nano-se test

[rumpole]

i hope this is of use to anyone thinking of a new satellite box.
and if you just want a single tuner to view sat tv, or as a box
for another room etc:. next this is just my honest view from the
perspective of anyone who just wants a good quality receiver at a
very good price.have not opened either box so my review is just from
a average user, but i'm sure if anyone needs more technical info then
i'm sure the forum sponsor or members will be able to help on this.
************************************************** **

i got a nano-se a few weeks ago and have been very impressed with it,
i have tested it along side a vu zero and these are my results
************************************************** **
differences

The Nano-SE is small and looks and feels really well built in a solid metal case
with a aluminum front panel that looks very good. compared the the Plastic cased
Vu Zero that's a smaller box that looks flimsy and feels very lightly made compared to
the nano-se.the tm nano-se PSU unit is external and set in line on the mains power cable
that comes with a uk three pin plug fitted.the VU Zero PSU unit has a euro 2 pin adaptor,
that you push into a converted UK 3 pin plug.and when plugged into a power socket the unit
sticks out at 90% from the socket,unless you use the shaver type three pin converted plug.
for me it's not been given the same attention to quality and design that technomate have given
to there power supply.both remote controls are good quality the tm remote has the most used
buttons better placed for the users.also the nano-se has both a card reader and a cam slot if anyone
needs them. the zero only has a card reader
------------------------------------
flashing the image

next my view on the set up and flashing the images.
the nano-se has clear on screen flashing info and prompts
so users know exactly how and when the image flash has finished
and when to remove the usb stick and re-boot,this is where
you have to pull the power supply out of the nano-se, my
thoughts are a rear switch would have been a great asset.
the zero has a small led light on the front panel that
******es a couple of times after you put the usb stick
in the port and then switch the box on, then the led appears
static and as the image is flashed the led ******es fast again
this is the signal to remove the usb stick and re-boot with the rear
panel switch.this is bit confusing and could lead to errors as to when
to remove the usb and re-boot for anyone new to linux boxes
-----------------------------------------------
image tests

my dish is a 1.2 chn master dish/36v superjack motor/v-box,with a
twin black ultra lnb.i can only use diseqc 1.2 motor settings
to drive the dish so both receiver tuners were set to advanced
and satellites from 30w to 42e set up,i used the same channel list
on both boxes. both receiver diseqc commands via my v-box moved the dish
without any problems.next i wanted to compare the quality of both receivers
using the same images, the three available presently for the nano-se are
:- ATV/ VIX/ 4D / and were used on both the receiver image tests, when it
came to the 4D image the nearest image to the 4D for the zero was the open PLI
all three images worked good on both receivers, the ATV in my opinion is the best
image out of the three,i did have to re-map the buttons so i could use the menu's
in the way i like and used to.. but thats just my personnel choice.
----------------------------------------------------
scanning

i also cleared and re-set the boxes,then i set up a multiscan to get a better view
of the tuners and to see which gave the best and fastest more accurate scan
for this scan i set-up 16 satellites and even though the linux box scans take
a long time,i found the nano-se finished the scan and found lots more services
about 15/20 mins or so quicker than the same scan with the zero.
the nano also found a signal and opened the chns on some of the weaker t/p's
on satellites from the UK like 7w/ 4.8e/ 26e etc: that the zero failed on,i have also
loaded many pluggin's/skins/ts panels etc and both receivers worked first class without
any obvious slowing down or crashing etc:
-----------------------------------------------------------
overview

the overview of my first weeks of testing is i would recommend the tm nano-se
to anyone who just wants a single tuner receiver and doesn't need a twin or
cable tuner receiver,having said that, both boxes worked first class,out of
the two in my opinion the tm nano-se is by far the better quality made receiver,
and being slightly bigger it has a bit more space on the rear panel to plug the
usb in and out etc: especially if you have big hands like me. the two things i would
like to see for the nano is more teams supporting and making images, and all
future tm models to have a on/off switch on the rear panel, the zero has more image
support teams to choose from and will make this a popular receiver with users.
finally even though it has no bearing on the above,the packaging, because first
impressions are important to people when purchasing any new item.
the tm nano-se came in a very strong box with highly coloured art work on the box
the vu+zero came in a very strong bland brown box with a small blue label on it
for me this packaging reminded me of pictures of people in the war years when everyone
had to carry a brown box containing their gas masks at all times. plus at the last look
at the prices for these receivers the [vu for £109] the [nano-se] for £89 thats £20 extra
in buyers pocket.Comparing hardware Nnao-se has lot to offer,
you will find the nano-se info on page 11 in the user's manual

3.5 AMP-which is a stabilised power supply to cope with any situation like
Long cable hi current drawing installation.
A Optical out for multi speaker DTs audio system
A Shield Tuner to stop any interference to disturb signal reception
A Solid heat sink to reduce heat
A warning led display
also both boxes have a external IR sender so the box doesn't need to be in line of sight of the remote
**********************************************
finally the vu range does have more support and teams making images etc:
hopefully technomate will in future will also get more teams involved, but
the support they have for images is good and the images are very stable

[linsladeboy]

Hi Rumple, I purchased my TM NANO SE a few weeks for £99 (now even cheaper at £89) as an upgrade from a TECHNOMATE 5402HD which cost me £150 a few years ago and so far have to say have been overall really impressed with this beautiful looking receiver.
I can't compare mine to a VU ZERO, but have been amazed at fantastic HD picture quality compared 5402HD which I thought was also pretty good.
The only thing I would disagree with you us is the remote control quality, which to me feels very cheap and flimsy.Having said that, buttons are at least better laid out than old 5402 which to me was the pits!