C/P
CNX Nano2 v. Kbox..or....Kbox v. Nano2
Well, it seems we have a new player that has emerged on the scene. The Nano2 by CNX. So I had to grab one and see what it was all about. I have been using it for a couple of months now, and will say I am impressed with it.
And there are a lot of diehard Kbox fans here I know. I really like mine.
But many people are like me, and believe in having several brands. Myself, I just enjoy playing around with the boxes just to see how well they actually work. Once I have had one working for a while, I like to do an honest side by side comparison...

And I am sitting here flipping back and forth between my Kbox and Nano2.
So here goes...the one I feel is better will be in red print, the other in black. If I deem them equal, it will be in blue.

Picture quality
Kbox takes this one. I am still very impressed with the great picture quality of Kbox. I have yet to find an SD unit that can beat it.

The Nano2 does have a really good picture, just not quite as crisp as the Kbox. I have many brands of SD receivers..I would rank the picture quality of the CNX unit as a strong second to Kbox, better than the rest.

Ease of use and setup
I will have to call this one pretty much a draw. Both are very easy to use. Setup on both are clear and to the point. Set up on both only takes a few minutes. With the CNX unit, it did take a bit of searching to find the place to enter the LNB type, but this is not a big issue, it is just kind of unique, and it does save the step of having to enter the LNB type as well as having to enter the diseqc setting as it is all in one step.


Motor Controls
Kbox gets my nod here. It just seems that with the Kbox my dish and motor work a little smoother and a lot faster. I am using USALS on both receivers to control the motor. And the progress meter on the Kbox as it moves the dish between sats is a plus.

The Nano2 does a fine job moving the dish. Just seems a bit slower than the Kbox. This may be in my head.

Channel Scan
Kbox, by a nose. The Kbox is very fast to start scan, and the scan is very fast. About as fast as I have ever seen on any receiver. The blind scan on the Kbox seems to do a better job for true fta.

The Nano2 does a good job with the channel scans. The main thing about doing a scan on the Nano2 is that it takes it a pretty long time to start doing the scan. Once it gets started, it is pretty fast, just not as fast as the Kbox. When I did a blind scan on the DN and Bev or the true FTA sats, I get more channels with the Kbox.

Both boxes seem to have the filter in place so that you can rescan your sats without having to delete your channels in fear of getting a bunch of duplicates. This is great. especially with the way some of the channels have been moving around as of late.

EPG
The Nano2 get the nod on this one. The guide just plain old looks better. And in my opinion it works better. You have the option to download the guide. When you use this feature, you generally will get a guide that is populated for seven to nine days, and it keeps the updated info unless you do a reboot of the receiver. Very nice.

Kbox needs to do some serious work on their guide. First the colors. Looks kinda like someone puked a pastel pallet. And the font is tough to read. I think this is related to the colors used. it does look better and is easier to read if you set the transparency to the lowest setting in the menus. And then with the guide open, you should be able to press the yellow button to populate an extended guide. When I press the yellow button, it changes to channel 438. Sometimes it will populate the guide, sometimes not.

Receiver appearance
A dead heat here. Nothing really special about either brand to make one better than the other. Both are nice, sleek looking boxes. One thing I really like about them both is the small size.

Remote Control
Kbox takes this one as well. For starters, the Kbox remote is considerably larger and feels better in my hand. The buttons are laid out better in my opinion and easier to access. I really like the PVR controls being more centrally located rather than at the bottom of the remote.

The Nano2 remote in my opinion is just too small. The buttons are too small, and have to many unmarked features hidden in the buttons. All of the features you need are there, you just have to take the time to find them. Also, the remote for the Nano2 lacks the ability to be used to control other devices such as your TV, sound system or a recording device.

PVR
Both units have PVR capability. Both can used to record to a usb storage device, be it a USB stick or an external HDD. Both need some work done to the PVR. The Nano2 records fine, but has playback issues at this time unless you drop back to a previous file. The Kboxes seem to have some issues connecting to some HDDs.
Both have the ability to select a program from the guide to automatically change the channel and begin recording. With both you can go into the menus and set up a timer recording. With both, the recorded quality is equal to watching live programming.

Due to the issues and need for work from both camps, this is a draw.

Sound Quality
Straight out of the box, the nod goes to the Nano2...however..
With the Kbox, I was kinda disappointed. It just seemed muffled and quiet. Then while playing with the remote while watching TV, I pressed the yellow button and found the Audio Settings options. And by setting the audio level to HIGH, it gets better than of the Nano2. With the ability to adjust the audio settings, the Kbox is better.

Updating software
Both have the ability to update the software on the receiver via either USB or RS232 port on the back of the box. Both work equally well...a draw.

True FTA
Kbox again takes this. Simply because the motor controls seem to work a tad better and the blind scan works better.

With an improvement of the blind scan, the Nano2 would be equal in this category.

Menus
Pretty much equal. I can't think of anything that really needs to be added to either.

Channel Info Bar
This goes to the Nano2. While both have all of the needed info available when you press the info button, the Nano2 wins this because of the fact that the info bar not only gives you the info for the current program, but also gives you the info for the next scheduled program. Not a necessity, but a nice feature.

Kbox gives you the info you would expect to see in the info bar, but like I said...the addition of the info for the next program gives the Nano2 a slight edge.

IKS
Kbox. No question about it. Simple to set up. From what I can tell everything except the individual local area channels and PPV are there. There is virtually no freezing on the Kbox. And very little downtime, usually due to channels being updated. Kbox offers a great selection of DN and Bev programming. Great job.

The Nano2, is very stable and has a good DN channel lineup working on its IKS system, but only offers a smattering of Bev channels. This can be corrected, and I feel that it will be soon. I do see some freezing, not a lot and usually only for a couple of seconds, however, there is considerably more downtime than the Kbox has. I took into consideration that the CNX guys are new to the IKS game, and they have made great strides. I see this lineup being as stable as the Kbox system if the same progress continues to be made.

Both brands IKS setup is super easy, almost setting themselves up. With the Kbox all you need to do is set it for network and turn off the autorolls and go to the network settings screen. With the Nano2, just go to the network screen, press the automatic button and then do the IKS registration and it is usually connected. Very easy on both. Both have an adapter that must be used, the Khub for the Kbox and the ethernet adapter for the Nano2. The Nano2 may have taken this category if not for having to use the adapter.

File Support
Kbox. But this is based soley on the past experience. When we had standalone available, Kbox was one of the leaders in this area, usually having needed files out in just a very few hours. The last file that was required actually lasted nearly 4 months, until N3 came along.

This remains to be seen what the Nano2 team can do if we ever get a standalone fix. The Nano2 loses this category for the simple reason that it was not around during the standalone era to have data to compare. I know the other CNX models were very well supported. We will have to see what happens. This could change.



SCORE
KBox----------9
CNX Nano2---2
Draw----------5


Now I know and want you to understand that this is my opinion. But I did try to cover all areas. If I missed something important, let me know and I will check into it. And I made sure the playing field is/was as equal as possible. Both receivers were connected using the same brand cables to the same TV and dish/motor equipment.

This may seem like a skewed comparison, but in actuality I feel it is pretty accurate. Kbox has been around a lot longer than the Nano2. I know there will be improvements made to the Nano2 system...and in time, I honestly feel that if the improvements are made, the Nano2 will draw equal to the Kbox. I am very pleased with my Nano2 and have no complaints with it. If the IKS support continues on the pace it is now, and if we ever get a standalone fix, I would definitely recommend the Nano2. At present, I have the Kbox and Nano2 connected and working side by side on my main tv. I am constantly flipping back and forth between the two.....and could not be much more satisfied. I feel confident that I have two of the leaders of this "hobby"...for now, and into the future.

__________________

I am looking for a new receiver and I am glad I found your info very helpful. Thanks Fast