisco STB/PVRs beyond the number allowed inside WHPVR inside your home.

You must contact Rogers to set up WHPVR and typically a home visit is necessary to implement as well as adding equipment


I have heard from a GOOD source the whole home pvr will be in Ontario in early to mid Feb. this will be a nice feature and can handle upto 4 cisco hd stb 1 of them having to be 8642 have a sleek new guide system very close to bells fibe tv and this will require a tech to visit house's to setup i do have alot of details about this (over 80% of techs have completed the course on this at this time) there is a fair bit of change over for this to be working in ones house
-A big down fall on this anyone that owns a 8300hd pvr or 4250 hd these boxes will not work on the Whole Home PVR there will be no software update to allow them to be on the system either
-Once a tech installs this in your home this will also not allow you as a customer to visit a rogers store to swap a modem of stb any longer
-currnet customers will also have to pay a onetime install fee to have this set up in there house where anew customer still gets the current free install

Go on, I'm listening. Or at least I was until the part about the one-time set up fee. I'll do it myself, thank you very much, or I'll just wait until FibeTV comes to my neighborhood (it's getting close; Bell Fibe --sans the TV part -- has been reported in Kanata South).

I wonder why? A tech needs to install it and is the internet modem included in the Whole Home PVR ?

My house might be difficult. Cable in and is split into 3. One goes to home phone, one goes behind fresh new drywall to the internet modem. The third goes to a Rogers supplied amplifier and then is split and those wires again go behind fresh drywall to an HD 8300 pvr and an SD 8300 pvr. The way these PVRs are used we would definitely need to be able to record 4 programs concurrently on the PVR while playing back 2. I bet it won't do that.

I'll wait and see the details.

The 8642 STB has had the ability to act as a Gateway since it was introduced so the "coming soon" feature has been coming soon for three years.

If your rumour is true then what is surprising is that Rogers is only starting to think about rolling it out now.

FWIW, I think this is a crappy solution.

Who wants a Whole Home PVR with only 2 tuners? The Shaw Gateway has 6 tuners and the ability to watch 9 HD streams. The Shaw Gateway also has a DOCIS 3.0 modem (thereby eliminating the need for a separate modem for internet service) and firmware that allows Shaw to deliver many of the cool features that are being delivered by IPTV providers like Telus Optik and Bell Fibe.

The Rogers solution (if it uses the 8600 series) just seems so five years ago.

Does the solution require a wireless network, or are they using the cable already in the house as the network? Either way, the setup of that network is probably what requires the on-site visit. Still, I'd prefer to do it myself so I understand it better and, of course, to save the cost.

P.S. That this was coming to Ontario was discussed in another thread by someone who got signed up as a Beta tester.

FWIW I agree with Hugh -- I've been thinking of getting a second PVR for two reasons -- too much tuner contention, especially on game nights, and to keep some of *our* shows in a separate location (so our teenaged son who gets home an hour before anyone else) stops watching shows we'd rather he didn't watch (why the heck it won't let you PIN-protect a scheduled show?)

A second PVR solves both issues, a whole-home PVR does not.

Will they at least deploy this with a 500 GB disk?

I'm also curious about the mention of the modem, which seems to imply that your Internet service is somehow intertwined with the Whole Home PVR service. Does that mean you are also required to have Internet service from Rogers in order to get the Whole Home PVR service?

the reason a tech has to make any changes is due to certain filters have to be installed to allow the pvr setup to work properly ! a self install will not be allowed as per requirements of making the setup work!

the whole home pvr system will be networked through the cable lines this is why a tech will be required for ALL work after the install of the whole home pvr set up due to the reason if a filter isnt installed or working right it can cause the interent modem to kick out or emta (phone modem)

I'm confused. Do I have to be a subscriber to Rogers Cable Internet to be able to get the whole home PVR?

My roommate works for Rogers and I saw several glimpses of the training video she was watching and I have to say the UI looks pretty impressive and is completely on par with what Bell Fibe has. The Whole Home PVR setup apparently supports up to 2 8642s, so I guess you could have a total of 4 tuners. The video details are quite sparse though, so I don't think its launching anytime soon. It has no information about launch dates, customer positioning, installation fees, and technical information like the number of shows that can be recorded at once, or whether slave terminals can pause live tv.

What I'm curious about is whether people who don't opt for the whole home pvr setup will get the updated UI. I have an 8642 and a 4642 and don't care that much about the whole home PVR feature but would like the new UI functionality.

Isn't pretty much the case for anything Rogers does anymore?

I'm taking a completely different opinion on the whole home pvr thing. Seeing as the industry in general is moving towards IPTV as the key method of video delivery, I can't see Rogers investing in a device, like an expensive 6 tuner pvr when it will only become obsolete very quickly. Bell made the right choice in it's delivery method, and I'll assume rogers is going that way as well. Tuners are a thing of the past. Think of it, why be limited in the number of IP streams you can deliver. Bell is limited to 4 because of their own bandwidth limitations. Rogers is not limited at all to the number of streams that can be utilized amongst any number of Networked PVR's using Network based cloud storage. Future PVR's will not have a hard drive. Going with tuners is obsolete. Any of you that have a good understanding of IPTV delivery will agree with me. From my understanding of the 8642 and 4642 set-tops they are both capable of IPTV delivery and future proofed. The built-in Docsis 3 modem will take care of everything.

See the subject. It's a rumour at this point. Nothing has been announced or released so no one can definitively answer at this point.

They absolutely will have a drive, but you're right, network-based storage is the way to go. You need the local drive, though, for buffering (pause live tv, pre-fetch content to improve VCR-control responsiveness). If I'm watching movies OD I'd definitely prefer to download the full movie and not stream. Or at least have an option to do so. Streaming content quality is crappy right now. I put up with it for TV shows (especially since they are free -- ROD) but not for movies.

Although the idea of buffering locally (to improve responsiveness) sounds great, there was significant opposition, in general, about the network-based DVR feature, and it was only struck down (on appeal) when it was ruled that 1.2 seconds' worth of buffering content does not infringe on copyright. You'd likely need a 2-3 of orders of magnitude more buffering to do what I'm talking about.