Technomate 5402 M4

Status
Not open for further replies.
is blind scanning any quicker than the old 5302 \ 5502 which takes an age, for a full scan, compared to other models
 
manikm909 said:
is blind scanning any quicker than the old 5302 \ 5502 which takes an age, for a full scan, compared to other models
Click to expand...
Much quicker...
 
Lot of members here got up to 30 west
Can anyone please scan ku band on 5 or 15 or 30 west on 5402 M4 @1meter dish
So we can compare the result with other receivers.
 
Still no updates since july 5, latest feedback is they are still trying to get some official cams/cards to work on the stb, no further feedback on other requests.
As it stands its a half handy stb, but its overpriced fior a 1080p stb which does not let you upgrade 3rd party sw due to lack of serial number visibility.
 
Last edited:
Channel Hopper said:
The Ferguson 204 receiver has many similarities to the TM.

The tune they have installed is the EARDA EDS 10830FF0VG
Click to expand...
A review of the 204 model below


Menu structures shown at around 7 minutes in.
 
I'm still "curious" as to why a SCART skt is included unless there's still a sizeable group of people who still use that connectivity!
 
I think scart is on for asian and african market
 
Gladstones said:
I think scart is on for asian and african market
Click to expand...
That's rather ironic, given that SCART connectivity was invented in Europe!:-rofl2

PS: the more so since few (all?) other relatively recent Sat Rx's (pretty much all made in the Far East!) don't have SCART skts!
 
SCART is still predominant in a number of regions, including Ireland, but it also allows recording to the older style DVRs if one fools the Macrovision restrictions.
 
jeallen01 said:
I'm still "curious" as to why a SCART skt is included unless there's still a sizeable group of people who still use that connectivity!
Click to expand...
I use it for audio to feed my old analogue amp..
 
whats the latest - general consensus with this STB - worth getting? it doesnt seem to do anything special \ more than other STB's can do at similar price.
 
manikm909 said:
whats the latest - general consensus with this STB - worth getting? it doesnt seem to do anything special \ more than other STB's can do at similar price.
Click to expand...
Don’t bother with this box. Support is not very good at al. Reading on other forums the feedback is poo.
 
Thanks
 
a little off topic, but does anyone know the difference between a TM-5402 v TM-5402 M3 ?
 
manikm909 said:
whats the latest - general consensus with this STB - worth getting? it doesnt seem to do anything special \ more than other STB's can do at similar price.
Click to expand...
I’d thread carefully when reading commentary from other sites. Technically I find the M4 quite capable for my motorised setup and there are bi weekly official firmware upgrades from Technomate being released at the moment. I hardly call that a lack of support.

I bought the M4 in order to get a reliable unit to drive my dish across the full East/West arc which it does very efficiently. The tuner is sensitive enough to pick up any of the KU broadcasts I require throughout the arc.

I have absolutely no interest in so called “extras” that seem to be the driving force behind much of the negative commentary on the M4 from these other sources. In fact it appears to be a particular cohort using the same user name registered on multiple sites and trotting out the same negative views because a particular “feature” was removed from the M4. If this “feature” was my main purpose for purchasing a satellite receiver I wouldn’t bother and I’d go the IPTV route.

Maybe you could ask if the M4 is technically capable of performing the way it was designed for and my answer is an emphatic yes.
 
Personally I found the mk3 a better box. As mentioned by William 1 it had its faults with phantom tps and poor SD picture quality but the tuner is as good if not better than the mk4. The only extras I would be interested in is the au on certain keys whitc don’t work anyway
 
Pipedream said:
Personally I found the mk3 a better box. As mentioned by William 1 it had its faults with phantom tps and poor SD picture quality but the tuner is as good if not better than the mk4. The only extras I would be interested in is the au on certain keys whitc don’t work anyway
Click to expand...
I came from 10 years reliable use of the TM 5200 owing to a power supply failure so I went to the latest TM non Linux HD unit, the M4. I have to say after one months usage I’ve no real complaints. Technically it does the job.

I’ve seen some crazy non technical complaints about the M4 elsewhere which won’t be addressed for obvious reasons.

I’ve had three occasions to contact TM support and have received satisfactory responses in each case. A number of issues I had previously have already been addressed in latest round of firmware upgrades. More to come I believe including a 7 day EPG.

I’d be glad to hear other owners technical experiences with the M4.

On the subject of phantom TPs I imagine if the blind search doesn’t find any active TPs it dumps the pre loaded TP list from its database into the search results. Again that’s just an observation from some blind searching I’ve been doing.

To completely dismiss the M4 owing to the removal of a certain “feature” is not exactly providing a balanced review in my opinion
 
Satspot said:
I’d thread carefully when reading commentary from other sites. Technically I find the M4 quite capable for my motorised setup and there are bi weekly official firmware upgrades from Technomate being released at the moment. I hardly call that a lack of support.

I bought the M4 in order to get a reliable unit to drive my dish across the full East/West arc which it does very efficiently. The tuner is sensitive enough to pick up any of the KU broadcasts I require throughout the arc.

I have absolutely no interest in so called “extras” that seem to be the driving force behind much of the negative commentary on the M4 from these other sources. In fact it appears to be a particular cohort using the same user name registered on multiple sites and trotting out the same negative views because a particular “feature” was removed from the M4. If this “feature” was my main purpose for purchasing a satellite receiver I wouldn’t bother and I’d go the IPTV route.

Maybe you could ask if the M4 is technically capable of performing the way it was designed for and my answer is an emphatic yes.
Click to expand...
because a particular “feature” was removed
:cool:
 
so does the M4 have the blindscan bug where it brings in TPs from a hidden Database even if you cant pick them up (out of range or dont actually exist)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top