nano-se test

rumpole

Inactive User
Joined
Oct 25, 2008
Messages
99
Reaction score
8
Location
uk
i hope this is of use to anyone thinking of a new satellite box.
and if you just want a single tuner to view sat tv, or as a box
for another room etc:. next this is just my honest view from the
perspective of anyone who just wants a good quality receiver at a very good price.have not opened either box so my review is just from a average user, but i'm not very technical minded and think if it's not broke dont fix it.lol

************************************************** **

i got a nano-se a few weeks ago and have been very impressed with it, i have tested it along side a vu zero and these are my results
*****************************************
differences

The Nano-SE is small and looks and feels really well built in a solid metal case with a aluminum front panel that looks very good. compared the the Plastic cased Vu Zero that's a smaller box that looks flimsy and feels very lightly made compared to the nano-se. the tm nano-se PSU unit is external and set in line on the mains power cable that comes with a uk three pin plug fitted.the VU Zero PSU unit has a euro 2 pin adaptor,that you push into a converted UK 3 pin plug.and when plugged into a power socket the unit sticks out at 90% from the socket,unless you use the shaver type three pin converted plug.
for me it's not been given the same attention to quality and design that technomate have given to there power supply.both remote controls are good quality the tm remote has the most used buttons better placed for the users.also the nano-se has both a card reader and a cam slot if anyone needs them. the zero only has a card reader
----------------------------------
flashing the image

next my view on the set up and flashing the images.
the nano-se has clear on screen flashing info and prompts
so users know exactly how and when the image flash has finished
and when to remove the usb stick and re-boot,this is where
you have to pull the power supply out of the nano-se, my
thoughts are a rear switch would have been a great asset.
the zero has a small led light on the front panel that
******es a couple of times after you put the usb stick
in the port and then switch the box on, then the led appears
static and as the image is flashed the led ******es fast again
this is the signal to remove the usb stick and re-boot with the
rear panel switch.this is bit confusing and could lead to errors as to when to remove the usb and re-boot for anyone new to linux boxes
----------------------------------------
image tests

my dish is a 1.2 chn master dish/36v superjack motor/v-box,with a twin black ultra lnb.i can only use diseqc 1.2 motor settings
to drive the dish so both receiver tuners were set to advanced
and satellites from 30w to 42e set up,i used the same channel list on both boxes. both receiver diseqc commands via my v-box moved the dish without any problems.next i wanted to compare the quality of both receivers using the same images, the three available presently for the nano-se are :- ATV/ VIX/ 4D / and were used on both the receiver image tests, when it came to the 4D image the nearest image to the 4D for the zero was the open PLI all three images worked good on both receivers, the ATV in my opinion is the best image out of the three,i did have to re-map the buttons so i could use the menu's in the way i like and i'm used to.. but thats just my personnel choice.
--------------------------------------------
scanning

i also cleared and re-set the boxes,then i set up a multiscan to get a better view of the tuners and to see which gave the best and fastest more accurate scan for this scan i set-up 16 satellites and even though the linux box scans take a long time,i found the nano-se finished the scan and found lots more services in about 15/20 mins or so quicker than the same scan with the zero. the nano also found a signal and opened the chns on some of the weaker t/p's on satellites from the UK like 7w/ 4.8e/ 26e etc: that the zero failed on,i have also loaded many pluggin's/skins/ts panels etc and both receivers worked first class without any obvious slowing down or crashing etc:
------------------------------------------------
overview

the overview of my first weeks of testing is i would recommend the tm nano-se to anyone who just wants a single tuner receiver and doesn't need a twin or cable tuner receiver,having said that, both boxes worked first class,out of the two in my opinion the tm nano-se is by far the better quality made receiver, and being slightly bigger it has a bit more space on the rear panel to plug the usb in and out etc: especially if you have big hands like me. the two things i would
like to see for the nano is more teams supporting and making images, and all future tm models to have a on/off switch on the rear panel, the zero has more image support teams to choose from and will make this a popular receiver with users.finally even though it has no bearing on the above,the packaging, because first impressions are important to people when purchasing any new item.
the tm nano-se came in a very strong box with highly coloured art work on the box,the vu+zero came in a very strong bland brown box with a small blue name label on,this reminded me of pictures of people in the war years when everyone had to carry a brown box containing their gas masks at all times. plus at the last look at the prices for these receivers the [vu for £109] the [nano-se] for £89 thats £20 extra in buyers pocket.Comparing hardware Nnao-se has lot to offer,you will find the nano-se info on page 11 in the user's manual

3.5 AMP-which is a stabilised power supply to cope with any situation like Long cable hi current drawing installation.
A Optical out for multi speaker DTs audio system
A Shield Tuner to stop any interference to disturb signal reception
A Solid heat sink to reduce heat
A warning led display
also both boxes have a external IR sender so the box doesn't need to be in line of sight of the remote
*****************************************
finally the vu range does have more support and teams making images etc: hopefully technomate will in future will also get more teams involved, but the support they have for images is good and the images are very stable
 
yes agreed bought one a few months ago to replace a slow solo,very fast box.
 
Back
Top