Slashdot Mirror


Uncompressed TV Video Over USB 2.0 from ATI

An anonymous reader writes "Ever wanted to watch TV on your notebook computer? Well, you used to be stuck with an external TV tuner that will usually compress the video so much to squeeze it down the USB interface, that it's not worth watching. But the new ATI TV Wonder manages to push uncompressed video down the USB 2.0 interface, producing superb image quality. It also comes with ATI's suite of multimedia applications and utilities. The reviewer reckons it's a great unit, although a little bit on the expensive side."

268 comments

  1. Nothing for you to see here. Please move along. by wertarbyte · · Score: 0

    "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along." Just got that message instead of a story. I already thought the /.-server would be busy shuffling video data over its USB...

    --
    Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
  2. Dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
    See this story.

    *Sighs for some dupe checking*

    1. Re:Dupe by Lispy · · Score: 3, Funny

      And it was already boring the first time. ;-/

    2. Re:Dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      this one has the better write-up, though. let's pretend the original story doesn't exist, and keep this one.

    3. Re:Dupe by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sure... duping happens. Sure... I can understand it happening even as frequent as it does. with all of the Mods and such. But notice it is almost ALWAYS CmdrTaco.

      On a slightly unrelated note, expect to see this modded into the ground, right before my account becomes mysteriously banned.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  3. Welcome to slashdupe. by Mongo222 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    See title.

    1. Re:Welcome to slashdupe. by justkarl · · Score: 1

      1st, lets assume I would like to watch TV on my computer. (Don't tell anybody, that's why they made TVs.
      2nd, let's assume that I want to watch any kind of video uncompressed on my computer.
      It dosen't make any sense to me.

    2. Re:Welcome to slashdupe. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't believe I am the first to say this on this site, but:
      "SLASH DOT DASH DOT SLASH DOT DASH DOT COM DOT COM DOT COM"

      .
      .
      .
      .
      (lameness filter avoidance guff)

  4. Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by SEWilco · · Score: 5, Funny
    Generally the problem is that the TV signal is not worth watching before any compression.

    (Oddly, /. itself at first thought that I should not see this article either...)

  5. the answer by slashpot · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Ever wanted to watch TV on your notebook computer?"

    No. I get too much tv shoved in my face in restraunts, coffee houses, gas stations, and walking down the sidewalk as it is.

    1. Re:the answer by wertarbyte · · Score: 2

      No. I get too much tv shoved in my face in restraunts, coffee houses, gas stations, and walking down the sidewalk as it is.

      Would be nice if they had TV there, but everywhere where there used to be music on tv they try to sell ringtones to me for incredible prices.

      --
      Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
    2. Re:the answer by kneecarrot · · Score: 1

      Gas stations? Walking down the sidewalk? Huh?

      --

      I always save my last mod point to mod up a good troll. You people are too serious.

    3. Re:the answer by DrEldarion · · Score: 3, Funny

      You sound like you'd be the type of guy mentioned here.

    4. Re:the answer by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      Living and working in the D.C. area I have seen a few gas stations with little LCD screens at the pumps. Sadly they don't seem to play the news, I've only seen sports highlights.

      It has the same effect on me as when I go to the john and someone leaves a newpaper behiind, I'm happy until I see it's the sports page...

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    5. Re:the answer by Insightfill · · Score: 1
      No. I get too much tv shoved in my face in restraunts,...

      Fair enough. We don't watch too much TV at home - half an hour a day, tops. If we go out to eat someplace where there's a TV set, my 4yo daughter goes into 'zombie-land' and it's almost impossible to get her to eat or talk. It doesn't matter what it is: sports, CNN, etc. She just fades out on us.

      We don't eat at those places much.

    6. Re:the answer by slashpot · · Score: 1

      WTF did this asshole Troll get modded up for?

      FYI ass, I watch TV. I like TV. I've got a three room dish dvr system at home that I use like hell. I just don't like fucking commercials - and the only time I have to watch them is when I'm somewhere where TV does not belong (like the places I listed). The last thing I want is all my sales guy out there with their laptops watching tv all day on my dime.

      The only thing funny about your comment is pure iqnorance displayed by leaping to conclusions.

    7. Re:the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you're a fucking spaz.

    8. Re:the answer by slashpot · · Score: 1

      Thanks Anonymous COWARD

  6. Notebook? by SimbaK2K · · Score: 0

    Watch tv on a notebook? First we need a decent battery pack!!!!!

    1. Re:Notebook? by wertarbyte · · Score: 1

      Watch tv on a notebook? First we need a decent battery pack!!!!!

      I guess at first we need something to watch. I don't have a notebook to search for an antenna connector if I'd like to watch TV. With a DVB-T tuner, this could be quite handy. Just put it in your notebook bag, lug it in whenever you want to see dumb TV instead of dumb internet pages via your hijacked wlan connection. Or just watch some reality show starring YOU while the cops get you :-)

      --
      Life is just nature's way of keeping meat fresh.
  7. No such limit. by seebs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My ThinkPad A31p has video inputs.

    Of course, to actually WATCH the TV input, you need software. Contrary to popular belief, Cyberlink PowerVCR is teh sux0r, and no amount of fidgeting was ever able to get it to synchronize the signal correctly; their support staff said to "check that my video driver was current", and I eventually gave up and got a refund. Capturix Video Suite worked fine, though.

    The GATOS and related projects which were once working on this seem to have silently disintegrated without touching XF86 4.4.x, although it could be that there's some kind of support and I just have no clue where to find documentation. But... No external dongle, and it's a laptop with video in.

    Not to say it's COMMON, mind you, but it does exist.

    (The A31p was the Best Laptop Ever, and I wish IBM would sell something at least COMPARABLE to it, but nothing in their current lineup can match the three-spindle monster machine. Curious tidbit: Although it's not in the official specs, an A31p can have 2GB of memory!)

    --
    My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    1. Re:No such limit. by jantheman · · Score: 1

      ditto here - & same sentiments re current lineup (i asked IBM already). end of an era :(

      --
      -- Mod me down. I am not a karma tart. ffs,gag
    2. Re:No such limit. by aliens · · Score: 1

      IIRC, the GATOS guys are now working directly with X.org

      Hence the reason the project seems to have disintegrated. /. should have the story in archives.

      --
      -- taking over the world, we are.
    3. Re:No such limit. by dslbrian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      their support staff said to "check that my video driver was current", and I eventually gave up and got a refund.

      Speaking of drivers, its too bad this thing is from ATI because it means the drivers will blow. I've already been burned a couple times by ATI cards with their POS drivers. One card I got had a TV tuner, but for that card ATI -never- managed to release a fully functional driver on Windows, much less anything else. When I called in to tech support for help, their proposed solution was to reformat the drive, reinstall windows, and try the crappy drivers again... yeah, thanks for nothing... only a year or so later did I manage to pull it out of the bottom of a box and get it semi-functional under linux using the xawtv stuff (which frankly says something about ATI's incompetence in that the only drivers that ever worked were written by a 3rd party on an OS they don't support). For specialty stuff like this drivers are everything, and I have no faith in ATI when it comes to that (esp under linux).

    4. Re:No such limit. by the+unbeliever · · Score: 1

      ATI's windows driver issues have been fixed for some time now, at least since the advent of Catalyst.

    5. Re:No such limit. by MJOverkill · · Score: 1
      Speaking of drivers, its too bad this thing is from ATI because it means the drivers will blow

      Mods, this is a troll. This hasn't been true for over 3 years now.

    6. Re:No such limit. by seebs · · Score: 1

      YMMV. My experience with ATI drivers, on both my laptop and my desktop, has been that they're consistently pretty decent.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
    7. Re:No such limit. by seebs · · Score: 1

      It'd be nice if they'd put up a note on the project page to that effect. Currently, any attempt to get links for ATI TV in and out support goes to their long-defunct page, and there's not much reference to how to get it working in current X.

      --
      My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
  8. ATI, please make a Mac version! by green+pizza · · Score: 2, Insightful

    My PowerBook and I would love this! Finally something to make use of those USB 2.0 ports. With FireWire 400 and FireWire 800, I haven't had a need to buy any gear that makes use of anything faster than USB 1.1.

    Plus using my existing laptop as a tuner+PVR would be awesome!

    1. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by crackshoe · · Score: 1

      also, look at eyeTV.

      --
      Don't worry - its just stigmata. Pass me a napkin and don't you dare tell my mother.
    2. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by catwh0re · · Score: 2, Interesting
      There are numerous things called DV boxes for the mac (and windows based pcs) that basically do the same thing through your firewire port.
      With the added bonus that it lets you import straight to iMovie, FCP, and any other DV based video editors.
      Apple also supply HackTV for free which lets you watch DV streams without doing anything to them. They also supply Quicktime Streaming Server for free which lets you take this stream and broadcast it over wifi/internet/satellite/etc in real time.
      The flip side of these DV boxes is that it specifically isn't a TV rec'ver, but rather just a converter for composite signal(so you need a vcr or tv with composite out to convert your cable/antenna/whatever into composite video or s-video).

      Before you say, oh no i can't carry be truly mobile. The idea of watching TV portably with the ATI device is useless anyway as it already relies on a powerbrick, so the difference to the end user is minimal between using either device. (You still get pegged to a power socket somewhere.)
      Plus the reality is most people will just use it in their home.

    3. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by kalidasa · · Score: 3, Informative

      The EyeTV boxes do in fact have TV tuners. The EyeTV 200 is a FireWire based PVR-like device for Mac. (It's about $300, though).

    4. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by INeededALogin · · Score: 2, Informative

      Fellow Mac user to Mac user(powerbook even), don't hold your breath. ATI doesn't make its Mac branded cards(Apple does) so I don't think they have a lot invested in making Mac compatible hardware and drivers.

      Just my thoughts, nothing more nothing less.

    5. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I would like to think that writing a USB driver would be a bit easier then writing an OpenGL extention to pipe drawing commands to the GPU.
      Heck, it's an uncompressed signal, so you don't even have to write a de-compression codec in your software. All you've got to do is figure out a way to trigger the feed, change channels, and grab the output that this machine starts pumping. From there it's just a matter of sending it to mencoder to package it up for consumption.

      Am I being to simple minded about this?

    6. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With FireWire, USB 2 has no reason to exist, especially not for audiovisual purposes. Just use FireWire.

    7. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      green pizza, you want the eyeTV 200. Contains a tuner, a hardware MPEG2 decoder (that can go up to 1920xsomething at 25 fps and will be able to do MPEG4 in future releases), S-Video and RCA inputs for analog video acquisition, and uses FireWire to stream mpeg2 to the Mac.

      Works on old G3-based Macs even, comes with built-in edition capabilities and can export in any format you want.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
    8. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by tenton · · Score: 1

      ATI doesn't make its Mac branded cards(Apple does) so I don't think they have a lot invested in making Mac compatible hardware and drivers.

      What makes you say this? Hardware-wise, ATi's Mac products aren't that different than the PC products (some are identical except for what ROM is flashed on, some have larger ROM chips), so it wouldn't make sense for Apple to make the cards themselves (seeing as Apple doesn't even make the OEM GeForce cards themselves)

      On the driver front, ATi does write the drivers on the Mac side; for the OEM cards, there is significant collaboration between ATi and Apple, but ATi writes the drivers.

    9. Re:ATI, please make a Mac version! by Creepy · · Score: 1

      that's crazy talk - ATI makes and manufactures a "Mac Edition" line of graphics cards and creates their own line of drivers for them. ok, maybe they may not make the "Apple branded" ATI card (I don't know), but you can get ATI Radeon Mac Edition cards through ATI or other reputable places.

      Try this link
      or if you specifically need PCI (like I do on my old-ass mac) this link

      yes, these are just graphics cards, but the point is ATI manufactures and ships Apple products and drivers for them without the Apple brand name on them and has been doing so for many years. For that matter, you can find PC ATI based graphics cards with other company names on them, too.

  9. What type of tuner by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    is this, TV only or is it Cable as well. Potential problem, even if it has cable capabilities is that cable companies are moving towards all digital, where you must use thier boxes. However, presently (at least in MD) you can still get the old signal. FREE (don't tell Comcast), if you have broadband

    1. Re:What type of tuner by rainman_bc · · Score: 1

      Hehehe - happened to a friend of mine too - he wanted an internet connection without cable. He got cable anyway :)

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    2. Re:What type of tuner by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I thought getting basic cable with cable internet was intended to be a selling point, not an unintended feature.

    3. Re:What type of tuner by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2, Informative

      My guess is comcast does not care. Time Warner will do a Roadrunner only install, but they charge you THE SAME price as if you paid for both the TV ands Cable Modem. So really, to them, they are getting the same amount of money.

      --

      Gorkman

    4. Re:What type of tuner by garcia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      However, presently (at least in MD) you can still get the old signal. FREE (don't tell Comcast), if you have broadband.

      Just wait until they do an audit (especially if you were previously an AT&T customer) and they find that you are using an unfiltered line for free...

      First is a warning on your door. They tag it and say that they did an audit and found you were stealing cable (not their exact words but their tone does come off as if they are saying that). They claim they will come back and check in a month to make sure it's still off.

      Now, in the mean time you will of course get a call to setup CATV service with Comcast. Cute deal. Sure, I'll take your $10/mo basic service so I can watch Football without fuzz. They come out and remove the filter and you are set to go.

      You decide, eh, this sucks and call up to cancel. They say it's d/c and they roll a truck to remove the filter. Problem is the lazy Comcast contractor was originally supposed to go there on a Friday night. He decides to skip it and not do it.

      Comcast does another audit and then your problems start.

      No, this isn't tin-foil hat fictionalized drama it's real life.

    5. Re:What type of tuner by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

      About two months ago, our "free basic cable" died. I was home that day, and a comcast van pulls in the driveway. 15 minutes later, there is a red-stickered filter on the line, at the top of the pole. Only the Country Music channel (CMT) works... aagh. I'm not sure if that was intentional, or if it just happens to be near enough the frequency of the cable modem.

      Never had them accuse me of stealing cable though.

      Within a day, had the satellite recievers out of the closet, and back in action. Just wish I could figure out what feed the local weather channel stuff is...

      BTW, why is it that canadian bell expressvu has about 4 times as many porn channels as anyone else...

    6. Re:What type of tuner by garcia · · Score: 1

      Of course they don't care. In fact, it's one less thing that the tech has to do during the install.

      *YOU* will care when you have to pay for the services they claim you were stealing because one of their outsourced techs didn't do his job.

    7. Re:What type of tuner by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Huh? Comcast won't let me have broadband at all without paying for basic cable. I'm in MD too.

      BTW, MD's state attorney is on a TV-stealing witchhunt, after both cable and satellite pirates.

      Analog cable isn't going anywhere soon. I know Comcast et al want rid of it, so they can charge me per TV in my home, and they've taken all the premium channels off of basic cable in hopes of coaxing me into "upgrading".

      What they don't understand is, I'm not interested in paying 3x more for digital TV, just so I can pay another 20 bucks a month for HBO or PPV Wrestling matches.

      I don't want their horrid digital tuner box uglying up my beautiful new 27" flatscreen either.

      And all my composite, svideo and component in jacks are used up with game consoles, and what's the actual improvement if their digital signal is just modulated onto channel 3 or 4? At the end of the pipe, I still have an analog signal being fed to my TV over coax, I'm just paying a whole lot more for it.

      Everyone I know still has analog cable, and if they tried to cut the service off there would be a huge outcry, as well as a huge migration to Millenium cable, or whoever the other company that keeps sending me flyers is.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    8. Re:What type of tuner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is why you have to pay an additional $15 a month over cable customers to get cable internet. they know you can use the cable tv and thus charge you for it under the guise of not being an existing customer.

    9. Re:What type of tuner by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      They usually just slap in a filter and call it a day. My neighbor climbed the pole and swapped filters on them and had basic cable for ages. The hardware here is probably so antiquated they can't reliably find out who's "stealing" cable based on the attenuation.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:What type of tuner by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Comcast gives you $10 off the $60/mo cable modem service if you also have some type of cable TV.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:What type of tuner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep it far away, if you can. My Comcast digital cable signal is actually worse, by virtue of the insane compression they use. I'm sometimes surprised to not see a "ripped by: 73377enZ!" creeping along the bottom of the screen. :)

    12. Re:What type of tuner by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
      I ordered Broadband, the bill only had a charge for the connection+the modem rental. Now the price very well be higher because they know you get cable.

      as far as the State attorney, I can't steal something thats given to me. I didn't mess with any of the cabling, etc, did not have a bootleg cable box. They can't sue me for having a TV in my house.

      unfortunately however, I bought two HDTV flat screens, and one didn't have a tuner, so in order to take advantage of HD, I ordered digital. It is way overpriced - but a real show stopper when company is over.

    13. Re:What type of tuner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can get your cable boradband through Earthlink or another company and not pay the cable company tax. I switched to satallite but wanted to keep my cable modem, they would have charged me almost $60 a month!. I called Earthlink, they reduced my bill to 24.95 for 6 months after that 44.95 and I never had to give up my modem, just reboot it.

    14. Re:What type of tuner by aardwolf204 · · Score: 1
      Happened with me and Cox. I was paying something like this:

      $10 basic cable

      $30 "standard" cable - 19-90 (MTV, Spike, FX)

      $15 digital cable - TechTv, nothing else good.

      $05 digital cable box rental - What BS

      $40 high speed Internet - ~500K down / 48K up

      $100 TOTAL! - WTF
      Once I took a good look at my bill and realized that I never watch TV and TechTV merged with G4 and the Screen Savers sucks now I decided to cancel basic, standard, and digital, hoping my bill would reduce to $40. Thing is, Internet without basic cable is $50. Internet with basic cable is $50. So I keep basic but they never disconnect standard, and I'm getting HBO which I never signed up for. My bill looks great now. Still havent canceled the digital yet, thought I might hang on to it and see if TechTV gets any better but it doesnt look like it.

      --
      Im dreaming ofa big bndwdth, That can resist the /.crowd.May ur days b merry & bright & may al
    15. Re:What type of tuner by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      as far as the State attorney, I can't steal something thats given to me. I didn't mess with any of the cabling, etc, did not have a bootleg cable box. They can't sue me for having a TV in my house.

      You sure? If I give or sell you a stolen car, you don't think you can be charged for driving it around?

      I know a guy who got busted. He moved into an apartment, and it already had cable. The previous tenant hooked it up illegaly. They bent him over in a big way because he was dopey enough to try and fight it. Rather than just paying for the service, he has a couple thousand in fines to his name. Like I said, it's a witch hunt.

      What matters is that you're recieving a service you haven't payed for. It's no different than going and getting your hair done and sprinting out before they can write you a bill.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    16. Re:What type of tuner by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
      The previous tenant hooked it up illegaly

      thats the key, I didn't hook anything up, I can't go outside and put something on the cable company's equipment without there permission. AND the tech said that the basic cable signal comes integrated with the broadband signal - so they are on notice that i can get basic cable. It's a BRAND NEW HOUSE, so nobody hooked anything up illegally. They can't sue me for having Televisions in my house. period.

    17. Re:What type of tuner by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Which is exacly why Comcast won't unbundle Broadband and Basic Cable. I must have basic cable in order to get broadband, and I'm in MD like you.

      So, once again, how is it that you pay only for broadband? Are you sure basic cable charges aren't buried in your bill each month?

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    18. Re:What type of tuner by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
      Just looked at my old bill (pre Digital Cable)

      The entire list of charges were:

      • Internet Modem: $3.00
      • Outlet Holder: $0.00
      • Comcast Internet: $57.95
      • Sales Tax: $0.25
      Total: $61.10

      Maybe comcast changed their policies after I went digital, but I never had a line item for cable access.

  10. What will they think of next? by ottergoose · · Score: 2, Funny

    What will they think of next? The internet on TV??

  11. But.... by Rev+Wally · · Score: 1

    Will it take rabbit ears?

    --
    LOAD "SIG",8,1
  12. Watch more TV with ATI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Slashdot : Commercials for nerds, it's money that matters.

    1. Re:Watch more TV with ATI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plextor makes a DivX, MPEG2, MPEG4 device: http://www.plextor.com/english/products/ConvertX2s pecifications.htm Perhaps this is the same idea, but I've seen Linux drivers from the chip maker for this hw.

  13. I'll pass by shane2uunet · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm waiting for TV via Wifi. Oh wait, I guess TV already is wireless.

    --
    This space available for rent.
    1. Re:I'll pass by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm waiting for TV via Wifi. Oh wait, I guess TV already is wireless.

      I know this was intended to be a joke, but the advantage to using a digital streaming protocol for video over wireless is that you can at least in principle handle signal degradation and dropouts a lot better than you can with plain old analog TV. I know _I_ got tired of doing the "wave the rabbit ears around until it looks almost-decent" thing.

    2. Re:I'll pass by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you've never tried to watch DirecTV on an especially cloudy day.

    3. Re:I'll pass by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      On the other hand analog signals degrade gracefully. Even when you can only see 10% of the total image, you're looking at 10% of the whole thing, not 1/10 the frames or 1/10 of the picture. A little interference in a digital video stream makes the picture "jump" and may cause bizarre audio artifacting as well. A little interference in an analog video stream shows up as static, color that's "off", et cetera. Admittedly your quality is much higher in the worst working case with digital, but the quality of the experience isn't necessarily so. To me the exciting thing about broadcast HD (not that I'm all that excited) is the resolution.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:I'll pass by Christopher+Thomas · · Score: 1

      On the other hand analog signals degrade gracefully. Even when you can only see 10% of the total image, you're looking at 10% of the whole thing, not 1/10 the frames or 1/10 of the picture. A little interference in a digital video stream makes the picture "jump" and may cause bizarre audio artifacting as well. A little interference in an analog video stream shows up as static, color that's "off", et cetera.

      Degradation effects depend very strongly on how the data is encapsulated. When redundancy and precacheing are added for important parts (e.g. most important spectral components of the image, if we're doing lossy compression, and most important components of the audio), then noise and interruptions in the stream cause degradation that's at least as graceful as with analog TV. Argubly more graceful, for a well-defined protocol, as you get to pick which components you want to preserve at all costs, while in analog transmission, you're limited by the fact that you're displaying frames and pixels in a predefined sequence determined by old TV hardware.

      There was an excellent demonstration of a scheme like this intended for mobile phones at TechCon 2003. That one worked by pretransmitting voice and key-frame data for a news clip, giving decent-looking and sounding results even when streaming was terminated half way through the broadcast.

      In summary, digital transmission at least in principle gives you far _better_ degradation qualities than analog, because you can choose important features and make sure they arrive no matter what.

    5. Re:I'll pass by multimed · · Score: 1

      How about Wireless Firewire?

      --
      Vote Quimby.
  14. VGA in via USB by automatix · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One gadget I've been looking out for is a portable VGA-capture USB adaptor, or a KVM usb adaptor.

    When you're playing around with headless servers it would be really handy just to have the actual screen available. Once the machine is booted, there is always SSH but sometimes it doesn't get that far.

    A nice little window on the desktop containing the USB-connected machine, ala VMWare/VNC.

    1. Re:VGA in via USB by Alioth · · Score: 1

      These things already exist, but they plug into Ethernet, not USB. For example, our servers at work have some built-in hardware which allows us to access the console even during POST via TCP/IP. Many dedicated server providers will provide what amounts to a KVM switch that can be accessed over the Internet so you can fix your borked server.

    2. Re:VGA in via USB by pdbogen · · Score: 1

      Our nicer Dell servers have this feature. I, however, would like to find an external box that does this- I.e., a little beige box with VGA, and a pair of PS/2 ports on one side and an ethernet jack on the other side. Now, I know they make KVMs that use ethernet lines as the transmission medium, but this isn't the same (especially since we don't run our own network, and there's no way to make sure that this raw signal will be able to go through the various switches and such that may or may not be in the way.)

    3. Re:VGA in via USB by emc · · Score: 1

      On servers, it's called a console port.

      Usually a 9 or 25 pin serial port that allows you to hook up a VT100 or similar terminal.

    4. Re:VGA in via USB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      something like this?

    5. Re:VGA in via USB by Alioth · · Score: 1

      You still need a terminal server (which can be a PC with a USB multiport card for many servers) to get remote console over TCP/IP.

      I'd prefer operating systems and hardware which can have a serial console, but we are forced to use PC hardware (so we can't see the BIOS screen over a serial port) and even in some instances forced to use Windows. And this brings me to my bug-bear about Windows - it is NOT, and never will be a good server OS. Its very name is a giveaway that it is not a server OS. A server OS should be able to be administered in its entirety via the command line, and should be able to run without a GUI at all.

    6. Re:VGA in via USB by emc · · Score: 1

      A 'server' requires both 'server' hardware an a 'server' OS.

      Windows and WIntel hardware (most x86) do not a 'server' make.

  15. Not Great by Jozer99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, using uncompressed video over USB just uses lots of bandwidth and processor power, both to encode the signal in software for PVR, and to control the USB bus. Sometimes a good MPEG2 codec can look great AND be used for PVR purposes without sending your P4 or Athalon XP to 100% usage and filling up your RAM and diskspace with gigantic uncompressed video. I had a card that used uncompressed video, and one with hardware compression, trust me, there is no compairison in terms of performace. My dream would be a USB tuner with a decent and flexable encoder chip, so that I could stream video as MPEG1, MPEG2, DivX or XviD.

    1. Re:Not Great by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1

      Uncompressed TV-quality video doesn't take that much bandwidth, by my calculations (assuming a resolution of 648 x 486, 32 bits per pixel, 30 frames per second), it would come in at about 302 Mbps, which USB 2.0 (or either FireWire for that matter) could handle without breaking a sweat.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    2. Re:Not Great by moonbender · · Score: 1

      32bpp is probably a bit excessive... You certainly don't need an alpha channel, which means a reduction to 24bpp and I'd assume a 16bit color space would be absolutely sufficient for TV-quality, too. PAL comes at 25 fps, a further reduction. I'd assume using some fast lossless compression algorithm would yield more savings. Of course, I'm far from knowledgeable about this topic (only watch the news), just some thoughts. :)

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    3. Re:Not Great by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "My dream would be a USB tuner with a decent and flexable encoder chip, so that I could stream video as MPEG1, MPEG2, DivX or XviD."

      Here you go: (link)

      The Plextor ConvertX PVR model PX-TV402U is the ultimate personal video recorder for the PC. The PX-TV402U allows you to connect to a satellite TV, cable TV or broadcast TV signal and record programs to your PC. You can then watch the video from the PC or burn it to DVD for playback on a DVD player. You can also connect a camcorder, VCR or DVD player to record home videos to the PC. The heart of the PX-TV402U is its multi-format encoder chip which converts video to the DivX®, MPEG-4, MPEG-2 and MPEG-1 formats as it is being recorded to the PC.

      No, I do not work for Plextor.

    4. Re:Not Great by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      First, this is not uncompressed video (the writup is wrong)! If you RTFA is says "capture video in MPEG 1/2/4, AVI and Windows Media Format". That's not uncompressed, its just compressed less. The way the article says this makes it sound like they're talking about uncompressed video, but they're not.

      Next, PC World gives 33.75 MBps (yes that's bytes, not bits) for unconpressed TV. Don't forget that each pixel requires 3 or 4 (depending on color space) 16-32 bit numbers (depending on depth used. That's a lot of data!

    5. Re:Not Great by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Thats not exactly what I was talking about. I know an uncompressed signal will fit on USB 2.0 (if it didn't, would this article exist?). 302 Mbps adds up quite fast when recording to your hard disk. With my measily 200 GB storage drive, I could fit a couple of hours.

    6. Re:Not Great by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1
      Next, PC World gives 33.75 MBps (yes that's bytes, not bits) for unconpressed TV.
      Umm, no. First, 33.75 MBps = 283 Mbps, so your numbers are even better than mine.
      Don't forget that each pixel requires 3 or 4 (depending on color space) 16-32 bit numbers (depending on depth used. That's a lot of data!
      Second, 32-bits per pixel, means just that, it does not mean 32-bits per component.
      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    7. Re:Not Great by clarkcox3 · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know, but my point was that, even with my liberal estimates, it fit well within the capabilities of USB 2. Any extra benefits from reducing the framerate, resolution, or color depth only serves to make my point that much more valid.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
  16. Wake me up when it supports HDTV by Brian+Stretch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, I did run across a HDTV USB2.0 tuner but I don't know much about it.

    1. Re:Wake me up when it supports HDTV by Jackson_Ash · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's been some pretty positive results with the Sasem device. See this thread in the AVS Forums (pretty much THE place for HomeTheatre knowledge) if you're interested in grabbing one. Be forewarned hoever, the AVS forums are as much a timesink as /.

      http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?s=&t hreadid=373490&highlight=sasem/

      JA

  17. Use of words.. by stratjakt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The user "reckons"? That implies he's never seen the product.

    Minor nitpick.

    Anyways, how would this thing perform as an input source for a PVR?

    I'd ask about linux support too, but, ATi, USB 2.0.. That's two strikes already.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    1. Re:Use of words.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nitpick?

      Try honesty in reporting:

      "I reckon that that there unit works just fine, seeing as the fine gentleman told me about it, gave me one thousand dollahs."

    2. Re:Use of words.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, not only is this just another Slashvertisement (AND a dupe to boot), it's a very poorly worded one. Way to go CmdrTaco!

  18. Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I watch tv on my laptop already using the wireless connection to my dekstop using it's PVR-250 mpeg2 card.

    ssh desktop nc -l -p 7000 /dev/video1 &
    nc desktop 7000 | mplayer -framedrop &
    ssh desktop ptune-ui.pl

    And whala! I watch TV on my laptop via 802.11g wireless card. (I use prism54 based cards.. very easy to setup on newer kernels)

    Of course you can use video lan server to do it if you want to get fancy, but I like netcat and to run the channel changing gui perl script thru X tunneling over ssh.

    Betcha you Windows guys didn't know I could build a video streamer using 2 lines in a Bash shell, did you? And people say Linux is sooo hard.

    But if you want to get fancy check out VLS (VLC is a popular media player in Windows already, too. VLS is the server half and it only runs on Unix-style boxes)

    Use that and buy a cheapo Bttv based card or a nice mpeg2 encoder like mine. All the video you need on your palm pilot or laptop, or seperate desktop computer you'd ever want. And if you have one of those faast DSL or cable lines you can even stream tv or dvd's or whatever to yourself at work.

  19. Why not firewire? by CrackedButter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would of thought it would be better performing since its throughput is higher and sustainable plus isn;t processor dependent, those exact things USB 2 hasn't got. If its price then surely there isn't that much difference and just plain wrong if there is a superior connectivity standard out there?

  20. what about broadcasting... by sucati · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This sounds pretty cool, but you still need to be tethered to a video cable. What I'd like to do is receive the tv on my desktop and be able to broadcast it via wifi to my laptop. I've done it before using the nullsoft streaming server, but it's a bit clumsy as I can't change channels. Is anyone aware of such a solution that would allow you to watch tv via wifi and change channels?

    1. Re:what about broadcasting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose you could always use some sort of remote desktop connection and get it to work that way

    2. Re:what about broadcasting... by LocalH · · Score: 1

      802.11b does not have the bandwidth for video of ANY quality, unless you're comfortable with watching shit, and certainly not when you're encoding the video in real-time (which drops the quality even more unless there is enough of a delay to do some bidi, of which 60 frames would be sufficient).

      802.11g *does* have the bandwidth, given a good, fast, hardware encoder, and it'll have the quality too. So if you want to do this, make sure you invest in 802.11g equipment.

      --
      FC Closer
  21. Mac compatible TV input? by Drakino · · Score: 1

    I've been looking for the smallest box I can get away with for my Powerbook that can do one thing:

    Display the signal from a component or SVideo source on the screen.

    I don't need a tuner or anything else fancy. Firewire or USB is fine, whatever works on the Powerbook.

    1. Re:Mac compatible TV input? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Get one of those 20 dollar Dazzle boxes, they work great if you want to use it as a simple display, say to plug in a VCR or nintendo.

      Of course, if you want to capture good quality video streams, you want one of the pricier models.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Mac compatible TV input? by voidstin · · Score: 1

      I use a Canopus DV converter to capture + display video sources all the time. They're great.

      This one is smaller than the 100, which I use, but is uni-directional.

      Probably a little pricey for what you're looking for ($229) but does the job great...

    3. Re:Mac compatible TV input? by Jucius+Maximus · · Score: 1
      "Get one of those 20 dollar Dazzle boxes, they work great if you want to use it as a simple display, say to plug in a VCR or nintendo. Of course, if you want to capture good quality video streams, you want one of the pricier models."

      Read reviews before you buy one. These things, particularly the DVC-80, are more trouble than they're worth IMO, and commonly drop more frames than they capture. Considering the fact that they only run on USB 1.1, they can only capture VCD quality MPEG-1 video.

    4. Re:Mac compatible TV input? by Drakino · · Score: 1

      Know any way to get them to work on a Mac?

  22. Don't suppose there is... by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 1

    A cardbus tv tuner out there?

    I get tired of this "let's put everything on USB" crap that happens all too often...

    1. Re:Don't suppose there is... by nytewyng · · Score: 1

      Avermedia TV Tuner, [avermedia.com]look in google for PCMCIA.

  23. Isn't it already obsolete? by YetAnotherName · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The TV tuner in the TV Wonder USB 2.0 looks to be an NTSC style tuner, compatible with cable TV and some over-the-air signals ... but if we believe what the FCC tells us, NTSC will be completely phased out shortly for ATSC. And more and more cable companies are moving to a QAM-encoded MPEG stream too.

    So, doesn't that sort of severely limit the lifetime of this product?

    1. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by stratjakt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I still have a TV with screw-downs for VHF and UHF antennas.

      Not being cable-ready didn't shorten it's lifetime.

      When we switch to ATSC, plug your tuner box into the TV Wonder.

      If that's a problem for you, buy ATi's HDTV Wonder.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by Anita+Coney · · Score: 4, Informative

      Broadcasters are only obligated to switch to ATSC when 80% of the local population are actually able to obtain ATSC signals. That means, that 80% of the local population will actually need HDTV tuners and monitors in place.

      That is a LONG way off for most of the US.

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    3. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by H8X55 · · Score: 1

      Yessir, but if you went to the store today would you be able to buy a non-cable ready tv? There are plenty of folks that can get by on older tech, but it's another thing to start off behind the curve. But you're right - dude would be able to get by, as you have. But it would be nice to see something in a dual format. One tech for now, one tech for the future.

    4. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

      The number I've read is 85%, and "able to obtain" or market penetration is subject to interpretation. Many people count existing cable and DBS subscribers as part of the ATSC group, leaving OTA NTSC viewers in a small minority in most areas. The FCC wants to get this show on the road, so don't bet on NTSC living forever.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    5. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Well what are you going to do?

      Right now there's no ATSC being broadcast where I live. If I wanted to get a tuner for my PC, I'd want an NTSC tuner.

      I wouldn't want the price to jump by 500 bucks or so to include HDTV features that I may or may not need 5 years from now, which is probably the minimum amount of time until HDTV actually means something around here.

      Hell, the only reason to buy an HDTV, at this point in time, is that some XBox games can run at a higher resolution. Or I can keep watching that same underwater shark show that's always playing on the HDTV sets at Circuit City.

      So buy this one now, and if in 5 years it's useless to you, replace it. Hock it on eBay for a couple of bucks, because even then there will still be plenty of rural folks with plain old analog cable or NTSC broadcasts.

      5 years or so is a pretty long lifetime for a PC peripheral.

      The compelling reason not to buy it, is that ATi has a well earned reputation for not supporting it's TV Wonder line at all.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    6. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by Billy69 · · Score: 1

      The TV tuner in the TV Wonder USB 2.0 looks to be an NTSC style tuner
      Not to be picky here, but the article advertises the tuner for sale in GBP, so it will almost certainly be a PAL style tuner

      --
      #include "disclaimer.h"
    7. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by Anita+Coney · · Score: 1

      You're possibly right about it being 85%. And you're also right about the quote "able to obtain." The thing to remember is that "able to obtain" does not mean a possiblity to obtain, but an actual ability to obtain. And that means 85% of homes must actually have HDTV recievers.

      I agree that NTSC will not live forever. But it is at least a decade away. Consdering that computers have a three year life, any TV card you buy now for your computer will get plenty of life out of it before we switch over to ATSC.

      --
      If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
    8. Re:Isn't it already obsolete? by Detritus · · Score: 1
      The thing to remember is that "able to obtain" does not mean a possiblity to obtain, but an actual ability to obtain. And that means 85% of homes must actually have HDTV recievers.

      That's one interpretation, and it's wrong. See the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The actual law can be read here (Title 47, Section 309, USC).

      Look for the section (towards the end of the page) titled "Auction of recaptured broadcast television spectrum".

      ...15 percent or more of the television households in such market - do not subscribe to a multichannel video programming distributor (as defined in section 522 of this title) that carries one of the digital television service programming channels of each of the television stations broadcasting such a channel in such market; and...
      It means that subscribers to a qualifying MVPD are put in the ATSC column, even if they do not have a television receiver or converter capable of receiving the digital television service signals of the television stations licensed in such market.
      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  24. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ssh desktop nc -l -p 7000 /dev/video1 &
    nc desktop 7000 | mplayer -framedrop &

    Oops, somehow that little carrot (shift-comma) between 7000 and /dev/video1 didn't show up right. Or maybe I missed it. Oh well, I am sure that you get the idea.

    Silly html stuff.

  25. Ghetto Monitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With a TV out card in my PC, I could set this bad boy up and use my laptop LCD effectively as a second monitor (albeit at a shitty resolution).

  26. Firewire and DV anyone? by ewanrg · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Generally I have found the firewire entries for doing DV captures to a laptop or to avoid tying yourself down to a particular PC to be better than the USB or USB 2 entries. This tends to be better supported in terms of both the quality of the image, and the ability to edit the file afterwards. Not to mention that there is excellent support in Linux as well as Windows for this (Kino and Cinelerra).

    As far as devices, my personal preference is a Canopus ADVC-100 connected to the output from a VCR. YMMV of course.

    Obligatory Plug - Please check out my online novel.

    1. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      This isn't supposed to be some pro-video solution, it's just a gizmo that lets you watch TV while you're surfing the interweb.

      Every new machine has USB 2.0, but not necessarily firewire, which has become more of a niche connector for amateur video. I know it's supposed to be more, but it's not.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      I'd hardly say Firewire is a niche connector - it's a bloody big niche if it is. Most consumer camcorders have had a Firewire connector for years. My first Firewire camcorder was a Sony digital 8 camera which I had over 4 years ago (sadly it died in a motorcycle accident).

      Computers like the Mac have DV editing software which just comes with the machine. I bought my Dad an eMac recently, and I could just plug my camcorder in and go (and iMovie doesn't suck like all the other inexpensive DV editing software I've tried).

    3. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, well I never bothered installing the firewire daughterboard in my machine at home. It plugs in right under the AGP card, and I have absolutely no use for it. All it would serve to do is block airflow to the card cooler.

      Anyways, my point is, I have about 5 machines at home, and two on my desktop at work. None have firewire, all have USB. If I were to try and sell me gizmos, I'd be smart to make them USB.

      Yes, firewire has a big niche, but a niche nonetheless. It's simply not ubiquitious. I'd even go as far to say Firewire is to USB what Zip drives are to CD burners.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Pretty much any non-budget personal computer sold today has firewire. It's pretty damned inexpensive even if you want to add it later - if you poke around you can get a PCI card with a cable for $20 or so - for laptops it's more like $60 but that's the price you pay, right? It only adds about $10 to the cost of a motherboard if you're building a system, my board (gigabyte GA-7N400PRO2) has one of each type of connector on the back plate and a connector for a front panel connector. I went the all-in-one route except for video though, so it's not surprising. nonetheless just about every laptop worth owning seems to come with 1394 these days, and refurb and overstock desktops on geeks.com have it even. 1394's time has come in terms of availability. Now we just need to start seeing the boatloads of cheap peripherals.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the budget personal computers outnumber the higher end ones by a huge margin in the wild. This product is aimed at the budget machines, ATi makes cheap-ass tuners.

      And adding firewire isn't an option for most of these machines, nearly all are MicroATX or FlexATX based, and simply have no free expansion slots.

      Like I said before, of all the machines I own or use, none have firewire, and none need it.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    6. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind, there are two differnt end-uses being served here.

      Firewire and DV are for capturing high-quality video for editing. USB and MPG 1/2/4, AVI and WMV (which this device uses) are for lower quality video that's not meant to be edited (at least not cleanly and easily).

      Firewire has a mode which allows a device to reserve a certain amount of bandwidth. So your video caputure device is quaranteed the bandwidth it needs at all times. That means I can caputure video to an external FW drive while also copying large files to and from that same drive without losing a frame. USB can't do that (at least not reliably).

      The DV format compresses each frame individually, there is no dependence on "reference" frames like in the MPEG and other "delivery" formats. That's what makes it a much better candidate for editing.

      So, two different systems, two different purposes.

    7. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by LocalH · · Score: 1

      The ADSTech Pyro A/V Link is good for this too. Plus, I haven't gotten mine upgraded yet, but apparently they have fixed the problem where crappy sources drop frames like crazy (and apparently they're the only one to do it in firmware only, without using a hardware TBC). So if you buy a brand new one now, it should work good, even with VHS tapes.

      --
      FC Closer
    8. Re:Firewire and DV anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that DV is compressed to shit. So why even mention it?

  27. OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    Tangentially related: I'd watch TV on my notebook if I didn't have to have the coax feeding into it. I have three cable conenctions in my house, none of which are in my computer room. One however happens to be near my server upstairs. Is there a way to get the signal from my server (running Mandrake) to my machines in my computer room via wireless access? I could theoretically put a tv card in the server and run a TV program (tvtime) on the server upstairs vi a remote X connection to view it, but how do I get the sound to my local speakers?

    -truth

    --

    I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    1. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by stratjakt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Easy.

      VideoLAN

      "Broadcast" from your server with TV tuner as source, watch anywhere on your LAN.

      It works well. VideoLAN+server full of TV and DVD rips = my very own Video on Demand system that blows the doors off of what Comcast offers.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by ewanrg · · Score: 1

      You might check out:
      http://www.grandtec.com/ultimatewireless.htm

      Which appears to support what you're looking for. However, I haven't tried it myself, so please let us know if you decide to give it a shot :-)

    3. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by BigJim.fr · · Score: 1

      http://www.videolan.org/ : really works, good quality, plenty of nifty features.

    4. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      I think we've been at odds before, but you are my hero.

      Seriously.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

    5. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by Stevyn · · Score: 1

      Instead of buying a tv card, just buy a small telelvision! Run some cable and do it the right way. Why go though the trouble of this when you'll end up saving money doing it the old fashion way.

    6. Re:OT: My own AskSlashdot re: TV by TheHonestTruth · · Score: 1
      TV Card = $50. Wireless TV access = $0.
      Small TV = $50. 100 feet of cable (from nearest outlet) = ~$25. Pissing off wife for drilling holes in my condo AND snaking an unsightly coax throughout = $???

      Sorry, the tuner card is the cheaper option and less of a hassle.

      But, were the house mine for the next 30 years instead of the next 5-7, I would agree with you because I'd run the cables (and probably some gigabit connections while I was at it) through the walls. But you can't be expected to know my situation or the layout of my abode.

      -truth

      --

      I had a steady B+ in my AI class until I failed the Turing test...

  28. Or Internet on TV delivered via the internet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just think you get your digital TV signal over the internet but you get the internet on your tv signal and you watch streaming video!

  29. Lame, dupe, etc, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of this TV story (who watches TV anyways) we could have had something like this or something funnier.

  30. Uncompressed != always perfect. by tcc · · Score: 2, Insightful


    When you see hardware like this, you might think "heck, why do people pay in the thousands for video capture cards with effects that can be done with current processors?" the answers are:

    Remember the video IN of your graphics cards with "VIVO"? with some you can do uncompressed streams, but why does it look amazingly ugly sometimes? noisy etc..

    The main difference between let's say a consumer card like this ATI and high-end card not only lies in price and bundled software, but also by the selection of components and the electrical design of the signal sampling portion of the board. Some will have basic filtering and signal conditioning (what I suspect from ATI) and others will have higher quality components, more signal conditioning features, better bandcut filters to limit noise, etc..

    While this is a nice way to have good video quality for an inexpensive rate, I'd keep my miro DC30+ board rather than replacing it with that, given ATI's track record with hardware and drivers, I wouldn't count on that hardware to work well outside ATI's bundled software, which is probably *very* newbie.

    Nevertheless, the good thing is this will force better companies to make similar specs at the same price breakpoint, end users and midrange users are the winners.

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
    1. Re:Uncompressed != always perfect. by LocalH · · Score: 1

      I agree 100%. That's why studios use the high-dollar equipment, because it's the only equipment that delivers the quality and reliability that they need. PC-based editing is still hit-or-miss unless you buy a turnkey system, which will cost you more.

      But yet, in the same regard, the cheap stuff IS good, because it brings the people the capability to do something they didn't have before. Plus, smaller studios WILL use the cheaper stuff simply because they don't have the money for the good stuff (for example, the production guy here uses Pinnacle Studio 9 to do commercial production).

      --
      FC Closer
  31. Imagine a Beowolf Cluster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never mind, it's been duped.....

  32. in 1998 i was watching TV on a laptop by doorbender · · Score: 1

    using a wintv tunercard in a desktop PC i was watching tv over a T-10 network.

    the entire C: drive was shared and i just doubleclicked the wintv shortcut in program files and VIOLA

    there really is nothing new anymore

    anything like desktop anywhere.... I was pretty sure they already did at PARC which is where Jobs stole the mac windows from that bill stole later.

    --
    "He's a real midnight golfer"
    1. Re:in 1998 i was watching TV on a laptop by kegon · · Score: 1

      the entire C: drive was shared and i just doubleclicked the wintv shortcut in program files and VIOLA

      Don't you mean CELLO ?

  33. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by digitalsushi · · Score: 1

    Betcha you Windows guys didn't know I could build a video streamer using 2 lines in a Bash shell, did you? And people say Linux is sooo hard.

    Doctors go to school for 8 years to write 2 lines on a prescription . . .

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  34. It will be newsworthy when... by adzoox · · Score: 1

    they stop using the exact same TV tuner from Philips that everyone uses in their TV Tuners whether USB or firewire.

    The biggest leap forward will be when it's a simple USB dongle like this

    This also make it truely useful laptops. Even something as big as a deck of cards is impractical with a laptop. I mean we're all already carrying our iPods.

    --
    Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
    1. Re:It will be newsworthy when... by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      They can make the dongle the size of an infants pinky toenail, but it still doesn't solve the problem of the giant-ass roll of coax a laptop owner needs to drag around.

      Unless you think sitting at a table in starbucks with giant ass rabbit ears with signal-enhancing tinfoil balls on the top watching a grainy feed of the local news meets your definition of high-tech.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  35. Bandwidth by nmg196 · · Score: 1

    It can't be uncompressed. There isn't enough bandwidth on even USB2 to fit a proper PAL or NTSC TV signal at full resolution, 24bit colour 24frames/sec. Perhaps it's compressed using a lossless compression system or motion JPEG.

    1. Re:Bandwidth by stratjakt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Maybe it's not 24-bit color.

      "Full resolution" is meaningless when you talk about an analog signal, too.

      ATi's TV Wonders in the past have considered 320x240 to be "full resolution", and anything higher was scaled up (video captures) or interpolated (still captures) from that.

      I don't know if it natively captures any higher now, but 320x240x16 at 24 fps isn't unreasonable.

      ATi used to really shine at all this cross-media stuff, nowadays they're teh suck. TV-Out quality on my 9800 is absolutely awful compared to a cheap GeForce 5200, for instance.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Bandwidth by Cowclops · · Score: 2, Informative

      A) NTSC is 29.97 FPS, PAL is 25. B) YUY2 video (essentially, full quality digital component video) is 16 bits per pixel. So take a 720x480 image 30 times per second at 16 bits per pixel and you get about 20 megabytes per second. USB2.0 supports up to 480mbits per second, or 60 megabytes. While it is more CPU dependent than firewire, it DOES have the bandwidth. I work for Avid, and our $25,000 Adrenaline box connects to the PC via firewire and is by no means limited by the fact that the firewire bus is only 50 megabytes per second. It captures uncompressed with impeccable reliability. USB 2 isn't optimal for a true pro video editing setup, but at the very least it DOES support the bitrate full quality NTSC video requires.

    3. Re:Bandwidth by nmg196 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I made a miscalculation.

      Mod my post down :)

    4. Re:Bandwidth by Detritus · · Score: 1

      Uncompressed standard definition digital video (SMPTE 259M) is typically 270 Mbps. It isn't 24-bit color or 24 frames/sec, it's digital NTSC, PAL etc.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    5. Re:Bandwidth by CaptnMArk · · Score: 1

      You really need to consider 60 half-frames per seconds (PAL) instead of 30FPS for better picture quality. I suspect doing deinterlacing on the usb device and sensing full 60fps frames to host would eat too much bandwidth, but maybe not.

    6. Re:Bandwidth by Cowclops · · Score: 1

      Well, 30 fps, 480 lines per frame and 60 fields per second, 240 lines per field is the same amount of data either way. (Never mind the fact that PAL is 50i. I'm talking NTSC)

      While it won't "look" the same when you watch a 60i video as full height 480 line frames, no data is lost. If you actually want to create 60p from a 60i signal (dscaler does this, but won't support a USB 2 external device) it will twice as much bandwidth. Whether this is done in the external device or inside the PC is just about moot, because the raw bandwidth is more of an issue than the processing and either way you need a high end PC to handle it.

    7. Re:Bandwidth by LocalH · · Score: 1

      You do your delacing with the CPU. DScaler already works wonders with that concept. All the USB device has to do is send the same resolution that many other devices capture - 720x480/29.97fps or 720x576/25fps - and literally just run it through DScaler (preferably in Bob mode, as it uses less CPU time than other delacing methods, with only a very slight vertical softness). It would be foolish to delace before sending to the CPU, and would be enough to turn purists like me off to the device.

      Plus, 60 fields per second is mathematically identical to 30 frames per second because each field is only half-height compared to the full frame.

      --
      FC Closer
  36. Another PoV by newandyh-r · · Score: 1
    The reviewer says: "I live in a strong reception area which shows me the full potential of this tuner"

    Whereas I live in a weak signal area with lots of interference at the boundary of 3 ITV regions - what I am most interested in is how well does it cope in such an area - especially when only a few inches from an operating laptop computer.

  37. old tat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    in the UK we are all digital (DTV) and the push is big, in fact they (the gov) reckon they will switch off the analog transmitters in 2012 in which case all those handheld tv's, tv tuners will all be static monitors or doorstops

    i guess these manufacturers dont quite get that TV is evolving without them, let me know when i can access my TV guide and have multiple camera angles with one of these things and maybe they might get some interest

    1. Re:old tat by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      Yeah.

      Another new TV product that doesn't support HDTV.

    2. Re:old tat by way2trivial · · Score: 1
      Um, my mom still has a tv that only goes up to channel 13..

      she uses a more modern vcr to actually change channels, and it transmits it all to ch 3.

      all those old fullsize tv's will not turn useless, you'll just need a cable box/tuner capable of output on old style analogue channel of choice..

      it will wreck OTA handheld useage, but how many handheld tv's have a life expectancy of 8 years?

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    3. Re:old tat by DrXym · · Score: 1
      There are digital TV tuners for PCs, e.g. (Hauppage Nova) but as far as I know they don't support analogue versions. I want one that is backwards compatible and works for NTSC and PAL broadcasts too. Toss in a PVR like control interface, multiple profiles (to support multiple countries), perhaps an online TV guide and it would make a compelling application for travellers.

      Who needs a TV / DVD / VCR when a laptop can do the lot?

      But digital is critical. BTW, the BBC said some parts of the UK will have their analogue switched off by 2007 so an analogue only device won't much use if you live happen to live there.

    4. Re:old tat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is actually a lot more common than you might think. Really high end "TVs" don't even come with tuners built-in; you basically need to buy a separate box anyway. Digital cable boxes and satellite TV also obviously need to change the channel on the box (can't very well simultaneously output 500+ channels of stuff out of a cheap little set top box). They're really monitors (of relatively low resolution, although HDTV is getting close to current desktop resolutions, albeit interlaced rather than progressive scan).

      Integrated TV tuners will likely become common on the low end after ATSC becomes widespread and costs for the hardware come down, but set top boxes will probably dominate in the interim and on the high end as part of home theater systems.

  38. TV over USB is a big deal? by fazookus · · Score: 1

    I'm confused... I've put the contents of a DVD on an external 2.5" hard drive and been able to watch it on my notebook using USB 1.1. OK it' was compressed by the ripping software to some degree, I guess, but the result was still way better than TV quality (and indeed to my eye it looked pretty much like the original DVD). What am I missing here? Faz

    1. Re:TV over USB is a big deal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What am I missing here?

      Brain cells would be my guess.

      The ripping software made a direct copy of the DVD.
      The DVD contained compressed video with a bitrate of about 6-8 Mbps. That's what you were streaming.

      If it was uncompressed (like the tuner we're discussing) you would have needed to stream about 300Mbps.

      Just to make things clear, 300 is a bigger number than 8. Hope this helps.

    2. Re:TV over USB is a big deal? by fazookus · · Score: 1

      Brain cells is the most likely explanation.

      So you can get a DVD quality picture with 8Mbps or a vastly lower quality TV picture for 300Mbps. Dang, wish I had those brain cells!!!

      Faz

  39. Sager/Clevo by chiphart · · Score: 1

    The 8xxx notebook series of Sager (AKA Clevo, Alienware, etc.) have had TV inputs for years.

    --

    ...if I wanted to read garbage like that, I'd go to \.
    1. Re:Sager/Clevo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TV Input != TV Tuner

      Any questions?

  40. Nobody has said it yet, but this is HUGE. by Cowclops · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Everybody can debate whether they really want to watch TV on the computer or not. Everybody can debate whether usb 2 or firewire is better. But there are more important things that people are ignoring.

    I don't care about watching TV, but if this has support for capturing to any AVI format, it should be an amazing cheap video capture device. PCI cards based on the bt878 or phillips chips seem to be flaky at times, and when you use these, the audio and video aren't recorded on the same clock. You've got the video capture card and your sound card running basically completely independent of each other. With this, the signal will be digitized before your PC even sees it. It will eliminate a lot of screwiness as far as audio sync is concerned. This puts it well ahead of most (simpler consumer oriented) PCI based setups.

    As far as how it compares to products like the Canopus boxes that take an analog signal and convert it to a standard firewire DV signal, while these boxes offer pro quality analog to digital conversion, and no audio screwiness like the consumer PCI cards, they ONLY support DV. People, DV is not "full quality." 4:1:1 sampled video has VERY noticable artifacts because the color info is only recorded once for every four times the luminance is recorded. This makes scenes with highly saturated color and sharp lines have painful JAGGED (because its digital) edges to the color.

    On top of that, 3.4MB per second is just not enough for repeated processing without generational loss. The reason you can edit DV on the computer with no loss is because, in most video editing programs, you're only recompressing the effects, not the stretches of unmodified video. However, if you actually tried compressing a clip to DV a few times, you'll notice the mosquito noise gets noticably worse every time. An external capture device that supports uncompressed video allows you to bypass this completely by recording in formats such as a very lightly compressed mjpeg (I tend to go for about 3:1 compression. DV is 6:1) or better yet, when the quality really has to be perfect, Huffyuv which is lossless. In this way, I can avoid the 4:1:1 sampling artifacts for full color resolution, and no loss in video quality while i'm processing it for noise reduction and whatnot.

    Now, whether device actually does what I expect it to is a different story, but I for one will certainly buy one of these to try it out. After all, the worst that can happen is it doesn't support what i'd like it to and I can just return it/sell it on ebay.

    1. Re:Nobody has said it yet, but this is HUGE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DV is 6:1


      Pedantic, but DV's intraframe compression is 5:1. The data rate isn't the direct cause of multi-generational artifacts as you stated, but rather the fact that the compression is lossy. 3:1 MJPEG that you're so fond of will exhibit the same generational loss. As you mentioned, the color subsampling in DV video is also a huge problem.

      But does this device ACTUALLY let you capture uncompressed?

      http://www.ati.com/products/tvwonderusb20/features .html

      Nope. You can capture in MPEG 1, 2, or 4.

      I'm curious what you do with your video once you digitize it and process it for "noise reduction and whatnot." Watch it on your computer monitor, with its different gamma and progressive (versus TV's interlaced) display? Make DVDs with lossy MPEG-2?

      Uncompressed costs money. A real capture card, faster drives, professional software, a production or a broadcast monitor where you can actually SEE the difference, etc.
    2. Re:Nobody has said it yet, but this is HUGE. by Cowclops · · Score: 1

      If its capable of transferring uncompressed video to your screen, its conceivable that it should be able to feed that uncompressed video into a software encoder. ATI doesn't say you CAN'T do it so I think it would be a wasted effort to just assume it doesn't and not at least try and see what i can do with it.

      And regardless of what ratio you think DV is compressed (which is almost certainly a "generalized approximation that you've heard repeatedly" and not actual math, i figured the compression to be 6:1 by 720*480*16 bits per pixel*30 frames per second, divided by 3.4 megabytes per second), 3.4 megabytes per second (cbr by standard) 4:1:1 DV degrades a lot more per every time you compress it than the same source recorded as 7 megabyte per second AVERAGE vbr 4:2:2 picvideo mjpeg. Picvideo doesn't use a constant compression ratio, its just constant quality, and if you set the luminance and chrominance to 1 and 2 in that exact codec, you get very close to the same results as huffyuv, which is lossless.

      Quality wise, it does say it has a 12 bit video encoder, which is more than any other cheap consumer device can handle. Just because some cheap products suck doesn't mean all cheap products do. There was a HUGE gain in color quality when I went from a bt878 card to one of the newer phillips 10 bit ones.

      And of COURSE the destination video would be DVD. But every step in the middle that adds mosquito noise means its also going to be more difficult for the mpeg2 encoder to compress, thus confusing it even more and possibly wasting bits on "noise" and adding more noise to the portions of the image that need it.

      While its true that the "best" hardware costs a LOT of money, you'd be surprised at how close you can get to the best at a mere fraction of the cost. Its just a matter of finding the right stuff, and sometimes inventing your own ways of working so that you can make a quality finished product without having to spend $25,000. I'd say, aside from the lack of component video in/out and that you're limited to using a completely independent audio capture clock, the video quality on a cheap as hell asus tvfm card is almost as good as the Avid Media Composer Adrenaline system I use at work (I work at Avid's main headquarters).

      While its true that you can't polish a turd, people don't realize the kind of loss involved in merely converting an anlaog signal to digital (and how much HARDER it is to capture a turd-like analog signal without mucking up any detail). Noise reduction should be up to specific noise reduction algorithms, and not merely an encoder throwing away data randomly that it proabbly shouldn't. When you make a decision to record a low quality source into a low quality digital format, you aren't "intelligently using less bitrate" but rather getting the WORST of both the analog and digital worlds... which could turn crap into even worse crap. If its that bad to start off with, shouldn't your goal be making sure it doesn't get any worse?

  41. All well & Good by da_Den_man · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But I don't see a COAX OUT connector. Man, if I could get a system that has a COAX out (along with the other 2) then I could actually find it usable. No TV in the hotels I have stayed in (other than maybe the Hilton) have a monitor with anything BUT a COAX.

    --
    You keep going until you die..."Me".
    1. Re:All well & Good by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Last 3 I stayed in had a TV with composite jacks in the front. Probably because it's impossible to find a TV without jacks in the front these days.

      If it didn't, coax would do me no good since it was bolted into the little TV stand and it was impossible to get to the back of it.

      It's really cool, I can just plug in my laptop and watch DVDs and DivXs, play some games..

      Couple that with high speed internet in the room, and it beats the hell out of paying 9.99 for some crappy spanktrovision porn with all the money shots editted out!

      This was in rural northwest Arkansas, so it wasn't like I was in some high-tech anomoly.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:All well & Good by shadowcabbit · · Score: 1

      At Otakon for the past two years my group has used a hemostat to get the coax cable off the back of the TV for use with gaming machines etc. You can probably get one at a medical supplies store-- or, worse comes to worse, if you live near a liberal arts school, check in the bookstore; the nursing kits might have them.

      Getting back to the topic, I'm more interested in the video in capabilities of this as I am a game reviewer, about to shell out $100-ish for a Hauppage capture device.

      --
      "Why Subscribe?" Good question...
    3. Re:All well & Good by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      RF modulators are very cheap and can be quite small. Best Buy, Circuit City, RadioShack, et al sell them still, mostly for people who want to hook up DVD players to ancient coax-only TVs.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  42. Software by BrynM · · Score: 1
    It also comes with ATI's suite of multimedia applications and utilities
    As an existing ATI user, I'd like to say... "Boy you had me interested there for a second". The ATI software is buggy and has some design problems (won't do PVR unless someone is logged in under Win2K, for example). The hardware still seems interesting, but they can keep the bundled software.
    --
    US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
  43. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya and windows users spend a 100 dollars on a OS that is only good for simple word proccessing and getting viruses out of the box.

    Then in order to get any more functionality they have to add hundreds of dollars worth of other software.

    So what doctors can write perscriptions? I can write video streamers and didn't learn jack shit about this stuff in school.

    Doctors 8+ years of schooling is much more impressive then my 15 minutes of googling on how to use netcat.

    But I guess I just don't realy get the point of your reply, sorry.

  44. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First off, it's voilà.

    > Betcha you Windows guys didn't know I could build a video streamer using 2 lines in a Bash shell, did you? And people say Linux is sooo hard.

    Not surprised. Clearly any idiot could have figured that out.

  45. I won't be buying one... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    because they don't provide linux drivers.

    Why do all these damn manufacturers not realise how easy it would be for them to provide Linux drivers and that not everyone runs windows?

    1. Re:I won't be buying one... by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      They barely provide Windows drivers. Do a couple searches on rage3d or any other ati site, and see how many pissed off TV Wonder or All-in-Wonder owners you come across.

      ATi's support staff is all about Doom 3 framerates on their highest end card, just look at the driver's changelog if you dont believe me. The rest is just handwaving. My "obsolete" 9800 doesn't even get any real support these days.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:I won't be buying one... by maduro55 · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, windows has a MUCH broader market base and many Windows lusers tend to have more money than sense.

    3. Re:I won't be buying one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't all these damn Linux users realize they are not as important as they think they are?

      If I were a hardware manufacturer I wouldn't touch Linux with a 10' pole. There's only a bazillion different distributions, a half dozen or so gui's, and a new kernal every 36 minutes. What the hell is this "Linux" you speak of anyway? Linux means a million different things to a million different people.

      Basically when you ask a company to support Linux what you are really asking is that they send someone out to your house to write a driver for your individual computer.

      You should really be bitching at all the fools that keep Linux divided amongst itself. If everyone wasn't so wrapped up in their own ego then maybe there would be one great version instead of the hundreds of half assed versions there are now. But no, everyone wants to be a project leader.

      Try to find some detailed documentation and write the driver yourself or use a platform they support. Complaining that they don't support your 1 in a billion system configuration solves nothing.

  46. Does it work with linux? by Lurker+McLurker · · Score: 1
    --
    Mod parent up!
  47. OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by albeit+unknown · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Will Firewire be commonly available in 5 years? If you were designing an industrial product which needed to be viable at least that long, and you need the elegance and peer-to-peer nature of Firewire, would it be a safe choice?

    1. Re:OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by Microlith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, I see Firewire being around in 5 years. Much faster than current designs.

      USB has no peer to peer capability, and I don't see Intel adding it anyitme soon (what, and lose the heavy CPU dependence?!) which secures it for one reason you've already mentioned.

      Of course, the better technology does have a habit of losing to the most heavily marketed tech (even if it's worse for many uses than the other) so who knows?

    2. Re:OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by Alioth · · Score: 1

      Yes it will be. All the camcorders I've come across that have digital connectors use Firewire for video in/out. Firewire cards for PCs are cheap. Many PCs and laptops have Firewire built in.

    3. Re:OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Audigy has Firewire built in, too (as "SB1394", but whatever). It's part of the reason I bought it instead of a cheaper model.

    4. Re:OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by SpeedyG5 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I believe Firewire was chosen as the dvd standard interconnect some 2 years ago. All the dvd manufacturers are busy meeting that standard. See the Audio Revolution article.

    5. Re:OT: Is USB winning over Firewire? by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1

      Like the IOGEAR SmartLink? True, it's not just built-in, but it is possible.

  48. Too bad it's ATI by LilMikey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, Hauppage has a USB2 capture device out as well and judging from past experience that card will be much more stable, compatible, and reasonably priced.

    ATI's capture drivers and software are generally pretty crappy and, although they seem to use standard hardware, they jack it up enough to be slightly incompatible with generic drivers and software. Many programs had special hacks just for ATI cards and I imagine it'll be quite a while before this device integrates smoothly.

    On a seperate note, what the hell took so long. The USB capture cards have been crap since they came out. You'd figure they'd have USB2 capture devices ready as soon as USB2 started shipping.

    --
    LilMikey.com... I'll stop doing it when you sto
    1. Re:Too bad it's ATI by Sentry21 · · Score: 2, Informative

      They forgot to mention this device as well. A coworker has it, he says it's fantastic in terms of quality, features, and software.

      --Dan

    2. Re:Too bad it's ATI by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      What took so long? Companies were making oodles of money selling firewire devices that did this. 1394's better suited to this task than USB2 is, certainly, and people will pay more for 1394-connecting peripherals. Now that sales on those devices are probably falling, it's time to bring in the usb2 models. :)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Too bad it's ATI by LilMikey · · Score: 1

      I can't find a firewire TV-Capture card. Yes, there are Firewire vid-cap cards out there by the dozens but I can't find anything with a tuner on it.

      Hauppage, probably the world sales leader in PC-based tuners, doesn't seem to have one nor does ATI. Looking through the newegg and tigerdirect catalogs as well as a google search I can't find a single firewire capture with a tuner. In the same vein "why the hell aren't they making these?!"

      --
      LilMikey.com... I'll stop doing it when you sto
    4. Re:Too bad it's ATI by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The strength of 1394 is the lack of a need for drivers for most devices, because they are covered by generic functionality. AFAIK the 1394 video spec allows for basic VCR-type controls but not changing channels. Hence such a device would need a custom driver which no one wants to get involved with if they can avoid it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  49. some people... by ashpool7 · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... want uncompressed signal so they can do more than dumb stuff like record TV and play it back.

    Some people, like myself, want uncompressed video so we can load it into a editor, chop out all the commercials, and encode it with DivX or Ogg Theora or something else. Or write it out to a DVD. Now they don't have to Fast Forward through the commercials.

    Here's another thing some people like to do. Hook up their VCR to the capture card, put in some old VHS tapes, and start recording. Then they can edit it, arrange the clips, and write it back to a DVD so it doesn't get degraded. The Macintosh is amazingly good at this sort of thing, particularly with DV cameras (if you don't have one, use a Formac Studio TVR).

    Anyway, you can't do any of these things with MPEG, because most editors don't do MPEG editing. Final Cut Pro and Premiere don't even do it (I've tried with v3 and v6 respectively). Why? Because it's lossy!

    Uncompressed, non-lossy video is good, particularly in open formats. Just because it doesn't suit your application doesn't make it any less cool.

    1. Re:some people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can do lossless editing of mpeg(2) so a good hardware mpeg2 encoder makes a lot of sense in most of the situations you describe.

    2. Re:some people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      Anyway, you can't do any of these things with MPEG, because most editors don't do MPEG editing.
      Yes, you CAN do ALL of that with MPEG, and the reason most editors don't do it is because it's so completely trivial (well, either that or they're lazy). MPEG are bitstream formats, so if you want to cut part of it out, just cut it out (as if it were a text file). If you want the cuts to look clean you should worry about cutting on key frames only, though.... Same thing for reordering scenes.

      The EyeTV does come with an MPEG editor which will do these trivial cuts for you, and will regenerate frames in case you want to cut on a non-key frame.

      As for re-encoding, absolutely you'd want it uncompressed then, of course.

    3. Re:some people... by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      A food software encoder may be more tiem consuming, but can produce superior quality.

      Multipass encoding is whaat you can't do in hardware, and what makes a huge difference when you want to create the best quality/size.

      MPEG editing in itself is trivial, and can be done without (much) loss of quality indeed, but the same is not true for MPEG encoding.

    4. Re:some people... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unless you are doing professional video editing, and possibly not even then, you don't need uncompressed video. What you do need is video compressed without interframe compression, using a codec such as MJPEG or Pixlet. Ideally, the codec you use should use the same per-frame compression technique that your final product will use (DCT if you are planning on producing MPEG1/2 content) so that your production encoder only needs to do the interframe encoding, and there is no transcoding loss on your key frames.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    5. Re:some people... by xsupergr0verx · · Score: 1

      A food software encoder may be more tiem consuming, but can produce superior quality.


      Mmmm.... food software....

      --

      Click here for a free picture of an iPod!
    6. Re:some people... by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

      most editors don't do MPEG editing. [...] Why? Because it's lossy!

      Actually, I think it's more likely that most video editors don't do MPEG editing because the MPEG data stream doesn't do non-linear access very well.

    7. Re:some people... by SillyNickName4me · · Score: 1

      Hehehehe. yeah, I can't type ;)

    8. Re:some people... by trippy · · Score: 1

      mpeg-vcr is what you need to edit mpeg2 without having to re-encode. I use it to chop out commercials all the time. Of course you have to pay for it, which is something that seems to be taboo here and it is for windows computers.

      http://www.womble.com/

    9. Re:some people... by Noose+For+A+Neck · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hey genius, you can do all that with MPEG-compressed video. You're an idiot.

      --

      Software piracy is victimless theft.

    10. Re:some people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyway, you can't do any of these things with MPEG, because most editors don't do MPEG editing. Final Cut Pro and Premiere don't even do it (I've tried with v3 and v6 respectively). Why? Because it's lossy!


      DV compression, which you mentioned, is also lossy. There's intraframe compression at the rate of 5:1, and low color subsampling at 4:1:1. DV is nowhere near lossless, as you imply.

      The reason you don't see tons of NLEs editing MPEG now is the interframe compression makes it really lousy for random access. However, look for support to increase over the next year or so. Many editors will natively support MPEG editing so they can cut HDV material.
    11. Re:some people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Editors don't do it because it's trivial? What? So to do trivial shit in my $10,000 editing program I have to go buy another program?

      WTF kind of logic is that?

      No, I think they don't do it because MPEG sucks as a source format for editing and no person in their right mind would do it.

    12. Re:some people... by poptones · · Score: 1
      Anyway, you can't do any of these things with MPEG, because most editors don't do MPEG editing. Final Cut Pro and Premiere don't even do it (I've tried with v3 and v6 respectively). Why? Because it's lossy!

      Hilarious. MJPG is "lossy" too and any editor that cannot do frame accurate editing on that ain't much of an editor.

      Anyway, if all you want to do is chop up already produced content, ripping out commercials and such, then get a real editor made for the job. I used avisynth for years, contributed to the project (and the docs) and I can tell you it has zero trouble giving you frame accurate editing from damn near ANY type stream.

      And yes, sending uncompressed video over USB is heinously stupid. If you really care about quality then you get a machine that'll take a PCI card and add a forty dollar video capture card (or if you really care then waste a bunch more on a pro rig - whatever). But you can send 12Mbps MPEG2 (or even 3:1 MJPEG) over USB a whole lot more efficiently and it won't take 2GHz of CPU just to handle the communication protocol and on the fly encoding when you want dvr functionality.

      If you're capturing DV you use firewire; if you're capturing HD and you care about quality, get a decent tuner. But if all you're doing is capturing broadcast TV or VHS tapes (and you really do care what the picture looks like) you're going to have to post-process it anyway and there's no fucking way you'll ever see the "loss" in the final product from that initial encode to 12Mbps MPEG2, much less high quality MJPEG.

    13. Re:some people... by axis-techno-geek · · Score: 1
      ... want uncompressed signal so they can do more than dumb stuff like record TV and play it back.

      Then don't bother with USB, use Firewire as it can handle the bandwith better, take the Canopus ADVC-100 with composite signal in, DV signal out.

      USB2 is fast and all, but it still lacks bandwidth allocation and syncronus transfer.

      --
      This is not the sig line you are looking for... -- Old Jedi Sig Line Trick
    14. Re:some people... by Jozer99 · · Score: 1

      Yes, some people do. I have done a lot with TV tuner cards. A lot. I have 3 of them. Two of them are non-compressed cards. Tell me, how often do you record and edit home video as opposed to watching commercial tv programming. Although a non-compressed card has slight advantages some of the time, they are a pain to use for watching TV, because if you want to use features such as timeshifting or recording, it takes all of your processor power, and skips frames and acts sluggishly. MPEG is lossy, but it is also not 1 Gb per minute, which was the rate that my old uncompressed card recorded to my hard drive.

      Also, the quality of the actual tuner will more than compensate for the quality loss of MPEG. Since most MPEG encoder cards are more expensive, they use better tuners. This means a better picture, better clearness and better color. Although this is reduced somewhat by the MPEG format, it can still approach DVD quality if you have a good digital cable or satilite connection.

    15. Re:some people... by LocalH · · Score: 1
        • Anyway, you can't do any of these things with MPEG, because most editors don't do MPEG editing. Final Cut Pro and Premiere don't even do it (I've tried with v3 and v6 respectively). Why? Because it's lossy!

        Hilarious. MJPG is "lossy" too and any editor that cannot do frame accurate editing on that ain't much of an editor.

      He said MPEG, not MJPEG. MPEG, in the usual sense, is impossible to edit without transcoding to other formats, due to it's interframe compression. If you have an MPEG stream with nothing but I-frames, then you can theoretically edit that without any loss (but then the file will be much bigger and you'd just be better off using MJPEG).

      Yes, MJPEG is lossy, but with the quality ramped up, it can still be quite good for real video. There is very little true 'uncompressed', even in the broadcast industry, outside of boards like the Toaster 2. Even devices that claim to be uncompressed typically compress the chroma by essentially resizing the chroma to half or one-fourth of the original width, then stretching it back out. True uncompressed is 24bpp (or 32bpp if you want to support an alpha channel) at whatever frame size you're working with, with the chroma resolution identical to the luma resolution. Of course, that can give you some unwieldy file sizes (standard D1 resolution, which is equivalent to NTSC, is 720x486 and runs at 27Mbps - about a gig per hour). Of course, you can use lossless codecs like Huffyuv to bring those file sizes down, but it's still quite large.
      --
      FC Closer
    16. Re:some people... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (I was waiting for some dumbass like you to show up...)

      DV is not "uncompressed". In fact it looks like ass.

  50. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My keyboard doesn't have the little ' above the a you little frenchy bastard.

  51. Re:Bandwidth - Uh, Yes, there is enough.. by warpedrive · · Score: 1

    Uncompressed digital video out of a decoder, even including framing data, blanking data, and so on, 'only' consumes 27MB/s. A standard digital video bus from the decoder, like ITU-656 is used, which is 8 bits wide, and runs at a consistent clock rate of 27MHz. It uses a 4:2:2 color space, which is actually only 16 bits of gamut information. So, uh, yes, there's enough bandwidth on USB 2.0 at 480Mbit/s, even though USB does not support isochronus streams, like video well.

  52. Please put price in the /. post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    please

  53. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by Ignignot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Generally the problem is that the TV signal is not worth watching before any compression.

    Ah - you have hit upon one of my pet projects. Most tv isn't worth watching at all. Some tv has good parts and bad parts, and this is the best tv you can find. If you could cut out the bad parts of tv episodes, and maybe reorder some scenes or something, you could compress shows down to vastly reduced, and concentrated hits of completely awesome. For example, imagine taking Babylon 5 and cutting enough to get it down to one season? First thing to do is cut out the doctor, who only drags the show down. Next cut out most of the mimbari, because I don't want to see elves in space. Next get rid of half of the episodes completely because they are throwaway filler. Get rid of the 5th season because there was a fifth season??? Splice in some of the movies and cut down the scenes, and you would have one intense viewing experience. So as you can see, sometimes shows are only worth watching after compression!

    --
    I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
  54. Not the first USB2 tv tuner by majland · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been the (mostly) happy user of a Pinnacle PCTV Deluxe. It is an USB2 external tv tuner that supports mpeg compression in hardware at bitrates up to 15MB/s

    DVD's is about 6MB/s so i think that 15 should be enough for most ....

    The only problem with compression and decompression is the timelag when changin channels

  55. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by LiMikeTnux · · Score: 0

    "Not surprised. Clearly any idiot could have figured that out.

    Clearly any windows idiot cant.

    --
    yap
  56. Apparently *I* fail it.. by Chuck+Bucket · · Score: 0

    apparently I fail it, because I *cannot* understand why anyone would want to watch TV on their computer! listening to MP3's while working/surfing/whatever makes sense cause that can always be in the background, but TV?

    Colour me confused, but I just don't get it. Do allot of ppl on /. watch TV on their computers? (and do they ever date or get outside _

    1. Re:Apparently *I* fail it.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5 main reasons:

      1) Buying a TV capture card is cheaper than buying a TV, especially if you already have a nice big CRT or LCD monitor.

      2) Watching a small TV, always-on-top window on your computer isn't that hard, you can tune it out and just glance over when something interesting happens. Obviously, you might not want to watch a gripping TV drama you watch religiously every week, but how many programs on TV are really worth 100% of your time, especially with commercials? Meanwhile, you can surf the Internet (perhaps to follow along with Web sites mentioned in the story) or get some work done.

      3) A computer can double as a PVR, with the right software (alas, the right software doesn't seem to exist completely yet).

      4) A TV tuner can generally double as a video capture card, if you don't have a video input already.

      5) Some cards can record close captioning data, which is handy for making transcripts and stuff.

      It's kinda one of those things you have to try before you understand how useful it can be.

    2. Re:Apparently *I* fail it.. by SpeedyG5 · · Score: 1

      Well it helps to have 2 monitors. You can put the ballgame on kinda small in the upper right of one of your monitors and keep working, then when something exciting starts happening. You can quickly enlarge and catch all the full screen action.

    3. Re:Apparently *I* fail it.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is many perfectly good reasons to watch tv on you computer.
      alot of students and young folks have really small apartments so they save space by using the pc as a tv.

      or i have a projector for watching movies and with a capture card i dont need a separate tuner to watch tv on the big screen.

    4. Re:Apparently *I* fail it.. by maduro55 · · Score: 0

      I agree. Hell I have a TV for watching TV and a stereo for listening to music. I'll assume your question(s) is rhetorical... I believe we all know the real answer!

    5. Re:Apparently *I* fail it.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not sure about this device but the ATI All in Wonder cards have an overlay mode you can switch to at will.
      You can still work and surf the web while viewing the TV full screen.

  57. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You think you're clever or something, you pretentious ass?

    Windows users don't want to fuck around with hacky bash scripts, be they two lines or two hundred.

    Bet you linux users didn't know that windows users can generally accomplish in a couple mouse clicks what takes you a week of script tweaking to get working - in this case - installing SnapStream PVR.

  58. On the road mobile monitor by lugannerd · · Score: 1

    When I was on Vaca last month, I alway take my laptop. Good for the kiddies to watch DVDs in the car. But I wanted to watch the end of the Olympics on TV. This device would have been perfect!!!

  59. aye aye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i've had an all-in-wonder since 99 and it worked real nice back then with win98. Rainbow6 never looked better and the tv out was awesome. The tuner quality was comparable to the haupauge tuner i had been using for a year. BUT an upgrade of directX later and it was never the same.

    currently with nvidia's linux support (compared to ati) i have no reason to look back to a brand that has lost it's glory

  60. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They have teletext on computers now?

  61. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

    And people say Linux is sooo hard.

    Well, it is for people who aren't versed in the magical incantations that allow one to stream video using a 3 line Bash script.

  62. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent funny (or insightful)

  63. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by SenseiLeNoir · · Score: 1

    Also with the UK and most European countries havign far superior Digital Terestrial networks, WHY ANALOGUE? these units are already old technology!

    Why have an expensive brick, decoding 5 channels (UK) of analogue signals into what is basically a framebuffer, digitising it, sending it uncompressed through the USB2, then if you wish to record the laptop then has to recode it into MPEG1/MPEG2/Whatever?

    A Better product will receive the 40+ digital channels (UK) send the raw MPEG2 stream direct to the laptop, where either the laptop can display the stream, or save to disk, or both.

    --
    Have a nice day!
  64. This sounds great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now all we need is someone other than ATI to make one so we can actually use the fucking thing!

  65. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am a pretentious ass?

    You dumb fuck.

    Does it look like it took a week for me to dump the output of a device file into a netcat stream?

    Who gives a fuck what most Windows users want anyways?

    "couple of mouse clicks", bullshit.

    I write 2 lines of text, and you get all pissy with a stick up your ass.

    Ohhhh... snapstream PVR, gods gift to windows users or something?

    WHY THE FUCK SHOULD I BE IMPRESSED IN A 100 DOLLAR PEICE OF SOFTWARE THAT DOES THE SAME THING AS TYPING OUT 3 LINES OF TEXT AND A HAVING A TV GUIDE SITTING NEXT TO ME??

    And if I want functionality I can have it. Mythtv is something that I use time to time.

    Full PVR.
    Full multibackend and frontend support.
    Mutliple tuner support
    Video game console emulation.
    Encoding software to compress saved shows.
    Ability to do multiple recordings at the same time.
    schedual records
    Picture in picture capabilities.
    dvd player
    weather modules
    ability to play transcoded recordings on any media player at any time.

    And lots of other functionality besides that.

    And combine that with VLS:
    Ability to stream:
    dvds
    dvb
    media files
    software encoded tv capture cards
    hardware mpeg2 capture cards
    stream media on the internet
    stream to multiple clients on a lan
    multicast streams
    broadcast streams
    stream webcams
    stream digital camera input

    and probably a whole bunch of crap besides that.

    But why should I care about that when all I want to do is watch some freaking TV on my laptop?

    Or should I do it the "what windows users realy want" luser way and buy a over-priced toy from ATI.

    What? Do you think that I am that big of a dipshit that I don't know that you can get PVR software on Windows???

    Ohhhh big tough boy on the internet.

    Why should I fuck around with piss-ass little things like Windows MCE and jack off on how cool I am for blowing another couple hundred dollars on some restrictive POS software that resticts what I can do with my own freaking recordings.

    I have better things to do with my time, and money.

  66. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Head down to tldp.org.

    Remember ignorance is not a virtue, take a little time to learn something about computers, they are fun to mess around with.

  67. sped up would be nice, too by timothy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I'd like most in a PVR is a system allowing pitch-corrected speedup. Some shows I want to watch in real time, others I'd like pumped at least a few percent faster.

    (In addition to the other things you name, like cutting out the junk ;))

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  68. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by imroy · · Score: 1

    Ok, you made a few good points there. But you shouldn't let the AC trolls get to you like that. I often see childish taunts by AC's to my posts but have to let them go. Most people won't even see them down at score -1, so it doesn't matter. Don't encourage the trolls with a reply.

  69. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by MarsDefenseMinister · · Score: 1

    As long as you leave in the part where Kosh tells Captain Sheridan "JUMP! JUMP! NOW!" and the part where Commander Ivanova is yelling "Boom Shakalala Boom" while she is 'fucking' that alien ambassador dude, I'm with you.

    --
    No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
  70. Re:This sounds great! yea right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea right, another windows crap app

  71. Yeah right by Snaller · · Score: 1

    Having bought one of their crappy graphic cards, which work bad, i'm not going to chance it on other of their stuff.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  72. I want the opposite... usb - svideo by sevinkey · · Score: 1

    I have a Powerbook and an airport express unit (the wireless usb wallwart thingy), and while playing video on the laptop would be nice, I would also like to use usb to send svideo to my home entertainment center.

    This would let me run dvds and games from my laptop on my TV, without having to leave a computer in the living room.

    1. Re:I want the opposite... usb - svideo by Jesrad · · Score: 1

      You can use your PBook's video output and plug it to a wireless TV repeater like this one. Plug the audio to your PBook's headset output (and lower the volume), and you get both video and audio sent to your TV set.

      --
      Maybe we deserve this world ?
  73. watchable by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Lots of TV tuners (and other ADC) suffer from RF interference plugged into the PCI bus, running off the chassis power supply. This device is isolated over USB, so it can have better quality, although it is pushing the USB envelope in bandwidth, as well as simulating realtime on an interruptable bus. I'd love to hear about a FireWire version, which could share the bus with other multimedia devices without digital interference.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  74. Bah. Uncompressed = crap by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Uncompressed=bad in this case.

    Uncompressed video means you have to waste CPU time compressing the video if you want to record.

    The fact is, that OK video quality can be obtained by passing MPEG2 over a USB1.1 link. Just because your average USB1.1 TV tuner uses worse compression than MPEG2 doesn't mean that USB1.1 is bad for PVRs.

    Although USB2 makes for some nice additional headroom if you want to crank up the MPEG2 bitrate really high. But anything above 8 megabits/sec can't be archived to DVD without recompression anyway. (At least not if you want it to play on any DVD player.)

    55 pounds translates to at least 80-90 dollars US these days I believe, which is more than an Avermedia M179 goes for, which has built in MPEG2 compression, allowing you to record high-quality TV with minimal CPU usage. (When MythTV records from my Haup PVR-350 on my machine, there is zero noticeable CPU usage. I've stressed the hell out of my system by doing major recompiles during recordings and it didn't drop a single frame.)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
  75. Cheaper alternative by Planet_Clown · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've been doing this for years. All I had to do was attach the incoming coaxial connection, boot it up, and voila! It even came with a remote so I can watch the broadcasts in the comfort of my couch. Anyone interested should check out the amazing Sony WEGA.

  76. Re:Nothing for you to see here. Move along. by Ignignot · · Score: 1

    I think your second request may be on the chopping block ;-) I guess I could make a copy that was all the stuff I took out, which would be the most bizzare and directionless show to ever be made?

    --
    I submitted this story last night, and it didn't get posted.
  77. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, sometimes I like troll right back, eh?

    It's like a game. Don't worry, he didn't piss me off.

  78. MPEG uncompressed? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

    Not only that, the write-up is wrong. Its not uncompressed, its just compressed less! From the article "capture video in MPEG 1/2/4, AVI and Windows Media formats". Those are all compressed (and lossy) formats. Even DV, which most people use when using Firewire, is compressed. For truly uncompressed video, prepare to have your 200 GB hard drive melt down in a matter of a few 10's of minutes (if it can even keep up without dropping frames).

    1. Re:MPEG uncompressed? by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2, Informative

      They mean uncompressed over the USB2 wire. Once it reaches the computer you can choose a format to encode to if you want to record it.

      Older USB1 tuners would compress the stream to make it fit in to USB1's bandwidth (or lack thereof), usually with a low quality MPEG1. If you wanted it in a different format, you then had to transcode, making the quality even worse.

      The USB2 tuners deliver the raw signal from the ADCs to the PC tuner software. What is done with it from there is the user's choice. You can record the stream uncompressed (at least in the last version of ATIs tuner software I used.)

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
    2. Re:MPEG uncompressed? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Are you sure about that?

      I don't have one around to test, but there's nothing in the article that says its uncompressed. Sounds to me it works exactly like the USB1 tuners, except that the unit can compress the video in more than one format using the Theater 200 chip .

      I read " running full, uncompressed video should place a fair bit of strain on your system, but you will find the majority of it is taken up by the Theater 200 chip, the tuner's onboard Video Processing Engine (VPE)." to indicate it is the Theater 200 chip in the device which is doing the compression, not the computer. Then sending the compressed video through USB to the computer. The "computer use" they talk about it for decoding the compressed video and displaying it -not encoding the video. AFAIK, you're not "running full uncompressed video" on your computer system, just the system as a whole -using the tuner to do the hard work.

      I could be wrong, but that's my understanding, and I can't imagine pushing over 30 MBps continuously down USB reliably. If you have more info, please let me know.

    3. Re:MPEG uncompressed? by shotfeel · · Score: 1

      Just to add another point to my post above...

      I'll admit I don't always have the fastest computers on hand, but if you've ever tried encoding in MPEG 1 or 2, you're doing much better than me if you can do it in real time (MPEG 4 I can do in real time). Especially not and only use 20% CPU as the article states.

    4. Re:MPEG uncompressed? by wolrahnaes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "but if you've ever tried encoding in MPEG 1 or 2, you're doing much better than me if you can do it in real time (MPEG 4 I can do in real time)"

      heh...that's the exact opposite of my experience. With my old 350MHz P-II and AiW128 I could encode MPEG 1 or 2 realtime without much trouble (MPEG2 dropped frames at higher resolutions), but MPEG4 maxed around 4FPS when I was doing DVD rips. I never tried to do it realtime.

      about your other comment, I would assume that it is easier on the system to just pull in the 30MB/sec from the USB2 port and shoot it straight to the video card with something like DirectX Video Acceleration or similar, rather than taking in a compressed stream and decoding it.

      --
      I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  79. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by imroy · · Score: 1

    Well, uh, alright. Carry on then!

  80. Anyone have one of these? by Matt+Ownby · · Score: 1

    I am looking for a video capture solution with a 2D comb filter that can capture 'true' 720x480 with the overscan area included. I have a cx23881-based card that claims to do 720x480 but from what I have observed, its 720x480 is actually 640x480 stretched to 720x480 which is useless at best...

    After reading the article, I see that this USB thing uses ATI's Theater 200. Who has info about this?

    1. Re:Anyone have one of these? by LocalH · · Score: 2, Informative

      It doesn't have a comb, but I use the ADSTech Pyro A/V Link to convert NTSC (it works with PAL too) to standard DV. You only need a comb filter when you're dealing with composite or less, anyway.

      How did you come to the conclusion that your card stretches 640 pixels to 720? If you went solely on the width of the frame on your computer screen, then it's likely that your card really does capture at 720 pixels. Those 720 pixels are actually supposed to be horizontally thinner on a real NTSC display than they are when you display the video without any aspect ratio correction. For example, if you have an NTSC source with a circle in the center that appears to be a perfect circle on an NTSC set, when you capture it on the PC and display it unmodified, the circle WILL look horizontally fat. However, take that same source, after capturing, and play it back out on a device that supports 720x480 output to NTSC (nVidia cards do this), and it will look correct again.

      If you're expecting perfect circles to stay perfect at 720 pixels capture, that will NEVER happen, because there simply isn't any more horizontal data to capture. If you want your final encoded file to have the correct aspect when played back on a square-pixel PC display, then resize it to 640x480 during the encode (NEVER resize vertically though, you'll mess up the fields). I personally recommend leaving the video at 720x480 and using a player such as DScaler to correct the aspect ratio - that way, you retain as much of the original resolution as possible. I find that encoding to Divx at a sufficient bitrate to fill a full CD-R with 30 minutes of video to give very high quality results (I do almost no processing during my encodes - only to clean up the existing video, never to delace it).

      --
      FC Closer
    2. Re:Anyone have one of these? by Matt+Ownby · · Score: 1

      Hi,

      re comb filter: Most of my NTSC capturing is from laserdiscs which are inherently composite.

      re 720 vs 640: I came to this conclusion by two methods.. first I captured the same section of video in 640x480 mode and then did it again in 720x480 and took note of what was being displayed on the left/right edges of each frame. I also compared these frames against captures that I've done on other hardware (bt8x8 which can do 720x480 with btwincap driver, for example) and noticed that quite a bit of overscan edge stuff was missing from the "720x480" that the cx23881 claimed to do. DScaler can get into "true" 720x480 mode on the cx23881 but last time I checked it isn't designed to capture to AVI in "raw" mode (without de-interlacing the data).

      In theory I could take the dscaler source code and write my own driver for the cx23881 but.. that would involve quite a bit of time and research.
      *sigh*

      My main goal is to preserve as much of the laserdisc video (horizontally in this case) as possible with as little quality loss as possible.

    3. Re:Anyone have one of these? by LocalH · · Score: 1

      Ah, I see. I've not used that particular chipset, so I had no idea it actually did capture in such a way.

      If you have a good LD player with an S-Video port on it, then the player's comb filter may be of sufficient quality to use this instead of composite, along with something like the A/V Link. I use it with the output of the SA Explorer 3100 via S-Video, and the comb filters seem to be good enough for my tastes. A while back, I recorded the "Press Your Luck" documentary from Game Show Network to DVCPRO via the 3100, and when I recaptured that tape with the A/V Link, there was very little processing required to clean the signal up (mostly to get rid of the analog noise inherent from the fact that it was recorded from analog cable). The final result was excellent, I have viewed it on a real NTSC set and I would subjectively say that it was close to DVD quality, albeit not quite.

      --
      FC Closer
  81. Re:Netcat ATI USB video. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Whala!?

    peut-être vous avez voulu écrire "voilà"

  82. Actually by kired · · Score: 1
    Ever wanted to watch TV on your notebook computer?

    No.

  83. How does ATI make it different by melted · · Score: 2, Funny

    >> it's not worth watching

    Well, guess what, even uncompressed TV is not really worth watching. Two hundred channels of complete bullshit.

  84. Who is their target market........ by maduro55 · · Score: 0

    the technophobe or technophile? Just curious and felt like picking nits.

  85. so it's lossy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but at 25Mbps, "nowhere near" as lossy as 9.8Mbps DVD MPEG-2 quality. Plus, the DV stream is mostly a bunch of I-frames. So, while lossy, it's pretty damn good when your output format is going to be much lower. I'd be interested the bitrate that the ATI device (not mentioned, very superficial review) can do with the uncompressed stream.

    I've been waiting for NLEs to support MPEG forever and will continue to wait until it never occurs. When it comes to editing, it's best to start with the highest bitrate you can and downsample when you're done. Downsampling to DVD quality MPEG to re-encode to DVD quality MPEG sort of defeats the purpose of having a good quality raw stream to begin with.

  86. they already use ATSC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have about 30 local channels. All but one are available in ATSC.

    Go to antennaweb.org and look up your local channels.

    Broadcasters aren't obligate to drop NTSC until we hit some criteria, but ATSC in in full-force already. Since we have a big overlap time, it will be easy for people to switch to ATSC. The FCC recently mandated that all TVs over a certain size have built-in ATSC tuners. You may have noticed that all the major manufacturers suddenly added built-in ATSC tuners to their TVs in the last two months.

    We need these know-nothing "pundits" to keep out of these discussions.

  87. that sounds fantastic by ashpool7 · · Score: 1

    But I can't find anything (or combination of things) that

    A) Does that (with high quality, like 25Mbps)
    B) Edits it too
    C) Exports and Saves to something other things can read

    So, DV might as well be a halfway solution. I mean, if it existed, it would be popular with amateur nitpicky videophiles and we'd hear about it, no?

  88. We need a good solution for PC DirecTV! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would be great if this product allowed one to connect a DirecTV tuner to the PC via USB (in such a way that the PC could control the tuner, of course). Given that it looks like DirecTV cards will never exist for the PC, perhaps this might work.

    Or will the evil people at DirecTV prevent it from happening? I really want a quality PC based PVR for DirecTV.

  89. oh sure by ashpool7 · · Score: 1

    Except with MPEG, I have to:

    a) downsample to some pathetic bitrate. No thanks, I'll stick with 25Mbps
    b) deal with crappy interframe compression compared to DV
    c) lose more data than DV on the cuts
    d) find an editor that will actually edit MPEG. FCP and Premiere don't do it natively. Got something else in mind that doesn't re-encode the stream when you save it?

  90. One question.. by TiggertheMad · · Score: 1

    Using a USB port to watch TV on your laptop sounds cool but doesn't the areial antenna get kind of heavy?

    THANKS, FOLKS! I'LL BE HERE ALL WEEK!

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  91. Just get the Plextor ConvertX - HW compression by scum-o · · Score: 1

    I just ordered one of these for myself. It doesn't pipe-in uncompressed video via usb 2.0, but it does do hardware-divx encoding in the box and the software is said to be pretty evolved. Why would you want uncompressed video anyway if you can compress in HW with almost-raw quality anyway? Takes less HD space and no CPU time to compress after the fact.

    1. Re:Just get the Plextor ConvertX - HW compression by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Divx isn't "almost-raw", even at high, near-DVD bitrates. I regularly encode ~30 min shows to Divx, from various sources, at 5000kbps and up, and there is ALWAYS some degradation in the color, and in certain areas that just happen to trigger a bug. Even with a source created entirely in After Effects (thus meaning that it is a perfect, pristine, pure source), when run through Divx, there is macroblocking and other artifacting. The *only* thing Divx has going for it, in terms of actual video (especially on video monitors) is that it can encode an interlaced signal without the horrible artifacts most codecs produce with mice teeth.

      If you want almost-raw, use MJPEG, 4:4:4 (or 1:1:1) chroma encoding, and highest possible quality. I use such a codec to record Amiga demos from WinUAE, and again after weaving the fields into frames. There is *very* little degradation, mostly around sharp changes in color (of which you have lots more on the Amiga than with real video). Either use MJPEG or Huffyuv if you can't quite push full uncompressed but still want great quality.

    2. Re:Just get the Plextor ConvertX - HW compression by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      "But does it support Ogg Theora?"

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
  92. V-Stream Xpert DVD Maker (Windows) by ImaLamer · · Score: 1
    "Ever wanted to watch TV on your notebook computer? Well, you used to be stuck with an external TV tuner that will usually compress the video so much to squeeze it down the USB interface, that it's not worth watching.

    Why bother with a tuner?

    I've got a sweet "V-Stream Xpert DVD Maker" video capture device that even came with software for "time shifting". Who needs a tuner when you are plugged into a cable box or VCR?

    Works great, has S-Video and RCA connections so it will take anything you throw at it. It's USB 2.0 but backwards compatible with 1.1, although USB 2.0 allows for recordings in 720 x 480 (30 FPS). Even has a timer function which is great for recording future shows. (Taped Survivor last night).

    Works well with anything that supports capture (VirtualDub, Nero, WDM applications). Even used it to set up a security camera for a while.

    You can buy one here (first google result)

  93. OT by doorbender · · Score: 1

    hehehe

    --
    "He's a real midnight golfer"
  94. Re:Bah. Uncompressed = crap by LocalH · · Score: 1
    • Uncompressed video means you have to waste CPU time compressing the video if you want to record.

    Not necessarily. You are correct, in the context of the average PC available today (even with a 200GB HD, that's only good enough for 200 minutes of uncompressed!). However, RAID a bunch of those 200GB drives together (say, 4 or 8, or even 10 - 2TB good enough for you?) and you suddenly have both the drive bandwidth and the storage space to record true uncompressed. Yes, I agree, for archival purposes you'll more than likely have to reencode, however this gives you full control over the encoding process, and thus the best possible quality given the settings used in the encoder.

    Perhaps it's not so viable CURRENTLY, I'll agree. But most bleeding-edge technology is not viable during it's very early days. Give it some time, and these devices will have a more practical use.
    --
    FC Closer
  95. correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sales tax was $0.15

  96. MPEG stream with nothing but I Frames by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is typically what people call DV :)