Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Rich Braun wrote: > Is MythTV dead? DVRs in general are in decline. The TV listing service typically used with MythTV and other open source projects, Schedules Direct, reports that subscriptions are down (and as a consequence, prices will be going up). I think for most consumers the rise of video-on-demand services offered by cable companies have taken away the motivation to purchase a DVR. (VOD services - at least what Comcast provides - are a really poor substitute for a DVR, but for a casual viewer who doesn't really care about seeing episodes in order or a season to completion, it's adequate.) Then for the early adopters is there is streamed video. MythTV (last I checked) doesn't do anything to address this emerging market. The wide adoption of encrypted digital signals has pretty much killed DVRs for the rest of us. It'll be interesting to see if the Silicondust CableCard tuners help address this. > ...whether to dump it in favor of something else? What's the alternative? > In the meantime I guess I could revisit how I build my own > front-ends. Have been using the PackMan repo to install 0.24 or > 0.24.1 ... I originally headed down the alternative front-end software path due to wanting to use low-power, appliance-like hardware, and at the time, the Hauppauge MediaMVP was the best option, and you couldn't run the full front-end on it. After years of using mvpmc as a front-end client, and more recently using XBMC (though not as a MythTV client), I really can't see the appeal in using the MythTV front-end. I still use it as a desktop player (in a small window), but I've always found the UI really clunky. As mvpmc has gone obsolete (no HD support), probably a majority of its users have moved on to XBMC. If you use MythTV as a front-end, have you tried XBMC? If so, why do you prefer MythTV's front-end? Derek Atkins wrote: > Note: I've been using Myth since 0.11 and I currently run 0.22 on FC12 > systems. I've had no reason to upgrade the OS or Myth systems, they > work well. I'll consider upgrading when I move next month and have to > add a few more frontend boxes. I've been treating my MythTV back-end like an appliance and let it and the LTE version of Ubuntu it runs on fall obsolete. Aside from storage upgrades, there isn't anything really compelling driving an upgrade of the back-end. On the other hand, I'm badly in need of a front-end upgrade, and I'm trying to figure out the best hardware to run XBMC on. Dan Ritter wrote: > My video is NVidia VDPAU across the board. When Debian goes to a > 3.0 kernel, I expect to be able to move one frontend off the > GT220 board and on to the integrated Intel graphics. I hear the integrated Intel graphics are becoming a more attractive option. > I'm thinking about buying an HDHR Prime (cablecard)... Likewise. Currently on sale at Micro Center for $200. I'd buy it tomorrow if I though my old version of MythTV supported it. (I gather it isn't API compatible with the original HDHR.) I guess this will be the compelling reason to build a new back-end. Jarod Wilson wrote: > That said, I'm actually thinking about not using MythTV anymore. For > one, most of what the kids watch anymore is Netflix. And its often > done via iDevices, which is another sore spot -- there's no great > integration between MythTV and iDevices. That there is any need for i-specific integration is a failing of the industry. UPnP or DLNA protocol should have addressed this. In part I think it was never solidly supported by MythTV (though maybe not a problem in the latest versions). The other part is that I get the impression the protocol falls far short of being able to control a DVR in he way most people would want. It seems you can't create a generic DVR front-end client based on DLNA. Only a watered down media player. But even pre-dating UPnP support in MythTV, I think this is an artifact of the MythTV back-end not integrating well with *anything* other than the MythTV front-end. The client-server architecture has always been sloppy, without good separation between the two halves. What should have been there is a MythTV protocol feature that lets the front-end negotiate with the back-end for supported video formats, and employ VLC-style on-the-fly transcoding. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |