iPlayer fix

Loading https://uk.humaxdigital.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2016/09/hdr_fox_t2_upgrade.hdf will presumably wipe the custom interface, so that's a no-no.
Yes, it does raise the question 'will there be a CFW built on this latest official release?' :-
 
  • Like
Reactions: LDW
@LDW: the thing to do would have been to refer you to the existing discussion on your topic: https://hummy.tv/forum/threads/iplayer-stopped-working.9882/

...where I already reported the screen you spotted:
Spotted this today, when testing the TV Portal:

View attachment 5530

...but to summarise: iPlayer has not worked since last September when the certificates embedded in the Humax firmware expired, and we already have all the tools we need to sidestep the issue (as noted in the previous posts). The "Ready to update your software?" banner does not go away, regardless of whether you do install the official fix.

Yes, it does raise the question 'will there be a CFW built on this latest official release?' :-
What for? Unless there is some kind of advantage, I don't see the point (and it would require significant effort). The iplfix package solves the problem for CF users in the interim, and when the next CF comes out of beta, users won't even need iplfix.
 
@LDW: the thing to do would have been to refer you to the existing discussion on your topic: https://hummy.tv/forum/threads/iplayer-stopped-working.9882/

...where I already reported the screen you spotted:

I did search for a post about the screen before posting. Perhaps I should include a caveat every time I post that cleverer people than me may have said something on the subject that either a) I am too stupid to find, or b) wasn't immediately obvious to the ordinary folk amongst us.

I don't expect you intended your reply to be as patronising as it sounds, but a little kindness would go a long way.
 
I think you misunderstood the intention of this bit:
the thing to do would have been to refer you to the existing discussion on your topic

That wasn't criticising you – I was aiming my criticisms at those who prefer to repeat information than redirect to existing information (thus interlinking threads on similar subjects rather than leaving them isolated)! In that regard, the previous replies were inadequate.
 
Last edited:
I don't expect you intended your reply to be as patronising as it sounds, but a little kindness would go a long way.
I strenuously object to your side-swipe. Post 6 was not in any way patronising to you, I am convinced you misread it or chose to misinterpret it. As a general rule, "patronising" is in the eye of the beholder and frequently means a kind effort to educate has been wasted on somebody who doesn't value being educated.

However, so as not to disappoint:

I did search for a post about the screen before posting.
Search results are a lottery – the searcher has to get lucky with the search terms they choose (although experience helps), especially considering the limitations of the forum search, and then diligent in their assessment of the results list.

Searching the Forum

...there are two methods of conducting a forum search:

Native - using the search box near the top right of the forum page. This is useful for being able to restrict the search to only a specific section and/or topic titles rather than the full post text. The native search cannot search for strings of three letters or fewer.​

External - using your favourite search engine. For example: a Google search can be restricted to search results from the forum by prefixing the search term(s) with "site:hummy.tv/forum", eg site:hummy.tv/forum newbies guide. It would be difficult to restrict searches to topic titles this way, so the native search still has its uses, but the results filtering is much better and there is no restriction against three-letter search terms.​

However, a forum search for "iplayer" would have produced results which include the relevant information, and as hits are listed in reverse date order the most topical discussion would have been at the top. Search experience says don't be too specific to start with, then increase the specificity to filter the results.
 
Back
Top