SATA controller and format roadblock.

MartinLiddle said:
If it were a bug in the firmware setting a flag, how do you explain the fact that there are lots of reports of boxes regaining accessing to the hard drive if left powered off for long periods of time? I think it is much more likely that it is a component that is going out of tolerance (NB not failed) and this accords with what Humax have said is the cause of the problem.
Click to expand...
I don't believe all instances of this type of failure have the same cause, those reports where the box recovers is indicative to me of one or more capacitors failing, its known that failing capacitors have the habit of changing their characteristics such that they can for a period return to a state where they work again within the cct, however such capacitors usually show physical signs of failure.

If a componants characteristics goes out of the tolerance required for its use in a cct it has failed, there are no grey areas. The customer service agents at Humax may give conflicting accounts, but they are clearly not electronics engineers.

I would also point out Humax would be very unwise to point in any way to the cause being a software bug as such would mean the box was not suitable for its intended purpose and under the sales of goods products could be returned long after the waranty expired.
 
Last edited:
Matthew said:
Simply comparing the drive behaviour when powering up with the SATA connected and not connected.
Click to expand...
I don't think you can prove anything by that. Anything could influence the apparent behaviour of the drive at startup, you would need to hook an analyser up to the SATA and observe the signal activity to be certain.

Matthew said:
I would also point out Humax would be very unwise to point in any way to the cause being a software bug as such would mean the box was not suitable for its intended purpose and under the sales of goods products could be returned long after the waranty expired.
Click to expand...
That's a fallacy. If the user was happy with the performance of the unit for the period of the warranty, it couldn't be unfit for purpose.
 
The early first generation HDR-1000S afaik have not had this issue (I have one) It's now on it's second 2TB drive after over 3 years running around 16 hrs a day. As all the g2 boxes use exactly the same software, how can it possibly be a software issue. The first generation Foxsat-HD did have the dreaded capxon capacitors. It's a very cheap and simple DIY job to replace them.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Humax-fo...-boot-green-circling-on-display-/201355421738

A poster on MyHumax reports he was told by Humax support that it was a faulty resistor on the motherboard. Initially Humax repaired the boxes and they were returned with all recordings intact.

A scan through the many threads on this issue at MyHumax will confirm this fact and also that units returned to S Korea to find the cause had started working again during the shipping period.

These reports were from Engineers at the parent company in S Korea, not customer support at all.
 
Black Hole said:
That's a fallacy. If the user was happy with the performance of the unit for the period of the warranty, it couldn't be unfit for purpose.
Click to expand...
I disagree, consumer lawyers have stated that the sales of goods act provides protection long after the statutory warranty has expired and however well a machine worked initially, if it fails not long after the warranty expires most will be unhappy.

My understanding is if a purchaser can show the failure is due to an inherent defect a claim under the act is possible. The sale of goods act applies up-to 6 years after purchase.
 
Do you get a big hammer and smash it to bits !
At least it would make me feel better and never buy humax again....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top