why all the hate for DreamBox's ??

[Sicilian]

I dont hate Dreambox, just their prices, far too high now that theres more genuine competition as in the VU+ and the upcomming Clarke-Tech ET-9000.

I've owned many genuine Dreambox's, DM500, DM600, DM7020 and DM7025. I was going to replace the 7025 with a 8000, then the Duo came along, haven't looked back since. I think DM need to get their heads out of their arses and start dropping their prices in line with the new receivers available on the market. Why one earth would someone buy the new DM800SE when theres the Duo and Clarke-Tech ET-9000 available?

[Maxwell]

I think that the problem is nothing to do with extortionate pricing/clones.
Dream were an innovative pioneer and as such they did spend an inordinate amount of time and money on R&D that has to be recouped somehow, the problems stem from the fact that they have since failed to maintain their position as market leader but have attempted to compensate for lack of sales revenue by maintaining high retail prices in the face of stiff competition.
Now as these types of receiver are an enthusiast/hobbyist unit it goes without saying that generally, as with any hobby, it will be expensive but Dream are not offering anything out of the ordinary anymore so the enthusiast can no longer justify the cost and will look elsewhere.
By the very nature of these receivers it will always attract the something for nothing brigade who object to having to pay for anything, particularly in the last 12 months with the demise of cable boxes, these are generally the people that create the market for clones (before anyone objects to this comment I am aware that some enthusiasts also use clones)
If you think upto £1000 for an enthusiast receiver is expensive go back a few years to the analogue days when you could spend anywhere between £300 and £5000 for a motorised setup sometimes £3500 just for the receiver alone ! Did anyone object ? No not really, those that could afford it did and those that couldn't dreamt and bought the best they could afford without resorting to slagging off other manufacturers just because they thought they were being ripped if they paid more.
Bottom line is that Dream have fallen off the perch and made some bad business decisions but that in itself does not negate the fact that they still make great receivers its just that the competition has caught up and is about to surpass them.

[niteman1969]

after all was it not dream who introduced the first linux based satellite onto the market ? and was it not dream who created the enigma 1 and enigma 2 operating systems that are now powering your boxes ?.

I think you should check your facts and read about the DBOX2 cable and
Satellite receivers, probably the first linux powered satellite and cable boxes
and the first to run most of the essential plugins and protocols which are still
used in linux receivers today, without which DMM would probably not exist.

Quote from Dreambox Wiki :

The Linux-based software used by Dreambox was originally developed for DBox2,by the Tuxbox project.
The Dbox2 was a proprietary design distributed by KirchMedia for their pay TV services.
The bankruptcy of KirchMedia flooded the market with unsold boxes available for Linux enthusiasts.
The Dreambox shares the basic design of the DBox2, including the Ethernet port and the PowerPC processor.

Who is the Clone????

I in no way hate dreamboxes, but hate all the hype around
the godlike status that some people attribute to DMM.

Enigma is open source so can be used by anyone only the frontend drivers
for the dmm are proprietary as they are for any other non-clone satellite
receivers that use enigma or enigma2.

I agree clones are bad if sold as original DMM boxes to unknowing customers
who could have problems with them later when updating, ie sim probs etc.

Clones of Dm500 not badged as DMM receivers are a grey area,
because they too are based on the DBox2 hardware.

Clones of later dreamboxes are different because of
significant hardware changes.

In many circumstances the build quality / tuner sensitivity is
just as good or sometimes even better than DMM.

But by not developing their own frontend drivers they are
definately breaching dmm's software licence.

To me linux receivers are a tool and I will use any
that will allow me to watch what I want, wether they
are a clone, a dmm or a vu+, technomate etc.

Each have their advantages and disadvantages.
Currently i own 2x Eagle DM500 clones, 1 Technomate TM9100,
1 Dm800hd (Original), and a VU+ Duo I class them in this order.

1. Vu+ Duo (Enigma2 based, manufacturer developed own drivers)
2. Dm800hd (Enigma2 based, manufacturer developed own drivers)
3. Eagle DM500 clone (Enigma1 based, using DMM drivers)
4. Technomate TM9100 (Enigma1 based using manufacturers own drivers, let down by poor images/support)

I have no doubt the dm8000 is just as good or better than the vu+ duo but the price is more
than I would ever pay for an stb.

So down with all the hating!!!

As long as your box does what it was intended for who cares what the badge
on the front says??

[sivhead]

I thought I would add my gripe, putting the 8000 and 7xxx series aside, the dreamboxes are just too small. They look stupid under your TV its just designed to so they can ship more. ITs not what I want. I as a consumer want a well supported box hey ticked all the boxes. I want a remote control that comes with it to look and feel expensive,, (you dont get this with a dreambox). I want everything laid out so that all my wires that I plug in have enough room. I dont want too purchase and extra thin SPDIF cable and an extra thin USB key just so that everything can fit in the back just nice.

Cmon lets be honest, the smaller you are going to build a device the less air the device has the hotter it gets fact...
They are just too small, the remotes look to cheap and they are too expensive.... Now if they released a DM800 that looked like a DM8000 with a remote control like the ones here.

http://www.dream-multimedia-tv.de/en/remote-control

for the same price as a dm800 then maybe I could justify the cost as you would actually buying something that looks and feels expensive. In my opinion they look cheap and the remotes are tacky.

.............. hang on I am not describing the VU Duo am I. lol

[steve1978]

I think that everyone agrees that the dreamboxes are over priced in this day and age production costs are coming down and competition is hotting up, DMM need to realise that firstly.
Clones - They have their place in the industry. the clone 500 quite literally brought the dreambox to the masses at a good price.
the 7xxx stink of good quality machines, the 8xxx not so much so.

the machine itself is useless without software. image makers make the box what it is. if there was no VIX we would all still be using some crappy ported DE version 0.95! its people like Andy (coder of Vix) Sic (admin of the forum) and world of satellite (sponsor) that move this market forwards. If Andy and the boys buy the new Etech box then we will probably remain at VIX 1.3.

Respect to the image makers.

[jjp2701]

lets see how these new dm500hd clones go, they have just started selling them on sites, me i am thinking of purchasing one myself

[Sicilian]

I just dont understand why peeps keep buying the cheap clones when theres decent genuine receivers out there for not masses more in cost

[silverfox0786]

I just dont understand why peeps keep buying the cheap clones when theres decent genuine receivers out there for not masses more in cost

sorry boss thats something i would love to know the answer too aswell i can safly and happily say i dont any more own a clone box and so help me god never will

[bigup7]

I just dont understand why peeps keep buying the cheap clones when theres decent genuine receivers out there for not masses more in cost

thats my thinking now

18months ago it was a different story, you couldn't buy a HD receiver for £180 (like the DM800S copies) hence why i got one back then

[jjp2701]

but for 170 u cant get a hd box for that open source linux

[bigup7]

but for 170 u cant get a hd box for that open source linux

the Qbox Mini HD is probably the nearest one in terms of price i think now

[silverfox0786]

qbox looks very promising

[basilyoung]

There are reasons to be very gratefull to DMM, which has to come at a price, both now, and in the future, but the unit prices, do need reviseing
there are as posted, several very exciting units at all levals available to us now, regardless of all the politics, who dev,d this that or the other

but the bottom line is, surport from 3rd party image writers, plugin writers and so on, is what makes this hobby work

baz

[Sicilian]

but for 170 u cant get a hd box for that open source linux

So would stretching to a something like a genuine VU+ Solo really break your bank account? Doubt it.....at least your buying a genuine receiver with full manufacturers warranty.

[Larry-G]

So would stretching to a something like a genuine VU+ Solo really break your bank account? Doubt it.....at least your buying a genuine receiver with full manufacturers warranty.

this is my opinion entirely. yes i do agree that DMM need to sort out their prices as there are several very nice boxes on the market that do the same if not better job for less, but from my point of view a lot of the negativity levied towards DMM comes from people who buy a cheap clone expecting it to either be the real deal or to work the same as a real box.