Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums banner

DLNA in Sight?

42K views 149 replies 38 participants last post by  henryk 
#1 ·
Shaw was saying that DLNA access would be available summer 2012. I've heard nothing further on the subject. Does anyone know the status of DLNA and when it may become available to those of us who bought a Gateway expecting this functionality?
 
#32 ·
To the earlier post - yes, just a DLNA server/control app installed on phones (Skifta i think). Took under 5 min to have two android phones - I streaming, 1 controllling - and WD live as client.

I don't want a DLNA server - although that would be nice to plug in a 1 TB external USB drive to the gateway and stream - that would be alot to work with to separate PVR /media libraries.

Enabling the Gateway as a DLNA client (and ethernet port to connect to home network) would be a good start. The internal phone/modem/router can happen at some point, for now some progress needs to be made on the "features" promised and promoted.

Funtionality cannot be promised/claimed and not delivered. There comes a point where this becomes false marketing or worse - outright lies to customers and refunds/credits to consumers need to be done. By Shaw's logic my claim "I can fly! (in 2013)" is completely true. I may have to change the date near the end of 2013, but that doesn't make it untrue.....
 
#34 ·
When enabled will dlna run over coax cable or ethernet wiring or both?

I dont have ethernet everywhere where my tv(s) are, My plan of spending 500$ plus on this system is to access my dlna (plex for example) media through the portal devices on every tv in the house.

sonisame
 
#35 ·
It would run via either ethernet cable or wireless to the Gateway itself (the internal router will be activated). After that it will be just like normal, the Gateway will use the coax to send the picture to your TV via a portal. Don't forget, the processing all happens at the Gateway.
 
#40 ·
Not yet. Once DLNA is enabled, hopefully before the end of this summer, it should have some sort of 'media player' capability but the exact functionality is still a mystery to us end users.
 
#43 ·
From their website:
...currently available to customers in Halifax, Dartmouth, Bedford, Sackville and St. Margaret’s Bay and will be made available to other communities in Nova Scotia and markets across Canada nationally over the coming months.
So, if you live in one of those areas, you can get the service. Until Shaw has made the needed changes to their system, we are like the people who have 'Eastlink' but don't live in one of the currently available areas.

More importantly:
And that’s not all! We will continue to expand the features available with Ultra Whole Home DVR to bring you even more convenience, entertainment and value.
Even they haven't been able to activate all the Gateway has to offer. I realize we have been waiting far too long but it is what it is.
 
#46 ·
If Shaw had waited until they were 'ready', we still wouldn't have it. As it is, those of us who chose to jump in early have at least enjoyed the 6 tuners. That much has always worked. I, for one, am very thankful for that much, as well as the 'whole home' side of it where you can record and watch from any room.
 
#47 ·
Don't get me wrong, I like the Gateway as well. What bothers me is that Shaw shouldn't have hyped all the possibilities of the machine if they weren't capable of delivering them with the current infrasructure. Even if they only just pushed the six tuners they would have convinced many to upgrade. It shows a lack of knowledge at the top that they didn't do enough research on the requirements of the Gateway to implement many of the key features. Someone got caught with their pants down, as they must not have realized the issues they would have.
 
#48 ·
You're hitting the nail on the head there. Shaw executives are not technology experts. For some reason, they don't do their homework before making announcements and since so many of them have blown up in their face, Shaw now refrains from making any public announcements any more, other than to tell us how they are going to move into a 'Crystal Palace' in the future.

As for DLNA and the other 'services' the Gateway is capable of, they are still 'coming'. I'm more than tired of saying this but I keep getting told about how things are progressing and every now and then I get a look at what they are working on so I at least know it is real and tangible. Shaw has been making big steps toward the future with their network convergence and once that is complete, we should start to see bigger jumps in the offerings the Gateway 'promised' from the beginning.
 
#49 ·
Oh my God, Buckycat and rejlafond, stop posting this stuff!!! You're making Shaw look bad. We wouldn't dare do this here now, would we?

Of course, I say this with my tongue fully thrusting my right cheek outwards... The fact that these two smaller Canadian companies are further ahead on the Gateway front is downright pathetic and embarrassing if I'm Shaw.

I posted something on the Shaw Community board about DLNA. Someone from Shaw replied we are a "couple of months away". Based on when I posted, that would put us about mid-June.

I can't wait to go back on the same thread June 30 and tell them they lied to us.... again (because they know they're lying, I know they're lying, and you know they're lying).

We should seriously start some sort of class action lawsuit or online petition demanding Shaw refund us part of the cost of our Gateways. This is a slam dunk case of false advertising or misrepresentation.They sold us these boxes over the past 2 years advertising features "coming soon" knowing FULL WELL they wouldn't deliver on them. I am convinced we would have a case.

Even their "network convergence" excuse doesn't hold water. As a matter of fact, it makes the case even stronger because if that's indeed the reason why these features aren't available, then Shaw knew they wouldn't have it done last year when they were advertising "DLNA coming 2012".
 
#51 ·
Sadly, Shaw would probably use an excuse that the equipment was represented to provide the service and were told it would work with their system with some 'custom' software by the manufacturer, ARRIS. Once Shaw had bought in, there were stuck. The equipment was designed and built to do what they wanted it to but Shaw's 'different' network configuration posed 'challenges' that no one fully understood or appreciated.

Yes, that all sounds like I am defending Shaw but I am all for the 'class action' law suit as I have been lied to by Shaw for years now. If I had any other choice for reliable high speed internet, I wouldn't be with Shaw but they have the monopoly so I am stuck. There has been promise after promise made on so many fronts that it just makes me want to shoot myself sometimes. That's exactly what Shaw hopes for though, that the dissenters will just fade away or are typical Canadians and just take the lumps as they come, over and over as they do with Shaw.

So, for us to still be waiting for DLNA, after it was promised for '2012', I agree there should be some consequence. Count me in if you can find a lawyer to take on the case. My efforts in the past have come up dry. No one is either interested or sees a winnable suit. The sad fact of the matter is Shaw can, and does, do whatever they want with relative impunity. The only thing we can do is talk with our wallets and unless we, the subscribers, start leaving Shaw in sizable droves, they will continue to do as they please; promises be damned.
 
#52 ·
audacity; I'm no network expert so I don't completely understand it myself but, from what different people inside Shaw have told me, there was some huge hole that was opened to Shaw's back end system because of the way their networks were separate. I'm sure no one will ever explain exactly how this was possible as it was that serious of a risk but I'd say it was quite something if it drove Shaw to 'converge' their networks after years of building and operating, otherwise successfully, the separate networks they had.
 
#56 ·
I read the post on the Shaw Community site, and ...

DLNA requires any participating devices be on the same local network and typically devices used in a DLNA ecosystem also require Internet service. As such, using your own DLNA devices with the Gateway platform requires your home Internet connection be provided via the Gateway. Most home networks are wireless in nature and based on our internal testing, we are not satisfied with the quality of the wireless Internet experience provided.
I don't understand the problem. Even if you have a wireless device (e.g. a laptop) running DLNA client software, would it not have access to the internet and also be able to see the Gateway on the network?

I've been doing this for years with my HTPC. Is the Gateway somehow unable to communicate with other devices on your network? Does Shaw provide a network diagram of how a Gateway is typically configured?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top