Could you power it from a USB port on the TV?
Which will almost certainly have the same limit?
Not a cut-out as such (except the regulators are internally protected), but you would expect it to comply with USB2 standards and typical implementation which uses resistive current limiting.
The point is the ethernet switch would only be powered on when the Humax was turned on. So if watching TV either with Humax or on TV for streaming provided they turn both boxes on everything would work. And while the Humax is in standby, the ethernet switch is off.
Yes it does, as I said I want the TV connected to ethernet for streaming. But I still want the HDR Fox T2 connected to ethernet so that RS works, I set most of my mum's recordings remotely for her.
I need the ethernet to come up when the HDR Fox T2 comes out of standby twice a day to check for new recordings I have set using RS. The TV almost certainly won't be on at the time.
The front panel USB can do 500mA as well. There's a decent chance I can take 1A from one of the USB sockets provided I don't have anything in the other socket.
I live in Cambridge, my parents in Yorkshire. The less there is at my parents that can go wrong the less likely I am to get phone calls asking me to remotely diagnose and fix things.
We're past that, my mum has an iPhone now and insists on the broadband and wifi being on all the time for her phone.
My dad can go into a mega sulk if you push him too far. It's not pretty.
TV probably can supply more current actually. USB3 sockets can supply a lot more, and must do as a minimum to be USB3 rated.
Possibly, but the Humax publicised user technical specification detail gives a specified maximum of 800mA shared between the two sockets.
Do you have a link to the discussion? 800mA is getting interesting, some ethernet switches draw 700mA.
From memory it is lower than that. The original USB2 spec allows 100mA initial connect current IIRC and can then be negotiated up to 500mA.
OK that's evidence the front and rear panel USBs have separate regulators. That's useful to know.
The new TV will have wifi, they all do. But wifi is less reliable than a cable, and as I said I want to try to reduce phone calls from my parents asking for help getting something working. The less there is to go wrong the better.
That's the sort of suggestion that makes my dad go into mega sulk mode. It's not worth the aggravation.
AI? Online search? You can do it easily from the unit price on your electricity bill.
But by how much, and is it at all significant. Probably not. Adding a switch increases the complexity and likelihood of things going wrong as it could get unplugged or turned off.
Wifi has always been a challenge at their house. It was built in 1960 and breeze blocks at the time had a lot of coal fired power station ash in that had high metal content. The internal walls are terrible for blocking wifi. I made things better a year or two ago by finally getting enough cat 6 structured cabling in to get a separate wifi base station (not the broadband router) installed upstairs and above the main living area, this was necessary for mum's phone. Prior to that the wifi was from the broadband router in dad's study in the far corner of the house downstairs, from where it only covered about a third of the house. Dad still wants to go back to that, because the wifi base station is "one more thing switched on and burning electricity". Mum won't let him because of her phone. I'm trying to plan for him going ahead with that anyway.
