pellonet
26-03-15, 17:04
I am fairly new here so bear with me if any protocols are breached ;)
I have been the happy owner of my Duo2 for just over a week now (purchased from sponsor), it a arrived as requested with the OEM image & after looking around at the options, I decided on the Apollo 153 (the latest one available at the time).
It was OK & soon 155 was available so I USB re-flashed that, I noticed that the TV picture was deteriorated, I was going to roll-back when I saw 157 was up so I tried that & what a difference, pin-sharp picture, very fast & exemplary transcoding to my mate in Thailand.
All too soon I saw 160 on the list so decided to give that a try & to my disappointment, the TV picture was again deteriorated, fortunately I had created a full backup & returned to 157 with everything going back to excellent again, I added the ViXBMC-1080 skin with the recommended OCRAM picons & the whole setup is really impressive.
So, the question is; would there be any obvious reason why the different revisions may have different TV image quality results?
I have been the happy owner of my Duo2 for just over a week now (purchased from sponsor), it a arrived as requested with the OEM image & after looking around at the options, I decided on the Apollo 153 (the latest one available at the time).
It was OK & soon 155 was available so I USB re-flashed that, I noticed that the TV picture was deteriorated, I was going to roll-back when I saw 157 was up so I tried that & what a difference, pin-sharp picture, very fast & exemplary transcoding to my mate in Thailand.
All too soon I saw 160 on the list so decided to give that a try & to my disappointment, the TV picture was again deteriorated, fortunately I had created a full backup & returned to 157 with everything going back to excellent again, I added the ViXBMC-1080 skin with the recommended OCRAM picons & the whole setup is really impressive.
So, the question is; would there be any obvious reason why the different revisions may have different TV image quality results?